We challenged the Prime Minister’s commitment to ‘put teeth’ into the CCJ’s cross-dressing ruling

Dear Editor,

I have noted Mr. Vidyaratha Kissoon’s polite, but logically challenged  response to my letter published by you on Dec. 04, 2018.  Please allow me to clarify some areas of understandable confusion  in Mr. Kissoon’s mind, as he predictably defends the LGBT agenda when I did not attack.

In an apparent misunderstanding of what I wrote, Mr. Kissoon said, “It is surprising that anyone would object to the Government of Guyana’s affirmation of its duty to transgender, gay, lesbian and bisexual citizens.” I am pleased to announce to Mr. Kissoon that I too would be surprised. Had Mr. Kissoon carefully read my statement, he would have observed that I said, “Whether or not the CCJ’s ruling is right is irrelevant, because the Government of Guyana has bound itself to abide by its ruling”. How clearer can I make that? Without prejudice to our personal

beliefs and/or preferences, we subscribe to the rule of law and the Government’s obligation to abide by our Constitution, and in this case, the ruling of the CCJ.

But I admit that there is a not-so-subtle nuance in my statement. We challenged the Prime Minister’s commitment to “put teeth” into the CCJ’s ruling, as against merely abiding by its ruling because of a Constitutional violation in the way our ancient law is written. We maintain that the sovereign right to legislate rests with our Government and not with the CCJ. Our Legislature must however ensure at all times that there is harmony between its laws and our Constitution.

The real issue that must be addressed is whether aberrations and distortions of human sexuality as embodied in homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexualism and transgenderism, constitute a medium-to-long-term asset or liability to any society.

If, for sake of argument, John Doe is a practicing, faithful, committed homosexual, it means that his sex partner or partners will all be male. This means that John Doe, as a man of integrity and faithfulness to his partner, has just waived his right to have children. The same applies to every faithful lesbian. Bisexualism has worse public health implications than homosexuality and lesbianism combined.

If John Doe decided to exercise his God-given ability to procreate, he would have to temporarily abandon his commitment to his male partner, stealthily have sex with a poor, possibly unsuspecting woman, and then scamper home to his man before he is found out. Such devious behaviour on the part of John Doe almost guarantees one more “fatherless” child growing up in our society.

Of course one of John Doe’s alternatives would be for him and his partner to adopt the offspring of a heterosexual couple, and enhance the chances that that child, by learning what it lives, will grow up to be a homosexual or lesbian. The result would be the acceleration of the vicious downward spiraling social cycle towards inevitable implosion.

Homosexuality, lesbianism and habitual lying are life-style choices that we make. We concede that some people for whatever reason find themselves attracted to persons of the same sex. The same-sex struggler is not unique! Everybody is born with the natural propensity to lie. But thanks to social and spiritual intervention, many of us have been saved from succumbing to this propensity. The same help is available for homosexuals and lesbians.

In the interest of brevity, on another occasion I will address Mr. Kissoon’s counter-arguments regarding Hinduism and the manifestos of our major Political Parties as these relate to the LGBT agenda.

Yours faithfully,

Phyllis J. Jordan