Column: Let It Be End Of Embarrassing Crusade

November 29, 2018 | 13 Comments

Dwayne Robinson Bermuda generic 098345[Opinion column written by Dwayne Robinson]

The Government sustained another legal defeat as the courts rule in favour of same sex marriage. We have heard both sides of this issue, everyone is entitled to their opinions, and beliefs.

However, every citizen is owed all the rights and privileges afforded to them in the land they are born. How can marriage only be of the church for a man and woman, when a legally binding contract is attached to it? You become bound to that person in the eyes of the state, not just in the church.

I must state that this is my article is my personal opinion, but this contract makes marriage fall in the jurisdiction of the state and no longer just a religious ceremony. Therefore, it should be made available to every member of society regardless of race, creed, age, gender, and sexual orientation. Our human rights laws are set up this way, why wouldn’t that extend to marriage, a legally binding ceremony of the state.

If religion wishes to monopolise it for themselves, the Government should strip it of all legal connotations, and allow it to be just a Christian ceremony. We can all then bind ourselves legally in a different union, that is equal across the board, not marriage for one segment, and domestic partnerships for another. That’s discrimination regardless of how it is explained or broken down.

This issue is polarising for the people of Bermuda and I am aware of how precious people’s beliefs can be, however I wish to put forward a question: is this battle for same sex marriage what Bermudians need?

I ask this because the Government has suffered three defeats on this matter, using the people’s resources. They are currently considering jumping back into the fray again, which will run the people’s bill even higher. Is this a proper allocation of funds, in a country with a dwindling bus fleet, rising cost of living, declining GDP, struggling trash truck fleet, and a youth development center in need of renovation?

The amount paid to this British barrister was anywhere between $200,000 to $400,000 but is obstructing consenting adults from choosing who they wish to marry, worth that massive price tag? People on both sides of this issue should agree we have much bigger issues that need public funds.

Three strikes and you’re out! I urge the government, no more! Let this be the end of this embarrassing crusade and let’s channel our money in the right direction.

I urge us to look past the things that divide us, towards the issues that unite us. We all want better for our children, a better education system, an efficient public transportation, superior job opportunities, and a lower cost of living.

We must stand together against these problems as one community or our descendants will look upon us poorly, for our petty squabbling. For these issues to be remedied, the Government must balance the budget, and cease delegating much needed resources to a battle they have clearly lost. I will wait keenly and hope the right decisions are made.

- The views expressed above are the personal opinions of Mr Robinson, who hosts a video series and serves as an OBA Senator.

testimonial-divider

20 Most Recent Opinion Columns

Opinion columns reflect the views of the writer, and not those of Bernews Ltd. To submit an Opinion Column/Letter to the Editor, please email info@bernews.com. Bernews welcomes submissions, and while there are no length restrictions, all columns must be signed by the writer’s real name.

-

click here same sex marriage

Share via email

Read More About

Category: All, News, Politics

Comments (13)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Warwick West says:

    I believe the bible says something like “judge not lest we be judged”. It also says that it is Gods place to judge, not ours.
    While it is not my choice of life style I would never feel I have the right to judge other peoples life choices. Live and let live.

    • Who said anything about the Bible ? You need not judge people in order to say that you dis agree with them . The government controls marriage licensing so the government needs to continue the fight until it wins in the Privy Council . Where are you judging . Warwick West, I think you need to check your GPS.

      • Come Correct says:

        Who said anything about the bible? Everyone opposing SSM. It’s literally their argument. Where have you been? Is your GPS working ok?

      • Legalgal says:

        This issue has nothing to do with religion. And it is most likely the Pricy (my typo!)/Privy Council will uphold the Court of Appeal’s finding. Although from a legal perspective it would be welcome as it would set an important precedent on the point. So becareful what you wish for! The religious zealots have already inadvertently destroyed the need for marriage! (O and I’m Christian!)

    • Chris Nelson says:

      Homosexuality is not a ‘life style’. Nor is it a choice. Did you choose to be heterosexual?

  2. You are standing under a OBA banner, so it becomes the OBA’s opinion .Young man, you are wrong , and I won’t hold your age against you . Many a case has been won in the Privy Council .Government’s case was weak . We fought harder when we won the case against Belvin’s . You cannot use religion as an argument when standing before the court on such matters . The Constitution does not allow government to pick sides when it comes to religion .But government could argue non prejudice discrimination and this would had won the case for them . Marriage is not a human right and as such , is left to the government to set the law on it .Yes the government should spend the money to win the case . Had MD and Moniz appealed the case at first , we wouldn’t be fighting it now . WEAK LEADERSHIP. The OBA can do better .

    • LaV says:

      “WEAK LEADERSHIP. The OBA can do better ”

      Newsflash…the OBA aren’t government.

      The homophobic government is currently messing up Bermuda…wake up, fool.

    • Chris Nelson says:

      Whether or not marriage is a human right is irrelevant. This is about everyone having the same rights. You know, like being entitled to sit where you wish to on a bus or in the theatre.

    • Mike Hind says:

      None of this is true, of course. As usual.

      This is an unwinnable case, Rodney, as there has never been an argument given against marriage equality that doesn’t involve religion.

      You keep spreading this misinformation. It’s been years. If your position is so strong, why do you have to resort to lies to support it?

  3. spider says:

    Not sure how you could argue non prejudice discrimination by denying and withholding marriage from a group of people, for no justifiable reason except that, “we claimed it already”. By your own words “Marriage is not a human right …” ,that means “any type” of marriage. So what possible explanation could you use to argue non prejudice discrimination. Please elaborate.

  4. wahoo says:

    I think that the taxpayer should not foot the bill any longer if the churches want to continue they should foot the bill.

Leave a Reply