Also not impressed with discrimination

Today’s royal gazette covers a number of topics not getting aired.  One such topic revolves around the review of discrimination based upon sexual orientation. 

Regardless of whether you are for or against a chance in the human rights legislation, what is abundantly clear is that our leadership on both sides are incapable and incompetent when it comes to making a decision on this issue.

Mrs. Louise Jackson has it half right and half wrong

“We believe it is a matter for a conscience vote in Parliament.”

Parliament has demonstrated it’s ineffectiveness in this matter already.

“We believe it is a matter for each individual to decide how to vote on this matter.”

This however, has merit.  Don’t leave it up to the politicians, put it to the people in a plebiscite (which is a vote requested of the people by government and differs from a referendum which is a vote requested by the people via a petition) and let the people choose whether we support this change or not.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized by . Bookmark the permalink.

13
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
13 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
7 Comment authors
Renaissance ManDenis PitcherBermudianGeoffCandunn Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
schnerg
Guest

” Don’t leave it up to the politicians, put it to the people in a plebiscite (which is a vote requested of the people by government and differs from a referendum which is a vote requested by the people via a petition) and let the people choose whether we support this change or not.”
No. It’s the moral obligation of government and lawmakers to protect the human rights of people in a minority position. Putting something like this up to a popular opinion poll would be shirking that responsibility.

Denis Pitcher
Guest

The rights of the minority were were perfectly protected by our lawmakers during the fierce debate on the issue when it was brought before parliament, right?
How can you propose that it is the moral obligation of government to protect the minority when it is the majority that votes them in to be their representatives?
There is a severe flaw in our present system of democracy, one where politicians are more concerned with protecting their own hides than doing whats right.
The human rights amendment was the perfect example of this when they sat their silently refusing to even debate the issue.

Candunn
Guest
Candunn

I think it’s time for direct democracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy

ken
Guest
ken

Denis,
What do you think of the UBP’s plan to give long term residents Bermudian status. Currently they are entitled to all rights of Bermudians, except voting. These are people largely not born here, but who have worked here for X amount of years.
Do you think that this is largely a ploy on behalf of the UBP to beef up their support on the voting lists?

Denis Pitcher
Guest

Ken, I’m not entirely sure what to think. On one hand, they’re already long term residents and thus, do they need more? On the other, they may well have contributed greatly to our community and island and may deserve to be rewarded with status. As for it being a ploy on behalf of the UBP to boost their voting lists, I doubt it. They don’t stand to gain this election by doing it because it is likely they will turn off far more Bermudians this election than they will gain support due to this position. I’m actually not really sure… Read more »

schnerg
Guest

re. direct democracy
that’s fine, but per the article you linked, the danger is of the majority forcing its will on the masses, or on minorities.
people are neither totally selfish nor totally altruistic, and you can hope that they will do ‘the right thing.’ But let’s say for example, including sexual orientation in the anti-discrimination list were to go to a popular vote and lose, as i suspect it might in Bermuda.
then we’re basically ruling by mob mentality.

ken
Guest
ken

Denis,
I have no idea why they are proposing it. It makes no sense to me because it turns off the everyday black bermudian that they need to win the election, however it does seem to solidify their base.
It doesnt seem like the smartest tactical move on their part.

Denis Pitcher
Guest

Ken, I think we’re in agreement there. Schnerg, I don’t follow your logic. Under our present system of democracy the majority elects a party of representatives who are to rule according to their interests. That still means the majority has control over the minority and thus the human rights change would still lose. The minority is left with really no say. At least in a direct democracy approach (my personal advocation is a mix of the two, but I’m still working on a coherent piece on how this works), the minority gets the chance to voice it’s opinion in the… Read more »

Candunn
Guest
Candunn

Schnerg, I have some problems with the current system. Using the Rene Webb bill for an example, We don’t know how the MPs voted, there isn’t an offical record of how each of them cast their vote. We vote to select someone else to be our proxy, and we can’t even find out how they vote, how do we know if they really do represent our views? I would love for CITV to broadcast the sessions so we can see how they really act and I would love for a website to provide how each of the MPs vote on… Read more »

Geoff
Guest
Geoff

If you want to see protection for the minority – and hear I mean the political minority, though it can translate to other minorities – look no further than the US system of republicanism. Direct democracy is superceded by the existance of an upper house with non-proportional representation, though it is still elected and accountable to the voters. The fact that each state gets two Senators no matter how many Representatives it has ensures that minorities are protected in a geographical sense. Large populous states like CA, TX and NY can’t overrule the wishes and input of small states like… Read more »

Bermudian
Guest
Bermudian

Geoff, even if we adopted the republican system, it still wouldn’t work without strong, morally-driven leadership. Even with even ‘geographic’ representation, there still wouldn’t be enough support to pass the changes. Our Judicial Branch in Bermuda is more independent than that of the U.S. It also serves as a check for the government. The problem with the proposed HR legislation is that the existing HR legislation doesn’t violate any laws. So how would you rule it illegal or unconstitutional? In its present state, legally speaking, there’s nothing wrong with it. It doesn’t state that you can discriminate against homosexuals, it… Read more »

Denis Pitcher
Guest

Geoff, There are some merits to the structure of the American system which could be adopted, however I don’t think the entire structure is ideal. As Bermudian suggests, even with geographic represenation there still wouldn’t be enough support to pass changes. Largely geographic representation ensures protection from bad laws being imposed that hurt a geographic minority, but not so much a minority in terms of overall population. It also doesn’t help the creation of laws to protect that minority. Though, as I’ve said, there are some merits to it that could be adopted to make our system better, and I’m… Read more »

Renaissance Man
Guest
Renaissance Man

Agreed, Denis. Our Constitution is a living document, and as such can be amended either by Parliament or the Crown. We don’t have to be independent to make changes to it, although it would be changed if we did become independent. We can learn from many countries on how to do things. We are fortunate enough to have the flexibility to review the world, and cherry-pick what would suit us best. Education would be a good place to start with that. As to the UBP motive, people are split as to the reason. Is it to increase their voting block?… Read more »