THE Jamaica Forum for Lesbians, All-Sexuals and Gays (J-Flag) says the recent findings of the RJR Gleaner Group-commissioned Don Anderson poll, which said 80 per cent of Jamaicans are against removing the country’s buggery laws, is not black and white.

The organisation says there is some level of dissonance between how people feel about lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights, and whether local laws should be changed.

Speaking with the Jamaica Observer on Wednesday, executive director Glenroy Murray said a J-FLAG 2019 survey found that 50 per cent of those sampled had positive attitudes towards the community on issues such as education. He said 1,043 interviews were done from 100 enumeration districts across the island.

“In a lot of ways, based on our own data, what we realise is that Jamaicans will have very positive attitudes around certain key issues – our most recent assessment of the attitude of the general public has more than half of Jamaicans saying that LGBT people should have equal access to things like education. But our polls also show that 67 per cent of the respondents did not support amending the laws to decriminalise same-sex intimacy, which is a different question than what was asked in the Don Anderson poll, so they’re not readily comparable,” he explained.

Murray was speaking against the background of the executive director of Stand up for Jamaica Maria Carla Garlotta’s position on the Anderson poll, which she said is “not true to the reality we all know”.

Garlotta argued that “like several of his other findings, although broadly accurate, it is an exaggeration”. She said hostility in Jamaica to homosexuality has been steadily declining and that the poll could have been framed by comparing the numbers over several years) in such a way to reflect this.

“So, regrettably – and unintentionally, we are sure – it caters to media that love the sensational,” she insisted.

Murray said the J-FLAG study found that some people believe the buggery law is necessary to protect children, so the issues of the law, and how the LGBT community is treated, could be muddied, if the two are compared.

“Jamaicans — some of them — will on the one hand believe that you’re not supposed to trouble, disturb or discriminate against LGBT people, but on the other hand, they would want that law to remain. So rather than necessarily disputing what that particular poll says, I think it is important for us to see deeper than beyond asking people should the law change, and ask why do we think that this law is necessary,” he suggested.

Murray added that the J-FLAG poll showed that the largest number of people who were opposed to legislative changes could not provide a reason.

“There needs to be more opportunities for engagement around the law. People have different views on the law, on what the law does and is supposed to do, while at the same time [having] the view that LGBT people should be treated better and have better access to goods and services. So it’s in that space of dissonance that we as LGBT people exist,” he stated.

He stressed that while the situation has improved to some degree, some LGBT people still face violence and discrimination: “It’s a complicated situation,” he noted.

Murray argued that the buggery provisions under the Offences Against the Person Act in its current form is not only bad for the LGBT community but the society as a whole, as it leads to unequal protection for boys who face sexual violence. He noted that the law doesn’t speak to, for example, same-sex acts of intimacy between females.

Section 76 of the Offences Against the Person Act states that “whosoever shall be convicted of the abominable crime of buggery, committed either with mankind or with any animal, shall be liable to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for a term not exceeding ten years”, and that anyone found guilty of attempting to commit such a crime, or is guilty of any assault with intent to commit the same, “or of any indecent assault upon any male person”, is guilty of a misdemeanour, and upon conviction is liable to up to seven years in prison, with or without hard labour.

Meanwhile, Garlotta said that religious and political leaders must give serious thought to the different obligations of moral and criminal law and the penalties due to their breaches, as this is especially the case where the moral law, as in this instance, is disputed by a significant segment of the population.

She noted that a recent independent survey of some church leaders found that a significant number of the Anglican Communion, along with a few in other denominations, firmly oppose the continuation of the buggery law. Garlotta urged lawmakers to strike a balance, as the decision by a majority does not justify ignoring, or overriding, the rights of minorities.