On 5/7/2017 4:29 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> On 2017-05-07 03:29 AM (-4), Stephen wrote:
>> On 5/6/2017 11:58 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
>>> We in the U.S. Virgin Islands just celebrated the 100th anniversary of
>>> the sale of the Danish West Indies to the USA.  Barely asked among the
>>> "important" people was the obvious question: why is being a colony of
>>> the USA cause for celebration over being a colony of Denmark?
>>>
>>
>> The literal answer is because you are Americans. But I know what you
>> mean.
>> Actually my personal opinion is that you would have been better off with
>> the Danes. I worked on a Danish Oil Exploration rig for about six
>> months. I really liked the people I met there. Importantly their sense
>> of humour is similar to ours. But on the other hand. Could you trust
>> them to keep you? The gave away the Shetland Islands to the King of
>> Scotland (No, not Idi Amin) Because the then King of Denmark was too
>> poor to buy his sister a weeding present.
>
> Good point.  I am a diehard republican (with a small 'r'); I do not
> understand how one person deserves sovereignty over an entire nation
> just because they emerged from some special vagina.  A constitutional
> monarchy such as Denmark would be tolerable, though; possibly more
> tolerable than a de jure republic whose sovereignty has been usurped by
> a small class of people just because they have more money.
>
> I assume you mean "wedding" present.  When people complain about us
> redefining marriage or protest that the government should get out of the
> marriage business and leave it to the churches, I remind them that
> marriage started out as a contract for exchange of merchandise, namely
> the bride.  Payment could be in the form of such things as, say, the
> Shetland Islands.
>
>>> One constitutional protection that recently seems to have put us in a
>>> better position is equal protection under law prescribed by the 14th
>>> Amendment.  In 2015, our local judiciary agreed that Obergefell v.
>>> Hodges applied to the Virgin Islands, thus legalizing gay marriage here.
>>>   In Greenland and the Faroe Islands, the issue was devolved, meaning
>>> that if we were still under Danish rule, the issue would have been left
>>> to our homophobic legislature.  It is not lost on me that in this one
>>> case, colonialism resulted in greater rights for us.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, lost me a bit there. Whose legislature. the US government's or
>> your island's?
>
> My islands'; if we were still under Danish rule, the U.S. government's
> currently homophobic legislature would be irrelevant.
>

That's what I thought.

> Nevertheless, I sense that the people here are far less homophobic than
> the legislature.  The homophobes are just louder and have the churches
> on their side, and in the Americas, few politicians want to cross the
> churches.
>

I have noticed. Here the press go to town when one of the C of E bishops 
criticises a government policy or make a controversial comment. On the 
other hand we have an openly gay C of E priest broadcasting on the BBC 
Radio 4 (mostly middle class).


>> I was taken aback when I found out how much homophobia was rife in
>> Jamaica.
>
> It's all over the region.  The only islands in the region with any LGBTQ
> rights at all are those still subject to outside powers.  The former
> British colonies are the worst, with gay sex punishable with lengthy
> prison terms or even commitment in a psychiatric institution.
>

I have noticed that. Just look at Africa. There is always an ongoing 
argument between countries that have different attitudes to LGBT issues. 
That's what we hear in the Commonwealth and Church politics, news.
I wonder why our lot are so bad.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message