Posted on 12/13/2009 9:04:20 AM PST by markomalley
Nettisha Walsh, the Dominica Freedom Party candidate for the Salisbury constituency, evoked uproar from constituents at a public forum when she declared that she had no respect for gay people.
“I respect nobody who is gay,” Walsh told a constituency parliamentary debate at the Salisbury Government School last night.
She was responding to a question posed by pastor of the Salisbury Pentecostal Church, Lloyd Vidal regarding the candidates views on gay tourism.
“We are a Christian, God-fearing nation and to bring such an abomination into our country, it hinders our development,” the young candidate charged.
Walsh further asserted countries should reject gay cruises.
“God will not intervene to take us further because it is an abomination and God will not like it. So we as a Christian nation should stand up and say no to gay tourism too. It should not be allowed in our country or any other country as a matter of fact. Again I will say I respect nobody who is gay whether it’s woman or not,” she said.
The Dominica Labour Party candidate Bentley Royer and United Workers Party candidate Hector John offered different views.
“I respect everybody’s sexual persuasion,” UWP candidate Hector John told the audience.
“Living in the US for two-and-a-half years I have experienced being around persons that have different sexual orientation and we worked together, we go to school together, we respect each other, we played together. There was no difficulty since you keep your business to yourself ... I think if they come to Dominica and they respect and enjoy the island there is no problem. They come they go ... most importantly they respect the country. You come to a country you should not be walking how you want like you would be walking in the US. Respect the laws of the country and we wouldn’t have any problem,” John explained.
Meanwhile, Dominica Labour Party candidate Bentley Royer said Dominicans should not discriminate against people. Royer told the audience the laws of the country would dictate how such situations should be dealt with.
“We live in a world that seems to be very far and yet very close, and gay tourism appears to be one form of tourism that is worldwide. How do we in small countries like Dominica deal with it? We cannot discriminate against people. We have laws which must be obeyed. Again the main thing is your laws. You have people in this island who are gays ... so you have to learn to deal with the situation. I think the laws of the country will decide how they behave on the island,” he explained.
The issue of gay tourism in Dominica has raised concern among the populace in recent time, prompting Dominicans on call-in radio programmes and ministers of religion to speak against it.
There was heightened interest following reports that several gay cruises were planned for Dominica from November 2005 to February 2006. The then head of the tourism office, Vincent Philbert, had said "We are promoting Dominica as a destination of choice, nature-based, adventure-type, diving and once we have done that it is reasonable to expect all manner of persons.”
American gays should pray (if any are religious) and give thanks to God that they live in such a tolerant, open society as America is. When you hear how homosexuality is treated in other parts of the world, it really adds perspective to the gay demands in our country.
We can have all the debates about gay marriage, “don’t ask/don’t tell” military policies, gay adoptions, and gay partners being on health insurance policies, among others. My only point is that the gay debates we have are far different than the gay debates in some other places. And the point is that American gays have never been freer or more open about their lives than they are right now. And for that they should be grateful.
WELL. It’s an idiotic thing for a politician to say,
and it’s an idiotic thing for you to say.
Worthy of Iran. There are millions upon millions of gay
people in every ‘civilized’ country of the West AND East,
who do not buy into the Gay Agenda in any way and just want to be LEFT ALONE. You apparently don’t know that, or respect it. You have this in common with lots of people, ironically, say, with John Kerry, who during the campaign
couldn’t resist “outing” the Cheney daughter who was gay, strictly for the dubious political purpose of stoking the ‘gay issue’, insisting she was fair game. Nice company you keep.
I’m just tired of gay this and gay that. They aren’t special for their perversion. A gay cruise is like bringing a diseased ship to your shores. It leaves far more behind than money.
In which case, they live their lives unobtrusively.
Participating in "Gay Days" at Disneyworld or going on "Gay Cruises" is not the way one does that.
You have this in common with lots of people, ironically, say, with John Kerry, who during the campaign couldn’t resist “outing” the Cheney daughter who was gay, strictly for the dubious political purpose of stoking the ‘gay issue’, insisting she was fair game. Nice company you keep.
Wow.
Live and let live. The government should not get involved in the private choices that people make. Gays should be given all of the freedoms and opportunities that everyone else in this country are. You, personally, don’t have to like them, but this should not be a government issue. We don’t need more thought police from our side.
Heck with gay days and gay cruises - you should get a load of the Gay Parade and the Folsom Street Fair in our area. It is like hell on earth. You have never seen such a thing.
“Gays should be given all of the freedoms and opportunities that everyone else in this country are.”
They already do.
They are free to do EVERYTHING I do.
They are not content with that.
Why should anyone “respect” someone who makes the bad choice to live in sexual immorality and then wants approval? The fact that anyone would advertise his or her sexual immorality calls to question the judgment of the person in question.
I remember during the 70s and 80s, it used to be them asking for tolerance. They said, "leave us alone."
OK, fine. I don't believe in beating down somebody's bedroom door.
But that wasn't good enough. And they asked to be accepted.
And now they want their lifestyle condoned and endorsed by government.
Have you seen what they're teaching in the schools? Have you not been paying attention since Ø came into office?
Sorry, FRiend. It won't be enough for them until they are accepted as the norm and we who are heterosexual are deemed the pervert.
And if this young lady wants to keep the cultural rot that is eating away at our society like a cancer out of her country's society, I say God bless her.
Well, it depends on where you live. Many states don’t allow civil unions — which I consider to be a freedom the same as marriage. Even with civil unions, there are other such as granting spousal privilege in legal matters. So at a federal level, they are not.
I’ve been to San Francisco and even, gasp, walked through the Castro district. I have no idea what you’re talking about here. If you don’t like it, don’t go.
I think the proper line that we should all strive for is toleration, without proactive endorsement. She does not handle this tension well at all.
It is not a question as to whether we “like them” or whether we’re the “thought police.” That’s a nonsensical argument, based on emotion and accusation about motives that you can’t possibly know.
There were no “thought police” involved when the mayors and city clerks all over the US decided to break the law back in 2004.
The people who want to change the laws - or just go around the laws by flaunting them and by litigation - are the ones who started all this, deciding to change established law.
They do not want to “live and let live.” The government can’t legitimately change the definition of marriage - and yet, the GLBTT demands it.
“many states don’t allow civil unions.”
True, and in those states, neither gays, nor straights, nor polyamorists, nor cousins, nor polygamists, nor celibates, can enter into a civil union.
It’s not just gays who can’t enter into a civil union in those states. The law applies to all of us.
In states where homosexual marriage is outlawed, I can’t marry another woman. Or my brother. I can’t marry a man who already has a wife, either.
The laws applies to all of us, equally.
My reply to her is, “Me neither.”
And if it would be that way, I would be happy to live that way. But that's not good enough:
There's a whole lot more than tolerance that we're talking about here...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.