Govt Files Appeal In Same Sex Marriage Case

July 5, 2018 | 117 Comments

[Updated] Government confirmed this morning [July 5] that they have filed an appeal in the same sex marriage legal case, adding that they “look forward to having this matter heard by the Court of Appeal.”

rainbow bermuda gavel flag TC July 5 2018 1

Chief Justice Dr Ian Kawaley ruled in favour of same sex marriage earlier last month, with the judgement saying that the provisions of the Domestic Partnership Act that serve to revoke same sex marriage rights are invalid.

Same sex marriage was initially legalised in Bermuda following a Supreme Court decision in May 2017, however the Domestic Partnership Act  passed in Bermuda’s legislature last year which created domestic partnerships and restricted marriage as between a man and woman, with the DPA taking effect on June 1st of this year.

A challenge to the Domestic Partnership Act was brought, with the Court ruling in favour of it on June 6th, and granting a six week stay to allow time for appeal.

When asked if Government has filed an appeal against the same sex marriage ruling, the the Minister of Home Affairs Walton Brown said, “We have filed an appeal in this matter. We look forward to having this matter heard by the court of Appeal.”

Last month’s ruling was the second court ruling in favour of same sex marriage, meaning same sex marriage has been legal in Bermuda, then restricted, then had a court ruling to make it legal again, with that court ruling now set to be appealed.

Update 12.26pm: OUTBermuda said, “We will never surrender equality for all Bermudians, and especially the LGBTQ families and couples who deserve it.”

Roderick Ferguson, the original litigant, said: “Just one month ago, LGBTQ Bermudians inched closer to our goal of restoring marriage equality. We regret this ill-advised and costly decision to appeal the Supreme Court’s finding, and we will summon our voices and resources again as a united community to prevail.”

OUTBermuda, which served as a co-litigant in the original lawsuit, said they will join again with Roderick Ferguson, Maryellen Jackson and “many allies seeking to defeat the Government’s appeal.”

Adrian Hartnett-Beasley, one of OUTBermuda’s directors, said, “We have strength not only in justice but in our numbers – including our respected faith leaders like Sylvia Hayward-Harris, along with citizen-activists including Julia and Judith Aidoo-Saltus, Chai T, Wesley Methodist Church, and Douglas NeJaime. We’ve made outstanding progress with our business advocates led by Carnival Corporation and many encouraging Bermudian-owned/based businesses and employers.”

“Legal counsel again will be provided through the services of Rod S. Attride-Stirling [ASW Law Limited] and Mark Pettingill [Chancery Legal],” OUTBermuda said.

click here same sex marriage

Share via email

Read More About

Category: All, News

Comments (117)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. sandgrownan says:

    Christ. I can’t even comprehend the level of ignorance the PLP demonstrate over this issue. They simply won’t let it go and for no good reason.

    • Jus' Askin' says:

      REFERENDUM REFERENDUM REFERENDUM

      • Mike Hind says:

        It was unanswered. How is this so hard to understand?
        That literally means that the results are irrelevant.

        • Anonymous says:

          I find it puzzling that whenever the referendum is brought up you’re very quick to throw it out. Its probably because of those that voted more than 2/3rds voted no to both items.

          • TR says:

            Because Constitution rights shouldn’t hinge on a democratic process or vote, and aren’t bound by them.

          • Toodle-oo says:

            I find it puzzling that anyone can believe that under 10,000 voters out of 40,000 who voted ‘no , no ‘ is an accurate representation of the electorate’s wishes.
            Especially when you throw in how much effort the ‘no ‘ side put into trucking and busing their ‘no’ supporters to the polls .
            If all the apathetic had been made to go and vote it might have resulted in a totally different outcome . One that stood .

            • Hmmm says:

              Trucking and busing… they were calling donors and asking them if they wanted a ride to vote… then asked I how they would vote.. if they said yes the caller just hung up…

          • Mike Hind says:

            No. Not true. All you have to do is ask.

            The reason that I’m quick to throw it out is because IT WAS UNANSWERED!
            The only time I talk about it at all is when people bring the results up as some sort of sign that we should continue discriminating against people for no reason.
            Unanswered and non-binding mean that the whole thing was a waste.

            That literally means that the results are irrelevant.
            It literally means that it CANNOT be used as a “litmus test” for how we feel.

            This is how referendums work.

            If it had gone the other way, I would take the same stance.

            I was against wasting the time and money on a referendum any way and I was very vocal about it.

            Somehow that didn’t stop you from trying to project motivations on me, though, did it?

            “Its probably because of those that voted more than 2/3rds voted no to both items.”
            2/3rds of those that voted is, in no way, the majority of Bermuda.
            The majority didn’t vote.

        • Portia says:

          The results were not legally binding, but I wouldn’t say that they are “irrelevant”. The referendum served a dual function, firstly, to see if a 50% vote could be obtained for either question, but secondly, it was also useful as a “litmus test” to gauge the views of Bermuda voters on the issue, which could potentially guide Parliament on making the next legislative steps. I’m pretty sure that if a large percentage of voters had said they supported SSM, but it hadn’t quite reached the 50% vote needed, that SSM proponents would not have been eager to disregard or toss the referendum results out.

          • Mike Hind says:

            No! This is completely untrue.

            “Unanswered” literally means that the results are irrelevant. This is not a difficult concept.

            • Anonymous says:

              You’re bs’ing Mike. I don’t believe for a second you wouldn’t be so quick to toss the results out if the result favored your stance. Yes it was unanswered but it still provided valuable data into what the people wanted. I highly doubt most of the people who supported SSM just stayed home, even after measures were taken to move some of the polling stations out of churches.

              The fact remains that supporters of SSM are trying to force their views on everyone (which is ironic, as that is exactly what they accuse their opponents of doing).

              • Mike Hind says:

                The only bs here is coming from you and yours.

                How, exactly, are folks forcing anything into you? How will this affect you in any way?

                The reason we say that views are being forced on us is because, if you get your way, people are going to be hurt. When we get ours, your life won’t change at all.

                Just saying things you made up doesn’t make them true.

        • Jus' Askin' says:

          HAVE A BINDING REFERENDUM!!!

          This Allows the Country have a Say!!!!

          Then This Can Be Laid To Rest for GOOD!!!!!

          “How is this so hard to understand?” :-D

          • Mike Hind says:

            Because referendums aren’t how we do things here.
            It HAD to happen in Ireland, because that’s how their system works, but that’s not how it works here.

            See, we have protection against one group’s religion being imposed on the rest of us. This protects ALL of us.
            And this means that one group’s religion is not a valid reason to legally discriminate and deny people equal access to rights. Seeing as no other reason has ever been offered, this entire thing should have been put to rest a long time ago.

            Unless you have a valid reason to do this that you’re willing to offer? Hmm?

          • Hmmm says:

            The job of a government is to represent all the people and to protect the minority!! NOT do what their church tells them…

          • Malachi says:

            Human Rights issues should never be decided by referendum. Imagine having a referendum to to decide the abolition of say, slavery?

            • Jus' Askin' says:

              Slavery~
              Kiddnapping
              Human Trafficing
              Murder
              Rape
              Torture
              Abuse etc etc

              SSM~
              Two people of the same sex wanting to get married

              Wow they are quite the same,I can see Your point, it ALL makes sense now!!!

              BINDING REFERENDUM!!!

              • PBanks says:

                Of the list above, slavery was legal. Murder and rape have never been legal.

                • Jus' Askin' says:

                  Who Made it Law?!?

                  • Question says:

                    According to the bible it’s perfectly fine to keep slaves and to beat them.

                    • aceboy says:

                      But the righteous Bermudians at Cornerstone ignore that inconvenient fact and keep trying to limit human rights.

                • K. says:

                  Actually marital rape – a husband raping his wife – was perfectly legal up until about 1991 in England and until the 1970s through 90s for the various states in America.

              • Mike Hind says:

                Oh, so, because one thing isn’t as bad as the other, it isn’t bad?

                How does that work, in your mind?

                One injustice isn’t as bad as slavery, so it’s ok to do?

                That’s just insane.

                • Jus' Askin' says:

                  How is it an injustice again?!?

                  Who has died from not being able to get married?

                  Mike I truly wish You had the Same Energy for other, Way More Important issues than SSM ;-)

                  • Toodle-oo says:

                    You’re getting really cheap with your stupid smiley emojis . Don’t you realize that your nonsensical posts lack legitimacy without them ?

                  • Question says:

                    Didn’t realise injustices are restricted to things that make people die.

                    So presumably you’re ok with racial discrimination in, say, housing then, since no one ever died of not being able to rent an apartment.

                  • Mike Hind says:

                    Do you seriously not get that treating people as less than equal and discriminating against them for absolutely no reason is, in fact, an injustice?

                    Like, do you honestly think that an injustice only involves people being killed? And, for that matter, do you not know the history of LGBT persecution?

                    As for me having energy for other things?

                    After receiving threats of violence and death because of my outspokenness, I promised my family that I would ease up on my activism. That is not to say that I don’t support other causes.

                    But you wouldn’t know anything about that, would you, all safe under your hood?

                  • aceboy says:

                    Who has died because two gay people got married?

        • legalgal says:

          The referendum is important in that it clearly indicated that the MAJORITY of the eligible voters either voted yes to SSM or weren’t concerned enough to turn up and vote “no”. That is the point. To many the referendum was offensive. Human rights issues are not populist. The hypocrisy is beyond me.

      • Mother Theresa says:

        Umm…..no. The referendum was invalid….

    • aceboy says:

      They are still in election mode and trying to keep the faithful happy.

      • Same way how OBA catered to their base ……………….

        • sandgrownan says:

          On this particular issue, at least, the OBA were as equally reprehensible as the PLP, although they approached it differently. Shame on them too.

          • Gay Bermudian says:

            But like a fool you voted for oba. Neither side should have received a vote last election hypocrite.

            • sandgrownan says:

              Well, actually I didn’t. But, I’m not a single issue voter either…

        • SMH says:

          “Same way how OBA catered to their base ……………….”

          So, you agree that the OBA was correct in catering to their base, like the plp is…yet, all you did was complain, lie and call names.
          Why?
          Do you know what hypocrisy means?

        • Mrs Brady says:

          OBA catered to their base yes. But spending public money on something which will definitely 100% fail in the long run takes a special type of stupid. That is PLP for you. Ignorant through and through. They have finally proved it to all but the most ignorant of voters.

    • Portia says:

      Actually, I think there are very good reasons for appealing, especially considering the fact that this judge has already had at least one important ruling overturned by the COA recently.

      • Mike Hind says:

        You keep saying this… and yet never offer any reasons.

        This point of yours was addressed the other day and you disappeared.

        • Portia says:

          How did I disappear? I posted a comment, I do not follow the article for hours and days to reply to every single person who may respond later.

          My point was merely that it appears that this ruling was made on a very loose interpretation of the Constitution, and given that the COA did not see eye to eye with Kawaley in the Bermuda Bred case, I think it right to appeal this ruling. Since this is a matter of great social importance to Bermuda, it certainly warrants greater legal scrutiny.

          • Mike Hind says:

            That’s literally HOW you disappeared! Unbelievable.

            And it wasn’t a loose interpretation. It was very clear. “…Parliament cannot impose the religious preferences of any one group on the society as a whole through legislation of general application.”

            Seeing as how NO reason has been given, other than religious ones, this HAS to stand.
            It’s kind of like now, with you. You SAY that “there are very good reasons” for the appeal, yet never actually say what they are… because there are none.

            Or are you saying that Parliament IS allowed to impose the religious preference of a single group on society as a whole?
            Is that what you are saying?

            • Portia says:

              Dude, I do not need to spend all day every day on here replying to every single post that is made and arguing with people! I have a LIFE!

              As I mentioned below, you would need to obtain the appeal documents to know the full grounds of the appeal. I personally DO believe it was a loose interpretation, as I fail to see how defining marriage as between a man and woman is “imposing a religious preference” on a group, since there are many non-religious people who do not support SSM. The DPA makes no mention of religious preferences at all, so the COA could well argue that the Government is well within its rights to restrict marriage to man-woman, as it restricts marriage in other cases.

              • Mike Hind says:

                All these posts and yet you STILL haven’t offered a SINGLE valid reason to deny same sex couples equal access to marriage.

                You say that the DPA doesn’t mention religious preferences.
                That’s irrelevant. It is the ONLY reason EVER given for this.
                Ever. Not once has any other reason been offered that stood up to even the slightest scrutiny.

                You say “…as it restricts marriage in other cases.”
                This is true. But in EVERY other case a reason has been given. Every single one. What you propose and support is to restrict access to marriage for absolutely no reason.

                Unless I’ve missed someone offering one? Have you ever offered one that wasn’t instantly and easily shot down with facts?

                I don’t think so.

                • SMH says:

                  When they start with ‘dude’, it means they’re grasping at straws….most of their arguments are like this, they really don’t have anything but hatred and jealousy.

      • sandgrownan says:

        That’s not the point is it – it’s about giving in to the churches on a point of discrimination. WB could have let it slide.

        Every time WB talks about equal rights, he needs to be reminded what a complete fraud he is, and that he’s a liar.

        • Spilt milk says:

          This has nothing to do with church or religion even though marriage is a church derivetive. Men and women white or black straight or homosexual all have civil rights. I think part of the problem is nobody looks at the facts they look at the issue then comment based on what their passionate about based on their perceptions. BDA PLP gov. Is saying “marriage” is defined between a male n female, But if you want to enter in a same sex union.. Your free to do so. Which aggrivates preserve marriage because its arbitrarily the same thing as marriage.

          • Mike Hind says:

            The problem with that is that now twice it has been shown that defining marriage like that is illegal and discriminatory.
            It denies equal access to rights for absolutely no reason.

            And marriage isn’t a “church derivative”. People have been getting married for centuries without “the church”. The church didn’t invent marriage.

      • sadly I agree with you Portia says:

        it seems like a waste of taxpayers money given the basis of the issue–BUT the GVT does have to speak to the promises made to its base in the election run up. I see their point that if there is some small hope of an overturn this is a massive win for them and their base–if they loose–they can say–well we tried– very slight chance the judge has this wrong–way too vizible a case.

        In any event–it drags the country through the mud in the eyes of the international community just for poltical reasons–at the end of the day–we can only hope its worth it for Bermuda.

        in any event its a process that needs to occur.

        • Mike Hind says:

          But there is no basis for appeal!
          Exactly what are the grounds?
          “We made a promise in our platform”?

          That’s not grounds for an appeal!

          Exactly what grounds have they offered for this appeal?

          • Portia says:

            “Exactly what grounds have they offered for this appeal?”

            To answer that question, one would need to read the appeal documents filed with the court stating the reasons for appeal, but the documents do not appear to have been posted online.

            But, clearly, there IS basis for an appeal, since Kawaley has given the Government leave to appeal, that is basically an admission that “I could be wrong” and that the Government has the legal right to appeal.

            • Mike Hind says:

              And yet, AGAIN, you don’t offer a single one.

              I wonder why that is…

    • Smith says:

      Please tell Bermuda what you was doing when the Preserve Marriage Demonstration march on Parliament. The PEOPLE SPOKE LOUD AND CLEAR NO NO NO!!!!!!!! We stood strong.

      Look at the Bernews link

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWfWk73aR88

      Not one you on here stood with 20 Rainbow flag holders that stood strong together saying Yes Yes Yes!!!!!

      You didn’t stand and support the Rainbow group Because you are closet cowards!!!!!!!

      • Mike Hind says:

        So… wait.

        A demonstration is how we make our laws now, even if they are illegal?

        Is that REALLY how you want our system to work?
        Strip laws that protect ALL of us because a group of people shouted the loudest? Because they were “brave” enough to go and tell falsehoods up on The Hill?

        I was up there supporting equality. I stood strong. So, that’s at least one of us that did. Does that mean you’ll listen to me, because I’m not a coward?

        • Smith says:

          Thank you for being strong Mike Hind. My question is what happened to the rest of the support are they afraid to stand for what they believe in ?

          • Mike Hind says:

            I don’t know. I don’t speak for other people. Only myself.

            But, if I had to guess, maybe they don’t agree that protests and marches on the House are the only way to get things done.

            It seems that you think that this is the way to do things, but others don’t and might choose to stand up in other ways. This is valid as well. It has nothing to do with bravery.
            One might say that showing up to support a larger group of people – especially one that is more than happy to lie outright to the listeners (for example, saying that it isn’t a religious thing and then saying, in the next sentence, that God and the Bible forbid homosexuality) – isn’t actually that brave…

          • Dae says:

            Only 7 couples have got married in Bermuda since all of this that’s how petty this all is and not causing the sky to fall down move on folks please stop the hate

      • yellow card Smith says:

        Folks on the non-bigoted sie of this issue had their peacful protest day which was carried out in a respectful and dignified way.

        Lets leave it at that shall we?

      • Chris Nelson says:

        I was.

    • drew says:

      Church votes.

    • Madge says:

      The plp have a lot to answer to, we tax payers have to foot the bill once again regarding S.S.M.

    • Hair says:

      sandgrownan, PLP is ignorant! They killing this beautiful island of ours.

  2. skeptic says:

    What a waste of money and reputation for us all – when will their ignorant bigotry stop!

  3. Double S says:

    And to think I almost believed Walton Brown when he has stated time and time again about how he has dedicated his whole life to fighting for equal rights for everyone. What a fraud.

    • sandgrownan says:

      He needs to be reminded of that, repeatedly. he’s nothing more than narrow minded little bigot.

  4. Sunshine says:

    Seriously?! I’m pretty sure tax payers dollars can go towards something more important than this. You know, like education, taking care our seniors, shoot even to paving out roads or two day a week trash collection! SOMETHING! Give it a rest. *insert eye roll here*

    • Wahoo says:

      It is a good smoke screen to avoid the Arbitrade questions.

  5. Triberd says:

    Appalling. A dogged and repeated resistance to equality. It is laughable that they still pretend to the title “progressive”.

  6. Disgraceful BDA GVT says:

    so very sad.

    what a waste of taxpayers money.

    shameful.

    • Majority of taxpayers support de appeal.

      • Mike Hind says:

        You have no evidence of this whatsoever.

        Stop lying!

        • Smith says:

          This is evidence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWfWk73aR88

          Did you attend with the other 19 rainbow saying yes yes??

          • Mike Hind says:

            It was more than 19.
            Why do you have to lie to support your position.

            And yes, I was there, proudly supporting equality.
            This has been addressed earlier, when you tried to push this ridiculous false narrative.
            It’s telling that you didn’t respond…

          • Mike Hind says:

            Also, that video isn’t evidence that the “majority of taxpayers support de appeal”.

            At least TRY to show some honesty…

      • sandgrownan says:

        I’m not entirely sure that’s the case, however, certain churches are notoriously homophobic and ultra conservative so I wouldn’t be surprised.

        That said, it just points to the fact that we’re essentially a theocracy. Sad really.

      • Christine says:

        Says who! Or is it just you wanting to believe that?

      • Chris Nelson says:

        “The minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.” Thomas Jefferson

      • Perhaps says:

        the majority that you speak to–but there are many folks that see this issue as more than just same sex marriage

        They see it as a bigoted approach to an issue–they see it as a massive double standard.

        This is an issue but also a proxy for a larger one.

        Everyone deserves equal rights not just a few, meanwhile the world chuckles.

        Blessings abound.

      • PBanks says:

        I think that is the argument, simply put. The govt, elected by a majority of residents, they had their platform to replace with the DPA, so they’ll feel justified in putting up taxpayer money in accordance with the desire of the voting public.

        Oddly enough, most people voted No-No, govt went with a No-Yes to try and reach common ground, but it looks like it’s going to be either Yes-Yes or No-Yes. And if it’s Yes-Yes in the end, we could very well see Furbert’s original bill resuscitated down the line.

  7. Merrick says:

    What a pain in the…

  8. Christine says:

    This is so sad! What a waste of taxpayers money, resources and not to mention how silly Bermuda looks to the rest of the world…this will have a major impact on tourism. So So Sad!

  9. Smith says:

    Please tell Bermuda what you was doing when the Preserve Marriage Demonstration march on Parliament. The PEOPLE SPOKE LOUD AND CLEAR NO NO NO!!!!!!!! We stood strong.

    Look at the Bernews link

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWfWk73aR88

    Not one you on here stood with 20 Rainbow flag holders that stood strong together saying Yes Yes Yes!!!!!

    You didn’t stand and support the Rainbow group Because you are closet cowards!!!!!!!

    • Mike Hind says:

      Repeating a lie doesn’t make it true.

    • Mike Hind says:

      What’s hilarious and pathetic is someone attacking others for cowardice while hiding under the hood of anonymity!

    • Sunshine says:

      You know what I was doing during that time? WORKING. I would have loved to attend and show my support for equal rights, but I had to work to earn my paycheck, to feed my family. This whole BS of protesting when the apple cart gets upset is ridiculous at best. We have laws in place for a reason and clearly you and your Government just can’t quite get that. The courts have already ruled on this so move on and worry about what happens in your own house!

      I would much rather see my tax dollars being spent on important issues such as Education or taking care of our seniors. ANYTHING OTHER THAN TAKING AWAY A HUMAN RIGHT!

  10. MsFedUp says:

    This is ridiculous. Just stop it. The PLP are making fools of themselves and of Bermuda. Please let it go. Everyone is entitled to equal rights in the eyes of the law. Stop being hateful bigots. Stop pandering to the churches. I am so angered and embarrassed by this. It’s a farce and we look ridiculous as a country. Walton Brown should be ashamed. What a hypocrite.

  11. swing voter says:

    money well spent…LOL my tax dollar at work. Looka wat I found

    Counsel on the other side of your appeal may require you to pay a Security for Costs. This may be paid into Court, as ordered by the Registrar, and can vary between $5,000 to $100,000.

  12. Stephen Thomson says:

    I am extremely let down that the Government has chosen to appeal this.
    What an incredible and wasteful way to spend the tax payers hard earned money.
    Lost in courts twice.
    Isn’t that sufficient to understand that you are on the wrong side of history?
    Discrimination never wins. Shocked that this Government supports this sort of discrimination.
    Dismayed at this waste of time and money.
    Terrible decision

  13. swing voter says:

    The Government will loose. Taxpayers will pay legal costs. The good church folk will get angry, and the government will say its another reason to go inde…..

  14. SMH says:

    People really come on here and argue with mike hind? lofl keep making him feel important folks!

    • Mike Hind says:

      Ah, the cowardly personal attack from someone too scared to take off their white hood.

      Yes. I do this to feel important. I risk my safety and career fighting for equality in public, using my real name, because it makes me feel important.

      Come on. You can do better than that!

      What makes me SMH is that you never actually have an argument. You just poke and poke with no actual substance to your posts.

      Why is that? Are you just trolling? Or do you think you actually have a point.

    • SMH says:

      And anyone can post with that name :)

  15. Lois Frederick says:

    Purely to pander to their supporters. This protects the plp from any backlash in the future, as even after they lose the fight and they will lose, they will say they upheld their firmly held position against allowing SSM. What a shame they couldn’t be bold enough to lead their followers to a more progressive thinking.

    As for the Minister of Home Affairs, he finds himself in a conflicted position, having openly advocated for equal rights but is now forced to tow the party line. He seems to have lost his conviction since assuming a cabinet position and would have to resign if he stood by his true beliefs. He must feel really bad inside on this one. Politics is a nasty world to exist in and to observe.

    • PBanks says:

      From what I see, the DPA was formulated to pre-empt the resurrection of Furbert’s bill, which would likely have passed by a substantial margin after the election.

      So Brown is in a spot, yes, but the good news is that PM has been effectively neutered. As of now the worst situation that will happen is an equivalent to a civil union will exist… something that PM was vehemently against.

  16. Ok says:

    It’s time to march on the churches and stop donating to their coffers! That will bring them back in line when people can’t get into church for “collections”!

  17. archie says:

    what is it with this government and human rights? This is not a left wing government anymore, if it were it would be liberal and allow ssm.

    Walton brown must be squirming, he cannot be happy at being forced to do this, surely.

    • PBanks says:

      I still think Brown is trying to find a happy middle somehow, but that’s an impossible task at this point. This is going to have to play out to the bitter end.

  18. In my opinion says:

    What a complete waste of the tax payers money! How embarrassing for Bermuda on the world stage

  19. What? says:

    If yall wanna waste more tax payer money, just drop it off down my house. I’d use it more wisely than this drivel.

  20. Concerned Bermudian says:

    Absolutely pathetic!! PLP… Poor Leadership for our People… instead of wasting our taxpayers hard earned money on this stupid appeal and embarrassment to the whole world, and filling their own desire to jet-set around the world frivolously, and increase so many taxes and fees making it more and more difficult for Bermudians to make ends meet…. why don’t they address the pathetic state of our education, lack of buses, and actually doing things to actually help BERMUDIANS…

  21. Great news.
    May there be success with the appeal!!

    • Mike Hind says:

      Why? What possible reason do you think there is for this appeal?

      • I’m just a BORN BERMUDIAN who thinks gay guys are yucky…lesbos rule though!

        if i don’t like it, no one should be allowed to be that way. That’s how the majority in bermuda works. got it?

  22. J says:

    THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU. Next they’ll say that you can choose your sex… that men and women are merely social constructs. How far we have fallen.

    • Mike Hind says:

      Exactly! How far have we fallen!
      We now are so arrogant and self righteous that we think we should have a say in other people’s relationships and even in their bodies!
      We now celebrate with repeated “thank yous” when we hear that our Government is going to try to continue discriminating against certain Bermudians for absolutely no reason.

      We certainly have fallen far.

      Shame on us.

  23. Dae says:

    Mr bitcoin and the shameful PLP will go down in history for this sad debacle sad really smmh

  24. Patricia says:

    Thank u Minuster Brown.

  25. ella says:

    I am so sick n tired of this bull – let it rest already!!! Just don’t be using my tax dollars for this – USE YOUR OWN MONEY!!!!

Leave a Reply