I do not support Dr Simms'article
published: Tuesday | April 22, 2003
THE EDITOR, Sir:
I HAVE read Dr. Glenda Simms' article in the Sunday Gleaner which under the guise of social commentary, is morally irresponsible.
The overall thrust of the article is that prostitution is an economic necessity, indeed contributes to the economy especially in the tourist sector, and should therefore be legitimised. It is no different from any other work, permitting a parent to advise her daughter to chose as a career being a secretary or a prostitute! It implies that the end justifies the means and is a manifestation of militant 'feminism' which demonstrates that an idea can be a dangerous thing especially if it is the only one you have.
It is quite illogical to argue that because a certain type of behaviour exists that it should exist. Child pornography exists: Should it be legitimised? Incest exists: should it be legitimised? Murder exists: should it be legitimised? Reductio ad absurdum. And how ridiculous to argue that married couples may need the services of a prostitute to "stabilise" their relationship. This is another attempt to sabotage what is left of the Jamaican nuclear family, to attack its sanctity and indispensable moral presence in the bringing up of children. Wives, Dr. Simms implies, are really no different from whores, putting out for their SUVs and other gifts. Always lowering down to the least common denominator.
And if we claim to be a Christian country, what about the clear and unambiguous biblical injunction against adultery and fornication - presumably old fashioned superstitions to enlightened ladies like Ms. Simms who seems devoid of any ethical, much less religious, sensibility.
