CCJ’s ruling is a blatant, backward step

Dear Editor,
Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo overstepped his authority when he announced Government’s commitment to “giving teeth” to the CCJ’s ruling that, in Guyana, men are free to disguise themselves as women, and women are free to disguise themselves as men, in public.
The Prime Minister has perhaps forgotten that he and his Government are accountable to the 800,000 people of Guyana, and not to the seven judges of the CCJ.
Whether or not the CCJ’s ruling is right is irrelevant, because the Government of Guyana has bound itself to abide by that ruling. However, the CCJ cannot, and will never, usurp the sovereignty of the elected Parliament of Guyana.
The CCJ is limited to interpreting the laws of Guyana. Our Government is tasked with effectively writing the laws of Guyana within the context of our Constitution, which itself is subject to amendment.
The CCJ’s ruling is a blatant, backward, retrograde backdoor step to the introduction of proposed legalisation of same-sex marriages and similar human relations, which are beneath the dignity of Guyana’s dogs, cows, cats and rats.
Instead of giving teeth to enforce the CCJ’s ruling, the Prime Minister should be rallying the legal minds of his Government and civic society to legislatively protect the socio-economic and spiritual fabric and values of Guyana, by plugging the Constitutional loopholes through which the CCJ has inserted its pernicious ruling.
Cross-dressing, buggery, homosexuality and their affiliates are all offensive to the values of Guyana’s Christian and Muslim majority; to the majority of its Hindu population, and to the foundational principles on which Guyana’s greatness is built.
On the other hand, every Guyanese enjoys the inalienable right and freedom to act behind closed doors in a manner of his or her choosing, so long as the exercise of those rights and freedoms do not offend, invade, or wrong the rights and freedoms of others.
The laws of Guyana must always protect Guyana’s vulnerable minority from the tyranny of the majority. However, it is palpably abhorrent for our laws to promote the tyranny of the large majority by a small minority.
We value our women for who they are, and for what they bring to our society. We value our men for who they are, and for what they bring to our society. When a small minority of our men fail to value themselves for their own inherent self-worth, we must lovingly aid their restoration, not empower them to corrupt and demoralise the rest of our society. This must be the underlying objective of our elected Government: to enhance the values that have made Guyana great.
Sincerely,
Phyllis J Jordan