THE EDITOR, Sir:
I HAVE been following the debate started by the Lawyers Christian Fellowship on whether or not we should allow the possible legalisation of homosexual marriage. Like, the lawyers, I consider homosexual behaviour to be unnatural. Whether or not it is immoral - I don't know and don't care.
If it is immoral, God will deal with them. The jury that is in my mind is still out on whether or not we should allow homosexual marriage.
However, in reading the letter from Shirley Richards (president of the Lawyers Christian Fellowship) in Friday's Gleaner, I became concerned by some of the points made. Ms. Richards states: "We, however, subscribe to the view that the criminal law ought to reflect the commonly-held values of a people".
She states that it is the right of every society to "draw the line".
DANGEROUS VIEW
This is a very dangerous view. It is this view that has caused oppression and murder of millions of people throughout history. The view is predicated on the assumption that the majority have the right to tell the minority how to live. It is the foundation of bigotry.
I would like to ask Ms. Richards what would happen if the 'commonly-held values' determined (as it did in the past) that it was immoral for people of different races to marry? Or if the 'commonly-held values' determined (as it does now in some countries) that adultery is a serious crime punishable by death? Or if it held that practice of certain religions is immoral? Or if it held that smoking and drinking are immoral? The list goes on ad infinitum. I would now like to ask Ms. Richards: Where do you draw the line?
I am sorry to say this, but the views of the Lawyers Christian Fellowship, as given in that letter, reminds me of those who blew up the World Trade Center. They were, no doubt, outraged by the behaviour of the 'infidels' in the western world, behaviour which offends their "commonly-held values".
I am, etc.,
HUGH P. SMYTHE
hpsmythe@cwjamaica.com
10 Schooner Court
Westmoorings
Trinidad & Tobago
