It is time for Jamaica to answer for its barbaric human rights record.

[Ravenman]

@Ouroboros

According to your morals, it is. However, according to the morals of others, homosexuality is evil. Is it the responsibility of the members of that society to change it, or is it our responsibility to change every society to be more like ours?

I call myself a liberal, but occasionally I get a chuckle from recalling that joke that a liberal is someone too open-minded to take their own side in a debate. This “we can’t judge anyone unless we’ve lived among them for a long period of time” argument made me think of that.

I think there’s a lot of room for disagreement on what constitute inviolate rights – there’s another thread going on on this board in which some people view the right to bear arms as sacred. But I really think FDR’s vision of the Four Freedoms as something that I find impossible to argue against, and in this discussion, the freedom from fear is extremely appropriate.

If certain people in whatever country have to live in fear of violence, that is wrong. I think it is wrong for people to have to live in fear of street crime, and doubly wrong if the government and/or society tacitly accepts that violence against whatever people is okay. I think it is impossible to condone a widespread pattern of violence, even in faraway places, and be a moral person.

I accept that not every person sees homosexuality in the same way. As much as I disagree with the views of someone like jtgain, I can accept those disagreements – and maybe work and hope that he changes his mind – because to his credit, jtgain at the very least does not believe that his intolerance justifies terrorizing or assaulting other people.

[Steve_MB]

@jtgain

Pat Buchanan in his 1992 “Cultural War” speech

Meh. It sounded better in the original German.

[Steve_MB]

@jayjay

And the curious phenomenon of Christian persecution in a First-World nation which has demonstrably the most actively Christian population is once again demonstrated.

My point being, in case explication is needed, that people who hold this sort of viewpoint apparently consider it persecution when people simply disagree with them.

Or, more precisely, when they don’t get every little bit of their own way.

@L. Sprague deCamp

“You don’t like the Goths?”
“No! Not with the persecution we have to put up with!”
“Persecution?” Padway raised his eyebrows.
“Religious persecution. We won’t stand for it forever.”
“I thought the Goths let everybody worship as they pleased.”
“That’s just it! We Orthodox are forced to stand around and watch Arians and Monophysites and Nestorians and Jews going about their business unmolested as if they owned the country. If that isn’t persecution, I’d like to know what is!”

[Ouroboros]

@villa

But you are being told what is being done there.

I’m being told by whom? A newspaper article or TV piece done by people who live in my society? Again, their views are biased towards the values of this society, so of course they will sensationalize everything that doesn’t happen the way it happens here.

@villa

Is there any degree of abuse a country can heap upon a segment of its own population that you might claim is unreasonable?

If I’m not personally witnessing such abuse and have no understanding of the culture in which it’s taking place, then I have no place to say what’s unreasonable. I don’t live there, and it doesn’t affect me. No amount of media coverage will change the fact that I don’t live in Jamaica and am absolutely powerless to change their laws, values and attitudes.

[Anne_Neville]

@jtgain

Well, what about people who have religious beliefs against your lifestyle? Should we all die, or be forced to accept your lifestyle as legitimate, even though 200 years of our history have said otherwise.

I’m Conservative Jewish. My religious beliefs say it is bad to eat pork. Should I be trying to get it made illegal for anyone to eat pork, so I won’t have to explain to my future children that some people have different religious beliefs than ours?

Conservative Judaism also doesn’t think that marriages between Jews and non-Jews are a good thing. Do we try to get interfaith marriages made illegal? No, we just tell people who want to go into an interfaith marriage that our rabbis won’t perform the service for them, and won’t allow them to have the wedding in our synagogue. Nobody has tried to force any Conservative rabbis or synagogues to perform interfaith marriages, AFAIK. Incidentally, the Bible has a lot more passages saying that interfaith marriage is wrong than it does saying homosexuality is wrong… Are you active in a campaign to make interfaith marriages illegal?

@jtgain

It was punishable by death in the middle ages.

Being a Christian and refusing to worship the emperor was punishable by death for a period during the Roman Empire. Does that mean that doing those things is wrong now?

[Ouroboros]

@Miller

Forcing women to wear veils is also wrong.

From your point of view. Wearing a veil is an integral part of some religions; who are you to say its wrong? Just to prove my point, I intentionally used the word ‘forcing’. If you ask a Muslim woman if she feels forced to wear a veil and she says no, is she ‘wrong’? Should she have to agree with your point of view in order to be ‘right’?

@Miller

If your neighbor is beating his wife with a lead pipe every night, how can you say he’s wrong to do that? What makes it okay to judge your wife-beating neighbor, but not a gay-bashing Jamaican?

It’s against the laws of our society to beat your wife with a pipe. If you choose to live in a country, you have agreed to obey its laws. However, I do not live in Jamaica and cannot use the laws of my country as a guideline for how I think their country should be run.

@Miller

I think it’s a fair generalization to say that humans, on the whole, do not like being chased by angry, violent mobs.

Have you personally experienced angry, violent mobs chasing gay people in Jamaica? If not, then you have no idea what the reality is and all you know is a newspaper article.

@Miller

We’re talking about a economic boycott…

If a Jamaican has to suffer because a foreign power believes he should be nicer to homosexuals, he will blame Jamaican homosexuals and their situation will worsen. So what will you do as a result of all this? Stop drinking Red Stripe? Ban reggae music from your house? Wear a lapel pin and put a bumper sticker on your car? Or will you move to Jamaica and start a grassroots movement to eliminate discrimination against homosexuality? Other than arguing with me, what do you plan on doing about it?

@Miller

…when the Nazis were rounding up all the Jews, Gypsies, gays, and handicapped in Germany…

This has absolutely nothing to do with the holocaust. The subject is homosexuals in Jamaica, not Jews in Europe 50 years ago. I could just as easily say that anti-gay Jamaicans are suffering because their views are being suppressed by Nazi-like people who are hostile to their beliefs, and your response would have to be that the anti-gay Jamaicans must be helped because to stifle their freedom of belief is wrong.

[levdrakon]

@Ouroboros

Have you personally experienced angry, violent mobs chasing gay people in Jamaica? If not, then you have no idea what the reality is and all you know is a newspaper article.

So if you don’t see something with your own eyes, it’s just a made up newspaper article. The world isn’t round, 9/11 never happened, and we don’t have 1,000s of troops in Iraq right now.

Yes?

[Miller]

@Ouroboros

From your point of view. Wearing a veil is an integral part of some religions; who are you to say its wrong? Just to prove my point, I intentionally used the word ‘forcing’. If you ask a Muslim woman if she feels forced to wear a veil and she says no, is she ‘wrong’? Should she have to agree with your point of view in order to be ‘right’?

Yes, and as you may have noticed, I also said, “forcing,” in my response. Because it’s the forcing part that’s wrong, not the veil part.

It’s against the laws of our society to beat your wife with a pipe.

What’s that got to do with right and wrong?

If you choose to live in a country, you have agreed to obey its laws.

Again, we’re talking about gays who were born in Jamaica, so it’s not exactly like they’ve got a choice about it.

Have you personally experienced angry, violent mobs chasing gay people in Jamaica? If not, then you have no idea what the reality is and all you know is a newspaper article.

Ah, so your contention is that there is no homophobia in Jamaica, and the widespread reports of mob violence and anti-gay policies from the government are just, what? Some giant media conspiracy? On whose behalf is this conspiracy being perpetrated? Is it the Jews? I’ll bet it’s the Jews. They get all the good media conspiracies.

If a Jamaican has to suffer because a foreign power believes he should be nicer to homosexuals, he will blame Jamaican homosexuals and their situation will worsen. So what will you do as a result of all this? Stop drinking Red Stripe? Ban reggae music from your house? Wear a lapel pin and put a bumper sticker on your car? Or will you move to Jamaica and start a grassroots movement to eliminate discrimination against homosexuality? Other than arguing with me, what do you plan on doing about it?

Not buying products from Jamaica would be a start. Not vacationing there, either. Talking about the situation there with other people, in the hopes that I can convince them to also avoid Jamaican products and so forth. You know, standard boycott stuff. You are familiar with the concept of a boycott, right? This isn’t new to you?

Will it work? I don’t know. Boycotts don’t always work. But some countries are sensitive to becoming international pariahs. It worked out pretty well in South Africa, for example. Jamaica, so far as I know, doesn’t have a whole lot of industry. Most of their economy is based around tourism. If their tourism money starts taking a serious hit because of outrage over their treatment of homosexuals, maybe their government will take harder line against the bigots in their country.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the holocaust. The subject is homosexuals in Jamaica, not Jews in Europe 50 years ago.

So what? Why does your principle of cultural non-interference apply to Jamaica today, and not Hitler’s Germany?

Incidentally, the Jews in Europe fifty years ago didn’t have it so bad, what with it being 1957 at the time.

I could just as easily say that anti-gay Jamaicans are suffering because their views are being suppressed by Nazi-like people who are hostile to their beliefs, and your response would have to be that the anti-gay Jamaicans must be helped because to stifle their freedom of belief is wrong.

No, my response would have to be gales of mocking laughter at you for making such a staggeringly idiotic comparison.

[MrDibble]

@Miller

We had a much larger boycott going when South Africa was operating under apartheid, and I haven’t heard too much resentment coming from South African blacks over it.

Well, we didn’t get the BBC TV shows, so that sucked, but then again, no 80s hair metal bands came on tour here, so it balances out

Seriously, though - the Jamaican situation sucks, and I support any boycott action against them.

[villa]

@Ouroboros

I’m being told by whom? A newspaper article or TV piece done by people who live in my society? Again, their views are biased towards the values of this society, so of course they will sensationalize everything that doesn’t happen the way it happens here.

Fine - then dispute the truth of the reports. That isn’t what you did. You shrugged your shoulders, and said you couldn’t judge.

@Ouroboros

If I’m not personally witnessing such abuse and have no understanding of the culture in which it’s taking place, then I have no place to say what’s unreasonable. I don’t live there, and it doesn’t affect me. No amount of media coverage will change the fact that I don’t live in Jamaica and am absolutely powerless to change their laws, values and attitudes.

Will you just once answer the question? Is there ANY degree of abuse a government can heap upon its own citizens that you think is unreasonable?

[tagos]

@villa

Will you just once answer the question? Is there ANY degree of abuse a government can heap upon its own citizens that you think is unreasonable?

I dunno. How much oil are they sitting on?

[cowgirl]

I am hugely sympathetic to the OP but I confess I’m a little uncomfortable by the unproblematic way that “Jamaica” is represented.

There are Jamaican gay people, I know some. Here is one that has even made it to Wikipedia (you will have to take my word for it re: her orientation, but if you peruse her site you can certainly see that she ain’t straight.) There are also lots of LGBT allies within Jamaican communities. They hate the homophobia in Jamaica just as much as we do.

So when I hear you criticizing “Jamaica,” I hear you criticizing them too, those people who are your natural allies and who need your support, and not your criticism.

I also think it’s important to note the rest of the context: Jamaican society not only has a lot of homophobia, but also misogyny, poverty, violence, and so on. I am not gay but I am female; if we were to separate out these different oppressions based on my personal interests I would consider the misogyny more boycott-worthy. But I cannot separate out these oppressions; the whole system is broken in a very complex way, and a lot of people (not just homosexuals) pay a tragic price. How can you boycott a nation for permitting gay people to be beaten to death, but not for permitting women to be beaten to death?

I know there are Jamaican gays and feminists and anti-poverty and anti-violence activists. So the only position I can morally take is: Support these people. Support J-FLAG and anti-hate activists wherever you find them.

Strategically: do not persecute Jamaica any more. It smacks of paternalistic colonialism; it is awfully close to racism; and it denies the agency of those Jamaicans with whom you would agree on every important point.

Find your Jamaican allies and work with them and support them to change their society the only way that social change is possible: from the inside. I promise you, they are out there.

[Ouroboros]

@levdrakon

So if you don’t see something with your own eyes, it’s just a made up newspaper article. The world isn’t round, 9/11 never happened, and we don’t have 1,000s of troops in Iraq right now.

Yes?

Yes, I am implying all of these things… You have defeated me.

@villa

Fine - then dispute the truth of the reports. That isn’t what you did. You shrugged your shoulders, and said you couldn’t judge.

Then what should I do?

@villa

Will you just once answer the question? Is there ANY degree of abuse a government can heap upon its own citizens that you think is unreasonable?

I believe I did answer this by saying I would not consider the question, as it’s irrelevant.

[Ouroboros]

@Miller

What’s that got to do with right and wrong?

He feels he’s right, she feels he’s wrong. It’s relative.

@Miller

Again, we’re talking about gays who were born in Jamaica, so it’s not exactly like they’ve got a choice about it.

They have the choice to help change the laws or leave.

@Miller

widespread reports of mob violence and anti-gay policies from the government are just, what? Some giant media conspiracy?

Since you have not experienced it yourself, you must trust the points of view of others. Taking someone else’s word for it is not the same as firsthand experience. Use the terms ‘widespread’ all you want, it will not change this truth, nor will it change your powerless position.

@Miller

Not buying products from Jamaica would be a start. Not vacationing there, either. Talking about the situation there with other people, in the hopes that I can convince them to also avoid Jamaican products and so forth. If their tourism money starts taking a serious hit because of outrage over their treatment of homosexuals, maybe their government will take harder line against the bigots in their country.

If not buying Jamaican products and not vacationing there gives you peace of mind, that’s fine. I’m just pointing out that this hurts Jamaicans who agree with you, and it risks creating animosity among natives. And countries don’t just change socially overnight because you don’t want to buy Red Stripe anymore…

@Miller

So what? Why does your principle of cultural non-interference apply to Jamaica today, and not Hitler’s Germany?

This is what I believe on this issue. It has nothing to do with Hitler’s Germany, just as much as it has nothing to do with penguins in Antarctica or anything else.

@Miller

No, my response would have to be gales of mocking laughter at you for making such a staggeringly idiotic comparison.

Your point of view. For example, many in Europe and the Middle East sympathize with Palestinians more than Israelis, while many Americans feel the opposite. It’s relative. In conclusion, you seem more concerned with being cute and witty than debating these issues, and I feel I have made my point as best I can, so peace and good luck.

[Miller]

@Ouroboros

Yes, I am implying all of these things… You have defeated me.

I don’t normally have to ask this but, was that sarcasm? Only, it’s so hard to tell, because your response here is no less loopy than your apparently straight-faced answers earlier in this thread.

Then what should I do?

I dunno. Judge, maybe? I mean, it’s one thing to say, “There’s nothing I can do,” but you came in here comparing outrage over the murder of innocent people to some sort cultural imperialism, as if the idea that it’s wrong to kill innocent people were equivalent to making fun of people for wearing dashikis.

I believe I did answer this by saying I would not consider the question, as it’s irrelevant.

You answered the question by saying you wouldn’t answer the question? That’s a pretty cheap dodge there, Ouroboros. You could, at least, explain why it’s not relevant. What’s the material difference between a culture that considers the murder of gays to be acceptable, and a culture that considers the murder of Jews to be acceptable?

[Miller]

@Ouroboros

He feels he’s right, she feels he’s wrong. It’s relative.

So you’re saying there’s nothing wrong with beating your wife with a lead pipe?

They have the choice to help change the laws or leave.

And go where? How will they get there? Where will they get the money for the journey?

Since you have not experienced it yourself, you must trust the points of view of others. Taking someone else’s word for it is not the same as firsthand experience. Use the terms ‘widespread’ all you want, it will not change this truth, nor will it change your powerless position.

Yes, that’s right, I have not experienced it myself. I also have not, personally, experience female genital mutilation in Africa, oppression of Christians in China, or date-rape on a college campus. That does not mean that these things have never happened, nor that one cannot have an opinion on the morality of these acts.

If not buying Jamaican products and not vacationing there gives you peace of mind, that’s fine. I’m just pointing out that this hurts Jamaicans who agree with you, and it risks creating animosity among natives. And countries don’t just change socially overnight because you don’t want to buy Red Stripe anymore…

Do you believe it was similarly wrong to boycott South Africa over apartheid?

This is what I believe on this issue. It has nothing to do with Hitler’s Germany, just as much as it has nothing to do with penguins in Antarctica or anything else.

Why not? Why does your reasoning on this issue not apply equally to the Holocaust? What’s the difference between the two situations that makes concern over one misplaced, and concern over the other appropriate?

Your point of view. For example, many in Europe and the Middle East sympathize with Palestinians more than Israelis, while many Americans feel the opposite. It’s relative.

Huh. So comparing the situation to Israel is okay if it makes a point in your favor, but comparing the situation to the Holocaust is irrelevant. Presumably, because it makes a point in my favor?

At any rate, the Israeli-Palestinian issue is extremely cloudy, with very few places where one can draw clear lines between good guys and bad guys. Both sides, at one time or another, have killed innocent people, and there are endless arguments over who has been more wronged in the conflict. What wrongs have Jamaican gays inflicted on the rest of their society, that there’s any sort of justification at all for how they’re treated?

In conclusion, you seem more concerned with being cute and witty than debating these issues, and I feel I have made my point as best I can, so peace and good luck.

I’d love to debate the issue, but there seems to be a lack of coherent thought and rigorous logic on the other end of the debate, so I don’t really have a lot to work with, here.

[Waenara]

Interestingly, today’s episode of Oprah is about what it’s like to be gay in various countries. Her examples of bad countries so far have been India and Jamaica. She interviewed a lesbian from Jamaica who was gang-raped because she’s gay.

Maybe this issue being shown on Oprah will raise many people’s awareness of the issue of homophobia in Jamaica.

Edited to add a link: Oprah.com

@oprah.com

According to a 2007 Jamaican study, almost 100 gays and lesbians were targeted in mob attacks over a six-month period. When Jamaica’s leading gay rights activist was murdered in 2004, a crowd gathered at the crime scene to celebrate.

Staceyann Chin is a critically acclaimed poet, playwright, performer and lesbian activist who was born and raised in Jamaica. She says she fled her native home because of the vicious crimes being committed against people like her. She now lives in a small Caribbean neighborhood in New York City. “I like being with people who look like me and sound like me,” she says.

[Cat_Fight]

@Waenara

Maybe this issue being shown on Oprah will raise many people’s awareness of the issue of homophobia in Jamaica.

Will have to check this out. I mentioned getting a gay Jamaican celeb to start a campaign, but if anyone can bring attention to an issue, it’s Oprah (and in this case, there’s less chance for her to bring in idiot ‘experts’). Maybe Oprah’s a doper!

[jayjay]

@Cat Fight

Will have to check this out. I mentioned getting a gay Jamaican celeb to start a campaign, but if anyone can bring attention to an issue, it’s Oprah (and in this case, there’s less chance for her to bring in idiot ‘experts’). Maybe Oprah’s a doper!

:dubious:

goes back to check all the The Secret threads to see who was defending that drek