Caribbean Churches reject Domestic Partnership Bill

The Caribbean CAUSE, a grouping of individuals and churches from 17 Caribbean territories including the Cayman Islands, is issuing this Communique in order to express its concerns about the fact and manner in which the Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Cayman Islands are being forced into establishing a legal entity called a "same sex union" because of the ruling in Oliari v Italy among other cases by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).

This ruling by the ECtHR is in fact an ideological imposition and no court has the authority to impose its preferred ideology on any society. The ideology within which a society forms its laws and public policy is the prerogative of the people and the people only. It must be noted, that some 90% of the population of the Caribbean islands probed, reject the concept of same-sex marriage.

The ruling is an ideological imposition because the people of the Cayman Islands have formulated their laws and public policy within the philosophical framework that design and purpose are necessary features of the universe; hence the definition of marriage in the constitution as a union between a man and a woman. This design defines normality. Any construct which defies design is therefore abnormal.

Homosexuality is not consistent with design and is therefore abnormal. It is illogical to create "rights" to that which is abnormal and such “rights” should not be imposed on any society.

In creating a so-called "right" to same-sex union the ECtHR is either being completely illogical or imposing another philosophy for law and public policy on the citizens of the Cayman Islands. Neither of those positions is tenable.

This is Judicial Activism. It is contrary to the requirement for separation of powers between the Legislature and the Judiciary and sets a dangerous precedent for the governance of all our countries.

It is instructive to note the part that raw political power has played in the current assertion that “homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexuality” which is the basis for the present situation in the Cayman Islands.

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is arguably the most influential psychiatric body in the world. Its final decision to remove homosexuality from its list of mental disorders was by vote in 1973 after the organisation was subjected to severe and sustained political pressure by the ‘gay rights movement’.

Members of the ‘gay rights movement’ picketed and actually stormed some of the APA meetings seeking the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Eventually after political action by members of the ‘gay rights movement’ both within and outside of the APA, the organisation responded to the political pressure by first changing its definition of mental illness. The Board of Trustees (BOT) subsequently removed homosexuality from its list of disorders based on the new definition of mental illness. Some members of the profession protested this approach by the BOT, so a decision was taken to have all members of the APA vote on the BOT’s decision. 58% of psychiatrists voted in favour of the BOT’s decision. After being removed from the DSM, homosexuality was designated a “sexual orientation disturbance.” Fourteen years later, homosexuality was declared to be normal.

It should be noted that the process to make homosexuality “normal” was neither medical nor scientific. Barbara Gittings was a member of the 1972 panel that considered removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders and a proponent for its removal. She is reported to have said that “the decision to remove homosexuality from the list of mental health disorders happened quickly because the decision was not medical…”

The APA cited research by Evelyn Hooker in arriving at its decision. However, this work was heavily criticised by Dr. Thomas Landess former Academic Dean at the University of Dallas and former Policy Analyst at the U.S. Department of Education.

In the conclusion of his critique of her paper and its subsequent use to facilitate prohomosexual legislation through the courts, Dr. Landess warned:

“This unquestioning acceptance of "authorities" on the basis of professional reputation or political correctness threatens the integrity of our legal system. Judges must take greater responsibility for assessing the soundness and accuracy of testimony by so-called experts; yet, paradoxically, such a task is manifestly beyond the competence of the court. This dilemma is the consequence of the politicizing of the scientific community over the past several decades, particularly in questions of sexuality. The recent exposure of Kinsey's errors indicates just how long researchers have been careless or deliberately misleading in approaching sexual questions. And the widespread acclamation of recent, flawed studies "proving" that homosexuality is inherited genetically is evidence that the problem has only worsened over the years.”

Early in the life of the LGBT political movement, its advocates sought to claim that being homosexual was both genetically determined and immutable and in fact, identical to race. This concept has been debunked by science. A report on a large study on genes in the Scientific American has stated, “It’s the end of the ’gay gene,’”. Also, in Position Statement PS02/2014 issued in April 2014 the UK Royal College of Psychiatrists stated that sexual orientation was not immutable.

It is incontrovertible fact that the AIDS pandemic started in 1981 in American cities that had removed their buggery laws. This can be explained by the behaviour of male homosexuals in bathhouses in those cities. We now know that Men who have Sex with Men (MSM) have higher rates of HIV infections than the general population because of the practise of buggery and the fact that they can play both roles in the practise (role reversal). Of all intimate practises buggery carries the highest risk for HIV transmission because of the high concentration of cells of the immune system in the rectum. These cells are the targets of the infection.

The LGBT political ideology is a desire driven political agenda. There is no evidence that this political agenda results in benefit to the society at large but there is considerable evidence of the harm it does. This includes the AIDS pandemic, the suppression of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, parental rights and the rights of children to grow with their biological parents and siblings.

Some three thousand years ago Aristotle had the wisdom and insight to note that “Law should be reason free of desire”. Unfortunately it is a lesson that western democracies have failed to learn as presently in providing legal and political support to a distorted desire western democracies are making “law based on desire free of reason” and the Cayman Islands are being forced to follow suit because of judicial activism and an illogical ruling from the ECtHR.

In consideration of the above we advise the people of the Cayman Islands, through the Members of the Legislative Assembly, to reject what is an illogical and harmful act of judicial activism by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the ideology that it represents. The LGBT political ideology is not only illogical but is also totalitarian and a threat to the people of the Cayman Islands.

Representative contacts:

• Jamaica – Dr Wayne West – (876) 372-7304

• Anguilla – Rev. Phillip Gumbs – (264) 476-1156

• Barbados – Dr Veronica Evelyn – (246) 234-5421

• Cayman Islands – Pastor Torrance Bobb – (345) 916-5639

• Curacao – Pastor Said Flores – (599) 9560 3911

• Trinidad and Tobago – Bishop Victor Gill – (868) 292-0972