Daily Nation – September 27, 2000

I wish to comment on some letters appearing recently in this paper wherein homosexuals are proclaiming that they should have the same rights as heterosexuals.

Now the matter of sexual orientation has two components – the first related to orientation as feeling, which is a private urge within the individual, it is of no concern to anyone else, it does not need the approval of others and there should be no requirement on the part of Government to assist.

Then there is the matter of sexual orientation as conduct, which is not a private concern since it has implications for society at large. What homosexuals are insisting is that they should have the same rights to express their conduct based on their feelings as heterosexuals do.

This is nonsense. For an individual should only have a moral and legal right to pursue a course of sexual conduct if that sexual conduct has some essential value to society at large.

Heterosexual conduct has essential value because it is necessary for procreation (in spite of in-vitro fertilisation). Even the homosexual is the product of a heterosexual union.

By comparison, homosexuality is a barren, immoral act, it serves no essential purpose to society and it merely satisfies the lust of the participants.

It would be outrageously irresponsible to legislate that a person has a right to express his sexual orientation (feelings) as one’s sexual feelings can manifest itself in all guises thereby incest between consenting adults, adultery, polygamy, polyandry, bestiality (sexualism), pedophilia and even rape. Basically, it would undermine traditional family life. The fact that the participants love each other cannot make such sexual sins right.

Barbadians, please do not allow ourselves to be taken in by the beguiling arguments of the homosexual agenda.

The rejection of immorality is not prejudice. This newspaper should not be used to support such vile causes. Ms. Roxanne Gibbs, do not allow them to intimidate and silence you.

Carol Marshall