OutBermuda Respond To Preserve Marriage

November 30, 2016

Saying that it is their “mandate to support the wellbeing, health, dignity, security and protection of Bermuda’s LGBTQ community, we issue this statement in response. support the wellbeing, health, dignity, security and protection of Bermuda’s LGBTQ community,” OUTBermuda has responded to an ad placed by Preserve Marriage.

Out Bermuda TC November 30 2016

The statement said, “Preserve Marriage Bermuda today published an advertisement complaining that Bermuda’s Supreme Court is being asked to legislate marriage equality.

“Preserve Marriage also argues that when the Human Rights Act was amended in 2013 it was a foregone conclusion that marriage equality would follow, suggesting the amendment was a sinister attempt to introduce marriage equality by indirect means.

“Given OUTBermuda’s mandate to support the wellbeing, health, dignity, security and protection of Bermuda’s LGBTQ community, we issue this statement in response.

“Preserve Marriage’s advertisement ignores the fact that the decision of the European Convention of Human Rights in Oliari v Italy, a decision the organization has spoken much about, was not decided until after the 2013 Human Rights Act amendment.

“Oliari is undeniably a landmark judgment, which marked a significant shift in the European Court’s approach to issues of Lesbian and Gay equality in the sphere of family matters.

“While that judgment is central to any argument today about family life protections afforded to Lesbian and Gay people, there was nothing back in 2013 to foretell this decision.

“OUTBermuda rejects the suggestion that LGBTQ people and allies schemed to amend the Human Rights Act with a view ultimately to marriage equality.

“To suggest this demonstrates a lack of understanding and empathy towards the experience of fellow Bermudians who were given both legal protection and peace of mind in the areas of housing, employment and the provision of goods and services [including governmental services] as a result of the “Two Words and a Comma” amendment.

“Although Preserve Marriage says in its advertisement that it believes all people should be protected regardless of their sexuality, OUTBermuda has not seen or heard any practical suggestions from the organization about how it believes the family lives of LGBTQ people ought to be respected within Bermuda’s current legal environment.

“While advocating that Government cobble together a bundle of rights in an unspecified manner for the benefit of Gay and Lesbian people, Preserve Marriage has rejected out of hand options for marriage, civil partnerships and other similar legal arrangements, thereby precluding any viable option for achieving that aim.

“OUTBermuda is committed to creating awareness of the real life issues affecting Bermuda’s LGBTQ people, and to leading dialogue on these issues.

“Accordingly, OUTBermuda will extend an invitation to Preserve Marriage to enter into conversation on how the status quo, as it relates to Lesbian and Gay families, fails to honor and respect the dignity of all people in Bermuda.”

Read More About

Category: All, News

Comments (64)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Curious says:

    Thank you OUTBermuda it is important to outline in real terms the impact of fear, judgement and loathing for our LGTBQ community.

    How can all of Bermuda move towards deeper respect, inclusion, understanding and compassion on all eight points of our Diversity?

    1. Ability – Mental and/or physical
    2. Age
    3. Ethnicity
    4. Gender
    5. Race
    6. Religion
    7. Sexual Orientation
    8. Socio-Economic Status/Class

    How do we as a community measure up on all eight points above? Why do we only protect some as basic human rights in our law?

    • Daylilly says:

      Preserve Marriage has always had an open invitation to anyone in the LGBTQ to come and discuss these issues. How many people from OUT have called?
      The ad looked to me like it was keeping the community informed on issues relating to marriage in Bermuda.

      Also, OUT Bermuda is willfully uninformed if it is claiming to represent LGBTQ issues in Bermuda. OUT should be aware that parliamentary procedures are recorded and based on those recordings, Mr. Pettingill said that what he is doing right now could never happen. The issues relating to SSM were posed to the parliament and Mr. Pettingill dismissed the them as ridiculous notions. Mr. Pettingill has benefited from his government position then and now. First, he sets the government up, then sues his own government to judicially impose SSM and is financially benefiting from it all.

      OUT Bermuda denies that Preserve Marriage made practical suggestions with respect to the LGBTQ community, then admits that there was a Bundle of Rights. Did we forget the majority of Bermuda rejected both the notion of SSM and SSCU. The only practical solution for many in the LGBTQ community is SSM. SSM was overwhelmingly rejected but Mr. Pettingill and the HRC, who never protected the religious or philosophical rights of Bermudians, are going to force their will in spite of the community vote, and in spite of parliament.

      • sandgrownan says:

        Listen numbnuts, this is just wrong “…who never protected the religious or philosophical rights of Bermudians, are going to force their will in spite of the community vote, and in spite of parliament.”

        Religious rights are not under threat here, nooone is having anything forced on them,you can believe whatever crap you think your invisible friend wants you to believe, but keep it to yourself. Religious freedom also mean freedom from religion.

        • Daylilly says:

          Good Day Sandgrownman you are entitled to your opinion and I won’t call you any names for having it. I would like to say that my “invisible friend” is apparent in all of creation. Not physically seeing something is not the same as not existing. Breath, air and wind are invisible but without them life doesn’t exist. We all bow to the power of the forces of wind during a hurricane, can’t see the wind but we all believe in it and prepare for its coming.

          • Mike Hind says:

            And no one is stopping you from believing all that.

            We just don’t think that your beliefs should have any effect on someone else’s life, relationship or happiness.

            You, however, think that your personal beliefs should apply to everyone.

          • Mike Hind says:

            Oh, and vision isn’t the only sense. Not being able to see the wind doesnt mean that it is not observable. Your analogy is invalid.

      • Sigh says:

        “Did we forget the majority of Bermuda rejected both the notion of SSM and SSCU.”

        Daylilly you need to go back to school and learn how to calculate a percentage. The majority of Bermuda did NOT reject the notion of SSM and SSCU.

        Total Electorate: 44,367 = 100%

        No: 14,192 = 32%

        32% of the Bermuda electorate is NOT a majority. Get it?

        • Daylilly says:

          Sigh”, you make a good argument although it has been played like a broken record. The point remains that the referendum numbers still reflect a valid polling of the electorate. If more people voted, the percentages would arguably still be the same. It’s the same analogy used in polling. They take a sample and extrapolate the information to determine wider statistics.
          The world has peeled back the aftermath of SSM and recognized that it wants out. Protesters in Paris, Italy, Mexico, Taiwan, and the world over recognize that being against the notion of gay marriage doesn’t mean being against LGBTQ people. Perhaps this is why conservatism is making such headway, people are tired of being bullied into SSM and its aftermath.

          • Mike Hind says:

            Hilarious, you saying something is like a broken record, given your history of repeating the same already-debunked misinformation, over and over.

            The referendum was not answered, therefore it cannot be used as a metric. That is how it works.

            And, as has been explained to you repeatedly, an ad populum argument is a logical fallacy and is not fair or valid.

            You mention SSM’s “aftermath”. Care to explain what that “aftermath” is?

            Oh, and supporting and promoting a denial of equal access to rights DOES, in fact, mean that you are against the LGBT community. Just because you don’t want to admit your bigotry doesn’t mean it’s not there.

      • Mike Hind says:

        As usual, there is nothing true or right or fair or kind in this. Just more lies and misinformation.

        • Daylilly says:

          The audio files are online.

          • Mike Hind says:

            Nothing that will back up your claims.

            You are misrepresenting the truth again.

      • Mike Hind says:

        And, again, the only people forcing their will – by using a misinformation campaign that they should be ashamed of! – are Preserve Marriage.

        Marriage Equality will have no effect on anyone else. You’ve never shown a single instance or example, not one that isn’t easily and immediately debunked and shown to be false, where it possibly could. Not once.

        • Daylilly says:

          Here’s an instance. SSM hasn’t passed and already Preserve Marriage was denied services by the Hamilton Princess based on its beliefs on SSM. The guest speaker Dr. Ryan Anderson was also denied lodging based on his “philosophical” beliefs. Our Human Rights Commission was deadly silent, no protection whatsoever.

          • Mike Hind says:

            Nope. Not true.

            As has been explained, over and over, it wasn’t the beliefs, it was the fact that Preserve Marriage and Dr. Anderson we’re promoting discrimination and a continued denial of equal access to rights to a sector of our community for absolutely no reason.
            That is wrong.
            You know how we know it’s wrong? Because whenever someone asks if someone were to deny YOU equal access to rights, you, at best, agree that it’s wrong and, at worst, go silent.

            As usual, you are misrepresenting the truth.

  2. If this becomes law, will all bathrooms in Bermuda become unisex ? Because would it not be discrimination to deny a man from using the female’s bathroom? or a young school age boy being denied the right to wear the girl’s uniform ? Could I start driving on the right side of the road ? The courts will just have to make allowances for my preferences. Is this the new direction that Bermuda is headed in? There is no such thing as same sex marriage. No law can say other wise .You are partners , friends , brothers , sisters , but not husband and wife .

    • Smarter441 says:

      Can you name one place that allowing same sex marriage led to people driving on whatever side of the road they want. It’s about equality nothing more nothing less. You would think that a place with a large black population would understand that but instead we forever out history. Its really sad

      • Sorry, Your wrong!

        • Hmmm says:

          Rodney, you are a pathetic excuse foe a human being, yet you have equal rights, and so do I. What about the people who don’t. Is that fair?

        • gummi bear grip n sip says:

          If you’re going to tell someone they’re wrong, how’s about at least spelling it right?

        • bdaboy says:

          “Sorry, Your wrong!”

          no, not wrong at all

    • sandgrownan says:

      Well there it is, the stupidest thing I have read all day.

    • PBanks says:

      You’re being silly here with the insertion of the unisex bathroom argument in the discussion, much less the ‘drive on the right side of the road’ nonsense. Defend your stance with logic, not hyperbole.

    • Mike Hind says:

      You are, as usual, talking nonsense, asking ridiculous questions in a pathetic attempt to fearmonger in order to push your hateful agenda of discrimination.

      Nothing in this post is true or fair or helpful.

      Try kindness. Try honesty. Please. You are hurting people.

    • Unbelievable says:

      haha my boy Rodney!

      Loopy loo!

    • bdaboy says:

      “There is no such thing as same sex marriage.”
      Yes there is.

      “Could I start driving on the right side of the road ?”
      If you wan’t to, I wouldn’t advise it though. What does this have to do with equality though? You’re grasping as straws because you have no real argument, you simply want to perpetuate hate.

      • No.I am not trying to perpetuate hate . I am just saying that equality cannot extend to same sex marriage. If it does, all other allowances must be considered. Equal must mean equal in all things. Fair is fair.

        • Mike Hind says:

          What other allowances?

        • Mike Hind says:

          I love how you say “Fair is fair”, yet oppose fairness and equality.

          How does that make any sense to you at all?

        • Hmmm says:

          Yes you are discriminating based on sexual orientation. Is discrimination right or wrong?

        • bdaboy says:

          ” I am just saying that equality cannot extend to same sex marriage.”

          …or mixing of the races, right?

        • Mike Hind says:

          As usual, no answer to simple questions.

        • John says:

          Are you the Rodney Smith the book author?

    • Rodneys secret says:

      HeY Rods, What are you so afraid of? Bathrooms and traffic? Or something…..bigger?

    • What?? says:

      You are a sad, ridiculous man.

    • Enough says:

      Wow…. Go back to bed and don’t bother getting back up.

  3. John says:

    Let love rule

  4. John says:

    P.S. there is only one way to preserve marriage and that is to Get Married

    Religious folks need say NO to living in sin and illegitimacy

    • Daylilly says:

      Agreed, all folks need to say no to living in sin.

      • Mike Hind says:

        No, people need to stop judging others by the rules of their personal choice of religions.
        Sin is part of YOUR personal choice. Keep it there.

  5. James H says:

    Hey Rodney, what about same sex marriage with no money darn?

    • Bermuda won’t allow that. It’s 1/2 in Bermuda . Half of yours is hers , plus her half , leaving you with nothing. That’s another story.

  6. Perversion says:

    You know,I was on board with civil unions. They were a way to solve the misplaced gender problem humanely and legally. Now though these folk want to co opt marriage to suit themselves. The majority of us are not with that and don’t we follow democracy (mob rule)? The majority outweigh the few for the greater good? So civil unions is where it should have been nipped in the bud. I don’t know how we allowed it to turn into the cold mess that it has become.

    • What?? says:

      Possibly by opposing any and all methods of offering any type of equality to partnerships that don’t conform to a religious norm.

    • Mike Hind says:

      Nope.not true. They don’t want to co-opt. They just want to share in equal access to rights and privileges offered by marriage.

      Yours won’t be affected in any way.

      And, as has been explained repeatedly, the referendum was unanswered because not enough people voted.
      Therefore, there was no majority.
      You are wrong.

      • Perversion says:

        Civil unions affords you all equal access to rights and privileges, Why isn’t it good enough Mike?

        It was the first solution offered and it seems equitable and fair but no, you all want to rewrite marriage to suit yourselves.

        As with everything,there must be some order or chaos will result.

        Civil Unions!! Civil Unions Matter!

        Legislatively speaking, the buck stops with civil unions. I suggest you all( homosexuals) ought to get used to civil unions. It’s fair. In common law jurisdictions such as ourselves, you will find that we the people as a whole, will accept civil unions. You lot ought to as well.

        Viva Civil Unions!! There won’t be any gay marriages. We the People ain’t wit dat!

        • Mike Hind says:

          Civil unions do NOT afford the same rights and privileges, nor are they recognized everywhere,
          They are absolutely not the same thing. THAT is why it’s not good enough. It’s not equitable and it’s not fair.

          Here’s the thing… if you agree that our LGBT friends and family should be afforded the same access to rights and privileges, why SHOULDN’T they just call it a marriage?
          Why shouldn’t we rewrite marriage in order to include a previously unfairly disenfranchised group?

          As for acceptance (and it needs to be pointed out, I am not gay, nor looking to marry a man. I just don’t think it’s right to baselessly and hypocritically discriminate against people and have never heard a valid, honest reason to continue this discrimination), we’ve been told time and again that people like Preserve Marriage will not accept Civil Unions, so your point here is wrong.

          And finally, you say “we the people ain’t wit dat’”…

          Would you care to offer a valid reason to oppose this? One that you’re willing to defend against simple questions?

    • Daylilly says:

      Perversion, the government only put same sex civil unions on the table, which has served as the legal gateway to same sex marriage. It appears that the intent has always been to legalize SSM or the could have offered a general civil partnership, etc.

      • Mike Hind says:

        Maybe, maybe not.

        But the question is: why SHOULDN’T we have marriage equality?

        Can you answer that one with a reason you’re willing to defend?

  7. bdaboy says:

    “The majority of us are not with that and don’t we follow democracy (mob rule)? The majority outweigh the few for the greater good?”

    If that’s what you want we’d still have slavery and no mixed race marriages. That’s what you agree with?

    • bdaboy says:

      You know what’s really perverse? Those of you who think marriage is a religious institution between a man and a woman only, have been divorced, have children out of wedlock, and you don’t treat your wives as the pieces of property that traditional marriage dictates.

  8. Mike Hind says:

    And, as usual, the Preserve Marriage side offers nothing true or real or honest. Just more lies and bigotry and hate.

    “Daylily” claims that they’re always willing to discuss, yet not once has any of them ever actually discussed anything.
    The reason is simple: they have no argument. They KNOW they are being bigots and promoting discrimination, but don’t want to admit it, so they lie and spread misinformation so they don’t have to face up to the cold reality. They are bigots.
    And before someone tries the “just because we have a different opinion, we’re bigots?” argument, it’s not your opinions. It’s the fact that you want other people impacted by those opinions. You want those opinions to affect other people,s lives, relationships and happiness in a negative way. It’s because you want to hurt and harm people. THAT is why you are bigots.

    Please stop. You’re on the wrong side of history.

  9. Married with children says:

    Do you like men? No? Don’t marry one.
    Do you like women? No? Don’t marry one.
    Do you like people of the opposite sex? Marry one of those.
    Otherwise, stay out of other people’s business (like, I would hope) they stay out of yours.

  10. bdaboy says:

    ” You want those opinions to affect other people,s lives, relationships and happiness in a negative way. It’s because you want to hurt and harm people. THAT is why you are bigots.”

    Quoted for truth, absolutely spot on!