The current debate on the so-called gender equality bills is a dishonest debate. It is a dishonest debate because the four bills passed in Parliament on March 2, 2016 really have nothing to do with true gender equality.
The truth is that bills one, two and three are fundamentally about citizenship, and bill four is in another category altogether. In my view, bill four is a blatant and deceptive attempt by Prime Minister Perry Christie and his government to set the stage for same-sex marriage in The Bahamas to be imposed by the Privy Council. So, those who are turning the discussion on these bills into a debate about gender equality are engaging in a dishonest debate, knowingly or unknowingly. If you disagree with my assessment, please hear me out.
Divine design
It is an indisputable fact that men and women are equal. I say this because men and women do not obtain equality based on how they are treated in the constitution or otherwise; instead, they are equal because God created them equal, in dignity and in worth. So equality between Bahamian men and women is by divine design, not by constitutional construction. Therefore, despite the constitutional differences between Bahamian men and women in their ability to pass citizenship to their children and foreign spouses under particular circumstances, Bahamian men and women in and of themselves are equal.
It should also be noted that although men and women are equal by divine design, they are not and should never be understood to be equivalent. A man is not a woman and a woman is not a man. The inherent distinctions should always be observed in a God-honoring society.
Superior men?
The significance of bill one: Currently, under article eight of the constitution, a child born abroad in wedlock whose father is Bahamian is also Bahamian at birth (but if the father himself was born abroad, the child is not Bahamian). On the other hand, a child born abroad in wedlock to a Bahamian woman who is married to a foreign man is not Bahamian at birth. Bill one seeks to change this by amending article eight so that, going forward, all children born abroad will be Bahamian at birth if one of their parents is Bahamian by birth.
The significance of bill two: Bahamian men have another citizenship passing advantage because, under article 10 of the constitution, their foreign wives are entitled to citizenship upon making application and satisfying some requirements. However, the constitution gives no such entitlement to the foreign husbands of Bahamian women. Bill two seeks to address this disparity by amending article 10 to extend this same entitlement to Bahamian citizenship to the foreign husbands of Bahamian women, going forward.
A critical question
So here's a critical question: Do these two citizenship passing advantages that Bahamian men have make them superior to Bahamian women? No, they do not; they are simply citizenship passing disparities, and they do not make one sex superior or inferior to the other. However, let me hasten to say that I'm not minimizing the fact that such disparities (especially the disparity that bill one seeks to correct) have caused enormous difficulties for many Bahamian families. I know some of the difficulties first-hand.
A case in point
One of my sisters married a foreigner and gave birth to two children, a girl who was born in The Bahamas and a boy who was born abroad. But even though they have the same father and mother, my niece is Bahamian (because she was born in The Bahamas) and my nephew is a foreigner (because he was born abroad, and Bahamian women married to foreigners cannot pass citizenship to their children born abroad). When my sister relocated to The Bahamas with her children, Bahamas immigration required my nephew to have a round-trip ticket because he wasn't a Bahamian.
My sister and nephew will not benefit from the proposed amendment in bill one, but bill one is a common sense bill that seeks to correct this citizenship passing disparity for women, going forward, and I fully support it.
Superior women?
The significance of bill three: Bill three seeks to address a thorny citizenship passing disparity. Currently, our constitution allows Bahamian women who have children out of wedlock to pass citizenship to them; but Bahamian men who father children out of wedlock cannot pass citizenship to them.
As a matter of fact, for citizenship purposes, the constitution does not even recognize men who father children out of wedlock; any reference to "father" means "mother". Bill three seeks to change this by amending article 14 of the constitution to give legal recognition to Bahamian men who father children out of wedlock and legally prove their paternity. However, practically speaking, if approved, this amendment will primarily function to enable Bahamian men to pass citizenship to their children born out of wedlock to foreign women, once they prove their paternity. This is because when the out of wedlock mother is a Bahamian, a paternity test would be an unnecessary expense for citizenship purposes. In such a case, the child can get citizenship through the Bahamian mother.
Unbroken equality
So, if we follow the argument of those who claim that one sex possessing a citizenship passing advantage over the other sex creates a situation of superiority and inferiority between them, it would also mean that Bahamian women are superior to Bahamian men since Bahamian women can pass citizenship to their children born out of wedlock, but Bahamian men cannot. Well, the absurdity should be obvious. How can provisions in the same constitution show men to be superior to women and also show women to be superior to men?
The answer is they cannot and therefore do not. The real question being directly addressed by bills one, two and three is not one of gender equality but rather the passing of citizenship. Yes, the constitution in some circumstances affords different citizenship passing advantages to Bahamian men and women, but these advantages do not in any way break the God-given equality that Bahamian men and women possess.
Better conversations
Rather than engaging in an emotional, dishonest debate about gender equality, would it not be better for us to have a national conversation about the value of citizenship and who should get it, how they should get it, and how it should be passed on? Would it not be better to discuss whether we should stop giving the foreign wives of Bahamian men a constitutional entitlement to Bahamian citizenship just because they said, "I do" (rather than seeking to rubberstamp and extend the same to the foreign husbands of Bahamian women)? Would it not promote a better Bahamas if we have a national conversation about the critical need to regularize the thousands of marginalized children born in The Bahamas to non-Bahamian parents, and whether we should continue to withhold citizenship from such children for 18 years, leaving many of them alienated from the only country they know, potentially stateless and vulnerable to exploitation and unimaginable hardships? These are far better citizenship conversations for us to have rather than engage in a dishonest debate about gender equality.
Looking back
It is important to remember that when our constitution was written more than 43 years ago, there was no public outcry against these citizenship passing disparities. Actually, some who are now speaking loudly in the dishonest gender equality debate were fully aware of these disparities back then, but they said nothing. That's because the disparities written into our constitution reflect how such citizenship issues were typically handled back then. And it had nothing to do with women being inferior to men. Therefore, it is insulting to accuse the framers of the constitution of not believing in the equality of men and women.
Upcoming referendum
In the upcoming referendum, we will have the opportunity to vote to change these three citizenship granting disparities. Whatever the outcome, Bahamian women will be no more equal to Bahamian men after the referendum than they were before the referendum. Bahamian women have always been equal with Bahamian men (because God made them so), and they will continue to be equal with Bahamian men. Nothing can and will ever change that, not even constitutional disparities or amendments.
A citizenship debate
So let's engage in an honest debate. The upcoming referendum is not about achieving equality between men and women. Two of the bills (bills one and two) are simply about seeking to extend to Bahamian women two citizenship passing advantages that Bahamian men have had since 1973, and another (bill three) is about seeking to extend to Bahamian men a citizenship passing advantage that Bahamian women have had since 1973. The Bahamas would be best served with an honest debate on citizenship, not a debate dishonestly framed in terms of gender equality.
o Cedric Moss serves as senior pastor of Kingdom Life Church. Comments may be sent to him at cmoss@kingdom-life.org.
Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian
