Retired Anglican Archbishop Drexel Gomez thinks it is unfair that "incorrect perceptions" are being given, which are stirring fear among the electorate ahead of the June 7 constitutional referendum without any facts to support the 'vote no' position some have taken.

"It is a legal issue. It's not a religious issue," Gomez told National Review. "It's not a theological issue, but what has happened is some pastors have seen in the proposed bill, they've interpreted it as a religious or theological issue. They see it as opening the back door or laying the platform for same-sex marriage, but they're acting purely on suspicion and in an intellectual claim it is called using the hermeneutic of suspicion without any evidence to support it."

Gomez is hoping for a more sober debate on the referendum. He said he "firmly supports" all four bills.

"We are dealing with our constitution, which is our supreme legal authority for the operation of our country, and the government appointed a commission to study the constitution after 40-odd years and the commission reported and made some recommendations," he said.

"We're not dealing with something that the government plotted behind closed doors or something.

"It was all spelled out and explained in the report of the commission, and out of the full report these four issues were taken up, because in these four areas it has been observed that inequality and unfairness exist, not in a theoretical sense but in a practical, living sense."

Churches in The Bahamas are split down the middle weeks ahead of the referendum, which will ask voters several questions related to citizenship. But it is the fourth question -- the one that seeks to make it unconstitutional to discriminate against someone based on sex -- which is causing the most confusion, tension and debate.

The pastors who launched the Save Our Bahamas group last week are urging their congregations to vote no on question four. They contend, although they have yet to provide a clear legal explanation, that this bill would lead to same-sex marriage. Stating that repeatedly, mixing in the emotions -- the fear of and in some cases anger toward homosexuals -- have riled up what appears to be growing numbers of people.

One man called the newsroom on Friday wondering why we weren't telling people the truth about the government's efforts to promote the "sissy" culture. He said he could never support "sissying". Of course, he had no clue how bill four would lead to same-sex marriage, and in fact admitted he really did not know what question four even says. But he is 100 percent certain that he is against it and that it would allow the sissies to marry.

Conscience
While they are urging voters to vote no on question four, the Save Our Bahamas pastors are asking people to vote their conscience on the other three questions.

On this point, Gomez said, "I saw that news item, and I found it extremely strange that religious leaders would make that statement because Christians are always [urged] to make decisions with their conscience.

"You can't make decisions without your conscience and doing something Christian, so I found that distinction to be really unchristian and totally strange."

The first three bills deal directly with citizenship matters: Bill one would enable a child born outside The Bahamas to become a citizen at birth if either his or her mother or father is a citizen of The Bahamas by birth.

Bill two would allow a Bahamian woman who marries a foreign man to pass on citizenship to him in the same way that a Bahamian man who marries a foreign woman is able to do now.

And bill three would allow an unmarried Bahamian man to pass on his citizenship to his child born to a foreign mother in The Bahamas subject to legal proof that he is the father.

"The first three bills represent an attempt to remove the unfairness that presently exists in the constitution itself, and so we're dealing with a legal issue; not a religious issue or a theological issue but a legal issue, a legal issue that requires justice, fairness and the removal of inequality," Gomez reiterated.

He said in the more than 50 years since he was ordained, he has seen multiple examples of discrimination based on sex -- in the areas of housing, in the job market and in other areas.

But the Save Our Bahamas pastors contend that bill four is really a moral issue.

"The reason why we're focused on bill number four is because we feel that it opens the door to same-sex marriage, and as a result of that, this is a moral issue as such. And because it is a moral issue, we feel that it's important for the church to voice their concern, and so that is what we are doing," said Pastor Mario Moxey of Bahamas Harvest Church.

Moxey said last week it is important for Bahamians to be concerned about the likely impact of question four because the global trend has been moving in the direction of legalizing same-sex marriage.

"...[With] just a casual investigation, you would discover that many of the nations that have same-sex marriage have done it through legislation, but it has been done in very heated environments and amidst incredible protests," he said.

"So many of the leaders now are going the path of, rather than legislation, to go through the judicial system i.e. to create gaps in the law that provide individuals to challenge the law, take it to court and then have the judges rule in favor of same-sex marriage."

Gomez finds the present debate disappointing -- particularly since objections are seemingly being made in the absence of facts, but with fear and emotionalism.

"We have people who are saying that this is some fraud or some scheme that some members of the government are introducing through the back door," he said.

Without referring to anyone in particular, Gomez added, "I think it is unfair to the general public to be exposed to incorrect presentations, but also devious things because they're obviously moving to prove a point. They have every right to oppose the measure, but they must oppose the measure on good grounds; give the reasons, good solid reasons that can be verified.

"You cannot object to something on a suspicion or a fear. You [say] that 'x' might happen or 'y' might occur. There must be some reason to indicate that if you vote this way, you would be doing x, y or z."

In 2002, Gomez opposed the referendum. He reiterated that he did so because the right process was not followed. This time around, he said, stakeholders were properly consulted and the Constitutional Commission has covered a lot of ground.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian