0

INSIGHT: Do you know how you’re going to vote?

By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Chief Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

IT’S SAFE to say that if you don’t know how you’re going to vote in the gender equality referendum by now, then you probably don’t have any plans to head to the polls on June 7.

With little more than a week left, one can also reasonably assume that if you don’t understand what the four Constitutional Amendment Bills seek to change, then you are intentionally distancing yourself from this monumental democratic process. As the reforms stated by the bills are all but gobbled up by the rhetoric of religious conspiracy theorists and political opportunists, take a step back and forge your own understanding of the amendments.

After four years of groundwork - and more than a year of delays - it is inexcusable for anyone to use a lack of understanding as a mask for rejecting the bills. If you don’t understand, then you must endeavour to understand, and do so quickly. To not vote, or vote in ignorance, would be a grave disservice. Not only to future citizens who will be affected by the changes, or lack thereof, but for so many in the country who are powerless to participate because of the current inequalities that exist.

The amendment bills read:

Bill 1: Under the proposed change to the Constitution, a child born outside of The Bahamas would, after the coming into operation of this amendment, become a Bahamian citizen at birth if either its mother or father is a citizen of The Bahamas by birth.

Bill 2: Under this proposed change to the Constitution, the foreign spouse of a Bahamian citizen would, after the coming into operation of this Article, be entitled to apply for and obtain citizenship subject to satisfying: existing national security or public policy considerations; and new provisions guarding against marriages of convenience.

It is important to point out that the foreign spouse must be married for five years before they can apply for permanent residency. If granted, they must maintain that status for another five years before they can apply for citizenship. Additionally, the spouse must then give up their former nationality in order to become a Bahamian.

Bill 3: Under this proposed change to the Constitution, a Bahamian father of a person born out of wedlock after the coming into operation of this amendment would be able to pass his citizenship to that person subject to legal proof that he is the father.

Bill 4: Under this proposed change to the Constitution, it would be unlawful to discriminate based on “sex”, which would be defined as “being male or female”.

The fourth bill has been the target of caustic national debate between persons who believe that it is a natural progression to remove discrimination against women and those with steely conviction that the entire referendum is a veiled bid to introduce a legal pathway to same-sex marriage. These starkly different interpretations represent the fluid nature of the law, which is ultimately based on the social norms and values of the electorate. For those with a biblical principle against equality for women, should temper their convictions with the realization that the constitution already provides discrimination based on religion. Therefore, why should there be a legal backing for inequality between men and women? It will have no impact on the teachings and practices of the Church. Each bill is separate and can be passed on its own so ignore the calls for a sweeping yes or no vote and scrutinize each bill. Ask yourself what can be gained from an outright rejection of all bills, and equally, what will be lost? There is no need to use this referendum as a tool to express dissatisfaction with the Christie-led administration, or exact karma for their role in the failed 2002 referendum.

Unlike the gaming referendum, which was non-binding, Bahamians hold absolute power over the outcome of this process in the same way that we control the outcome of the 2017 general election. In less than a year’s time, voters will send a clear message on matters of governance; however, now is the time to hold ourselves accountable. The government, political parties, religious groups, or the LGBT community will not bear the responsibility for what happens at the polls on June 7 - it is the citizenry. Will you be distracted by the circus acts, or will you evaluate the bills and their proposed impact through the lens of national development. It is ok to disagree with the amendments, it is not ok to abdicate your rights on the whims of an external political agenda.

This is why the recent utterings of FNM Leader Dr Hubert Minnis are reproachful at worst and disenchanting at best. The Free National Movement has been circling this wounded process like a shark drawn to blood, inhibited only by its parliamentary pledge that it would not campaign against the vote. But the opportunity to savage the government became too great for Dr Minnis when he took aim at the government last week. Siding with the vote no campaign against the government’s support of the YES Bahamas campaign as “unequal and unfair”, Dr Minnis took what could have remained an arguably neutral observation a step further and questioned how voters could be expected to make a decision on something they have “little to no knowledge about”. He went on to suggest that the government was trying to shove a yes vote down people’s throats. While he would have us to believe that the missiles came straight from the hip, his statements do little to mask the stench of political opportunism. With the vote a matter of days away, his statements rang hollow in the absence of what efforts his party have taken to increase education and awareness. There is no room for empty criticism, and it is especially disappointing given the FNM’s legacy of advocacy on this issue. Without a doubt it is politically advantageous to appear sympathetic to the religious-backed vote no campaigns, the most vocal being Save Our Bahamas. This group of prominent religious leaders already has one referendum ‘success’ under their belt. They campaigned against the poorly attended gaming referendum, and although the outcome of the vote was not upheld, the referendum failed overwhelmingly.

Pair that with the widely-held belief that the June 7 vote will be a litmus test for the 2017 general election, and the proof is in the pudding. But in case anyone had any doubts, Dr Minnis then ratcheted up his pseudo concern over “process” and condemned the government over allegations that persons were being bribed for yes votes with money, jobs, and contracts. He made the claims as a guest on radio talk show Hard Copy with Steve McKinney on Peace 107.5FM, citing “legitimate sources” that had “no reason to call me and give me untruth”. As leader of the Official Opposition, it is indeed Dr Minnis’ duty to bring these allegations to the fore if they are deemed credible. However, as a leader, it is also his duty to ensure that he is not further handicapping the vote. He should emphatically state his position on the referendum in a way that clearly reinforces his party’s promise to support the bills. It is not enough to simply make a speech in Parliament, and then distance yourself from the process, waiting in the wings to drive a political stake through whatever outcome.

The government issued a statement yesterday appealing to the estranged FNM leader to get back on message.

“The concerns Dr Minnis voiced recently about public education are unfounded,” the statement read, “in fact, the public education campaign has been extraordinary, with more than 200 public information sessions held by the independent Constitutional Commission over the last two years.

It continued: “He (Minnis) also offers, without evidence, the accusations that votes are being improperly obtained. We invite Dr Minnis to campaign in support of the bills he voted for in Parliament. We ask him to join his many colleagues from both political parties who have offered their support and activism in favour of a yes vote.

“Should Dr Minnis locate the courage of his conviction, and campaign with YES, he will see firsthand the inspiring and extraordinary work being done to ensure our sons and daughters are equal in the Constitution and under our laws.”

As the time winds down on what will be a defining moment in Bahamian history, take control of your country and its future.

• What do you think? Email comments to aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

Comments

hallmark 8 years, 5 months ago

John 10:7 - Jesus said, "I AM THE GATE."

Well_mudda_take_sic 8 years, 5 months ago

Like Minnis, it's probably time for the Editor of The Tribune to move on. No righted minded Editor of The Tribune (or columnist for that matter) should ever a trust a word coming out of the mouth of the Wicked Witch of the West or the smooth talking disingenuous Sean McWeeney. The corruption running rampant in our country today is directly attributable to the willingness of these two despicable creatures to do the bidding of the corrupt Christie-led PLP government no matter what its hidden and hideous agenda may be. Here are the facts The Tribune's Editor, Maynard-Gibson and McQueeney don't want voters to know. The amendment proposed by Bill # 4 would prevent discrimination of any kind based on the word "sex" which means our parliamentarians would then be free to legislate same-sex marriages with the simple stroke of their pen once the courts latch on to the word "sex" (aka sexual orientation) in their rulings against discrimination. This is why the corrupt Christie led-PLP government and the detestable likes of Maynard-Gibson, Sean McWeeney, Rubie Nottage, Sharon Wilson, Lynn Holowesko, etc. have steadfastly refused to support the drafting of a proposed amendment that would unequivocally define "marriage" as the legal union through wedlock of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all other forms of union whether they be between man and man, woman and woman, man and sheep and woman and sheep. Surely The Tribune's Editor and its Chief Reporter accept that The Bahamas is not America; as Bahamians we have our own culture and identity and the vast majority of Bahamians do not want our constitution to be amended in a way that would not respect and protect the institution of marriage as we have known it for centuries. Most Bahamians now know they need to do the right thing and vote a resounding "NO!" on June 7th to all four of the proposed amendments given that each of them contains serious flaws of one kind or another that would prove most harmful to our society and way of life. We must vote "No" to all four bills in order to prevent the corrupt Christie-led government from giving citizenship to thousands and thousands of foreigners in exchange for them voting PLP. At a time when so many of us and our children graduating from school cannot find decent paying jobs, the last thing we need is for thousands and thousands of skilled and unskilled foreigners to be encouraged to flock to our shores as newly minted Bahamian citizens (retroactive to July 10th, 1973) to serve the hidden agenda of our corrupt Christie-led government.

Well_mudda_take_sic 8 years, 5 months ago

For the record, like most Bahamians I am only intolerant of others who seek to impinge on my rights, my freedoms and my way of life as a Bahamian. This bucket obviously does not include the vast majority of Bahamian men or Bahamian women, but it does include the many thousands of foreigners who are willing to sell their loyalty to the PLP (or FNM for that matter) in exchange for our government (with its hidden agenda) granting them Bahamian citizenship or permanent resident status. And this bucket certainly does include the very loud few in the global LGBT movement who seek to impose their way of life on others under the pretense of the rest of us (the 98+% of us) discriminating against them. The vast majority of Bahamians (both men and women) should not have to give up any of their rights, freedoms and beliefs, nor compromise in any way their way of life, simply because a small few in our society falsely accuse them of being somehow discriminatory. I, along with the other 98+% of Bahamians, have rights too!

Sign in to comment