Dear Editor,

The Inter Religious Organisation (IRO) has issued a statement (Stabroek News, June 30) on the SASOD film festival and on homosexuality that came out of a meeting of its members held on the previous day. Unfortunately, I could not attend that meeting but having gone through the statement, I realised that I cannot agree with the overall position of my colleagues on the issue.

What in summary seemed to be the main objections and concerns articulated by the IRO? The strongest one seems to be the contention that SASOD is using the film festival to influence and corrupt young and impressionable minds to promote homosexuality.

The IRO feels that while homosexuals have rights to their views and practices they must not be allowed to express themselves in the public space. The report emphatically states that religious leaders cannot allow “public education” on homosexuality, again, to influence young and impressionable minds.

The statement instructs us that the scriptures of all religions condemn homosexuality, as against the “natural law,” violating the natural plan of creation, that will lead to the damnation of our nation and to our extinction.

The most extraordinary claim, however, is that homosexuality is a product of western culture, to which the Guyanese society cannot subscribe.  We cannot allow the western world to “foist their lifestyle and thinking on us.” Surely, homosexuality, imported from the west, is a new form of colonialism.

It is clear to me that the statement reflects a host of irrational fears that cannot be empirically supported by social reality anywhere in the world.  The contention that SASOD’s Sidewalk Café film series is intended to lure and corrupt, “young and impressionable minds,’ is as ludicrous as it is unfounded.

People are not converted to homosexuality in the manner of religious proselytizers who through their unconscionable and despicable methods, unapologetically and deliberately target not only young and impressionable minds, but also prey on people’s vulnerability.

In Guyana, the sex rings involving schoolgirls, the frequent seduction and abduction of schoolgirls by bus drivers and bus conductors, the sex trade which deliberately targets minors, the luring of young females into prostitution and trafficking involving our hinterland residents who are brought out on the pretext of working in bars and restaurants and other such crimes are certainly not the work of SASOD and homosexuals.

As to the charge that homosexuality leads to the corruption of society it is impossible to find any society in the world where homosexuality is accepted as an alternative lifestyle that has suffered the kind of the degradation that our religious leaders fear may take place in Guyana.

The Netherlands, for  example, and particularly the Dutch city of Amsterdam, is perhaps one of the most liberal places in the world where homosexuality is concerned and which even boasts of a monument devoted to the memory of homosexuals who have been persecuted throughout the ages. There can be fewer places in the world that breathe an air of freedom, sophistication and culture, music, art and literature, much of it contributed by homosexuals themselves, as Amsterdam.

Further afield, from Finland to Italy and across the Atlantic to United States and Canada, that also have liberal, compassionate and enlightened attitudes towards diversity and alternative lifestyles we see generally peaceful, progressive, humane societies where the family continues to proper. There are no signs of “extinction” and “damnation,” here.

Whatever fears of damnation and extinction exist derive not from homosexuality, but from irrationality and fanatic religious zealots of every stripe and star, from those religious persuasions which claim to be the sole repository of the truth to which all else must be converted, and from those followers of religions who do not have the patience to wait for unbelievers and homosexuals to be punished in the afterlife, as their teachings go, but who with awesome zeal seek to do so here and now.

So who/what poses the greatest dangers to society, dangers of extinction and damnation? Is it from homosexuality or religious zealots? The clear and unambiguous truth is that the greatest potential for the dangers of extinction lies among those aggressive, proselytizing, intolerant religious creeds of the world that see unbelievers and those whom they believe violate the “natural law of the universe” as agents of the devil and enemies of God.

A bigger danger we have to be wary of is those self appointed arbiters of morality, or moral policemen, who claim to derive their authority and inspiration from ancient and divine writs that, implicitly and explicitly, have no room for toleration of religious differences not to talk of other diversities such as sexual orientation.

This brings us to the claim that  having a liberal and enlightened attitude towards homosexuality means that we are giving in to western influence and values. Since when, have we been against western values and influences?  What value system and world view constitute the very foundation of this country and inform our day to day dealings with one another, if it is not the so called western value?

After all, the mention of anything eastern is anathema to those very people who now wax eloquent in their denunciation of western value and influence.  It is sheer hypocrisy and double-standard to attack western values and influence, when it is all we are guided by, some people more than others.

It is always intriguing when post-colonial Christians denounce western values and influence and speak of homosexuality as a form of colonialism.  Aren’t they aware of the apparent contradictions? Of all the institutions we have inherited from the colonial past there is none so more thoroughly colonial and western, heart and soul, than Christianity.

The fact of the matter is that homosexuality is as old as humanity itself and has nothing to do with western culture and values.  It has been practised for untold centuries, in one form or another, in many non-western and traditional societies.  Even in those societies as in the Arab world, Iran, and Pakistan where death can be the penalty for homosexuals, closet homosexuality is rampant as evidenced in the literature that celebrates the master’s yearning for the young male slave.

We also have to be concerned about what is glibly and uncritically invoked to be the position of scriptures on homosexuality.  There is hardly any consensus here. While it is true that some religious books consider homosexuality as an abomination, Hinduism, for example, offers a much more nuanced and sophisticated perspective on the matter.  While Hinduism does not approve of homosexuality, it admits of a wide range of sexual orientation possibilities and therefore the vehemence and stridency with which the IRO has expressed its anti-homosexual sentiments cannot be shared by Hindus.

Rationality is all I am advocating.  Religious people often decide which things are right and wrong based on what they believe and imagine to be true, which in turn is based on what is stated in their religious texts. How does one know whether a religious scripture is right?  The answer is that it is the inviolable, unalterable word of God.  And, how does one know that it is the word of God?  The only answer is because God says so. Quite an eternal conundrum!

Rationality, therefore, must be the only sound base for our relationship and for understanding one another.  No religious scripture, no matter how sacred we hold it to be, which elevates itself beyond the scrutiny of reason, can be accepted as a standard by which to judge human conduct. It can never be a safe ground on which to decide important issues that may have implications in matters of life and death.

Yours faithfully,
Swami Aksharananda