Bruce Golding: OK, Gleaner, let's free up everything!

THE EDITOR, Sir:

Now that The Gleaner has come out in support of same-sex unions, including marriage, the debate can now begin in earnest, and those of like mind, who have been hiding behind the 'Repeal the Buggery Law' placard, will now hopefully step up to the discussions.

The Gleaner has made itself crystal clear that, "Section 28 (it is actually Section 18 of the Constitution), which defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman, represents an assault on the principle of equality of people and people's right to forge relationships, especially when the exercise of those rights does not impinge on the rights of others and their right to equal protection under the law".

Section 18 would be just as much of an assault in defining marriage as a union between only one man and only one woman. It should not prevent a man from marrying more than one woman or a woman from marrying more than one man.

No, I am not being absurd. Polygamy is still practised in some African and Islamic societies. Indeed, just three months ago, Kenya passed a law to formalise unlimited polygamy. Polyandry (one woman marrying more than one man) is still practised in remote parts of Asia. Allowing those practices may well attract more subscribers than same-sex unions.

The laws that criminalise prostitution, bestiality, indecent exposure and a host of other behavioural inclinations would also have to be repealed since this conduct does not impinge on the rights of others.

And we shouldn't allow any of this to be an 'uphill battle' or await the formation of a lobby similar to J-FLAG. It is a human-rights issue, isn't it? And if it denies even a minority of one the right to choose, "so long as the exercise of that right does not impinge on the rights of others", it is an injustice that ought to be removed, according to The Gleaner's logic.

Pandora has, indeed, opened her box.