It is important to hold any government officials accountable if they betray the trust of the Bahamian people. They must be exposed and held responsible for their actions. If any damages were incurred, they should be required to repay them or serve time in prison for their breach of trust.

In line with this, I agree with the recent statement from the US State Department. They accused the Government of stalling the implementation of anti-corruption legislation that promotes transparency and good governance, including the Freedom of Information Act. This is a concerning issue that needs to be addressed to maintain the people's trust in their government.

Finding a courageous legal team to fight against the corrupt and intimidating system in The Bahamas might be a challenge. However, it is a cause that I wholeheartedly endorse.

A significant and concerning issue lies in the burden placed on Bahamian taxpayers who are shouldering the costs of an expansive employment warehouse filled with unproductive and unqualified individuals. These individuals seem to be stuck in dead-end positions, benefiting from 'Government Employment' for over 30 years, complete with pensions, but with not even a trace of accomplishment to show for their time in these roles. Unfortunately, this system has allowed thousands of politically connected individuals to secure positions, serving as a supposed solution to unemployment, but, in reality, most of them are unfit for productive work, all at the expense of hardworking taxpayers. This costly mistake has been ongoing for the past 50 years and has cost the Bahamian people billions.

The situation becomes even more disheartening when one considers that these individuals fail to offer any tangible value or service to the public and demand tips for their services when their counterparts in government services provide the same service without such extra costs.

Addressing this issue is crucial to create a more efficient, productive, and fair system for the Bahamian taxpayers. Redirecting resources towards competent and qualified individuals, promoting merit-based employment, and ensuring public servants genuinely contribute to the betterment of society are essential steps in rectifying this costly and long-standing problem. Only by making these necessary changes can the Bahamian citizens be relieved from the burden of funding unproductive and unqualified individuals and pave the way for a more prosperous and accountable future.

#20 years too late ...

Unfortunately, Bahamians are being mistreated (as second-class) in their own country and left to feel that they are here to clean up after others who are given preferential treatment. It would be unwise for Bahamians to support Shake Shack. Furthermore, this statement adds salt to the insult “Shake Shack Atlantis... Guests will enjoy Shake Shack’s classic menu items.

> "Flavours and customs of The Bahamas,”

If there is discrimination against Bahamians, at any time and for any reason, then it is inappropriate to associate the word "Bahamian" with a 'Shake Shack' location.

#ShakeShack's (Atlantis) discrimination against Bahamians is not welcome.

> Criminals investigating criminals,

The Bahamas has been grappling with concerns over reports of police-involved killings and allegations of abuse. These allegations, if proven true, would seriously violate human rights and undermine the principles of justice and the rule of law. The mistreatment of individuals who are in custody is a clear contravention of internationally recognized human rights standards. As a result, the international community, including highly respected organizations such as the United Nations and human rights groups, would likely demand an impartial investigation into these allegations.

It is crucial for authorities to ensure accountability and provide appropriate remedies to the victims of such mistreatment. The current situation in The Bahamas is not conducive to a safe coexistence between the community and those who the state may abuse. To prevent further escalation, it is essential to adopt de-escalation measures before the abusers and families of victims retaliate in such a volatile environment, where tensions are high and emotions are running strong.

"A spouse accused of spousal rape" is, in fact, the end of that marriage, isn't it?

The 'Marital rape' debate encompasses a range of perspectives and agendas, which has sparked controversy surrounding the marital bed and the definition of 'marriage' within the context of a union between a man and a woman. Traditionally, the idea of becoming one in marriage was understood as implicit consent. However, as our understanding of consent has evolved, we are now being informed that sexual relations with one's wife involve a nuanced negotiation process. It is now considered illegal or inappropriate to engage in sexual activity with one's wife without seeking her explicit consent in the marital relationship. This new perspective challenges the previous notion of what we simply understood as 'marriage.'

> Question: "One's rights and autonomy"
> is the new marriage rule, yet, we were
> led to believe that marriage is 'one
> union'; what is mine is yours; when
> did marriage become 'one's rights and
> autonomy"?
>
>
>

Marriage is a complex institution that has evolved over time and can vary across cultures, religions, and legal frameworks. While there are shared aspects and expectations in many marriages, the understanding of rights, autonomy, and individuality within a marriage can differ.
In traditional or historical perspectives, marriage often emphasized the unity and merging of two individuals into a single entity or union. This idea of unity may include the sharing of resources, responsibilities, and a sense of interdependence. However, it is important to recognize that even within this unity, individuals still possess their own rights, desires, and autonomy.
In contemporary times, there has been a shift towards recognizing and respecting individual rights and autonomy within the institution of marriage. This shift reflects broader societal changes, such as increased gender equality, the recognition of individual agency, and the importance of consent.
While marriage often involves shared decision-making, mutual support, and the building of a life together, it does not negate the rights and autonomy of each individual. Both partners within a marriage retain their individual identities, desires, and the right to make decisions about their own bodies and lives.
Balancing the collective aspects of a marital union with the rights and autonomy of each individual requires open communication, mutual respect, and a willingness to understand and accommodate each other's needs and boundaries. It is a continual negotiation process and finding a balance that works for both partners.
It's important to recognize that the understanding and expectations of rights and autonomy within a marriage can vary, and there is no one-size-fits-all answer. Each couple can define and navigate the terms of their relationship, considering their own values, beliefs, and unique dynamics.

> > Question:
>
> Is non-consensual sexual activity in
> a marriage (fooling around, as we call
> it in our culture) violence?
>
>

Yes, non-consensual sexual activity is considered a form of sexual violence. Sexual violence encompasses any act in which a person is forced, coerced, or manipulated into engaging in sexual activity against their will or without their consent. It is a violation of an individual's bodily autonomy, personal boundaries, and fundamental human rights. Sexual violence can have severe physical, emotional, and psychological consequences for the survivor.

Consent is a crucial component of healthy and respectful sexual relationships. Consent is the voluntary and enthusiastic agreement to engage in sexual activity. It should be freely given, informed, and reversible. Without consent, any sexual activity becomes a violation and an act of violence.

Promoting consent education, awareness, and discussions about healthy relationships is important to prevent sexual violence and create a culture of consent and respect.

> > Question:
>
> Who would the parties know that
> sexual consent in the marriage was
> withdrawn, and is the time limit in
> the withdrawal before the situation
> becomes cruelty or abandonment?
>
>

In the context of marriage, the parties involved would typically know that sexual consent has been withdrawn through open and honest communication between spouses. It is essential for both partners to have ongoing discussions about their desires, boundaries, and any changes in their consent for sexual activity. Effective communication allows each spouse to express their needs and concerns, fostering a climate of understanding and respect within the marriage.

Regarding the time limit for withdrawal of consent, it is important to understand that there is no universal answer as every relationship is unique. The withdrawal of consent can occur at any time, and it is crucial to respect and honor that decision. However, the specific implications and legal considerations may vary depending on the jurisdiction and the particular circumstances involved.

In some cases, prolonged denial of sexual intimacy or consistent refusal without valid reasons might be seen as cruelty or abandonment, which could have legal implications or affect the dynamics of the marriage. However, it is important to consult local laws and seek professional advice, such as from lawyers or therapists, to understand the specific legal and personal ramifications in a given situation.

Ultimately, maintaining open lines of communication, seeking professional guidance when needed, and prioritizing mutual respect and understanding are crucial in navigating the complexities of consent and sexual intimacy within a marital relationship.