CIG wasted public cash on LGBT case, says HRC

| 14/02/2019 | 132 Comments

Cayman News Service(CNS): The Human Rights Commission has accused government of an “inexcusable waste of public funds” that are “purely for political reasons” in its fight against Chantelle Day and Vickie Bodden, a same-sex couple who were refused a marriage licence last summer. In a paper submitted to the UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee’s inquiry into Britain’s relationship with its Overseas Territories, the HRC addressed the continued failure of the government to address equality and LGBT rights, among other human rights challenges.

It pointed out that government was spending the money “to placate the demands of the more vocal discriminatory voices in the Cayman community”, while failing to provide a framework for the legal recognition for same-sex partnerships.

The document was submitted to the UK at the end of last month ahead of the case, which was heard by Chief Justice Anthony Smellie last week. But it has now been made public on the commission’s website.

The HRC pointed to the challenges of tackling discrimination against LGBT+ people and the “culture of homophobic attitudes within sections of the legislature and vocal sections of the community (particularly some of the churches)”, noting in particular the case of Day and Bodden and the expenditure of public money for this case.

While the two women were forced to invest their own funds to push this case, government spent taxpayers’ money to fight it, even though it was forced to partially concede during the proceedings on the need for civil unions. The government instructed one of the UK’s leading advocates, Sir Jeffery Jowell QC, to argue the case, supported by the acting solicitor general and support staff from the Attorney General’s Chambers.

In addition to these costs, the public will be footing the bill for the three-day court case, even though in its final position the government withdrew any attempts to argue against the inevitable need to create some form of legal partnership for same-sex couples. In the end, Jowell confined his arguments to objecting to the introduction of same-sex marriage.

The chief justice has not yet made his ruling, but given the concession by government’s lawyers, it is now inevitable that it will at the very least be directed to introduce some form of civil partnership. However, he may also use the power of the court to modify the law and address the problem of marriage equality in the simplest way.

Whatever the outcome, the HRC’s position, as set out in their paper submitted to the UK parliamentary committee, was that all of these costs could have been avoided.

The HRC pointed out that it had made clear recommendations that the government must adopt some form of civil partnership for same-sex couples, as required by the European Convention on Human Rights, more than three years ago.

It said that it had become “undeniable” that it is “unlawful to fail to provide equality to same-sex couples in areas as diverse as adoption, inheritance, pensions, next of kin visiting rights, access to welfare and even to residency in the Islands”.

The commission also took aim at the UK, noting that despite the clear breaches of an international treaty extended to the Cayman Islands, the British government had not taken action to remedy the human rights violation either.

“The UK has the ability to end this legislative discrimination by an Order in Council. The failure to do so arguably places the UK itself in breach of its legal obligations under the ECHR,” the HRC stated, drawing attention to the willingness of the British parliament to legislate for its overseas territories, without consultation, on beneficial ownership.

“The decision not to act where the fundamental human rights of British citizens within its jurisdiction are concerned is hard to justify.”

The commission pointed out that while it is extremely rare for discrimination against LGBT members of the community “to manifest itself in physical violence or abuse”, it has a “potent and pernicious” impact.

The HRC raised the now infamous debate on marriage in 2015, when shocking statements were made in the Legislative Assembly by veteran MLA Anthony Eden about LGBT people, which were not challenged by Premier Alden McLaughlin.

At the time the only MLA to speak out and defend the LGBT community was Wayne Panton, who then lost his seat when his opponents used his support for LGBT rights as a political weapon against him in the 2017 campaign.

See the HRC submission to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee in the CNS Library

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Category: Laws, Local News, Politics

Comments (132)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Jg says:

    The Patriots from any Country will always stand up for what they believe in. Whether its Saudi Arabia, France, Jamaica or the United States, its what the forefathers passed on. So some people understand what you want and some wont. I am personally not for it but God is still with you regardless of the outcome.

    18
    9
  2. Anonymous says:

    The majority of voters in Cayman identify as being “christians” so the party in power always cater to their whims. These so-called christians (notice the small c) seldom agree on the important stuff like which day is the sabbath, what food is unclean, what it means to love your neighbour etc. but the one thing that unites them is their hatred of gays.
    If you have ever experienced the venom with which they say “love the sinner but hate the sin” then you will know that you can count on their vote next time.

    10
    23
    • Anonymous says:

      Exactly, let’s have less Christianity and more humanity.

      18
      24
      • Anonymous says:

        How about more truth? On both sides?

        11
        3
      • Anonymous says:

        If you want less Christianity, Grand Cayman is a bad place to be my friend. Why try put up a fight for something that has not existed here for 500 years? I have nothing against LGBT but you dont have to make a big scene about something the people dont want. Imagine if same sex marriage was legal and we began marching, taking people to court and demanding laws to be changed because of something we want, wouldnt you get upset? Stop trying to take the stripes off the tiger.

        18
        10
    • Anonymous says:

      That is the shadow of the elephant in the room. The actual elephant is the sheer horror that (some) Christians feel for the thought of two gay men being a visible couple, particularly if one or both are effeminate.

      This is the core of the hatred and the reason some claim that gay marriage would ‘change their world’; it’s very simple. Such an endorsement of equality could cause gay men to come out and be fully themselves, and the thought of that gives some folks the trembles.

      I realise this story is about two women seeking fairness and equality, but the core of the resistance is what (primarily male) Christians imagine. They do not realise that gays and lesbians walk among them everywhere, and would behave no differently if they enjoyed the same rights as the rest of us.

      12
      16
    • Anonymous says:

      Christians are not haters, they are a people of every nationalty, tongue and heritage who believe in a just and righteous God.
      There is no “venom” towards you, just a desire for your salvation. How can that be bad?

      20
      13
    • Anonymous says:

      If one looks further afield, there is no longer any societal or mainstream Christianity support for this vengeful, hypocrite-minded, far right, splinter faction mindset. Our “churches” are (literally in some cases) dwelling on orders of service from the 1600s. Many would support public executions, if they weren’t finally banned by Orders in Council in 1990s. The CIG shouldn’t be giving a nickel of public cash to support any of this hate infrastructure, without some precondition that they radically modernize their scripts 1000 years.

      1
      2
    • Anonymous says:

      Cayman’s Constitution applies only to government actors, not to private enterprise. This U.S. case has nothing to do with Cayman.

      12
      10
  3. Anonymous says:

    It is not a waste of the Caymanian people’s money if the majority of Caymanians don’t agree.

    809
    1082
    • Void says:

      It is a waste of some Caymanians money.

      The void stands for peace and equality. Stop the division and hate among our people!

      859
      15
      • Anonymous says:

        Until the rights for bigamists, arranged marriages and to minors come into play. I would think they have rights too? We don’t have to be like the rest of the world. Look at what mess they are in now. If someone wants to marry the same sex, I don’t have any issues with that as long as the existing laws on the books remains unchanged. Don’t I have that right too?

        15
        9
      • Anonymous says:

        Void, you are truly annoying. Just stop the rubbish.

        6
        9
        • David Shibli says:

          Funny how all the supposed thumbs up people for the “void” did not have the courtesy to follow up on the conversation?
          Nicky, can you explain this? Is it legit?

          CNS: If you’re asking if the vote numbers are legit, I wish I could guarantee that every person could only vote once but the fact is that if people try hard enough they can get round it. I just find it amazing that people go to that much trouble. The choice tends to be to use a cookie restriction or an IP restriction, neither of which works perfectly. The alternative is not to have any thumb votes, but people do like them, as imperfect as it is. I keep an eye out to see if any better systems appear but I haven’t found one yet.

          3
          3
          • Void says:

            We respect CNS and love their site. If we were malicious, every comment would be at -99999…. we only restore balance.

            We are not the only ones with ability.. if we see something off we counter it as in the case above. We aren’t altering any regular comments as you can see.

            Let’s be friends, shall we? Anything can be bypassed. Save the effort.

            1
            3
          • Jus sayin says:

            ? hmmm … well CNS, my advice is, get rid of the thumbs votes.
            That way people will be more likely to express their views in words. And they won’t be hiding behind numbers.

            CNS: Except it doesn’t really work like that.

            3
            3
    • For LGBT says:

      Thanks for controlling the thumbs rater ?? We need to win. To show who we are.

      110
      16
  4. Bertie : B says:

    On the other hand , Kim Kardashian claims her skin is smooth and very few wrinkles because she doesn’t Smile . Sounds to me by these hate posts there must be a lot of no wrinkled people in Cayman , Although frowning scowling and yelling will probably wrinkle ya up a wee bit lol. How are ya ladies ? good I hope . You seem to be getting more press than Trump lately .One sure could make a bundle of cash selling chill pills in Cayman .God Bless keep smiling , I tink Kimmy may be lying Just a little .

    17
    20
  5. Anonymous says:

    You all can support SSM online all you want …

    Cayman is a place where R rated movies ane not shown on a Sunday, so if you really are positive that the “ordinary Caymanian” support SSM. Put it to a referendum … might turn around and get 80% saying no !!

    CNS: The point of human rights is to protect the minority. In some places they aim to protect the right to be Christian, where Christians are in the minority.

    46
    5
    • Anonymous says:

      My thumbs up is for CNS

      30
      42
    • Anonymous says:

      For crying out loud, that protection, CNS, deals with defending Christians from persecution. I am sure no one here is being threatened harm because they are gay.

      CNS: Firstly, human rights is not confined to protection from physical harm. You might want to read through the Cayman Islands Bill of Rights, as you apparently don’t understand what they are. You can read them here. Pay particular attention to the right to family life and freedom of conscience.

      Secondly, persecution can take many forms, physical violence is one of them but emotional violence or verbal abuse can be just as devastating – young people are particularly vulnerable to this. If someone is denied employment because of prejudice, that can also make life very difficult.

      Thirdly, I don’t think that there’s such a thing as hate crime here, so violent crimes against LGBTs will not be recorded as such. I do not know if this happens and if it does, how frequently. Sadly, because of the prejudice among many voters, the politicians are not paying any attention to this, which is pretty disgraceful in itself.

      37
      4
    • Anonymous says:

      Thumb up CNS!

      29
      44
    • Anonymous says:

      Well said CNS. Human rights even protect the right to express yourself like a bigot or homophobe as so many people seem keen to do.

      22
      46
    • Anonymous says:

      That’s really odd, considering that Saturday is the Sabbath Day.

      5
      15
      • Anonymous says:

        Incorrect. Friday is the sabbath of His Noodleyness.

        11
        4
        • Anonymous says:

          Partially correct. It’s from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday which means more hours on the Saturday, so no movies on Friday night or Saturday during the day.

          3
          5
          • Anonymous says:

            “Around the time of Christmas, Hanukkah, and Kwanzaa,us Pastafarians celebrate a vaguely defined holiday named “Holiday”. Holiday does not take place on “a specific date so much as it is the Holiday season, itself”. Because Pastafarians “reject dogma and formalism”, there are no specific requirements for Holiday. Pastafarians celebrate Holiday in any manner they please.

            Friday is our holy day and we encourage you to refrain from working or going to school as to keep the Sabbath holy.

            Pirates are the true holy and divine beings yet are lead to be thieves and outcasts by less popular Christian Theologies.

            The Flying Spaghetti Monster is an invisible, undetectable being who accidentally created the ENTIRE UNIVERSE one night after heavy drinking. After we pass on, we will move on to the land of the FSM where there is a beer volcano and a stripper factory.”

            5
            4
            • Anonymous says:

              A man (made in the image of God) will be required to account for every idle word.
              Life is a fantastic gift, but it comes with responsibilities. Be blessed.

              7
              1
      • Anonymous says:

        I’m thinking if someone hadn’t rushed to finish things in 6 days, so He could take the 7th off, the world would be a better place.

        4
        4
    • Anonymous says:

      not the minority, to protect rights!

    • Anonymous says:

      I remember when they protested about The Golden Compass. Not because of what was in the movie, but because later books in the series had anti-Christian/anti-religion themes, and heaven forbid, a child seeing the movie might go on to read the books.

    • Anonymous says:

      Yes, like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Syria etc. God’s children being slaughtered like sheep and the world ignores it. Soon there will be no place to hide.
      Fortunately, nothing is hidden, not even the thoughts of men.

    • Anonymous says:

      The day that CNS champion the rights of Christians anywhere in this world will be a cold day in Hell, but go on, tell us.

      CNS: You believe that because you don’t really understand the concept of human rights. The day your rights to worship as Christians are taken away, we will champion your rights. The day your safety is threatened, or you cannot get a job or are refused any rights granted to everyone else because of your faith, we will support you. But worshiping as you like (freedom of conscience) should not give you the right to restrict the rights of others.

      6
      2
  6. Anonymous says:

    The reason everybody wants to work, raise kids etc in Cayman is because of the culture we have. Change it and it will be like working living in New York. Just the simple facts.

    40
    29
    • Anonymous says:

      12:19pm and your s..t don’t stink. What culture? With the amount of shootings, rapes, home invasions, child molestation, corruption, robberies, should I go on, we already are like everywhere else!!! Two people of the same sex marrying isn’t going to corrupt us anymore we already are

      30
      32
  7. Gray Matter says:

    Heritage: The Cayman Islands .. Pirates and Wenches … Not San Francisco Treats.

    16
    34
  8. Anonymous says:

    I am not religious at all but what was wrong with getting married in England or Honduras?This has been the way of life here forever.
    But like the Rastas break down the barriers I guess.We all see how that worked out.What a mess.

    164
    256
    • Anonymous says:

      The women — one of them Caymanian — intend to live and raise their child here. If they were married elsewhere, they would still not be afforded the same rights as other married couples, such as hospital visitation, insurance benefits, child custody, school liaison with teachers, etc. etc.

      272
      158
      • Void says:

        Equality for all Caymanians.

        Pedophilia is the main argument against equal rights for homosexuals. Pedophilia is a sick crime and has nothing to do with

        TWO consenting ADULTS.

        ONE love.

        – Void

        286
        160
      • Anonymous says:

        I’m not married and both me and my partner can get all these things without getting married…not a strong comment there..

        162
        235
      • alaw says:

        before you people fight for marriage
        your first fight, was to have the laws, of the land change!

  9. Anonymous says:

    The rule of parliamentary supremacy makes it completely clear that the judiciary may interpret the law but cannot change or ignore it. Considering the spirit in which law is drafted is important but the courts cannot change the law.

    The introduction of new legislation to recognize civil unions is not within the courts power, the legislature must do that. That way, the definition of marriage as being between man and woman remains in tact but there is an even playing field in terms of how same sex unions are recognized in Cayman. We then amend subordinate or ancillary legislation such as our Immigration, Intestacy, Children and Adoption laws for examples to include same sex unions so that they may have the same rights and obligations.

    Whatever training or familiarization or messaging is necessary for our community to be educated and able to support the recognition of same sex unions is done. I am thinking of counseling, adoption process, crisis centres, any social settings, children of same sex couples support, special needs support. Anything that our society benefits from or participates in now becomes inclusive of same sex unions as seamlessly as possible.

    I have never, as a heterosexual person, had to fight to marry, have kids, adopt, have beneficiaries recognized, worry how my sexuality may affect getting jobs, living in my own country. I recognize my privilege and I don’t think anyone should have to live that way.

    31
    28
    • nauticalone says:

      Well said!

      6
      2
      • Anonymous says:

        Except we do not have Parliamentary supremecy, and have not since we signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights! Our own constitution now fetters our Parliament, so notions of parliamentary supremecy are way outside the abilities of our village council.

        2
        1
  10. Anonymous says:

    The law MUST be revised to include same-sex MARRIAGE. Anything less than that merely continues the discrimination because it says to people, “These two persons are a “couple” — wink, wink — but they must sit at the back of the bus. They’re not good enough to sit up front.” You better believe that kids in our community totally get that type of message: On the playground, the kids of the same-sex couple are taunted by other kids because of stuff like this. I know all about homophobia on the playground because as a gay kid myself, I was on the receiving end of ENDLESS taunts. It was wrong then — and it’s wrong now. It is way past time to put an end to it. Justice Smellie, please do the right thing: Please let this country know in no uncertain terms that homophobia is wrong. Please do so by mandating same-sex MARRIAGE.

    43
    64
    • Anonymous says:

      And how is changing the law going to make kids act different on the play field?

      6
      9
      • Anonymous says:

        How could you honestly NOT understand my point??? The obvious point is that kids pick up on the cues they get from society and laws. If society or the law doesn’t value LGBTQ people or same-sex relationships, kids will notice and do the same. And the converse is true as well: For example, when have kids EVER ridiculed a classmate because his/her parents are an opposite-sex couple? The answer is, obviously, NEVER. Gee, this stuff is so basic. I can’t believe I have to explain this it.

        11
        4
  11. Gay peps at it again says:

    Money excuses. It is costly. As if government is not making any money. The most revenue increase I have ever seen is with this government.

    31
    4
  12. Anonymous says:

    Happening right now in Birmingham, England;

    ‘Education, not indoctrination’: British parents lead group of 300 in protest outside school gates against equality lessons on homosexuality and gender.
    Parents protested against lessons on homosexuality and gender at Parkfield Community School, Birmingham.
    More than 300 people stood outside yesterday and parents took children out of class to join the protests.
    They’re campaigning against lessons on equality at the school including issues of homosexuality and gender.
    Assistant head Andrew Moffat, a homosexual, created ‘No Outsiders’ to teach children about Equality Act and British values.

    (The proposed changes to our laws will not be limited to gay marriage in Cayman.)

    CNS: Interestingly, you leave out that the protest is led by and largely consisting of Muslim parents. Here’s the link to the story in the Daily Mail. I’m curious how you would feel about Muslims protesting against anything in the Cayman Islands.

    36
    15
    • Anonymous says:

      Really CNS, really?

      You see, times like these highlight the discrimination that exists on both sides of an argument.

      CNS, what difference does the religion of those BRITISH protestors make?!

      They are British, the country is Great Britain, they live, work, pay taxes like any other respectable BRITISH CITIZEN, so WHY do you feel the need to highlight the supposed religious background of those that are against the proposed changes to the education of their children?

      Re: “I’m curious how you would feel about Muslims protesting against anything in the Cayman Islands.”

      You say that as if being a Muslim automatically excludes one from being a Caymanian.

      Anyway, I trust you are brave enough to post my response.

      CNS: Noting the “brave enough” slur… Tut, tut. What difference does it make? To me, none at all. I merely pointed out that you left that fact out. Apart from anything else, it affects how people, especially generational Caymanians and Christian conservatives, interpret this story. My question was how you feel about it (and yes, I can see from the IP address Who you are).

      I actually agree 100% in what you say about these protesters in Britain (and yes, I am British). The fact that in all probability they are first or second generation British citizens makes absolutely no difference to me or, more importantly, British law. As a long-time reader of CNS, you know that already.

      However, the fact is that many of those who disagree with same-sex marriage are adamant that those of us who are first generation Caymanians and support the LGBT community in their quest for equality are corrupting the Cayman culture. So from what you say, you at least believe that my opinion on the matter holds just as much weight as generational Caymanians. Right? And if you’re going to include living, working and paying taxes, that would include everyone who lives and works here. Right?

      Genuine questions, not about same-sex marriage so much as who has the right to have opinions here and whether the opinions of generational Caymanians are more important than mine.

      Adding to this now I’ve seen the comment which is a mess of insults because I didn’t post this one instantly. Care to apologise?

      37
      12
      • Anonymous says:

        Genuine questions, not about same-sex marriage so much as who has the right to have opinions here and whether the opinions of generational Caymanians are more important than mine.

        Well said CNS. There is so much discrimination here it’s scary.

        8
        34
      • Anonymous says:

        @ CNS,

        At the end of the day, you opted to highlight the claim that the protesting British parents are Muslim.

        (Again, religion is NOT the sole reason to oppose same sex marriage, (elementary education, an LGBT curriculun).
        E.g. I am not religious yet you and I are clearly diametrically opposed on these issues.)

        Therein lies evidence of not only your mindset, but that of much of the UK, EU and western world today.

        (I expanded on that reality of democratically elected and endorsed discrimination in my earlier posts.)

        I see where you stated earlier that; “Democracy protects the minority” – that is clearly untrue in this instance, isn’t it?

        Lastly, re an apology; considering you arbitrarily categorised my post as “a mess of insults”, there will be none forthcoming.

        That’s a bit too much methinks, sorry.

        Had you posted or quoted the post I may feel differently.

        CNS: Just noting that you have ignored all of my points and not answered any of my questions. I did not say democracy is to protect minorities, I said human rights is to protect minorities from discrimination. The mess of insults centered on the fact that I hadn’t posted your comment, when I had in fact, rendering it pointless.

        13
        2
      • Anonymous says:

        @CNS:

        Subsequent to reviewing this thread (after previous post) on a larger device and in a more comfortable setting, I realise I have misinterpreted and perhaps misunderstood various aspects of your post.

        For that I do apologise and retract erroneous previous remarks.

        2
        11
        • Monty says:

          Dear Whodatis

          By posting under both your nickname and anonymous, as though different people, you have lost whatever little credibility you had.

          And so far as this topic is concerned, you have proved yourself to be a homophobe who lacks the guts to admit it, even under your assumed nom de plume.

          10
          6
          • Anonymous says:

            Bless your little obsessed heart.
            I advise you use this weekend to find yourself a bit of a life.

            – Who

            *Call me what you want – my position is clear and steadfast.

            6
            10
      • Anonymous says:

        CNS: “and yes, I can see from the IP address Who you are”. Was there any reason why you spelled “Who” with a capital “W”? Wink.

        CNS: Because in another comment with the same IP address, he signed it “Who” and it was the same writing style. To respond to the next bit of your comment, we do not have google ads to click on, no readers have to register as they do on social media, so the only information that we gather is the IP address, which by the way, changes regularly, as these are not static here. Google Analytics gathers general information, such as the numbers of visitors, the browsers they use and on what devises, but none of this can identify our site visitors. Read our Privacy Policy here.

        Anyone with half a brain knows that you know who we are. The main giveaway is not the IP Address, but the other host of machine attributes that are harvested with every page visit and post.

        CNS: As explained, this is nonsense.

        Why do you feel the need to assume the moral high ground when you are slanting your writing from a left-wing, atheistic mindset? It is your right to do so and no one is begrudging you this, but since you are a visitor to these islands, why do you feel it necessary to bully those indigenous folk who have a traditional God-fearing mindset?

        CNS: This is the comment section, which is for opinions, including mine. I am not a visitor to the Cayman Islands, I am a Caymanian. Because I was not born here does not make any difference legally or in any other way. This is classic prejudice.

        The sentence below is too vile to post, classic shaming, otherwise known as bullying, and you should be ashamed of yourself for writing it. However, people with a God-fearing mindset are not being bullied, they are simply getting push-back about preventing other Caymanians from having the same rights they do. It will not affect their lives in any way.

        XXXX

        Finally and most importantly, did it ever cross your mind that the people who disagree with you for reasons of spiritual conviction are choosing to disagree with you because they actually have a relationship with the God you have chosen to believe does not exist?
        If they are right and you are wrong, where does that leave you on Judgement Day?
        No genuine Christian wants to see any soul end up in eternal punishment which is why they actually speak out at great personal cost to try and help you reconsider your position. Nobody is perfect, only the Saviour. He is willing (and longing) to help you. You only have to ask. Seriously, best of luck.

        CNS: Yes, I absolutely accept that some people who disagree do so for spiritual reasons, and they have every right to do so. No one is taking that point of view away from them. However, I’m skeptical that they are doing so because they are worried about my soul.

        2
        2
        • Anonymous says:

          @ Poster,

          I too found CNS’ attempted “outing” to be in very bad taste.

          Had it actually been my post I would have been most disappointed 😉

          Anyway, I guess human beings are fallible and, for whatever reason, the situation proved too much for CNS to maintain their usual journalistic composure.

          However, it is not the first time I have witnessed this behaviour during my participation on this forum.
          For example, there was the “oops” moment when another “anonymous” poster made specific reference to an aspect of an earlier post of mine – which was NOT actually cleared by the moderators.

          (This was a few years back CNS so don’t sweat it. I didn’t say anything at the time – but definitely made a mental note.)

          Re: “CNS: This is the comment section, which is for opinions, including mine. I am not a visitor to the Cayman Islands, I am a Caymanian. Because I was not born here does not make any difference legally or in any other way. This is classic prejudice.”

          “Classic prejudice” you say eh? Interesting.

          Question: Does being a British-born Muslim “make any difference legally or in any other way” when a group opts to exercise their rights and freedoms to protest against an action by their government?

          Because…if memory served – you were QUICK to highlight that little fact earlier…in this very thread – you know what I’m referring to.

          Asking for a gay friend… 😉

          – Whodatis

          * Civil partnerships.

          CNS: No, Who, I don’t know what you are talking about. Read what I actually said and not what you think I meant in your head.

          4
          2
          • David Shibli says:

            My only problem with CNS is that they decided to chop up my post to make it appear as though they retain the higher moral ground. They are in a leaky boat and it will eventually sink.
            Next time CNS, print the post as it comes or do not print it at all. We do not need you to sanitize the truth, nor our lives.
            Yes, you are British as you have previously stated and before you were Caymanian, you were a visitor, the same as me, and yes, it matters.

            CNS: I retain the right to cut out highly offensive parts of any comment or delete the whole comment. It’s the job of the moderator. Like it or don’t comment.

      • Anonymous says:

        I fail to understand why you have taken us down a path of “who has a right to an opinion”?

        The issue at hand is “gay marriage / definition of marriage in the Cayman Islands”.

        I have stated my personal opinion on the issue on more than one occasion and I hold steadfast thereto.

        You, Pastor Tom, Gay Harry, my mother, whoever – are FREE to disagree with my opinion – it makes no difference to me whatsoever.

        However, what I will say, it is rather arrogant for anyone to relocate halfway across the world and EXPECT of DEMAND an overhaul of customs, quirks and “prejudices” to their preferences.

        E.g. I lived in the UK as a young, Black, male.
        I was very much disappointed by the UK govt’s, by way of the police, discrimination against young, Black, males.
        Being stopped and searched far more times than I can count within a few years compared to NEVER having ANY encounter with the police in my homeland and other countries, was not the most welcoming experience.

        Nevertheless, the UK has a reputation for racism and prejudice. Even its highest courts have called it “institutionally racist”.
        Brexit and the breakdown of the vote only concretes the stain of xenophobia and discrimination within the British psyche.

        Granted, they are anti-discrimination laws in the UK but that clearly does eff-all at crucial moments – e.g. Anthony Walker.

        My point is, after living there for some time, it became clear to me that the UK will NEVER compare to my beloved Cayman in respect to racial and societal harmony (unless, of course, we don’t put checks and balances on those importing such attitudes), however, there other aspects of the culture that were good.

        ** Btw, skin colour discrimination does not have to wait for a marriage application:
        It pops up as you step off the Central Line.
        It flashes the blue lights and gestures to “pull over” while driving along perfectly legally at 10 pm on the A13.
        It surrounds you with the sniffer dogs in London Victoria station when your girlfriend’s Mom is in town and looking on.
        It plays word games and tries to embarrass you from the serving side of the bar in the Aberdeen pub in front of your White university classmates.
        …I could go on. **

        (Btw, fast forward a few years to just a few weeks ago; I am walking through Victoria Station and see 4 bobbies surrounding an afro-haired, Brown-skinned 20ish, Black male…with the hi-vis doggie at command.
        I just looked the scared and frustrated young man in the eyes – gave an encouraging nod, and kept my stride…swallowed the lump.
        He has a lot of more of that to endure until he is able to present in British society as a non-criminal, like myself now – apparently.)

        Yet they wonder why Black men are disproportionately locked away in UK prisons, etc – but I digress.

        Non-White and non-Christian people have learned to accept and adapt to engrained British discrimination and prejudices for generations now – and that is not about to change anytime soon – DESPITE laws in place to combat.

        Can you not therefore come to terms with Cayman’s constitutional definition of marriage?
        Civil partnerships are awesome instruments you know.
        You know, I actually WANT a civil partnership with my woman but cannot get because we are not same-sex!

        What say you we trade; non-institutionally-racist, non-murderous, non-Brexited racial harmony for gay marriage?

        Deal?

        If no, then at a minimum, cool your jets and get a grasp of reality as it concerns this issue and DISCRIMINATION as a whole
        .
        Moreso considering the vast majority of your partners on this “discrimination” campaign will hypocritically disregard the aforementioned reality of British (and wider) discrimination or justify by some other means…if they’re honest and not playing up for the blogs, that is.

        – Whodatis

        *Hmm…if only there was a “civil partnership” equivalent for those Brits forced to endure skin-colour / culture discrimination in the UK on a daily basis…especially in these Brexit times.

        What a wonderful world that would be 🙂

        CNS: Cutting through all the whataboutism, which is exhausting…. I am strongly against racism in Britain, which I acknowledge exists, and I am strongly against prejudice against gay people anywhere. I am not going to say, yes, some people are racist in Britain therefore it’s OK to be prejudiced here. I can walk and chew gum. Really.

    • Anonymous says:

      That’s almost as bad as trying to teaching them that the world is more than 6,000 years old when we have a Good Book that has detailed recordings of it’s creation down to this exact date!

      3
      20
  13. Anonymous says:

    Basically a lot of people feel bad about me finally getting married to the love of my life. Still trying to understand exactly why.

    36
    65
  14. Unison says:

    I think it is worth defending traditional family and parenting in the Cayman Islands.

    Section 14.1 of the Bill of Rights, states –

    “Government shall respect the right of every unmarried man and woman of marriageable age (as determined by law) freely to marry a person of the OPPOSITE SEX and found a family.”

    The wording clearly barred same-sex couples from the right to marry in the Cayman Islands.

    Like Sir Jeffrey Jowell, QC, defended – the constitutional provision clearly shuts out 4 classes of people: the poligamist, bigamist, the underage, and homosexuals. Many of the supporters using this site to undermined what has been voted for by 62%of the electorate in 2009.

    Furthermore, the right to family life and the right to freedom of discrimination, both clauses mentioned in the Constitution, can not be used to disregard the specific marriage clause.

    According to Sir Jowell, it is clear that the drafters of our Constitution never intended to allow same-sex marriage, or any kind of marriage for that matter – the Natural Right of an unmarried man and lady of marriageable age must be uphold.

    Hence, the only remedial decision I see that Chief Justice Anthony Smellie has as the head of our Judicial system, is to assess the couple’s fair specific requests so it can be legally framed and ratified in civil partnerships law. I see no other way around it. Because it is made the minimum accepted option by the European Court of Human Rights.

    Yes, the COST.  It is worth it!

    Unison

    98
    27
    • Anonymous says:

      Well written and you get to the heart of it. The Marriage Law is clear so the only way around is to enact Civil Partnerships so same sex couples can have the same legal rights as opposite sex couples. As long as it’s not called “marriage” the religious people will have to accept it.

      13
      34
      • Unison says:

        “so same sex couples can have the same legal rights” … in all respects, I’m not for that. Some what you call gay rights are not Natural Rights.

        Unison

        36
        11
    • Anonymous says:

      Respecting one right does not bar another.

      21
      32
    • Anonymous says:

      Read the words of section 14 again: “shall respect the right”. It does not say “shall have the right”. As such, it is conferring a protection for straight couples to marry. It is not imposing a restriction on same-sex couples to marry. You need to read more carefully and if you can’t understand plain English go back to school.

      2
      1
    • Anonymous says:

      Unison, keep reading.

      In no way does this wording clearly bar same-sex couples from the right to marry in the Cayman Islands.

      This wording says nothing about same sex marriage.

      2
      2
  15. Smh says:

    Folks, the cost of legalizing SSM here will be more. We will need to include them in our Welfare systems!

    47
    31
    • Anonymous says:

      Same sex couples usually pretty well off because they dont normally have children. Dont really see this as an issue.

      18
      22
    • Anonymous says:

      God forbid we recognize them as humans in all capacities!!

      17
      22
      • anon says:

        oh stop. No one is saying they are not human. get over yourselves. its like the sky is falling because people cant get their own way.

        22
        7
        • Anonymous says:

          Oh please, how many “unwed” mothers are there in Cayman, and quite a few complaining they can’t take care of their “more than 4 children, all from different fathers”…that is just great values we have here and you are going to condemn to mature adults from getting the same benefits as a man and woman married? Ok…..we have such great morales here in cayman

          13
          6
    • Anonymous says:

      We should legalize S&M instead. Free the personal massagers!

      8
      9
    • Anonymous says:

      SMH, what are you smoking? Only Caymanians get welfare, and would probably get that anyway by dint of being Caymanian…why are you trying to scaremonger with lies?

      13
      16
  16. Cost don't Matter says:

    Comparing the ongoing cost of having to make huge changes for same-sex marriage couples with the cost of government defending the Condtitution, why yes … it is worth the fight ??

    52
    21
    • Anonymous says:

      What huge changes?? Please specify.

      10
      18
    • Anonymous says:

      The most nonsensical comment I have seen. Do you actually know what you want to say? Government went into this knowing they would lose on civil partnerships and possibly marriage..they just want the court to tell them they have to do this, so they can say to the churches “it wasn’t us, it was the courts”. The ladies in question have more balls than the entire LA put together. Alden and crew should have just stood up and done the right thing. He could have spun it as “if we went to court we would lose, so we are saving tax payers money and will comply”.

      26
      27
  17. Anonymous says:

    You are an idiot. This is not an issue to do with democracy. It is about the rule of law, but you are probably too ignorant to understand the distinction or the importance of it.

    The government just wasted hundreds of thousands of our dollars even though they know they are wrong. The persons responsible for the waste should be held personally accountable. Only then will Cayman stop this kind of crap.

    38
    45
  18. George Towner says:

    What? How gay marriage affects me?

    Some gay laws that spring from this marriage law that will go against our rights! I can see it happening!

    67
    30
  19. Anonymous says:

    Similar to how the British government “wasted public cash” on a democratic process to be xenophobic, racist, and insular aka Brexit referendum?

    Cayman’s HRC is nothing but a collection of brain-dead “copy and paste” drones looking to adhere to the woefully hypocritical and retarded standard of modern liberalism.

    Cayman is a great place to live and every person I have met on my travels reacts in envy upon learning of my home country.

    In terms of discrimination, Cayman itself is now suffering from transplanted realities via attitudes and prejudices imported right along with persons from parts of the world where such behaviour is normalised and increasingly endorsed.

    – Whodatis

    * The USA, UK, and virtually the entire EU block has NO PLACE to lecture any other country about DISCRIMINATION.

    Extreme “nationalism” and “white power” is back with a bang in the western (democratic) world – and interestingly, to a worrying degree in young Europeans, and talking heads expect us to ignore the fact or shove our heads into the sand right along with them.

    It is a disgrace that international human rights organisations are not calling them out for the disgraceful state of their campaigns, policies, elections, and administrations.

    Then again, democracy, Right?

    (foh)

    ** Civil partnerships.

    43
    29
    • Anonymous says:

      Moron

      16
      17
    • Monty says:

      So instead of the usual anti-UK / anti West diatribe, just answer something with a plain yes or no.

      Are you in favour of same-sex legal partnerships (civil or via marriage)?

      10
      10
    • Anonymous says:

      So says Caymans biggest Xenophobic, homophobic, racist commentator. Pot this is kettle, kettle this is pot.

      16
      15
      • Anonymous says:

        Quite a strong accusation there, Bud-Bud.
        Care to share any examples?

        For the record, I don’t ascribe to the generally upheld definition and broad application of the term “homophobia”.

        E.g. A person being gay is distinct and separate from the constitutional definition of marriage.

        – Who

        8
        10
    • Anonymous says:

      Although personal insults aplenty, I guess we should be encouraged by the absence of denial regarding the “white power” atmosphere of the western world.

      Now, if we could only fix the gay marriage stand-off in the Cayman Islands – all would be finally right in the world.

      So nice to see DISCRIMINATION is a thing of the past.

      – Who

      7
      10
  20. Anonymous says:

    HRC not the be all and end all. They probably represent or share the same views with a tiny fraction of the Caymanian people.

    9
    34
  21. Anonymous says:

    This Unity administration, a coalition dream team of the worst of the last two decades, is holster-shooting again on a wide range of expensive projects, with complete insensitivity to reason, cost, or consequence. The protagonists hope to have one final glorious pass at the till, maximizing great infrastructure largess, and corruption-prone contracts, before retiring without consequence. It couldn’t be worse.

    11
    21
  22. Anonymous says:

    The H,R.C needs to go and sit down, here they are fighting for rights of the lgbt but are silent on rights of children and people who have been murdered.

    59
    22
  23. Anonymous says:

    Sounds like a climb down to me!

    Civil unions for all?

    18
    16
  24. Anonymous says:

    How embarrassing Cayman.

    20
    36
  25. Anonymous says:

    Unjust laws are still unjust.

    20
    18
  26. Anonymous says:

    inexcusable waste of public funds….?…thats everyday with the cayman civil service….

    19
    39
  27. Anonymous says:

    Build the fence!

    14
    17
  28. Anonymous says:

    The Government stood up for majority of the Cayman people, boo hoo!

    79
    53
    • Anonymous says:

      The majority of the Cayman people are morally wrong.

      23
      54
      • Anonymous says:

        Except I actually believe the majority of Caymanian people side with the ladies, at least as far as civil partnerships are concerned, (although it would probably be true to say the majority of Jamaican people in Cayman do not).

        36
        28
      • Live Free.... says:

        You ever heard the saying majority rules?
        For example 62% is greater than 38%. 62% of Caymanians vote against Same Sex Marriage, so tell me where did they go wrong?

        26
        10
        • Anonymous says:

          No, they didn’t. They voted on a Constitution that most didn’t read, nor evaluate the consequences of. At that time, it was more a choice of ratify this Constitution or continue without one.

          Those that even considered the ramifications of gay marriage at that time likely thought that the strong proviso for nondiscrimination and equal rights would protect EVERYONE’s rights.

          None of us ever voted for or against homosexual marriage.

          9
          17
    • Anonymous says:

      One more time: Democracy respects the rights of the minority even if the majority do not.

      33
      13
    • Anonymous says:

      Not at all for my household.

      7
      17
    • Void says:

      Why must you control the lives of other Caymanian adults who are LEGALLY in love?

      As the article mentioned this is about their pensions and visitation, not special bathrooms. Two consenting adults, not three, and absolutely no children.

      If same sex couples didn’t deserve equal rights, they wouldn’t already have the legal right to be in a homosexual relationship.

      Equality for all.

      – Void

      24
      41
    • Anonymous says:

      They also wasted money that could have been used to help Caymanians in need
      You think QCs are cheap?
      But at the end of the day the only thing you care about is perpetuating hate at any costs to maintain control over other consenting adults

      19
      37
      • Live Free.... says:

        Sure the Government wasted Money, but not really, they actually use the money to defend the law of the land which is the Constitution and defend the majority the people that voted against SSM, because of that it was drafted in the Constitution. Hats off to the Government Money well spent.

        34
        8
    • Anonymous says:

      what is your evidence that this is the opinion of the majority?

      10
      29
    • Anonymous says:

      Oh so now you like your government….

      11
      12

You can comment anonymously. See CNS Comment Policy at the top of this page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.