Dear Sir,

There are few newspaper columnist that I will make it a point to read because I know they will usually bring clarity to the issues, and Sir Arthur Foulkes is one of them. When it comes to political issues he usually offers some fresh insight and perspective. But it seems that when it comes to speaking on moral issues there is an astonishing lack of moral clarity coming from his pen. Worse, he viciously attacks the very ones (churches and pastors) whose passion and job is to bring moral clarity and help to persons crushed by their own moral indiscretions.

I cringed as I read his broadside against the Bahamas Plays and Films Board, The Bahamas Christian Council and "religious leaders" in their opposition to the homosexual-themed movie Brokeback Mountain.

For Sir Arthur to have made the comparison between the banning of the 1950s movie "No Way Out" (on Racism in America) to the banning of "Brokeback Mountain" was an intentional but unfortunate attempt to link the plight of the homosexual with that of blacks. He writes, "Religious leaders can preach all they want against homosexuality or anything else, but in this democratic society and pluralistic society they should not be allowed to manipulate the apparatus of the state to force their views on other people." Wake up and look around Sir Arthur! All around the world the powerful homosexual lobby has been forcing their views on the world regardless of existing law!!! For instance, the Mayor of San Francisco arbitrarily allowed for homosexual marriages to be performed in his city, although it was against the law. An activist Court and Legislature in Massachusetts has made homosexual marriage the law of that state. In other words, homosexual marriage was imposed by activist judges, not by the democratic will of the people.

Canada has made same sex marriages legal, and persons who speak out against homosexuality in anyway (except inside a Church building) can be jailed for up to 2 years (what happened to free speech there?). In a New York school children cannot say "Happy Mother's Day" because it might offend the student who has two homosexual men as his parents (all must suffer for their deviant choices). In Spain, the legislature voted to accept same-sex marriage based on erroneous information put out there by homosexual advocates. Here in the Caribbean, The Sandals Resorts chain, perhaps the premiere singles resort on the planet - under extreme international pressure brought on them by these groupings - changed their policies to allow homosexual "couples" to be allowed on their properties.

And several years back, The British Government demanded that all their remaining Caribbean territories change their laws to accommodate homosexuality although that those territories were opposed to it. Just who is manipulating who, Sir Arthur? Gay activists have gained their ground through emotional manipulation that they are the victims (rather than the aggressors), and by high-jacking civil rights language. The homosexual lobby has repeatedly indicated its willingness to use deceptive means to achieve its objective. I have included below the stated goals of the homosexual agenda, and how they plan to accomplish their objectives as expressed at the Gay Pride March on Washington DC on April 25, 1993.

1. Demands for the repeal of all laws regarding sodomy

2. Demands for the legalisation of all forms of sexual expression including pedophilia (sexual abuse of children)

3. Demands to change the age of consent to allow sex with minors

4. Demands for public funds to cover same-sex operations

5. Demands for the legalisation of same-sex marriages

6. Demands for legalisation of adoption, custody, and foster care within a same-sex marriage structure

7. Demands for the deliberate inclusion of lesbians, homosexual men, bisexuals, and transgenders in education and childcare

8. Demands for public funding of artificial insemination of lesbians

9. Restriction of freedom of religion and speech vis-à-vis teaching on homosexuality (already the case on radio/TV in Canada and becoming increasingly so in the USA)

10. Pressure to ban prayer in public schools and other public places

11. Demands that the Boy Scouts and armed forces be required to accept homosexuals. As someone who sees himself as a "guardian of Bahamian freedoms," I ask you to answer me once again who is attacking who? Who is manipulating who? The great majority of these demands have been met in the United States and parts around the world. The Bahamas stands on the threshold of the unfolding of the homosexual agenda in this country. Item (1) of the agenda has already been achieved. Even now statements are being made about homosexual marriage being allowed for in amendments to the Constitution.

Yours, etc.,

PASTOR LYALL BETHEL

In The Bahamas we have seen how the homosexual cruise issue has been used to begin bringing about these changes. Taking advantage of our nation's dependency on tourism, the agenda is using the innocence of tourism to flaunt their lifestyle in The Bahamas. We can surely expect that the orchestrated Rosie O'Donnell "Gay Family Cruise" will be used on HBO to portray how innocent homosexual couples trying to enjoy a vacation in The Bahamas had their vacation turned into a nightmare by "raving homophobes".

Banking on the fact that we won't care where the money comes from as long as we can put food on our table, they brazenly announce their coming. They believe that international pressure and our historical love of money no matter how it is gained, will prevail in this regard to have us sell out our convictions. But when one takes a hard, studied look at what they want to achieve our only legitimate response must be that we are not a nation for sale, again.

As for the "civil rights" angle being subtly used by Sir Arthur, I like how Glenn T. Stanton, director of social research and cultural affairs at Focus on the Family put it. "A moment's reflection reveals that "giving marriage a gay make-over" is not a civil rights issue. Sex preference is not skin colour. San Francisco is not Selma. Marriage is not a lunch counter or a seat on a bus."

He continues, "African-Americans are not allies of same-sex marriage advocates – certainly not brothers and sisters marching arm in arm in the struggle for equality. They are, instead, same-sex marriage's greatest opponents. The same-sex marriage proponent's slippery rhetoric would have us denounce most blacks as bigots. [M]aybe African-Americans see this not as an issue of equality, but morality - and very little morality at that. Jesse Jackson recently challenged the comparison that gay "marriage" is a civil rights issue by explaining that "gays were never called three-fifths human in the Constitution and in that they did not require the Voting Rights Act to have the right to vote."

Sir Arthur should know that "the real reason the overwhelming majority of African-Americans and two-thirds of all Americans oppose same-sex marriage, is because they understand it fundamentally redefines the family and says mothers and fathers don't matter for children. And the black community, more than any other, has suffered under the ravages of this."

Be advised that when you call religious leaders "homophobes" and "bigots" and imply that they are simple-minded and backwards and against social advancement, you attack us all -- the good apples and the bad. I can assure you, I represent the vast majority of the religious leaders and Christians who love this country; pray tirelessly for its moral and spiritual advancement and welcome homosexuals who want to know about Christ into our Churches (we are not homophobic nor social backward).

Remember, you have earned the right and the respect to carry the title "Sir"; don't ruin your clout by vilifying the clergy, or putting out poorly researched editorials that do not advance sound arguments.

I trust that this letter helps you in further discussions on these matters.

Yours, etc.,

PASTOR LYALL BETHEL