Jon Qwelane is not fit to represent South Africa as` a diplomat.

This is what Jon Qwelane wrote in the Sunday Sun (July 20th, 2008):

Oh dear, here we go yet again. The Anglican Church is heading for a split in its ranks, and homosexuals are the reason. The church faces the first real schism since the day Henry VIII walked angrily out of the Catholic community to lead his own faction, because Rome would not sanction his marriage to Anne Boleyn, his brother's widow. This time some leftists among the Anglican Communion want not only more homosexuals ordained as bishops, but women as well.

The real problem, as I see it, is the rapid degradation of values and traditions by the so-called liberal influences of nowadays; you regularly see men kissing other men in public, walking holding hands and shamelessly flaunting what are misleadingly termed their "lifestyle" and "sexual preferences". There could be a few things I could take issue with Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, but his unflinching and unapologetic stance over homosexuals is definitely not among those. Why, only this very month - you'd better believe this - a man, in a homosexual relationship with another man, gave birth to a child!

At least the so-called husband in that relationship hit the jackpot, making me wonder what it is these people have against the natural order of things. And by the way, please tell the Human Rights Commission that I totally refuse to withdraw or apologise for my views. I will write no letters to the commission either, explaining my thoughts.

Trouble in the Anglican Communion began when the Episcopalian fraternity in America (where else?) decided to ordain a homosexual as bishop of the flock. Here in South Africa we had a senior officer of the church in Cape Town parading his "gay lifestyle" openly. The 10-yearly Lambeth Conference in England - the gathering is the world "synod" of the church - will deliberate the delicate matter of women and homosexual bishops, among other things.

Homosexuals and their backers will call me names, printable and not, for stating as I have always done my serious reservations about their "lifestyle and sexual preferences", but quite frankly I don't give a damn: wrong is wrong! I do pray that some day a bunch of politicians with their heads affixed firmly to their necks will muster the balls to rewrite the constitution of this country, to excise those sections which give licence to men "marrying" other men, and ditto women. Otherwise, at this rate, how soon before some idiot demands to "marry" an animal, and argues that this constitu%uFFFDtion "allows" it? - by Jon Qwelane.

The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, was approved by the Constitutional Court (CC) on 4 December 1996 and took effect on 4 February 1997.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. No other law or government action can supersede the provisions of the Constitution.

South Africa's Constitution is one of the most progressive in the world and enjoys high acclaim internationally.

"9. Equality

1. Everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law.

2. Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms. To promote the achievement of equality, legislative and other measures designed to protect or advance persons, or categories of persons, disadvantaged by unfair discrimination may be taken.

3. The state may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth."