Buju seems "salt" In Salt Lake City

As gay groups continue the pressure on Buju Banton’s tour machine across the US, this time he has yet again met opposition on Utah, according to The Salt Lake Tribune local gay activists threatened to picket the show and boycott all future shows at the planned site. The venue’s management quickly issued a statement cancelling the show. Buju’s team seem to be very active on the ground as his manager said on radio that they had found another venue in the state to host the show.

Urban Lounge, located in downtown Salt Lake City, had scheduled an Oct. 8 show featuring Banton, but co-owner Will Sartain released a statement Tuesday saying the show was canceled — not because of the anticipated protests, he said, but because the club doesn’t condone Banton’s past anti-gay music.
“When initially scheduling the Buju Banton event, we were unaware of his hateful anti-gay message,” Sartain said in a statement. “Upon further review, Urban Lounge has decided to cancel the event. We strive for peace and understanding in our community. We support the rights of all. We have made this decision on moral grounds.”
Banton’s record label, the New York-based Gargamel Music, immediately denounced the cancellation, issuing a news release with the title “The Voice of Jamaica Will Not Be Silenced.”

Tracii McGregor, president of the label, said in a Tribune interview that an alternate Utah venue would be booked to replace Urban Lounge, as Banton’s music promoted love and peace.
Banton’sRasta Got Soul” tour was launched in Philadelphia on Saturday, and was scheduled to stop in Utah on Oct. 8.
Provo activist Ash Johnsdottir said she was surprised to learn Monday about the Utah show, as concerts in Richmond and Minneapolis and other cities had been canceled because of activists’ protests.

For Johnsdottir, the decision to lead the charge against Banton’s Utah show was a spur-of-the-moment decision.
Johnsdottir, who said she has participated in previous Wasatch Front protests, sent out a news release late Monday by e-mail that called for Urban Lounge to “immediately cancel their upcoming show which will headline ‘murder music’ star Buju Banton.”
Banton calls for the torture and murder of LGBT people at his concerts,” the news release continued. “His song ‘Boom Boom Bye’ calls for the execution of ‘batty boys’ (Jamaican slang for queer men) using an uzi or automatic gun, as well as pouring acid over their heads, and to ‘burn [them] up badly, like you would burn an old tyre wheel.'”

Johnsdottir, who in August organized the third “kiss-in” to protest the arrest of two men who embraced near the Salt Lake LDS Church Temple, said she was surprised Urban Lounge would schedule a concert that might offend some patrons.
If the concert wasn’t canceled, the LGBT community was “prepared to protest in full force the night of the concert of the show [and to] not want to support a venue that supports violence and torture against them or their fellow citizens,” she said.
McGregor criticized both Urban Lounge and the activists who appeared to have forced the cancellation. “Lots of people were looking forward to it,” McGregor said. “The people who lose are the fans.”

She said Banton, now 36, was 15 when he wrote “Boom Boom Bye” in response to a man-boy rape case in Jamaica, and the song wasn’t a call to violence. Wanting to set the record straight, she said she was incensed that Banton was portrayed as a pro-violence and anti-gay performer when in reality, she said, his music is “positive, uplifting music.”
McGregor said gay activists were practicing “thuggery” because “there’s no room for violence in [Banton’s] music.”
She has received a “ton of other offers” from venues in other cities that want to host Banton, and said she would soon seek to book a new venue in Utah.

Sexual Offences Bill 2009 (Excerpts from the final bill)

As it relates to anal intercourse or buggery I have found some of the relevant clauses to that effect. Please bear in mind I am not legally trained or do not seek to imply same, this is just my layman’s two cents on the bill as I understand it.

Please see the full 40 paged PDF document for your perusal. Download here

AN ACT to Repeal the Incest (Punishment) Act and certain provisions ofthe Offences Against the Person Act; to make new provision for the prosecution ofrape and other sexual offences; to provide for the establishment of a Sex Offender Registry; and for connected matters

PART II. Rape, Grievous Sexual Assault and Marital Rape
3. -(1) A man commits the offence of rape if he has sexual Rape. intercourse with a woman
(a) without the woman’s consent; and
(b) knowing that the woman does not consent to sexual intercourse or recklessly not caring whether the woman consents or not.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), consent shall not be treated as existing where the apparent agreement to sexual intercourse is
(a) extorted by physical assault or threats or fear of physical assault to the complainant or to a third person; or
(b) obtained by false and fraudulent representation as to the nature of the act or the identity of the offender.
4.-(1) A person (hereinafter called “the offender”) commits the Grievous
sexual offence of grievous sexual assault’ upon another (hereinafter called assault.
the “victim”) where, in the circumstances specified in subsection (3), the offender
(a) penetrates the vagina or anus of the victim with-
(i) a body part other than the penis of the offender; or
(Ii) an object manipulated by the offender;
(b) causes another person to penetrate the vagina or anus of the victim by
(i) a body part other than the penis of that other person; or
(ii) an object manipulated by that other person;
(c) places his penis into the mouth ofthe victim;
(d) causes another person to place his penis into the mouth of the victim;
(e) places his or her mouth onto the vagina, vulva, penis or anus of the victim; or
(t) causes another person to place his or her mouth onto the vagina, vulva, penis or anus of the victim.
(2) Subsection (l)(a) and (b) do not apply to penetration carried out in the course ofa search authorized by law or for bonafide medical purposes.
(3) The circumstances referred to in subsection (1) are that any of the acts specified in paragraphs (a) to (t) ofthat subsection is
(a) carried out
(i) without the consent ofthe victim; and (it) knowing that the victim does not consent to the act or recklessly not caring whether the victim consents or not; or
(b) carried out upon a victim under the age of sixteen years.
(4) For the purposes of subsection (3), consent shall not be treated as existing where the apparent consent to the act is
(a) extorted by physical assault or threats or fear of physical assault to the victim or to a third person; or
(b) obtained by false and fraudulent representation as to the nature of the act or the identity of the offender:

This section seems to be the only section that speaks to anal intercourse directly whether by consent or not, interestingly it falls under this section. So it seems to me if one person fully consents to have sex with me and we decide to conduct oral sex or with an object such as a dildo (which by the way are readily available at sex shops across the island) as adults I may be in breach, then in the Charter of Rights which affords the right to privacy seems threatened here. Why guarantee that right and then challenge it with a piece of legislation that impedes on that right so profoundly?

Is lesbian sex also impacted here as many lesbians use sex toys and specially made impliments for penetrative activity by women who have sex with women, notably “strap on” toys.

So consent is overlooked as we saw during the debate itself from the presentations.

Sexual intercourse is described as acts between a man and a woman, yet assumed acts of buggery within a heterosexual union is captured here as an offence which is already assumed/captured in the Buggery law as it is gender neutral. Male homosexual penetrative sex had been skirted around from early in the debate (click labels below this post to see the debate tracking).

Remember to track previous posts on the Sexual Offences Bill please LABELS see the below this post, just click it will take you to all associated posts.

Just my two cents