Bush: Cayman Should Consider Referendum

June 8, 2016

Cayman Opposition Leader McKeeva Bush says the Cayman Islands should follow the same route as Bermuda and call a referendum on the issue of same sex unions.

This is according to a report from the Cayman Reporter, which said, ”Opposition Leader Hon McKeeva Bush says if Cayman is being pushed to accept same sex unions then this country should follow the same route as Bermuda and call a referendum on the issue.

“This as he made it clear that he will not support any legislative amendment that will usher in such cultural changes here.

Cayman Reporter Bermuda June 8 2016

“He said the majority of Caymanians are not in support of any changes that would bring the acceptance of same sex unions and he intends to follow the will of the majority,” the Cayman Reporter said.

Mr Bush, speaking in Cayman’s Legislative Assembly in Friday [June 3], said, “I am not going to change any laws to satisfy anyone’s agenda.”

Bermuda is going for referendum on the issue and the other territories, maybe that is what we ought to do if we are being pushed by them. We subscribe to human rights, but that does not mean I do not have a right, Mr [Anthony] Eden does not have a right. We have our right too and that should be respected,” Mr Bush said.

Mr Bush said his party, the Cayman Democratic Party, supports human rights “but I must say we are not willing to change our culture and fly in the face of the law.”

Bermuda’s referendum will be held on June 23 with voters to take to the polls to answer two questions: “are you in favour of same sex marriage in Bermuda?” and “are you in favour of same sex civil unions in Bermuda?”

click here same sex marriage

Read More About

Category: All, News

Comments (73)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Family Man says:

    This just proves stupidity and ignorance are not exclusive to Bermuda.

    • Eyes Open says:

      No it proves that the majority don’t support the DIRT that you support! June 23rd NO & NO!

      • frank says:

        how can folks expect to get human rights when they want to commit inhuman acts
        grew up around a lot of animals and I never saw 2 bulls trying to have sex or 2 roosters tying to have sex
        goes to show that animals no right from wrong. no no no

        • Mike Hind says:

          “Frank”, you’ve already been shown to be wrong on this. Repeatedly.

          Just because YOU haven’t personally seen it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.
          Your premise is wrong.

          But more importantly, can you offer a single reason that your opinion should have an affect on someone else’s relationship? On Bermudians’ equal access to rights and privileges?
          Can you offer a single argument against marriage equality that you are willing to defend?
          A single reason that we should continue denying access to rights to Bermudians?

          Or will you ignore this question and leave your despicable, hateful misinformation to stand, while hiding under the hood of anonymity?

          • Tyson says:

            Men spare in the Boxing ring Mike…not in the bedroom.

            • Mike Hind says:

              Thank you for this amazing post, saying absolutely nothing.

              That isn’t a reason to deny people access to rights.

              Why can’t you offer one single argument that stands up?

        • Anbu says:

          Come out the closet bie!!! When these people get the rights they deserve u know full well that u will be at the front of the parade. Take it easy mate. Their life does not affect u in any way. Leave them alone

        • Rene Clarke says:

          frank are you comparing the intellect of two donkeys to that of humans?

        • Family Man says:

          No and know are not interchangeable. But, as I was saying, ignorance and stupidity …

        • Rene Clarke says:

          Actually frank your comments are insensitive, immoral and demeaning to the LBGT community. To compare them to wild beasts does a disservice to the millions of LBGT people around the world. Do you wonder why there are hate crimes and why gay people have to seek counselling just to learn how to survive in society. So do you really think gay people are like dogs and cats. Maybe one day you will have a son or daughter who is gay.Start saving for the psych visits now cause they will need them to deal with you.

          • OBA says:

            My guess is after 23 June 2016 many people on the losing side will need counseling.

        • What?? says:

          How can it be “inhuman” if you argue that animals DON’T do it? It must be human behavior in that case. Just another example of bigoted, muddled thinking.

      • @ Eyes Open, I think you need to re- read the comments written by Family man and I would think you owe him a apology, now if I am wrong, i read his comments to be that he is saying that for the Cayman Islands to want to follow the same route as Bermuda, then they are just as ignorant as the O.B.A Government and those that support this referendum.

        So if you carefully read the comments, I would think that you and Family man is on the same side and that you both oppose this referendum. so your vote is no & no and sounds as his is also, so I support his comments, but think you should reconsider what you have replied in response.

        • Mike Hind says:

          You can oppose this referendum and still vote yes/yes.

          Equal rights should never be left up to referendum.

          • hmmm says:

            Well the OBA is doing it!

            thank you :)

            • Mike Hind says:

              I have no idea what this means.

              • Its me again says:

                The poster doesnt understand what referendum means

      • Daylilly says:

        The rights to freedom to vote and express an opinion are fundamental. People proclaiming tolerance for SSM can not at the same time advocate complete cultural shifts and dismantling the foundation of society without soliciting the opinions of the people affected.

        Marriage is not a human right. Every loving relationship does not fit the tenets of marriage. Why pretend that they do under the pretense of being politically correct. The stakes are too high!


        • Mike Hind says:

          Here we go again with the misinformation from “daylily”!

          Marriage may not be a human right, but there ARE rights that marriage affords and those rights are being denied to Bermudians.
          THAT is the issue.

          As for this nonsense about the “dismantling the foundation of society”?
          It’s exactly that. Complete nonsense.

          How can we prove it? Well, that’s easy. You NEVER explain how it will do that. Ever.
          If it were true, it would be easy to show how it would do that. But you always evade that.

          Just like you evade actually offering a valid, reasonable, defensible argument for denying access to the rights and privileges that marriage affords.

          No, no. You always change it to “Marriage isn’t a human right” and cite oft-debunked studies and articles.

          Oh, and “political correctness” is nothing more than showing basic respect and decency to other people.

          You say “the stakes are too high!”
          Will you explain what the stakes are? Or will you just ignore this and refuse to give a real answer, as usual?

        • Build a Better Bermuda says:

          Nobody is dismantling the foundation of society, the movement is to evolve it forward under the right of law. In no country that has same sex marriage has the social foundations even been disturbed. And marriage is a human right, because in its legal status under the law, it grants rights to those that engage in it, so to deny it to others who would engage in it based entirely on their sexual orientation, is to deny that equality under the law. This isn’t about political correctness, it is about the continuing evolution of equality for all peoples under the law. Nobody is redefining marriage for anybody, people are free to define marriage as they want, churches are still free to marry whom they choose, but under the law, the ability to marry must be equal, otherwise there is no equality.

        • Rene Clarke says:

          Would you have suggested a referendum on slavery as well?

          • Daylilly says:

            Rene Clarke. Which slavery, the transatlantic slaves or the thousands of different slaves from different centuries. Black folks weren’t the only slaves. From an ancestral perspective, weren’t we all slaves at some point.

            Slaves existed and still exist in many cultures for various reasons, according to the Global Slavery Index about 29 million slaves exist. Perhaps you can fight to free those 29 million people.

            If SSM was an appropriate cause, it wouldn’t require using slaves, a play on words, bullying and mistruths.

            No Bermudian is bound in shackles, picking cotton and having their communities raped and pillaged and their daughters being taken by the enemy because they want SSM. Slavery vs. SSM is a ridiculous but often used comparison. We don’t buy it.

            VOTE NO, NO BERMUDA

            • Mike Hind says:

              This is gibberish.

            • Build a Better Bermuda says:

              You don’t buy, because you don’t believe in it… and nobody is saying you have to. What is being said is that your belief does not grant you the right to prevent other from enjoying the same rights that you have access to. Right now in this country, their are people who cannot have a say in what happens in the lives of someone they have spent their life in love with, cannot provide for those after they are gone in the same way that is available through the law to those who fit your conservative definition of traditional. Same sex marriage hasn’t damaged any society that has embraced it, it hasn’t destroyed the familial structure in those countries, what has done the damage is the intolerance preached by those like yourself. It is intolerance that is the ill to society.

          • knight says:

            My people are still slaves under this government.

        • serengeti says:

          Allowing ssm would be “dismantling the foundation of society”?

          You lot are just hysterical.

        • Rene Clarke says:

          Marriage is a human right and so is the right not to be discriminated against based on race, sex etc. The legislation needs to be amended to reflect there is no discrimination.It’s legal in many places already including the UK. I haven’t seen any evidence of the dismantling of the foundation of society yet. Perhaps I should stay tuned.

          • Daylilly says:

            Rene C. The United Nations has not said that SSM is a human right. Neither has 90% of the world’s population. Prior to 20 years ago and a lot of politics, no one said that SSM was a human right.

            Marriage being a human right that fits every loving couple is a made-up notion.

            In terms of society dismantling, we already have a health crisis on our hands with HIV and and other diseases at epidemic proportions. Children are being encouraged to experiment with body parts they have barely learned how to bathe. The media has a politically correct agenda but fact check the statistics with the CDC.

            • Mike Hind says:


              Is there no low to which you won’t stoop?

              This is truly foul, linking this to marriage equality.

            • What?? says:

              “Children are being encouraged to experiment with body parts they have barely learned how to bathe”.

              Once again. GET A GRIP.

        • What?? says:

          “complete cultural shifts and dismantling the foundation of society”

          Get a grip.

        • PBanks says:

          Of all the things that threaten to cause a ‘dismantling the foundation of society’, I’d think that gay people marrying each other ranks pretty low on the scale. I haven’t yet seen a valid argument to support such a theory.

        • Nightlilly says:

          You realise the second No isn’t for marriage, right? It’s for Civil Unions – so why are you against that?

          We need to follow the French model: all marriages are civil unions and if you wish to have a secondary religious ceremony you can do so.

        • blankman says:

          lilly, if marriage is not a human right why should hetero couples (and only hetero couples) have the right to marry?

      • Mike Hind says:

        Care to offer a reason why? One that you’ll defend against simple questions?

        Or will you just continue trying to spread hatred and inequality and injustice?

        • Daylilly says:

          Mike. Bigotry – intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself. Um, that would be you and many of the SSM advocates looking to black ball and ostracize people who don’t hold your world view.

          Marriage is not about Bigotry its about Biology. Same gender people can not unite in marriage. Same Sex Civil unions are the precursor to SSM so NO, NO.

          VOTE NO, NO BERMUDA.

          • Build a Better Bermuda says:

            Actaully, marriage is about legality, and the rights granted to those who engage in it under the law. It is these right that must be granted equally under the law, which is why the legal institution of marriage under the law must also be granted equally. How one defines marriage either for themselves or under religious institutions is entirely up to them, and the granting of same sex marriage under the law cannot change that, but on that same token, individuals or religious institutions cannot define marriage under the law. And there are religious institutions that will marry same sex couples, not just under the law, but before their God. Marriage isn’t about Biology, you are confusing that with procreation… and humanity’s over abundance for that poses a greater threat to our own survival more than same sex marriage ever could. The desire to deny equality under the law is about Bigotry.

            • Daylily says:

              BABB. The history of Marriage in most countries, including Bermuda is that it was under the guardianship of religious institutions. The government didn’t get involved with marriage until much later. Check with the Registar.

              Also, consider that most of Bermuda’s legal framework was derived from Biblical principles.

              The entire world didn’t invent traditional marriage based on bigoted homophobic intentions. Actually Marriage already existed and then it was defined. Across the entire globe people recognized the union of a man and woman who raised and protected their young was a benefit to society like no other relationship. That’s mainly why marriage was promoted and sanctioned.

              • Build a Better Bermuda says:

                The history of marriage is a diverse and older institution than any modern religious institution, and wasn’t nor isn’t always isolated to the sole definition of only a. Man and a woman; and while government cannot claim its beginnings, it did adopt it to a legal frame work. A framework that was designed to establish legal standings for those that commit to it under law. Churches can marry who they wish, but without the certificate from the government, that marriage is not recognized under the law, and the people subject to that marriage will not be granted the legal rights under the law. And this is the crux, currently the government legislation discriminates to the issuing of a legal status, and that is in violation of the Human Rights Act. Churches have the right to discriminate who they choose to marry, but government is not legally allowed to as the laws must be applied with equality. You and your church have all the rights you want to define marriage in your way, but that right does not extend beyond you and your church, so keep your narrow definition, nobody is going to take it from you, but don’t think you can enforce it on others who don’t share it.

              • Mike Hind says:

                And? None of this is relevant.

                “We’ve always done it like this” is not a valid reason to deny people rights!

                Come on.

          • Mike Hind says:

            Nothing in here is true.

            Pro equality folks aren’t looking to deny access to rights for no reason. That’s what YOU are doing.
            That’s what this is about, as you know, because this has been explained to you before. It’s not about your worldview, it’s about the fact that you are promoting the denial of access to rights for Bermudians and haven’t offered a single reason that stands up. Not one. Not one reason based in reality.

            For example, “it’s about biology”.

            This is yet another argument from you that proposes that the ability to procreate together is a requirement or stipulation for marriage.
            As has been pointed out to you on many occasions, this is false. It is not a requirement for marriage.

            Same gender people absolutely CAN unite in marriage. The evidence is ALL of the places where they are doing just that.

            This is what I’m talking about.

            If your cause is right, why do you have to keep posting these falsehoods to defend your position?

            Why can’t you just answer the simple question?

            Why should we continue to deny Bermudians access to rights and privileged afforded by marriage?

            Why is that such a hard question for you?

      • Rich says:

        Dirt? Seems a bit harsh.

    • Toodle-oo says:

      It would appear that the term ‘Island mentality’ covers a broad spectrum of behaviors and beliefs , not just the obvious stuff.

      • The Original Truth™ says:

        Even though U.S. Supreme Court ruling of Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015 makes SSM legal in all states but there are still 14 of them in which the majority of the population oppose and challenge the ruling. One of them is the biggest state in the U.S. This goes to show it’s nothing to do with island mentality. Opposition is more to do with religious belief since all opposed states are ones with a higher Christian population.

        • Nightlilly says:

          They also did the same thing when they legalised interracial marriage…with the same Christian states opposing the changes.

          I’m not saying there’s a connection between Christianity and intolerance…no, yes that’s exactly what I’m saying.

    • Its me again says:

      If its so ignorant here move to a less ignorant country.

      Poor black bermudians do it everyday.

    • Daylilly says:

      A fairly done referendum would be the best way to assess the will of society. The cultural shifts are far reaching. The healtcare statistics and sociological ramifications of abolishing traditional marriage will prove that the right side of history is to leave marriage in tact, take it seriously and value and protect it and the children it creates.


      • Mike Hind says:

        More lies and misinformation.

        No one is talking about abolishing “traditional marriage”. At all. That is a completely dishonest misrepresentation of the truth.
        People will still be able to get “Traditionally married”. No one will stop that from happening.

        And what healthcare statistics? Put up a link and defend it.

        And what “sociological ramifications”? You always say garbage like this, but never actually say what they are.

        Why vote no? Why should we continue to deny Bermudians access to rights and privileges?

        Why? Why can you never answer that?

      • Just the Tip says:

        Prove it Liar, show use these stats show us how it harms show use cause looking at the countries that have Marriage Equality they are doing pretty good. but you don’t care about all that do you, you’d rather keep lieing. go be like Joshua and tend to your own house and stay the **** out of mine

      • Build a Better Bermuda says:

        It isn’t a cultural shift, it is an evolution forward for equality and the broader scientific community, after reviewing all available studies and their methodologies, have come to the conclusion that same sex marriage has no more advantage or disadvantage than your ‘conservative’ definition of marriage. The propagation of the failed notions of cultural collapse and familial devastation that same sex marriage would bring, in the face of an abundance of evidence to the contrary, is nothing more than a continued attempt by ‘conservative right’ thinkers and self righteous, morally centered religious zealots to not want to live in a society that they believe they should have the dictation over. Equality under the law is a must, and these same it’d arguement said now hold as much weight as when they were used 50+ years ago, 100+ years ago, 150+ years ago to deny right to others then.

        • Daylilly says:

          BuildaBB. Speaking of evolution and science, wouldn’t maintaining the tenets of evolution require mating with the opposite sex and fostering parental roles that teach and protect both genders?

          Doesn’t survival of the fittest includes unions that facilitate reproduction? How has science put its stamp of approval on SSM. Science and the Leona Tyler principle was thrown out when the APA was high-jacked by a fringe component. See videos on the Leona Tyler principle, NARTH, and Nicholas Cummings who sponsored the bill declassifying homosexuality. The decision was not based on science but politics.

          • Mike Hind says:

            You are talking absolute nonsense!

            Marriage equality will in no way effect survival of the fittest or reproduction as a species.

            This is just nonsense. Desperate, illogical, completely false, hateful, sinister nonsense.

            Why can you never post anything true?

            Why can you never offer a single reason to stop people from sharing the same rights as the rest of us?

          • Build a Better Bermuda says:

            We are so far off natural evolution what natural evolution does by effect we pose a threat to the natural order. But there are enough examples of same sex engagement within the natural order, to easily hypothesis that it isn’t an abnormal occurrence within the human race, especially given the unprecedented numbers we are as a species. But I wasn’t speaking of natural evolution , but social, and the fact that you tried to defer away from that means you either missed the obvious point of the statement or you just have no real arguement to denounce it.
            Now for the Leona Tyler Principle, well, to try and say that a conservative right organization like NARTH can actual claim any sort of tenant to this principle is like saying that a flying fish can fly like a bird… that might look like what it is doing, but that isn’t what it’s doing. And Nichols Cummings was a man of his time… that time and many of the notions entertained have long passed. Please try to keep up, because in keeping with the Leona Tyler Principle, the ASA conducted a thorough review of all available studies at the time, a few years ago now, reviewing not just their conclusions, but scrutinizing their methodologies, and the conclusion of this scientific (not political) review was that same sex marriage was in effect no different to the family values and structure than the traditionally defined marriage. So for quite a few years now, the ASA has been in support of same sex marriage based on the Leona Tyler Principle of taking a stance and public position based on scientific data. It would be impossible for NARTH to claim the same.

      • PBanks says:

        Daylilly, can you explain how ‘traditional marriage’ is going to get outlawed here? As far as I know, any man-woman marriage isn’t going to be disqualified, discontinued or otherwise nullified if gay people are allowed to marry each other.

      • Nightlilly says:

        What the hell are you on about? Nobody is trying to abolish anything. Stop scaremongering.

  2. BobtheBuilder says:

    It proves that a majority democratic society still works. Ad that the agenda of a few powerful should not dictate the majority

    • cpt says:

      Let’s be clear. It is never correct or acceptable for the majority to compromise the human rights of a minority, even if the majority vote for it.

      • Mike Hind says:


        • Nightlilly says:

          Wow. Downvotes for a 1 word comment? You truly have some haters…must be doing something right then!

    • Build a Better Bermuda says:

      Above the notion of majority rule in a democracy is the fundamental position that equality under the law must be first to all so that all can engage equally in democracy, which is why democracies have human rights acts to ensure that never again should majority will deny equality under the law to minorities. So in this case, democracy is broken, not being upheld.

  3. Starting Point says:

    (Mr Bush said his party, the Cayman Democratic Party, supports human rights “but…).

    as soon as you say or type ‘but’ you join the rest of the racists and bigots throughout history have said the same thing.

  4. Mike Hind says:

    “We have our right too and that should be respected”

    A right to what?
    How will marriage equality infringe anyone else’s rights?

    And why do YOUR rights matter, but these couples’ don’t?

    Why do we never get an answer to the question “Why should these couples be denied equal access to the rights and privileges that marriage affords?”

    Can ANYONE answer that question with something that they’re willing to discuss and defend?


    • OMG mikey says:

      Bermuda will answer all the questions for you on June 23, 2016.
      No need to take notes it will be very clear.

      • Mike Hind says:

        This isn’t an answer to my question. It’s just gloating, privileged nonsense.

        As per usual. No one has the courage of conviction to engage in a conversation and defend their position.

        Cowardly potshots aren’t helping anything.

    • Unbelievable says:

      No Mike…..the proponents of No/No have to real reason except anger, hatred and ignorance toward anyone that doesn’t suit them.

      All we can hope for is for them to die off.

  5. Ydhrsc says:

    For all those people who claim they need to save traditional marriage bla bla bla or whatever… I hope you all remained celibate before your marriage, I hope none of you have engaged on adultry, and more importantly I hope that none of you have been divorced. I also hope you have no children out of wedlock either, let alone several kids from several different people. Let’s save our traditional marriage plzzzzzz.

    Anyone who opposes the rights of two consenting adults is a fool.

    To put this is a better perspective… should we have had a referendum back when blacks couldn’t marry whites? Oh no it was about human rights and the right to be happy wasn’t it? Although it wasn’t “traditional”.

    And to the Holy Bible folks, the same page where it says “man shall not lie with another man”, also says “you shall not mix two different fabrics and wear them.”

    If you’re wearing polyester, nylon, any sort or sport sock or dry wick shirt… God condemns you just as much as the gays.


    I cannot understand how disgusting and hateful people can be. I bet these people agaisnt SSM constantly post quotes on their Facebook saying “live and let live”, “no hate, just love”, etc.

    Pathetic group of people we have on this island.

    • Unbelievable says:

      ^^^This right here.

      Thank you, Ydhrsc.

  6. Rhonda says:

    He must have called his friend the Finance Minister for that advise…

  7. Legalgal says:

    “Cultural differences”? So why not dismiss the old discriminatory race laws as just “cultural differences”? These are human rights to which each individual is entitled. If you are against gay marriage don’t marry a gay person. Simples. Shame on Bush for trading on homophobia. Desperate man.

  8. Mike Hind says:

    And yet another story where the anti-equality camp posts nothing but lies and misinformation and outright refuses to offer a single reason that we shouldn’t have marriage equality.

    Not one.

    How is ANYONE ok with this?

    How can anyone resort to this level of dishonesty, just to oppress someone else?

    I thought we were past that…

  9. Coffee says:

    Only countries with a majority Caucasian population condones same sex marraiges . You will never see crap aurguments in China or Japan about two samurai’s or two monks or two geisha wanting to marry one another . Referendum … No..no..no . Man and woman only ever allowed to marry !

  10. Coffee says:

    Wonder why same sex marraiges aren’t legal in japan?

    • Mike Hind says:

      What on earth are you talking about?
      This is just bizarre.