First domestic challenge to Jamaica's...

First domestic challenge to Jamaica's anti-sodomy law

There are 63 comments on the www.caribbeannewsnow.com story from Feb 10, 2013, titled First domestic challenge to Jamaica's anti-sodomy law. In it, www.caribbeannewsnow.com reports that:

In 2011, Jamaica’s Parliament unanimously approved a new Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms which, for the first time, explicitly guarantees the right to privacy.

However, the Charter also appears to preserve the 1864 British colonially imposed anti-sodomy law. Under this law, intimacy between two adult men in the privacy of their bedrooms can land them in prison for up to 10 years at hard labour. This creates an obvious contradiction: it is arguable that under the new Constitution it is now impossible to enforce the anti-sodomy law without breaching the new right to privacy.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.caribbeannewsnow.com.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#42 Feb 14, 2013
Massa G wrote:
Tell that 2 tha millions a tourist that visit jamaica annually and know tha truth, insteada hearsay....
I'll be in Hawaii, thank you.
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#43 Feb 14, 2013
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>I don't LIVE in Los Angeles area anymore, besides, I lived in Redondo Beach and Long Beach, both about 20 miles from LA. That city is strange. It goes from ultimate over the top luxury, Bel Air, Holmby Hills, Beverly Hills, to full on slum, all 20 minutes apart, depending on traffic,
I guess some have it good and some aren't so good.
That's a very true statement from you.

Now, if you were going to ask me where the hotspots are in Jamaica, I would tell you, as I have been to Jamaica NUMEROUS times!

You asked me if you could safely walk through Kingston. The answer that I would give you is 'Yes...in certain places at certain times of the day'. This also applies to other places in Jamaica, like Spanish Town and Portmore, Curteese. It also helps if you KNOW where you are walking, where you are headed, and it couldn't hurt to know people that know where you are, and that can walk with you.

This basically goes for the volatile places in Jamaica, Curteese, as this likely is the same advice you likely would give me about Los Angeles, correct?

There's no question that the laws in Jamaica need to be rewritten...did you hear about the pregnant lady that was shot dead by a police officer, because she 'cursed' a bad word when she was speaking on the phone about how her purse got stolen, or something of that nature? The atmosphere for MOST Jamaicans can be quite dangerous at times, from crazy drivers, to storms, to hurricanes, to crime, to corruption, to all that other ridiculous foolishness, Curteese...same thing that I come across up here, or that I would encounter in your neck of the woods, or in any other place in the world, right Curteese?

Praying that things will improve in Jamaica real soon, Curteese...hope that they get better all across the world, as a matter of fact!
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#44 Feb 14, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>While I have never been to Jamaica myself, that doesn't prevent me from finding out and understanding what has been happening there.
<quoted text>You presented me multiple points to respond to, I broke down the text so the response to each would be easier to read than a lengthy soliloquy.
<quoted text>Of course there were prosecutions of consensual heterosexual acts under state "sodomy/unnatural acts" laws, but they were relatively few and far between as your first source admits and as your second source exemplifies, almost always involves other criminal sexual acts. The actual history of these laws remains one of a largely anti-gay vendetta.
<quoted text>Interesting article, too bad it isn't sourced as to where what the author says actually came from.
<quoted text>The case of Mr MacDonald is an interesting one. Under the law, what he really was guilty of was statutory rape, the age of consent was 18 and neither girl had made it there yet. But he was not prosecuted for statutory rape, but for contributing to the delinquency of a minor by having consensual vaginal sex with a child over 15, a misdemeanor that likely wouldn't have earned him jail time and wouldn't have earned him the title of registered sex offender. He was also prosecuted under the criminal sodomy statute, where the age of consent remains 18, which got him both and the conviction he is trying to appeal.
<quoted text>No dear, I am not forgetting that there have been occasional prosecutions of heterosexuals for otherwise consensual acts of "sodomy" etc. You seem to be forgetting that they are in reality, very few, very far between and that the laws have all but exclusively used to target homosexual acts in a purely discriminatory manner.
Again with the splitting up of my text...it would be so much easier if you posted several comments in where you sequester parts of my comments to answer to, rather than splitting up my comment, and posting several answers in one comment. Maybe that is what I will do for you here, Rick, even though I do believe that I can answer your statements in one or two comments.

First off, where it comes to you NEVER having been to Jamaica, so you would not have an understanding about what is going on in Jamaica, is a very true fact, EVEN IF YOU TRY TO KEEP UP WITH WHAT IS GOING ON IN JAMAICA, as many sources from where you get your information from likely don't depict the WHOLE story, much less depict ALL of Jamaica. Unbeknownst to you, Jamaica is a lot bigger than the size of Washington, D.C....maybe if you realized THIS fact, you would realize that you don't know so much about Jamaica as you would like to believe you do.

Considering that there was a shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, Rick, would it be fair for me to believe that more children are killed in Connecticut, when Jamaica comes to being closest in size to Connecticut, than any other state in America, Rick? Here's a link for you to look at...

http://geography.about.com/od/jamaicamaps/a/j...

Just because you read up on a part of Jamaica, doesn't mean that the WHOLE NATION is like that, correct Rick? Just like I can't start believing that there are piles of bodies being stacked up every day in Connecticut, simply because I keep in touch with the numerous massacres happening in America, right Rick? RIGHT!

Again...you haven't been to Jamaica, so you don't TRULY know Jamaica. I have been to Jamaica MANY times...you can't win this argument with me...though I'm sure you are going to try!

;)

P.S. I'm going to answer your other statements in another reply...that should make things simpler...a way of keeping things to a particular point, rather than having you deviate from one point to another to another...fair enough? GOOD!
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#45 Feb 14, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
Jamaica's laws need to be rewritten as I have said in each and every post. Consensual acts should be removed from it as should any reference to "buggery", "sodomy" and/or "unnatural acts". What should remain illegal are acts committed without consent or committed against those too young or otherwise are unable to provide consent to them. the law needs to be stripped of anything which allows it to be used abusively against any one or any group.
You're repeating what I have been saying, Rick...is this how you try to warm up to people, by trying to say that they stand for something else that they don't (like you saying that I have no problem with how the laws are in Jamaica right now, which I don't, but that I have a problem with how other people [namely police officers] can INTERPRET the law, where they can use their interpretation of the law to DISCRIMINATE against others [in THIS case, LGBT Jamaicans], which i have a SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH!), and then saying to them that something that they are already hoping to see is something you have to say to them, as if it is something that they have never even made mention of before, much less standing up for that same principle, Rick?

You are quite a nifty piece of work, Rick...hard to work with, and I usually don't have that to say about LGBT people, as there are MANY nice ones that I know...you may want to RECONSIDER your approach, if you are looking for allies in your quest for equal rights for ALL persons across the globe, Ricky boy!
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#46 Feb 14, 2013
Massa G wrote:
<quoted text> who tell u not 2 go outside tourist areas brothermon, they never told me dat ever wen i go 2 Yard yet. And how dem suppose 2 get 2 ocho rois or negril without them going out a da tourist area mon. Deres only a airport in Mo Bay and Kingston mon.
That poster has NEVER been to Jamaica, and most of the people that make negative comments about Jamaica don't know that MOST of Jamaica is safe and practically free of discrimination...

I won't say that those parts of Jamaica are totally free of discrimination, as I don't want to come across on this forum as a liar. I do seek to properly inform persons that only get a sheltered opinion of Jamaica, and seek out all the negative press about Jamaica in order to form their opinions of Jamaica. Some people will rather believe what they read from questionable sources, rather than taking the word of bonafide Jamaicans like myself...GO FIGURE!
Anonymous

United States

#47 Feb 14, 2013
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>I'll be in Hawaii, thank you.
u do that
Rodan

Amherst, MA

#48 Feb 14, 2013
Massa G wrote:
Why doesnt the USA permit polygamy/ mulitple marriage partners regardless of religion, if there is freedom of religion? Why is gay/homo marriage illegal in most all US states? R they going to reform this?
The govt is deliberately placing the public in harms way with hiv/aids. This is a sterilization process by them to decrease our population and it's working here. One thing this govt is good at and that is stealing, waging wars, and allowing people to destroy themselves and others.
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#49 Feb 14, 2013
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>Have a great time.
I had a WONDERFUL time, as I do almost every time that I go to Jamaica...

Too bad you let questionable sources scare you off from otherwise excellent travel destinations. Have you, Rick, or any other of you misinformed LGBT posters spoken to StevenFL since, or have you now disregarded him as a traitor, because he had a wonderful time in Jamaica, huh?
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#50 Feb 14, 2013
Massa G wrote:
<quoted text> u do that
I don't chance it with islands that are sitting near dormant volcanoes. Jamaica over Hawaii ANY DAY!
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#51 Feb 14, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>While I have never been to Jamaica myself, that doesn't prevent me from finding out and understanding what has been happening there.
<quoted text>You presented me multiple points to respond to, I broke down the text so the response to each would be easier to read than a lengthy soliloquy.
<quoted text>Of course there were prosecutions of consensual heterosexual acts under state "sodomy/unnatural acts" laws, but they were relatively few and far between as your first source admits and as your second source exemplifies, almost always involves other criminal sexual acts. The actual history of these laws remains one of a largely anti-gay vendetta.
<quoted text>Interesting article, too bad it isn't sourced as to where what the author says actually came from.
<quoted text>The case of Mr MacDonald is an interesting one. Under the law, what he really was guilty of was statutory rape, the age of consent was 18 and neither girl had made it there yet. But he was not prosecuted for statutory rape, but for contributing to the delinquency of a minor by having consensual vaginal sex with a child over 15, a misdemeanor that likely wouldn't have earned him jail time and wouldn't have earned him the title of registered sex offender. He was also prosecuted under the criminal sodomy statute, where the age of consent remains 18, which got him both and the conviction he is trying to appeal.
<quoted text>No dear, I am not forgetting that there have been occasional prosecutions of heterosexuals for otherwise consensual acts of "sodomy" etc. You seem to be forgetting that they are in reality, very few, very far between and that the laws have all but exclusively used to target homosexual acts in a purely discriminatory manner.
Ignoring your other comment, let's get to your third comment, where you mention that there WERE/ARE prosecutions/convictions of HETEROSEXUAL people. Regardless of whether there were infrequent convictions of HETEROSEXUAL people REPORTED for the public like ourselves to see on here, Rick, or if you want to try to find an excuse in why HETEROSEXUAL people were, in your mind, justifiably prosecuted/convicted of acts of sodomy and buggery, because there are other charges that are lumped in there, the FACT is that HETEROSEXUAL people WERE/ARE STILL being prosecuted/convicted for acts of consensual buggery and sodomy, and the SOLUTION that I'm sure that we can both agree on is that NOBODY should be prosecuted/convicted for CONSENSUAL acts of buggery or sodomy, no matter WHAT their sexual orientation, whether they are GAY, BISEXUAL, HETEROSEXUAL or what have you. The law SHOULD work to absolve EVERY person from unjust persecution from engaging in CONSENSUAL acts, right Rick?

That IS what we are talking about here, correct Rick? The minute YOU get distracted, in trying to justify why MOST of these HETEROSEXUAL people were/are prosecuted/convicted of buggery and sodomy, it serves to pervert the outlook of justice where ALL are concerned, Rick. It is HETEROSEXUALS one day, RIck, and for the rest of the month, it is LGBT people (isn't that how I hear it being depicted by some of you LGBT people, Rick?)! THINK OF IT, Rick...it is a divide and conquer method happening here. Your rationale is being methodically broken down, and you lose focus and objectivity when you look for reasons to find HETEROSEXUAL people of being guilty of acts of sodomy and buggery, as this is the SAME methodology that is being floated to the general public about LGBT people, where it comes to acts of sodomy and buggery, Rick.

Just take a minute to think of that, before you choose to respond in kind...Oh, and remember, we are on the SAME SIDE here, Rick!

(:
The Kisser

Amherst, MA

#52 Feb 14, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't chance it with islands that are sitting near dormant volcanoes. Jamaica over Hawaii ANY DAY!
Have you ever performed a metzitzah b’peh? Has Curteese?
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#53 Feb 14, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>The law is not written merely so that it might only be used against non-consensual or under aged acts, but it applies to consensual acts as well and the "complainant" need not be a party to the act, merely know that it is happening. The law has to be changed, it really is that simple.
Remember how you said that prosecutions/convictions against HETEROSEXUAL people happened, because of other mitigating factors/other breaches of the law? This is how other complainants are able to have charges brought up against people in Jamaica, of whom are committing CONSENSUAL acts of sodomy and buggery in Jamaica.

Do I think that THIS part of Jamaican law is right? Not necessarily. I do believe that IF there are people engaging in public sexual acts, that they should be convicted of that, rather than convicted for exactly what they were doing. Where it comes to people having sex in their residence, what I have to tell them is keep your doors and curtains closed. It would still be considered a lewd act if people can see you, based on the reasonable distance of one's door and window from the community's public area spaces.

In the end, the laws need to be rewritten. Unfortunately, it seems as if the Jamaican government has more pressing issues to deal with. I find this to be an UNNECESSARY excuse! I can see where the Justice Minister is having issue with simply revamping all the laws in Jamaica overnight, and to be honest, when it came to Jamaica taking a look at rewriting laws in relation to buggery and sodomy, the American government came down on Jamaica where it came to the 'lotto scam', so that seemed to take precedence over the buggery and sodomy issue, and with Jamaica trying to secure an IMF deal (with America's endorsement), the buggery and sodomy issue got put on the backburner, as did other laws that NEED to be rewritten/struck down, that affect ALL Jamaicans, moreso HETEROSEXUAL Jamaicans than LGBT Jamaicans...but you already knew that about Jamaica, right Rick?
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#54 Feb 14, 2013
The Kisser wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you ever performed a metzitzah b’peh? Has Curteese?
NOPE! Never have performed a Jewish circumcision procedure...have YOU performed this procedure, The Kisser?

Of course you have...likely with your teeth!

Beat it, troll!
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#55 Feb 14, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Interesting article, too bad it isn't sourced as to where what the author says actually came from.
And, where it comes to the articles that you rely on to form your opinion on Jamaica, did you happen to note where the author of those articles said where the majority of incidents you read up on occurred, Rick?

I sincerely doubt it!

;)

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#56 Feb 14, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't chance it with islands that are sitting near dormant volcanoes. Jamaica over Hawaii ANY DAY!
The last eruption of Diamond Head on Oahu was probably about 2 million years ago. I am not worried.

The only active volcano activity is down south on the Big Island. It is over the "hot spot" now, while the other islands have been traveling north and are out of danger.
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#57 Feb 14, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Of course there were prosecutions of consensual heterosexual acts under state "sodomy/unnatural acts" laws, but they were relatively few and far between as your first source admits and as your second source exemplifies, almost always involves other criminal sexual acts. The actual history of these laws remains one of a largely anti-gay vendetta.
<quoted text>Interesting article, too bad it isn't sourced as to where what the author says actually came from.
<quoted text>The case of Mr MacDonald is an interesting one. Under the law, what he really was guilty of was statutory rape, the age of consent was 18 and neither girl had made it there yet. But he was not prosecuted for statutory rape, but for contributing to the delinquency of a minor by having consensual vaginal sex with a child over 15, a misdemeanor that likely wouldn't have earned him jail time and wouldn't have earned him the title of registered sex offender. He was also prosecuted under the criminal sodomy statute, where the age of consent remains 18, which got him both and the conviction he is trying to appeal.
Did you happen to READ the portion of the article where it said that in Virginia, the age of consent is 15 YEARS OLD, not 18 YEARS OLD, Rick? Did you SEE what Mr. MacDonald is ACTUALLY guilty of, Rick?

I suppose that you IGNORED where a male teenager was CONVICTED for engaging in acts of sodomy with his teenage girlfriend, right Rick? Case 1.

The POINT is that it isn't ONLY LGBT people being prosecuted/convicted for acts of buggery and sodomy, Rick. The GOAL is to have these laws rewritten, to where CONSENSUAL acts of buggery and sodomy, between adults, are not prosecuted, right Rick? RIGHT!

This throws out your notion that there are almost always other criminal sexual acts occurring between HETEROSEXUAL persons that are convicted of buggery and sodomy, and that the sodomy/buggery laws remain to be one of a largely anti-gay vendetta throughout history. There were HETEROSEXUAL people burned at the stake also, for engaging in acts of buggery and sodomy, Rick...though I wouldn't expect you to acknowledge that, because it doesn't conveniently fit in your argument, does it, Rick?
The Kisser

Amherst, MA

#58 Feb 14, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>
NOPE! Never have performed a Jewish circumcision procedure...have YOU performed this procedure, The Kisser?
Of course you have...likely with your teeth!
Beat it, troll!
Oh Sharky......So stuck in your ways. May I suggest a Mondavi 1998 for your procedure.
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#59 Feb 14, 2013
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>The last eruption of Diamond Head on Oahu was probably about 2 million years ago. I am not worried.
The only active volcano activity is down south on the Big Island. It is over the "hot spot" now, while the other islands have been traveling north and are out of danger.
I would rather chance it in Jamaica, where the nearest dormant volcano, that I can find information on, is likely in Mexico.

If that happens to change, I will refrain from going to Jamaica again. The likelihood of that happening is just as likely as a gay couple being sentenced to 10 years of hard labour in Jamaica for consensual buggery, so I suppose you will see me kicking back in Jamaica for years to come.
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#60 Feb 14, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>You told me that you saw no problems in how the law is used as a discriminatory weapon against the gay folk, even though you went into great detail as to how much of a problem it really is for THEM.
In this response, you never actually ANSWERED the question that I had, in relation to where I made mention of not seeing ANY case to my knowledge where Jamaican law has unfairly targeted and convicted an LGBT couple for engaging in CONSENSUAL buggery/sodomy in Jamaica, Rick...you sort of went off on a tangent.

Now, that you have raised the stakes on this issue, by making mention that prosecutions/convictions against HETEROSEXUAL people, in relation to CONSENSUAL sodomy and buggery is concerned, PLEASE show me ONE case where an LGBT couple was prosecuted AND convicted for engaging in CONSENSUAL sodomy and buggery in Jamaica, where NO OTHER CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS, OR CRIMES AT ALL, WERE PRESENT, Rick! Can't come up with one? Ain't that funny how that works out, huh?...
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#61 Feb 14, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Of course there were prosecutions of consensual heterosexual acts under state "sodomy/unnatural acts" laws, but they were relatively few and far between as your first source admits and as your second source exemplifies, almost always involves other criminal sexual acts. The actual history of these laws remains one of a largely anti-gay vendetta.
<quoted text>Interesting article, too bad it isn't sourced as to where what the author says actually came from.

<quoted text>No dear, I am not forgetting that there have been occasional prosecutions of heterosexuals for otherwise consensual acts of "sodomy" etc. You seem to be forgetting that they are in reality, very few, very far between and that the laws have all but exclusively used to target homosexual acts in a purely discriminatory manner.
Actually, Rick..if you stop MISQUOTING the authors of the articles you are reading, you would see that the one author said...

'Although sodomy convictions are rare, they do occur, against both homosexuals and heterosexuals.'

The author didn't say that sodomy convictions rarely happens against heterosexuals ONLY. The author said that convictions of sodomy are rare against BOTH homosexuals AND HETEROSEXUALS! Get the context of what you are reading correct, Rick...LBGT people aren't the only victims of sodomy convictions (as the author said in his/her article). The author also said that sodomy convictions are rare against BOTH homosexuals AND HETEROSEXUALS, though the author DOES note that these convictions do happen! This throws out your argument that these sodomy and buggery laws were exclusively used to target homosexual acts in a purely discriminatory manner, based on this article that I posted in my previous comment, and that contrary to your belief that these sodomy and buggery laws were historically known to be laws that were only on the books to carry a vendetta against LGBT persons, the REALITY is that CONVICTIONS of sodomy and buggery were few and far between for ANYBODY, regardless of their sexual orientation, dear, and that HETEROSEXUALS were also targeted, prosecuted and convicted for the SAME acts that you say that homosexuals were almost always targeted for, Rick. THAT IS THE FACTS. Doesn't mean that I agree with it, Rick, and it doesn't mean that I don't agree that the laws should be rewritten, and that people that were previously targeted/discriminated against shouldn't have their names cleared. What it means, in my view, is that it isn't only LGBT people being targeted for these acts, of which is clear here. This is something you cannot argue, can you?

DId you want to read the article in its entirety AGAIN, Rick?

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/sex14.htm

1998 conviction of a man that had oral sex with a woman in North Carolina...he was sentenced to 10 years, and he spent 2 years in prison. Case 2

1986 - a Maryland man is convicted of heterosexual sodomy, and gets 18 months probation. Case 3

It goes both ways, figuratively speaking, Rick...there is also mention in the above article to persons like yourself, that almost exclusively seek to make the LGBT group the ONLY victims of these unconstitutional laws, and this is what the author says...

'...Opponents say the laws are rarely used except in failed rape prosecutions and to provide legal justification for discriminating against homosexuals....'

I'm glad that we had this read-along, Rick. Let's do it again REAL SOON, since I have the feeling that you are going to want to argue the points with me AGAIN, rather than seeing that we both agree on a common goal, okay pumpkin?

(:

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Saint Andrew, Jamaica Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Jeff Moehlis: Reggae Legend Lee 'Scratch' Perry... Jun 20 kelly 1
Saint Andrew Music Forum (Dec '12) May '16 Musikologist 11
News To be gay in Jamaica "to be dead" (Apr '07) Feb '16 Tom Stelin 1,332
News Behind the Lens: 2015 White House Photographs Jan '16 Ritual Habitual 1
News 39 US missionaries robbed in Jamaica (Jul '08) Dec '15 my balls on ur chin 74
News Mexican hotel chain announces US$900 million in... (Oct '15) Oct '15 Anonymous 1
News Old Women Battle With Razor, Pepper Spray On Je... (Aug '15) Aug '15 beatlesinafog 3
More from around the web