Some time next month, Government backbencher Renee Webb?s private member?s bill barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the Human Rights Act may get debated in the House of Assembly.

The reason it get debated is because Community Affairs Minister Dale Butler has a raft of other amendments to the same Act also on the table. Under the rules of the House of Assembly, the House cannot debate two separate sets of amendments to an Act at the same time. This may not stop Ms Webb, because she simply has to wait Mr. Butler out.

The broader issue, assuming that this bill will get debated at some point, is whether it should be supported and what chance it has in passing. About a decade ago, Ms Webb, along with the late Dr. John Stubbs, was one of the prime movers in getting homosexuality decriminalised, a long overdue step that got Government out of the bedroom and brought Bermuda in line with most civilised nations in the world.

That?s not to say that it was not a contentious debate. With fundamentalist Christians praying outside the House of Assembly for the bill?s defeat, and claims within the House that the bill would turn Bermuda into a modern day Sodom (or another San Francisco), the measure passed when enough courageous MPs from both sides of the House overrode fears of losing the church vote to pass it.

To the surprise of its opponents, the sky did not fall. Bermuda continued much as it had done, and an oppressed minority could admit their orientation without far of arrest and imprisonment.

Today, there is ample evidence that gays suffer discrimination. They risk their jobs, their homes and face outright discrimination in every facet of their lives, not because of something they have done, but because of the bigotry that is allowed to occur under the law.

Ending this form of discrimination should have been contained in Mr. Butler?s amendments. It was not, not through any fault of the Minister?s, who has championed it, but because the central committee of the Progressive Labour Party ? which has no power in a legislative sense ? chose to block it.

That?s a tragedy, and a betrayal of the PLP?s legacy, given that two former leaders of the PLP, the late Frederick Wade and Dame Lois Browne Evans, crucially gave their support to the Stubbs bill.

The solution to the current legislative impasse is to allow a free vote for Ms Webb?s bill in the House. That lets the organised parties off the hook on the question of whether to support the bill or not, and allows MPs to vote their consciences.

That is by far the best way to conduct this vote because this is above all a moral issue. Although this newspaper supports the amendment, it also respects the views of those who have strongly held views, rooted in their religions and upbringings, who cannot vote for it. They have a right to speak and to oppose it, just as much as the amendment?s backers have the right to support it.

It is a debate that is needed and it goes beyond the issue on the table. It asks MPs to set a moral course fort the Island. If the first rule of Government is ?do no harm?, then leaving homosexuals open to discrimination is harmful. Ms Webb?s amendment should be debated, and it should be passed.