PM: ‘Judgment Is Attack On Traditional Marriage’

May 5, 2017

“The judgment is an attack on traditional marriage,” the Preserve Marriage group said following today’s historic court ruling, with Preserve Marriage saying it is an “attack on Christian and other faithbased and traditional values” and “directly undermines the diverse population of Bermuda” and has “further fractured our society.”

Preserve Marriage Bermuda May 5 2017 TC

Historic Ruling Made In The Supreme Court

Their statement follows after today’s landmark ruling by Justice Charles Etta-Simmons in the Supreme Court , with the court finding that “common law discriminates against same-sex couples by excluding them from marriage.”

The ruling followed a legal challenge that was brought by Winston Godwin and Greg DeRoche after their marriage application was declined by Bermuda’s Registrar-General, with lawyer Mark Pettingill representing the couple.

The ruling said, “On the facts of this case the Applicants were discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation contrary to section 2 [2] [a] [ii] as read with section 5 of the HRA when the Registrar refused to process their Notice of Intended Marriage as required by sections 13 and 14 of the Marriage Act.”

Speaking after the ruling, a very happy Winston Godwin told Bernews, “I think the courts got it right. I cannot thank everyone enough for their support – it’s a great day for Bermuda and a great day for the LGBT community.”

Preserve Marriage Statement

A statement from the group said, “Today a single judge, Justice Charles Etta-Simmons, of the Supreme Court of Bermuda has decided to redefine the institution of marriage. By imposing this judgment, the court has ruled against many in the community of Bermuda.

“The decision has heightened the cultural divide in this country and has further fractured our society. The members of Preserve Marriage and the diverse population we represent, acknowledge the judgment of the court, but profoundly disagree with it for some of the following reasons:

“The judgment is an attack on traditional marriage. It is an attack on Christian and other faithbased and traditional values. And the judgment directly undermines the diverse population of Bermuda, specifically, the over 14,100 persons who participated in the referendum.

“Preserve Marriage takes the position that the referendum fell short of the required votes to be official due to the fact that the Premier who called the referendum, stated publically, that it would be non-binding. This had an obvious impact on the number of people who voted. However, it does not negate the fact that the people of Bermuda clearly decided they do not want samesex marriage because of the vast cultural change that it brings.

“Contrary to what Justice Simmons ruled, the culture of Bermuda has not changed to the extent that the institution of marriage is no longer recognized as being between a man and a woman.

“This decision has taken Bermuda beyond the law of the European Court of Human Rights which the Human Rights Act of Bermuda must adhere to. Bermuda has now elevated same-sex marriage to a human right which is contrary to the decision of the European Court.

“In Oliari and Others v. Italy, 21 July 2015, Paragraph 192, “Article 12 of the Convention [the right to marry] does not impose an obligation on the respondent Government to grant a same-sex couple … access to marriage.” In addition, the Human Rights Commission is out of step with their responsibility to uphold the rulings of the European Court.

“The redefinition of marriage in other countries has led to the reinvention of gender among children; the erosion of parenting rights to govern what their children are taught as it relates to gender and same-sex education; and the false perception that the church, faith-based organizations, and non-faith affiliated citizens who stand for traditional marriage are promoting bigotry or hate-speech.

“Bermuda has now become the only country in the world to introduce same-sex marriage through the ruling of a single judge. As a result, the voices of 9,000 petitioners were ignored. The voices of 14,100 referendum voters were ignored. And the voices of our duly elected Members of Parliament were ignored.

“Preserve Marriage will continue to stand for traditional marriage between a man and a woman because of its importance to the culture of Bermuda, the family and most critically the children. Truth has no expiration date. We firmly believe that the redefinition of marriage leads to an exponential cultural shift in the future of Bermuda and the children that will be raised on these Islands.

“We firmly believe that to uphold the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman in Bermuda is not hateful nor bigotry. We will continue to boldly speak the truth on this matter and will consider all options going forward.”

click here same sex marriage

Read More About

Category: All, News

Comments (93)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. aceboy says:

    There is no attack on anyone except your attack on people who mean you no harm at all. Bunch of hypocrites.

    • Paradise Reclaimed says:

      Aceboy nailed it!

    • grain of salt says:


    • steve says:

      this group makes me embarrassed to be a strait christian.

      • Daylily says:

        Don’t understand what you mean by “strait Christian”, did you mean straight Christian. Never seen that term in any Bible, either you believe God’s word or you don’t. Either you stand for truth or you don’t, nothing embarrassing about that.

        What is embarrassing is that we are lying about all of the rainbows and happiness. Pretending that many of our young people haven’t been violated, abused, preyed on, hurt and traumatized into this lifestyle. That’s what’s embarrassing.

        • steve says:

          I don’t share your self righteousness or the feeling of self gratification from correcting others spelling. but hey you wanna tell us all the way it is the world and imply your impeccable character? YOu go Girl!

        • bdaboy says:

          Daylily, you’re an embarrassment to humanity.

          The toxic venom you spew is gross….God will punish you for this!

        • Mike Hind says:

          What? Non of this is true! Show evidence!
          You are now stooping to be, vile lows in your pathetic attempt to defame gay people. Shame on you, sir. Shame on you.

    • Build a Better Bermuda says:

      Their assertion on the Oliari and Others v. Italy, 21 July 2015, judgement is also false and misrepresentative. The ECHR did rule that Italy was not obligated to provide marriage, but they are obligated to provide the same rights of family legal standing as marriage.

      Lets be clear, the PM are deliberately misleading in their selective propaganda campaign, and marriage is not their institution to define. Even with this ruling, they can and will still have their own limited definition of marriage, it just reaffirms the protection of religious freedom that means they don’t have the right to define marriage for everyone else and that marriage must be equal under the law.

      • Daylily says:

        BaBB. You are wrong. If your assertion was true, then why doesn’t Eastern Europe or All of the countries within the European Union have SSM. No one is obligated to have SSM or SSCU under the law.

        Explain why other countries in the EU don’t have SSM.

        Misleading, Propaganda campaign?? People can see who has a Misleading, propaganda campaign. Let’s see, 2 words and a comma (Human Rights Act amendment) led to this whole situation. The misrepresentation told to by Pettingill to get that passed in parliament, led to Pettingill being allowed to work in government while suing the government based on the very changes in the human rights act that he made while attorney general.

        Also, PM is not defining marriage for everyone else, marriage already has a definition. It is others who want to make up a definition and redefine marriage for everyone else. Pot and kettle situation here.

        • Mike Hind says:

          This particular argument has been shown to be wrong many times and it has been explained, using facts and data and reality, that it is YOU and the other American agitators behind Preserve Marriage, as well as some of the members of that “charity” who have been using lies and misinformation to promote their agenda of hate and discrimination.
          Pretty much everything you have ever posted has been show to be either incorrect or an outright fabrication.

          Please stop. You aren’t good for this country.

    • Alex Madeiros JP says:

      Perfect reply. Bunch of hyprocrits for sure. Half of them don’t even go to Church and the other half more than likely are divorced or cheating on their spouses..but hey, it is traditional.

      • Daylily says:

        The real hypocrites are all of the people jumping on the politically correct SSM bandwagon of the rich and elite. Most of these people never believed in SSM until it became socially expedient. No real values, just joining the crowd out of fear and the need to have “friends” and be “liked”. Afraid that their “human rights advocating” boss will discriminate against them if they dare to have their own mind.

        • bdaboy says:

          “The real hypocrites are all of the people jumping on the politically correct SSM bandwagon of the rich and elite.”

          You’re just jealous because you’re not elite :)

          how many baby daddies do you have?

        • Thomas Mahoney says:

          Intolerance should not be tolerated

        • Mike Hind says:

          No. the real hypocrites are those, like you, who claim to be Christian and good and righteous, yet lie and bear false witness when it comes to spreading this vile message of hate.

  2. just wondering says:

    Nope – no “attack “anywhere in sight – if you wish to get married then of course please do so – but don’t impede others from doing the same because of your own values – that’s in fact an attack on their rights!! One wonders what you think “Christian values” are? If they are depriving others of the joy of a committed relationship that you enjoy simply because of your sexual orientation then we will have to disagree as to what “Christian values” in fact are!

    • Daylily says:

      SSM is not a human right.

      • bdaboy says:

        “SSM is not a human right.”

        yes it is.

        Being a hate filled bigot is not a human right…You’re simply confused.

      • Mike Hind says:

        They didn’t say it was.
        Why do you keep lying like this?

  3. wahoo says:

    Live and let live. Force your morals upon yourself only.

    • sage says:

      Right, let’s dump the misuse of (some) drugs act.

      • Mike Hind says:

        Different topic, but one many of us support.

  4. PBanks says:

    “The judgment is an attack on traditional marriage,”

    – I was ‘traditionally married’ a few years ago, by a church official in a place of worship. I don’t think my marriage has been attacked or altered in any shape or form, but heck.

    ““directly undermines the diverse population of Bermuda” and has “further fractured our society.””

    - Society was already split on what a marriage is(should be) defined to be, that hasn’t changed.

    ““attack on Christian and other faithbased and traditional values””

    - again, existing marriages haven’t been affected. And why has there never been an outrage against people who get married without the presence of a Christian or other faith-based ceremony/official?

    Ah well. PM were always going to stand firm behind their beliefs. Will we see a public demonstration in upcoming days?

    • Daylily says:

      PB. Your arguments are a bit overused. It’s apparent that an attack on marriage refers to the Timeless institution of marriage and what defines marriage as a whole, not your specific relationship.

      Marriage that is redefined has no definition at all, it becomes nothing more than a friends with benefits contract. There is no longer any reason to stop at 2 persons or any combination of a group of people who “love” each other from getting “married”. It means nothing, which is the real intent. To destroy its value. Look up Marsha Gessen’s comments.

      • steve says:

        who hurt you DL?

      • bdaboy says:

        Is your marriage, your faith, so delicate that it’s being destroyed by something that has absolutely no effect on your life? That’s sad…perhaps you should seek help.

      • Mike Hind says:

        Overused doesn’t mean they are wrong.

        And the rest is gibberish. “Marriage that is redefined has no definition at all…”? That is complete, ignorant nonsense. Marriage has been redefined over and over.

        You,re plumbing new depths in your desperation!

        And Marsha Gessen is an anti-marriage activist that has been debunked many, many times. Yet you keep bringing her up. Who’s arguments are overused? And wrong? Oh, yeah. That would be you.

  5. bdaboy says:

    Traditional marriage…the transfer of property from father to husband…wives are just objects to be traded.
    Let’s uphold ‘traditional’ marriage.

    • Daylily says:

      The first marriage was a man and a woman in a covenant with God. Sin and man tainted the marriage institution with bad customs, however, the sacred sexual complementarity necessity was apparent. Humans have lots of relationships but only one can be consummated and produce fruit. Only one.

      • bdaboy says:

        “. Humans have lots of relationships but only one can be consummated and produce fruit. ”

        You’re right, my parents are straight and they produced a fruit :)

        Your parents produced a hateful bigot.

      • Sickofantz says:

        Not really reflective of modern day reality is it your comment? I guess you didn’t get to play the field!

      • Mike Hind says:

        This is your religion talking. No one else has to follow your religion.

        And, as has been pointed out to you too many times to count, procreation and “bearing fruit, is NOT A REQUIREMENT FOR MARRIAGE SO THIS ARGUMENT IS IRRELEVANT,

  6. Bermudian Thinker says:

    “The judgment is an attack on traditional marriage. It is an attack on Christian and other faith based and traditional values. And the judgment directly undermines the diverse population of Bermuda, specifically, the over 14,100 persons who participated in the referendum.

    Lets look at this statement. The law should have nothing to do with one set of values held by one religious group. Hence it was made that way. This is nothing about your christian values, this is the interoperation of the law. The Registar acted in a discriminatory way against these men because of their sexual orientation. This is illegal as noted by the Human rights act. This has nothing to do with the referendum that took place. This is the law working. You cannot pick and choose in the law (as you can in your faith) to only do one set of values on a certain occasion and and another for a different occasion.

    Quoting a European case from Italy is a joke. Correct me if I am wrong wasn’t this the same group when international laws were talked about with marriage and sexual orientation equality, they said this is Bermuda and not the same as the other countries.

    Again here picking an choosing what suits this group for the time to forward their agenda. I think it quite hilarious that a country with quite a high divorce rate and children born out of wedlock that we are saying that we need to up hold the “sanctity of marriage”. Why don’t you sort your own house out first before even starting to talk about others that have nothing to do with your faith, your space, or your life.

    Marriage is a legally binding agreement, not a faith one. With your same reasoning people who don’t get married in Christian religious ceremony shouldn’t be able to get married either.

    Again why don’t you spend the same amount of time counseling couples in order to actually “Preserve Marriage” , I think this may be a use of your time.

    • Daylily says:

      BT. Our laws certainly do have a lot to do with the values of one religious group namely the Church of England. You asked to be corrected if you were wrong, well yes you are wrong. The Italy case is of significance.

      The Bermuda Human Rights Act 1981 reads:

      AND WHEREAS the European Convention on Human Rights1 applies to Bermuda2: (page 2/3 on-line-check it out)

      Italy, France, Eastern Europe, England, etc are member countries of the European Convention, so the European Court on Human Rights (ECtHR) may hear cases from any European Convention country. These rulings, as per our own Human Rights Act 1981 have some implications in Bermuda. What happens in Canada and the US, for example do not have the same influence on our laws.

      Not only the case in Italy, but another in France, June 2016 again before the ECtHR (Chapin & Chapentier v. France).

      Basically, the ECtHR continue to rule that SSM should not be forced on any country and should not be decided by judges but by the people, particularly in a democracy.

      Bermuda is the only country in the world to try and force SSM through 1 judge. Even the US used a panel of judges.

      Also, you make a claim as to how “Preserve Marriage” should spend its time. The organization and its members have counseled numerous married and unmarried persons, gay/straight and in-between. Please don’t claim to know the heart of the many people who have been on the front lines rebuilding and fighting for marriage and this community long before the whole SSM debate ever came to the forefront.

      • bdaboy says:

        “Bermuda is the only country in the world to try and force SSM through 1 judge. ”

        No, it’s not. You’re either a filthy liar or just stupid….more likely, a little of both.

      • Mike Hind says:

        Nothing in this is true. It’s all already been addressed and shown to be false.

  7. wahoo says:

    So interestingly enough I wonder how the old guard PLP feel about all this. They have been rolling out a lot of candidates and I noticed some old and familiar faces in the crowd, err group, mmmmm-couple people. Nice tent by the way.

  8. Wassup says:

    Can they force an appeal?

  9. Mary says:

    what a great and proud day for Bermuda hip hip horaaay “eat those apples”

  10. But says:

    So is divorce and adultery…oops

  11. Toodle-oo says:

    * By imposing this judgment, the court has ruled against many in the community of Bermuda. *

    No , she (the court) hasn’t ruled ‘against’ anyone .

    But she sure has pissed you all off .

  12. bdaboy says:

    ““We firmly believe that to uphold the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman in Bermuda is not hateful nor bigotry.”

    And I disagree, you are bigots, plain and simple. You’re perpetuating hatred and discrimination in the name of your god. You’re disgusting.

    • Daylily says:

      a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions. Looks like your living in a glass house yourself, calling people disgusting because you don’t agree with them.

      • bdaboy says:

        read your own posts, daylily. You are nothing but a hate filled bigot.
        You hate the fact that others are happy in their live…just because your life is such a miserable existence, doesn’t mean everyone else should live like you.
        You’re a sad little heathen.

      • Mike Hind says:

        Here we go again with the regurgitation of the same tired, false arguments.
        Sir, you’ve been shown to be a bigot and it’s been explained to you many times.

  13. Real Onion says:

    Traditional marriage…read as Arranged marriage in some places…so please,choose your words carefully in future…
    You have already offended many throughout Bermuda and the rest of the World.

  14. PW says:

    Please re read what you write. I think a good part of Bermuda is embarrassed for the way you approach this.

    Why not do what your name sake says. Preserve marriage. Help all the couples who have a cheating spouse that breaks up a home and throws kids lives into disarray or better yet ladies that have babies out of wedlock and then spend all of their lives trying to make ends meet while the children suffer.

    Sadly with the problems Bermuda has on its plate in respect of marriage and relationship management your rhetoric on one issue makes the group look simply like a political lobbying tool without more sincere objects.

    Just an observation.

    Live and let live folks.

    • Varied says:

      Truth. A pressure group is what they are and will continue to be. Which is fine as long as they don’t try the claims of being a charity nonsense without doing something… charitable

    • Daylily says:

      No, “a good part of Bermuda” voted in the referendum and they support Preserving Marriage. You guys just have louder bullhorns and more money.. Your comments are old and worn, whose to say that Preserve Marriage isn’t helping with all of the other things.

      Also, no one is holding up divorce, or single parenting as an ideal. These are things we all understand can happen but no one aspires to have. We already understand that families tend to do best with both the parents it took to create them.

      • bdaboy says:

        “No, “a good part of Bermuda” voted in the referendum and they support Preserving Marriage.”

        No, they didn’t.
        Can you post anything without lying?

      • Mike Hind says:

        “A good part” isn’t the majority. The referendum was unanswered and, thus, irrelevant.
        You are, as usual, wrong.

  15. Reality says:

    Not even bothering to read the hateful message of this false charity….. if you were really about marriage, you would be fighting divorces, adulterers, swinging, single parents… To claim you are Christian is a farce. Christians are taught to treat others as they wish to be treated… remember who gets to throw the first stone? Oh, you say it’s in the bible…. so, do you eat shellfish, play crown & anchor, use a condom or other birth control …. etc, etc?. Interesting how some “christians” get to pick and chose what they follow in the bible.

    • Daylily says:

      Again with the you don’t care about any other sin and you eat shellfish argument. Really? Please read a book on Bible customs vs.moral laws, etc.

      • bdaboy says:

        “Please read a book on Bible customs vs.moral laws, etc.”

        or read a batman comic…they’re equivalent.

      • bdaboy says:

        You keep mentioning the bible, like it’s credible…you’re mistaken of course.
        But, since you live by the bible, you must support the return of slavery, the ‘good book’ is all about promoting slavery, why don’t you challenge the courts to rule on this? Bring back slavery, like the ‘good book’ says!

      • Mike Hind says:

        Yeah! Read a book written by someone who believes in the Bible and is hypocritically looking to justify bad behavior!

  16. Jennifer says:

    I am in complete agreement.
    No matter what or who, God’s word cannot be changed.
    He will have the final say!

    • bdaboy says:

      ” God’s word cannot be changed.”

      Sure it can, you xtians do it all the time…in fact, you’re doing it now.
      Stop hating, it’s not what god wants :)

      • Rich says:

        Yeah the bible also states they took 2 of every animal on a boat during the floods. We couldn’t even do that with the largest boats in the world these days. Enjoy your stories, we all know Bermudians love stories…..

        • aceboy says:

          After the lions were brought in two by two, what were they fed?

    • wondering says:

      Ever heard of the Reformation? Nicene Council?

      God’s word has been changed a lot my dear

    • Mike Hind says:

      Then let Him have the say and you lot stay out of it!

  17. Jennifer says:

    I agree with Preserve Marriage!

    • Rich says:

      Preserve Marriage has one point of view how about the rest of the world. Why should their religious beliefs impact others. It is because of religion that we have had wars through out time.

  18. It is high time that we the Church be the Church and start cleaning up our own mess, and not worry about other people and their lifestyle.

    We have gotten so far off track in our own lives toward each other as believers, that we have absolutely no room at this hour to deal with the homosexual or lesbian community.

    I stand on the Word of God and try my best to live by it, but I come short every single day, but the more sickening thing to me is not what the LGB community is doing, but what we are doing as Christians.

    You have Churches and it’s leaders that are so divided that the real quest for souls is in a poor position.

    Let today’s ruling remind us that the Bible clearly stated that these things will happen in the last of the last days, so why are we not getting our own house in order, so in paralysis times we the Church will stand, and having done all to stand, “STAND”. So that we can be the Light in a dark World.

    When Judgement day comes, we are not going to be Judge for what the LGB,Homosexual or lesbian community did or not do, we will be Judge for what we as Christian did or not do, to proclaim Jesus Christ as Lord.

    • Mike Hind says:

      So… are you saying to just let the LGBT community get on with their lives and for PM and other anti-equality groups to mind their own business?

      That’s very Christian of you!

  19. Warlord says:

    I am in a traditional marriage and I do t feel attacked by the ruling.Preserve marriage are a bunch of religious fools.

  20. JUNK YARD DOG says:

    We are looking at people with a plain and simple mental disorder here.

    • Mike Hind says:

      That may be a little harsh, but it IS a fair description of Preserve Marriage and it’s supporters…

      • Get with the times says:

        mental health is nothing to with a person’s believe systems and is not a matter to joke about or to label an individual with. Mental disorders are not to blame for ignorance and hate, the only thing to blame for that is fear of change, selfishness and small mindedness.

  21. Cedar berry says:

    How is it undermining the diverse community when the Judge just embraced and included diversity?!? Do you even understand the definition of diversity???

  22. bdaboy says:

    “We are looking at people with a plain and simple mental disorder here.”

    Agreed, they believe in the sky monster, it’s pathetic.

  23. No “attack on traditional marriage” at all. On my reading of the judgement heterosexual people will still be permitted to marry each other. Nor will they be required to marry people of the same sex. Get over it. So glad I can tell my young daughter that Bermuda is a less discriminatory island today, and her gay and happily marrried Aunts are welcome, and her gay Christian married Godparents are welcome. Now the poiticians need to confirm their position on whether they will look to legislate discriminatory laws against this BEFORE the AC. Let’s ask them to clarify while the world’/ attention is on us. PLP?

  24. Rich says:

    Too bad preserve marriage. You didn’t want civil union or any equal rights, so this is justice for the hardship and pain you have caused others, by not accepting any rights for the LGBT community or anything else outside of your book of fables. Bye Felisha.

  25. Janice says:

    Seriously this stuff is written from people of God scarey and if you know any of them be afraid

  26. Yo lmao says:

    these people are sick in the head

  27. Zevon says:

    I assume churches will be speaking out against single parents, unmarried couples, and divorced people, and rejecting them if they try to go to church or try to contribute tithes.

  28. Navin Johnson says:

    Preserve Marriage group you are free to live the life you choose and now its time for others to have the same right…..time to shut it down and move on to your next religious crusade…

    • Varied says:

      Sadly they have proven to be a one trick pony over the past year and change. They’d have had a bit more respect if they actually talked about things to strengthen or encourage marriage, but it was all about the gays for them

  29. Mike Hind says:

    If your “values” are to deny people equal access to rights and promote discrimination for absolutely no reason whatsoever, using lies and dishonesty to promote your agenda of hate, then your values SHOUlD be attacked!

  30. Not correct says:

    The movie is called Jack and Jill…. not Jack and William.
    The act is sick!

    • aceboy says:

      What movie you moron?

    • bdaboy says:

      “The act is sick!”

      yet, you spend so much time thinking about it, pervert

    • bdaboy says:

      “The act is sick!”

      but you spend a lot of time thinking about…probably the only thing that gets you off. lol

    • Mike Hind says:

      The act is legal and no one cars what you think about it!

  31. ImJustSayin says:

    It’s not an attack on traditional marriage. Stop trying to mislead the uninformed. No one has said traditional marriage must end. The most ridiculous statement I’ve ever seen. Fear mongering at its best to suit their narrative.

  32. unus sed leo says:

    so…….you were saying?????

  33. Up D hill says:

    I really don’t care, its their life to live so let them live it!!!

  34. FUI says:

    Bye PS you lost go try to force your ideals on some other sect. B the way people this country has finally joined the real BIG world scary isn’t it

  35. mm says:

    Even if one had no religious beliefs in harmony with a male and female created by God, one would look at the biological design of the bodies and come to realise that a male and female were meant to satisfy each other. Now going a step further.if a same sex union/couple wish to raise children, how is the child suppose to affirm their own identity when two adults of the same sex are married and purport to be the child,s parents would not the child have a twisted mindset and values imposed into his/her life. Will we as a community be able to embrace the troubled child/teenager when he /she engages in some deviant behaviour,not necessarily sexual.It may be violent or malicious in nature. What rights does the Registrar General,s staff have, with this new turn of events, will they be subject to disciplinary action for failing to issue a license to marry.