I disagree with Dr Carrico’s views on Western cultural imperialism

Dear Editor,
I refer to the feature by Dr Christopher Carrico (`History This week: Western Cultural Imperialism in neo-Colonial Societies’; SN 8th July 2010), and would appreciate the opportunity to rebut. It is noteworthy that Carrico argues that there is an overt attempt to impose “normative” or “good” Western value-systems (marriage defined as a union between a man and a woman, manhood, womanhood, sex) on “colonized” populations, and argues against this in the cause of homosexuality.

But the gay-militant camp must be in a state of confusion after the recent IRO-denunciation, because equally confusing is Swami Aksharananda’s effort in the letter-section of the same day (“Homosexuality Has Nothing to do with Western Values”). Having imperiously cast this proposition upon us, he then proceeds to disprove his case by citing no less than six Western states now beset by gay-militant efforts to influence entire national policies. He simply ignores the evidence! It is sad that the Swami uses the occasion not to enlighten, but to camouflage the degenerative influence that Western-style gay-rights agendas have on accommodating populations … by an attack on the IRO’s principled position. His advocacy that the IRO-position is “… as ludicrous as it is unfounded …” is patently false, and easily rebutted on several grounds. We shall deal with Aksharananda in greater detail later!

For now, however, it is the wilful and academically disastrous position adopted by both Carrico and Swami that should concern us.

Since the IRO’s recent and cataclysmic denunciation of SASOD’s “film festivals” at the Sidewalk Cafe, many are apparently finding top billing and space in the Stabroek News letter/editorial/feature column-space.  Will the opposing voice be given the same opportunity?

And they continue to ignore the facts … and the details … as outlined in:

1. “The Case Against Pancap and the Decriminalization of Homosexuality” (http://www. scribd.com/doc/17685588/The-Case-Against-PANCAP-and-the-Decriminalization-of-Homosexuality    )

2. “The Case Against Cross-dressing or Transgen-derism in Guyana” ( http:// www.scribd.com/doc/27698238/The-Case-Against-Cross-Dressing-or-Transgender-ism-in-Guyana-UPDATED )

A stupendous silence … or else a tonnage of intellectual-sounding gobbledygook … emanates from Carrico and his ilk when the facts listed therein are exposed. Carrico ignores the fact that many of his academic colleagues have shown that homosexuality is a psychosexual and mental disorder causing spiritual distress. Carrico ignores the fact that no less than 15 secular study groups have shown that medical and spiritual therapy for homosexuality works. Carrico ignores that fact that the homosexual community is plagued with internal physical and sexual violence on a scale many times more than that imposed upon then from without, and is a sure manifestation of psychosexual distress.

Carrico clearly has not read (or refuses to admit that he has) the article by Melanie Phillips “How Britain is Turning Christianity Into a Crime” (http://www. melaniephillips.com/articles-new/?p=447 ) …all in the name of homosexuality/ human-rights! It illustrates that a disorder, when left to itself or given latitude to consider itself “normal” always seeks to impose its madness on society! What, exactly, can Guyana learn from this?

This latest jaunt into intellectual mischief by Dr. Christopher Carrico is therefore consistent in one area, however … it illustrates the pathological proclivity of gay-militancy to confuse, to deceive, using the simple tactic of “skullduggery-by-verbiage”. Medical, legal and sociological facts and details from the Western experience (of which we are a part) play no part in such an effort. If you cannot dazzle them with brilliance, offers Carrico, then baffle them with bull!

So, instead of attending to the detail supplied by his academic colleagues, decided retreats to tribes in the deepest jungles of Borneo are called forth as “evidence” of …what? Savagery? Bar-barism?

The tactic is only useful when the reader-recipient does not challenge, does not demand more detail, more focus.

Carrico basically parrots all the same arguments Alissa Trotz was confused with before … and our reaction should be the same … demand that he focus, and consider the overwhelming evidence as outlined, say, in the article ”Alissa Trotz: Using … and Abusing … Desmond Tutu in the Cause of Homosexuality and Transgenderism” (http://www.scribd.com/doc/28722766/Alissa-Trotz-Using-and-Abusing-Desmond-Tutu-in-the-cause-of-Homosexuality-and-Transgenderism     )

We should begin by asking him to understand that homosexuality is not a civil right in saner populations because of known facts relating to disease and psychosexual distress, and the following excerpt from the article by Robert Regier and Daniel Garcia (“Homosexuality is not a Civil Right”; www.crrange.com/wall34.html), is instructive:

“ … When protecting one’s inalienable and civil rights, the government must discern between liberty and license. This requires that rights attach to persons because of their humanity, not because of their behaviors, and certainly not those behaviors that Western legal and moral tradition has regarded as inimical to the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” as stated in the Declaration.

Yet, today some advocate granting “rights” to behaviors hostile to the most fundamental forms of self-government, family, church, and community. This is especially the case with homosexual activists, who ironically seek to hijack the moral capital of the civil rights movement….”

To equate the social currency and legitimacy of the cultures that gave him his education … and Doctorate … with the habits of a few remote tribes in Papua, New Guinea, tells us one thing … that should we not find Dr. Carrico establishing his new place of residence with the happy campers in New Guinea, or insisting that his children … and wife … attend “schooling” there, then his best qualification (fully earned and deserved) would be that of “hypocrite”!

Because he has consciously made a decision that those cultures are somehow inferior to his, or are potentially injurious to him and his family in their construction and ambience.

Our advice could be this simple: Address the details, Carrico! Address the details, Aksharananda! For your own sake and that of your children!

But is this simple request feasible? …. because there are none as blind … as those who would not see!

Yours faithfully,
Roger Williams

Around the Web

Comments