The Tribune

EDITOR, The Tribune.

I’m writing this letter on January 15, 2017, a day that has been set aside around the world as Sanctity of Human Life Sunday.

As I thought about the sanctity of all human life, regardless of the circumstances of their conception or the extent of their illness, I could not help but think about and reflect on Archdeacon James Palacious’ “black people breed too much” comment. I’m quite surprised that all the loud voices that lambasted Mr Richard Lightbourn for his far milder and civil comments were curiously silent about Archdeacon Palacious’ blatantly racial and misconceived comment about black people. In my view, their silence is a case of racial hypocrisy.

For those who have short memories (or no memory) of what Mr Lightbourn said, I will remind them. After pointing out that “many young women have 5 and 6 children many of whom are born out of wedlock” and “many of the fathers of those children have little involvement in the child’s upbringing either emotional or financial,” and the fact that “the laws of our country and the legal system is such that the father is not likely to be compelled to assist financially in the upbringing of the child,” Mr Lightbourn went on to say that “an FNM Government would introduce legislation which would enable a court to deduct from a father’s paycheck an amount to be paid directly to the mother of the child and in this way the father would consider carefully the consequences of having an unprotected relationship and in all likelihood reduce the number of children born in The Bahamas.”

Mr Lightbourn then said: “It is also necessary for us as a nation to consider adopting the lead of several countries in the world which result in an unwed mother having her tubes tied after having more than two children which would in the end result in fewer children being born.”

Mr Lightbourn is a lawyer, so fair minded people knew that he was not proposing any programme for Bahamian women to have their tubes tied involuntarily (because the Constitution protects against women being forced to do so). But many people publicly pounced on Mr Lightbourn and his comments.

Therefore, in view of their silence about Archdeacon Palacious’ “black people breed too much” comment, I’m left to conclude that Mr Lightbourn was attacked primarily because he is white and the women within the scope of his comments are predominantly, if not exclusively, black. It is a case of racial hypocrisy.

How can those who objected to Mr Lightbourn’s comments say nothing about Archdeacon Palacious wrongly broad-brushing the reproductive habits of black people, likening us to animals, by saying “black people breed too much”?

I was forced to look up the meaning of “breed,” and none of the dictionaries I consulted connected the verb to humans; they connected it to animals. I imagine that a dictionary from the era of the transatlantic slave trade might describe “breed” as forced sexual intercourse between slaves to produce slaves.

Archdeacon Palacious was wrong to broad-brush sexual reproduction among blacks, and he was wrong to use the word “breed” to describe it. But he is also wrong in his understanding of the problem that he addressed.

The problem in our country of people having more children than they can afford has more to do with socio-economics than race. So it is a simplistic approach to the problem to say “black people breed too much” and verbally demean and try to shame them into having less children.

I find it ironic that Archdeacon Palacious made his infamous comment at the PLP’s Majority Rule Rally. I believe he would have done better to decry the sad fact that after 50 years of so-called majority rule we still have communities that are steeped in a vicious cycle of poverty that produce generations of women who have too many children for too many men outside of wedlock.

And he should have decried the fact that they are, to some extent, victims of governmental neglect through poor education, governmental waste through unaccountable social welfare, and governmental abuse through laws that hurt the poor, like the legalization of webshop gambling and consumption-based taxation, like VAT and customs duty.

As I wrote previously concerning Mr Richard Lightbourn’s comment, Archdeacon Palacious’ comment provides us with yet another great opportunity to have a national conversation about sexual conduct, the responsibility of fathers, and traditional marriage.

The truth is that we as a society need to affirm in word and deed that marriage is the only legitimate context for sexual relations and the birth of children. If such an affirmation is broadly embraced in our country, it will make for a better and stronger Bahamas, morally and socio-economically.

PASTOR CEDRIC

MOSS

Nassau,

January 15, 2017.