Guyanese urged to denounce Constitutional Amendment on `sexual orientation’
… hints of ‘Evangelical Obediance’ By Shirley Thomas
Guyana Chronicle
July 17, 2003

Related Links: Articles on homosexuality
Letters Menu Archival Menu

THE Georgetown Ministers’ Fellowship (GMF) and the Guyana Evangelical Fellowship (GEF) have mobilised a ‘Call to Action’, urging all Guyanese to categorical say a “No!” to the proposed amendment to have ‘sexual orientation’ deemed a fundamental right in the Constitution of Guyana.

The Ministers are contending that, if allowed to go through, the Constitutional Amendment which promises to pave the way for what has been termed ‘sexual orientation’, would open the flood gates to a host of ills.

Such a precursor would “open the door to homosexualaity, bestiality, child sexual abuse, and every form of sexual perversion being enshrined in the highest law of this land,” Bishop Juan Edghill, a representative of the GMF/GEF explained.

He cautioned that : “If the Legislation is passed, Guyana will be faced, for the first time - with what is called ‘Evangelical Obediance’.”

The Ministers made these remarks at the launching of a 25-page document which clearly spells out “Why we must say NO to Sexual Orientation.”

The document, launched during a press conference in the conference room of the National Library, deals extensively with the attendant ills of what is now being proffered as ‘sexual orientation’.

These include unnatural behaviours, sexual abuse, family breakdown and the alternative lifestyle’, now coming under the guise of ‘sexual orientation’.

Bishop Edghill outlined that, since ‘sexual orientation’ has been removed from the Fundamental Rights Bill, and the Sexual Orientation Bill, every parliamentarian will now have to decide, by a separate vote, if sexual orientation should be included in the Constitution.

Considering the serious social consequences and the attendant scope of social dislocation, GMF/GEM was adamant that what stands at the center of the militancy is not only a ‘better deal’ for homosexuals, rather it is the ‘Goals of the Gay Lobby’ and gay militancy specifically, that are being advocated.
Noting that behaviours which were previously known as ‘sodomy’ have come to be called ‘gay’; what was recognized as ‘sexual perversion’ now called ‘sexual preference’, and ‘sexual defiance’ - sexual orientation or alternative lifestyles, the Ministers are determined that the Bill should not be allowed to go through.

And citing some of the atrocious goals of the Gay Lobby which will almost immediately come to the fore in the event such a bill is passed, GMF/GEF pointed to demands being made :

** for the repeal of all sodomy laws

** for the legalisation of all forms of sexual perversion including
paedophilia (child sexual abuse)

** to change the age of consent to allow sex with minors

** for public funds to cover sex-change operations

** for the deliberate inclusion of lesbians, homosexual men, bisexuals
and transgenders in education and childcare, and

** the trend toward the removal of God … from public life.

Bishop Edghill recalled that in 2001 the combined religious community, following a meeting, approached President Jagdeo, asking him not to sign the Homosexual Bill. He said the President, accordingly, did not sign the Bill, but sent it back to Parliament for further discussions and notations.

But, coming out of the Communique signed between President Jagdeo and the Leader of Opposition, Mr Robert Corbin, there was need for the passage to the Fundamental Rights Bill within a certain time frame.

Edghill said, under his leadership, the Ministers of Religion convened consultations at the highest levels, of which the Guyana Evangelical Fellowship and the Georgetown Ministers Fellowship including Hindus, Muslims, Bahis Roman Catholics and Anglicans formed part. They have since written all the Parliamentarians, clearly stating their position, which is, that they are totally against the sexual orientation bill.

He said the Ministers have issued a statement, “in which we have clearly and categorically, that we cannot and will not support any legislation that lists Sexual Orientation as a Fundamental Right.”

Meanwhile, Pastor Roger Williams, alluding to the goals and manoeuvre

of the Gay Lobby, referred to it as nothing but deception, and semantic terrorism, asserted, “We are not interested in semantic terrorism, legal chaos and alternative lifestyle.”

He said, that what is now being witnessed is an attempt to allowed a minority group of people to change the value system of society. He said that, while society respects the right of such persons to work, medical care and the like, “We cannot allow people, based on their perversion, to change the value system.”

Further, the Ministers argued in this regard that, views held, can

ot be transformed into rights enshrined.

Elinor Jordan noted that, while the Church at large, does not like the ‘behaviour’ of the homosexuals, it is not to say that they do not like the people exhibiting those behaviours. She added that the Church is willing to help them out of such behaviours, but they should seek that help, and show that they want to change.

And Reverend Raphael Massiah, of the First Assembly of God Church, and of GMF/GEF noted that there is no credible scientific evidence to support that there are homosexual genes, but that there is evidence to support that homosexuality is behavioural.