On November 18, 2009, the Human Rights and Peace Center at Makerere University in Kampala, Uganda hosted a public dialogue on the Anti-Homosexuality Bill. The blogger, GayUganda, has an extensive report here and I want to also call your attention to the remarks of Sylvia Tamale, law professor at Makerere University. Her paper presents a compelling case for the setting aside of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill. From GayUganda, we also learn that the Exodus letter to President Museveni was a significant issue in the dialogue.
Dr. Tamale begins by discussing history of family in Africa. The she notes other issues which are more important to the family than homosexuality.
Thus, while I agree with you Hon. Bahati that we must seek ways of dealing with issues that threaten our families, I do not agree that homosexuality is one of those issues. Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and gentlemen, what issues currently threaten our families here in Uganda? I will name a few:
a) Blood thirsty Ugandans and traditional healers that believe that their good fortune will multiply through rituals of child sacrifice.
b) Rapists and child molesters who pounce on unsuspecting family members. Research undertaken by the NGO, Hope after Rape (HAR) shows that over 50% of child sexual abuse reports involve children below 10 years of age, and the perpetrators are heterosexual men who are known to the victims.[1]
c) Sexual predators that breach the trust placed in them as fathers, teachers, religious leaders, doctors, uncles and sexually exploit young girls and boys. A 2005 report by Raising Voices and Save the Children revealed that 90% of
Ugandan children experienced domestic violence and defilement.[2]
d) Abusive partners who engage in domestic violence whether physical, sexual or emotional. The 2006 national study on Domestic Violence by the Law Reform Commission confirmed the DV was pervasive in our communities. 66% of people in all regions of Uganda reported that DV occurred in their homes and the majority of the perpetrators were “male heads of households.”[3] The Uganda Demographic Health Survey of 2006 put the figure slightly higher at 68%.[4]
e) Parents who force their 14-year old daughters to get married in exchange for bride price and marriage gifts.
f) A whole generation of children who were either born and bred in internally displaced persons (IDP) camps or abducted by the Lords Resistance Army (LRA) in the northern sub-region of Kitgum, Gulu and Pader districts.
g) The millions of children orphaned by HIV/AIDS. The Uganda Aids Commission puts the cumulative number of orphans due to AIDS at 2 million.[5]
h) The all powerful patriarchs that demand total submission and rule their households with an iron hand.
i) Rising poverty levels and growing food insecurity which lead to hunger, disease, suffering and undignified living. Figures from the latest report from the Uganda Bureau of Statistics show that over 60% of Ugandans living in rural areas live below the poverty line.[6]
Professor Tamale makes a clear case that all Ugandans are at risk if this bill passes.
III. The Social Implications of the Bill to the Average Ugandan
You may think that this bill targets only homosexual individuals. However, homosexuality is defined in such a broad fashion as to include “touching another person with the intention of committing the act of homosexuality.” This is a provision highly prone to abuse and puts all citizens (both hetero and homosexuals) at great risk. Such a provision would make it very easy for a person to witch-hunt or bring false accusations against their enemies simply to “destroy” their reputations and cause scandal. We all have not forgotten what happened to Pastor Kayanja and other men of God in the recent past.
Moreover, the bill imposes a stiff fine and term of imprisonment for up to three years for any person in authority over a homosexual who fails to report the offender within 24 hours of acquiring such knowledge. Hence the bill requires family members to “spy” on one another. This provision obviously does not strengthen the family unit in the manner that Hon. Bahati claims his bill wants to do, but rather promotes the breaking up of the family. This provision further threatens relationships beyond family members. What do I mean? If a gay person talks to his priest or his doctor in confidence, seeking advice, the bill requires that such person breaches their trust and confidentiality with the gay individual and immediately hands them over to the police within 24 hours. Failure to do so draws the risk of arrest to themselves.
Or a mother who is trying to come to terms with her child’s sexual orientation may be dragged to police cells for not turning in her child to the authorities. The same fate would befall teachers, priests, local councilors, counselors, doctors, landlords, elders, employers, MPs, lawyers, etc.
Furthermore, if your job is in any way related to human rights activism, advocacy, education and training, research, capacity building, and related issues this bill should be a cause for serious alarm. In a very undemocratic and unconstitutional fashion, the bill seeks to silence human rights activists, academics, students, donors and non-governmental organizations. If passed into law it will stifle the space of civil society. The bill also undermines the pivotal role of the media to report freely on any issue. The point I am trying to make is that we are all potential victims of this draconian bill.
Tamale then provides a legal analysis of the bill which finds much of it unconstitutional and confusing. She concludes by saying
Mr. Chairperson, distinguished participants, I wish to end by appealing to members of parliament and all Ugandans that believe in human rights and the dignity of all human beings to reject the Anti-homosexuality bill. I am imploring Hon. Bahati to withdraw his private members bill. Do we really in our hearts of hearts want our country to be the first on the continent to demand that mothers spy on their children, that teachers refuse to talk about what is, after all, “out there” and that our gay and lesbian citizens are systematically and legally terrorized into suicide? Ladies and gentlemen, you may strongly disagree with the phenomenon of same-sex erotics; you may be repulsed by what you imagine homosexuals do behind their bedroom doors; you may think that all homosexuals deserve to burn in hell. However, it is quite clear that this Bill will cause more problems around the issue of homosexuality than it will solve. I suggest that Hon. Bahati’s bill be quietly forgotten. It is no more or less than an embarrassment to our intelligence, our sense of justice and our hearts.
The remarks are amended to include some thoughts on the question and answer period. To get a more complete sense of this meeting, you should also consult GayUganda’s eyewitness description. There he describes talks by David Bahati and Stephen Langa. Langa in particular was described as referring to the Pink Swastika by Scott Lively and materials from Exodus International.
However, according to GayUganda, during the question and answer session, a questioner asked Stephen Langa why he referred to Exodus International material in his defense of the bill when Exodus had recently denounced the bill. I’ll let Gug describe it:
The Exodus letter is a particular foil. Why, even Exodus does not support the Bill! That is a shock, to Steven Langa. An unpleasant one. Because he is using information published by some of the signatories of this letter. He quotes them. And, very embarassing that they don’t support his bill! Even his allies see that his action is un-Christian. He also quotes Lively, extensively. Yes, he does. This Lively. To Langa, the true intellectual mind behind the Bahati Bill, Lively is THE prophet of his crusade. And he promotes his books. Repeateldy. Even yesterday. (It was the Pink Swastika)
I will always remember Langa’s face when he was challenged that Exodus was not supporting the bill. That they were not supporting him, though he was quoting them. And, it was a fellow pastor, I believe, who challenged him. Could he answer? Ha!
Americans with a connection to Ugandans who support or promote the bill have a special responsibility to come along side their Ugandan brothers and ask them to put down their stones.
15,000 members today.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=198541255168&ref=mf
14,000 members. Thanks to every one for stepping up and speaking out.
“When we speak we are afraid our words will not be heard or welcomed. But when we are silent, we are still afraid. So it is better to speak.” – Audre Lorde
Over 13,000 people have joined the Facebook group. Please invite others to step up and speak out. http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=198541255168&ref=mf
12,000.
Now averaging about 500 members every day. In light of the very good news of the past 24 hours, I think the momentum will pick up. It would be wonderful if the Bill was dead before we reach 20,000.
10,000 members have joined the FB group! Way more than some people (even me) expected.
RIck Warren has come out against the Bil and other major Christian groups and leaders may followhis example. http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwthrockmorton.com%2F2009%2F12%2F10%2Frick-warren-issues-statement-to-uganda-regarding-anti-homosexuality-bill-2009%2F&h=286cff44b6d5eae08c5ea5bafe451eb2
The Media Office of the President of Uganda is urging that the Bill be dropped to avoid bad press. http://www.mediacentre.go.ug/details.php?catId=1&item=718
God does indeed answer prayer! Keep stepping up and speaking out. The race is not over yet.
RAH. 🙂
Facebook reports that 9,000 members have now joined the group. Correct me if my math is wrong, but I think that’s 1,000 in two days. More news outlets are picking up the story. This just posted by Dr. Throckmorton on the FB group: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=9281237
.
Done.
The Exodus letter and Exodus’ public opposition to the Bill continue to get press attention: http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/12/07/should-us-religious-conservatives-denounce-ugandas-anti-gay-bill.html
This link, posted by Warren on FB, gives an opportunity to leave a respectful comment. Please give your opinion, mentioning the Exodus stand and encouraging other voices of faith to speak out. Thanks.
Eddy, thanks for filling me in. I had lost all contact with pop culture. Maybe that’s a good thing. 🙂
Michael–
Don’t know if you’re serious but Adam was performing on a major music awards program and didn’t quite perform as rehearsed. In this prime time show, he approached his guitar player and brought him to his knees…face in Adam’s crotch…simulating oral sex. Adam claims he got ‘caught up in the moment’.
Big uproar. (Let’s not forget Janet’s breast reveal!) He’s not being particularly apologetic and his appearance on at least one morning show was cancelled. I’ve heard that he was supposed to appear on ‘Dick Clark’s Rockin’ New Years Eve’ and that has been cancelled as well.
The debate lingers. Was this any worse than what Madonna has gotten away with? Some debate that she ‘earned the right’ to be controversial while he’s just beginning.
Mary, thanks. I take that as a compliment. My pleasure. Hey, it keeps me out of trouble and it really is a very exciting and diverse group. It has been wonderful to see hands reach across the divide.
I have learned a lot. Now reading 3 Ugandan newspapers and am almost completely out of touch with what’s happening here at home. I understand that there is some big controversy with Adam Lambert. That sounds important. Can anyone bring me up to speed? 🙂
Michael,
You such a spaz!!!
:)Keep up the monitoring!!! This is important.
Cool. Should be real soon.
A news release is planned when we hit 10000.
I took a one day sample. I check the FB ticker every 15 minutes or so — just to keep my spirits up. That’s not easy to do since it seems the bill may pass in spite of all efforts.
Facebook reports that 400 new members joined in the last 24 hours. Wow. That used to take two weeks. Some will smile. Some may cringe. Oh well, word is getting out. I am happy.
Rah. 🙂
It seems to be averaging somewhere in the general vacinity of 330 new members each day and the rate seems to be increasing. As I said, math is not my forte. Thank God, the group keeps growing in spite of what I say or do. 🙂
Like Don Schmeirer of Exodus said, “The bill warrants outrage and shock from all groups and individuals to be sure…” He says it’s “…worth all the news media coverage possible” to oppose “the tragic nature of and heartbreaking potential this bill holds.”
The situation is certainly desperate there. You need to look for the positive. Hope and gratitude prompts me to post the numbers. I will let y’all know when we hit 10,000. 🙂
Michael–
Where are your statistics coming from? I’ve been consulting the group profile page and don’t come up with anything close to what you are claiming. I realize that as a group member you may have gotten access to some form of data that actually shows the rate (the one every two minutes, now one every minute) but, on the surface, it looks and sounds like hype. (I’ll show what I mean in the next paragraph.)
Consider that the site had over 8000 members yesterday when I challenged your once every 30 seconds comment. Now it’s listed at 8276. So, even if it was just at 8000, no more than 276 people have joined since yesterday. BUT, here it is almost noon, so there have been approx. 420 minutes just since midnight.
There is a summary line that indicates 769 plus new members but that doesn’t indicate in what time period. Rather than raise factual and statistical questions, why not simply say ‘the facebook group reports 769 new members’ and leave it at that. (I personally cringe at the ‘rah rah rah’…I hated Elvis because they overhyped him as ‘the King’…I had trouble with The Beatles for similar overhype…the constant emphasis on numbers appears 1) desperate and 2) as an appeal to ‘jumping on the bandwagon’. Maybe I’m unique in those reactions…but, if I’m not, you may actually be driving people away from the facebook site.)
Yesterday, the rate at which new members were joining the FB group was one every two minutes or so.
Now the rate is one new member every minute. Can one new member every 30 seconds be far behind? I have faith it will happen — that and more.
I know that math is important. I promise I will try to improve my skills in that area. Maybe work on more tact while I am at it. I need practice in both areas 🙂
Correcting my math — I watched the group talley for the past couple of hours. From countries around the globe, it’s running about one new member every two minutes. It may pick up a little momentum once the word gets out.
Speaking of voices of faith, did I mention that Don Schmeirer of Exodus has added his name to the Exodus letter and has clearly denounced the bill?
http://blog.exodusinternational.org/2009/12/03/rachel-maddow-uganda-me-guest-post-by-don-schmierer/
My apologies, Warren, for going off topic. I believe the Exodus Letter, their strong statements against this Bill and their participation on the Facebook group has helped — and reveals their heart.
Other voices of faith on FB and elsewhere may be more effective than anything “gay activists” might do. I pray that my poor math skills and episodes of bad manners will not deter other voices of faith from helping out.
Regarding the topic, let’s see if we can stay on it.
The very easy approach to content or issues which you don’t think are appropriate for the thread is to ignore them.
Check out again the thread topic and let’s please stay on it.
Sorry, but ‘controls the content’ is a gross overstatement. On this blog, Warren does a wee bit of guiding and steering but he does not control. How many times has he presented a topic and we, his bloggers, have gone off on our own tangents? Sorry, that’s not control. And he’s never forced us to discuss things that we weren’t inclined to. Rarely has he stepped in and said “I don’t want you to discuss that aspect”…and when he has, he’s said it once and moved on. That’s not ‘control’ by any definition I’ve ever read.
And I won’t belabor the last sentence of the quote.
BTW: 100 more people joined the FB group since my last count.
Christian voices are especially welcomed since Uganda has tended to dismiss political pressure or threats of sanction (from Sweden and other countries) and probably will not listen to gays or the folks who support them — no matter how softly or diplomatically they speak out. Gays are the enemy. Uganda is a heavily Christian nation. Christian voices of opposition may be our best hope.
As creator and host of this blog and the FB group, it is my understanding that Dr. Throckmorton controls the content and moderates what is dicussed in both places. I believe all ideas are welcome on the FB group as long as they pertain to the topic. I do not control the conversation. I just encourage people to join and thank new members each time we reach a milestone.
My apologies about the numbers. Big “oops”. Sometimes, my math isn’t very good. Over 1,000 joined in the past three days alone. As the word gets out, the rate of new members continues to increase exponentially. It should easily top 10,000 by the end of the year. Again, thanks to Warren for creating a place where anyone opposed to this Bill can speak out.
WHAT? SAY WHAT? Is this the new math? There’s just over 8,000 members TOTAL. There are 86,400 seconds IN A DAY. The group has been going for at least A MONTH. Can anyone do 30 (days) times 86,400? Can you divide that by 8,000 (members) and come up with anything remotely close to 30 seconds??????
Correction: this should read ‘some’ of the many factors related to this bill. My understanding is that discussion of ‘compromise’ is out of the question (at least discussion of it here is) and any talk of toning down gay activist efforts there is also not fit for discussion. However, if your interest is in getting the conservative Christians to compromise or in toning down their message that it may be sin–the site will be happy to accommodate you.
Tha’s one new FB member every 30 seconds or so — just in case anyone is counting! 🙂
Have YOU spoken out for Uganda today?
Over 8,000 members today! The group is a lively, international, cross-faith, cross-orientation exploration of the many factors related to this Bill — plus contact information and suggestions for taking action to stop it.
Step up. Speak out.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=198541255168&ref=mf
Over 7,000 members now! — and new members added every minute. The international and interfaith momentum against this Bill continues to grow.
The discussion is a vibrant, thoughtful and (generally) civil one — exploring all of the factors that may have led up to this Bill and what might be done about it now.
Especially wanted: Strong, clear, Christian voices.
Big reward. 🙂
In light of all this, I keep thinking of the Simon and Garfunkle song:
At the rate it is growing, I am certain the Facebook group will top 7,000 members today. I am confident that there will be 10,000 by 2010. I ask your readers to continue to step up and speak out. Christians, especially, must not remain silent on this.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=198541255168&ref=mf
Now, it’s over 6,000 — a lot more than some people expected. 🙂
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=198541255168&ref=mf
Oops! I was feeling so thankful that I jumped the gun a bit. It’s over 5,600 members at this hour, but at the rate the group keeps growing, it will reach 6,000 real soon. Much to be thankful for. As we give thanks today, please remember to pray for Uganda.
“As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.” ~John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Happy Thanksgiving to everyone! A special thanks to the over 6,000 people who spoken out against this bill on Facebook — it’s a lot more than some people expected — and I am grateful for every one. Thanks again to Warren for creating the group!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=198541255168&ref=mf#
Ann–
I’m very sorry but….what can I say, I thought I said clear ‘I’m done with this’ statements hours ago…followed by more posts directed to me from Michael…I engaged and made it even clearer…got his statement of ‘agreed’…went out for the evening and come home to find 3 or 4 more posts from him addressing or engaging me. It just doesn’t end. It’s so incredibly tiresome…and for what? Did I have the opportunity to say anything productive? Was any cause or purpose advanced?
If you find another venue…another place where people are trying to say and do productive things…a place where my words can be just my words taken at face value and evaluated on their own merits, there is a spark of vision left. But I’ve no patience left for people who keep saying ‘one more thing’ umpteen times after I’ve said I’m done. NONE, NADA, NO patience left.
As I’ve said, I’ll be around and I’ll be still be fact-checking, exaggeration monitoring, freedom of speech defending but, as for the rest of my vision, it needs another place to flourish. Perhaps there isn’t another place and perhaps there won’t be, I’ll just have to see if I can live with that.
HAPPY THANKSGIVING, by the way. I’m thankful for people like you!
Eddy,
For whatever it is worth, I know of your valuable contributions here – your words and thoughts and wisdom are held in high esteem by me and many, many others.
Sorry, I was trying to post this:
Here is a very vivid story of the martyrdom:
http://wau.org/archives/article/the_uganda_martyrs
I can’t find anything to suggest that the Church named him the patron saint of homosexuals. Do you have a reference?
I am sure that you did, Lynn David, and that I missed it. Sorry. My eyes are going blurry and my mind is numb from all the reading. Nerves are shot. It’s a truly fascinating and sad story. Hey, I didn’t know we had a patron saint… 🙂
BTW …. the current Roman Catholic Archbishop over Uganda happens to have the same surname, Lwanga. I’m not sure of his familial relationship to Saint Charles (Carl) Lwanga.
Didn’t I post on King Mwanga a while back on a thread, Michael? It was about 1880 or so and a Carl (or Charles) Lwanga, a Roman Catholic[?], who was a teacher in the king’s court spoke out against his pederast ways with young page boys. Those pages who followed Lwanga’s teaching were marched off to some place away from the court along with Lwanga and given a chance to confess their transgression with the king and return to the court. When they didn’t, Lwanga and the pages were killed, beheaded I think, by the king’s men.
The Catholic Church canonized Charles Lwanga as a saint. No, he’s not a patron saint of pederasts, they made him the patron saint of homosexuals.
See, Eddy, I am not at all opposed to learning, discussing understanding. I spend hours on that everyday for the Facebook group. It has become practically a full-time job. I did not waste time and energy getting into a bickering match with you here. But, dammit, I think I did just that.
I felt an urgency to speak out clearly and quickly and to encourage others, especialy Exodus, to do so. I think their strongly stated opposition to this law is making a difference. It is already being heard in Uganda and in many publications. They did a good thing and I will always be grateful to them for doing it.
Frankly, what I percieved as your (1) reluctance to denounce the law, (2) your unwavering defense of Exodus and (3) your compromise ideas puzzled and angered me.
Yes, I am opposed to the idea of “compromise” in the sense of what you mentioned: “severity or length of penalty, who or what is penalized, who has to report ‘an offender’, under what circumstances is reporting mandatory,…”
It was that suggestion that got my blood boiling, and not the idea that we need to not only speak out — but also to listen and learn. I think we are all getting a crash course on Uganda — as we join together to oppose this unjust and unChrisian law. Anything we can learn might help. At least we agree on that much.
This is for Eddy, who really ruffles my feathers and whose words I apparently often misunderstand. In spite of our personal differences, I am posting it in support of Eddy’s suggestion that we really need to understand the bigger picture if we hope to compassionately and effectively oppose this Bill:
A commenter on Facebook, Christopher Yuan, reports that a friend who spent “many years as a missionary in Uganda” told Christopher some “interesting history regarding homosexuality and the church in Uganda.”
The missionary friend told Christopher that is was his understanding that “some of the first converts to Christianity were martyred because they refused to particpate in homosexual practices on order of the Kabaka (king)”
Christopher says: “I’m unsure if outside opinions will be at all influential” and he “wonders if this explains some of the intensity which the Ugandans have over this bill. We have a lot to work on and pray about.”
I don’t know if this is fact or folklore — or some combination (it seems they may have been martyred for refusal to obey other orders of the king — for example, refusing to kill the king’s enemies), but I found this reference that seems to support what the missionary friend told Christopher:
http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1570&C=1471
Michael–Your reasoning is all valid up until you tell me there’s ‘no need to back out’. It’s me that’s doing the backing out and, admittedly, you have a very hard time figuring me out. So, you’re not in the place to assess what I need to do.
As I hinted on the other thread, my personal hopes of contributing anything productive to the larger issues are crushed. I’m tired of investing hours trying to communicate clearly and not even accomplishing having my words properly heard. “Oh, now I get what you are saying” after hours (or days even!!) of back and forth dialogue is regarded as ‘productive’…usually that’s only the base idea that I had hoped to build a productive dialogue from.
I’ve been in this place for several weeks now…it only comes up today because you have used my name in your report of these new findings and you even posted them partly for my benefit.
I’ll still be around ‘fact checking’, ‘generalization spotting’ and ‘ex-gay defending’ but I’ve shaken off any other role. I have a personal need to be productive. That need isn’t being met here. So there IS a need to back out.
BTW: The more I learn about the “bigger” picture, the more I am convinced that helping to quickly mobilize oppostion to this bill was the right thing, the most important thing, to do at that time. I still think so.
Eddy, It’s not too late. It never was. From the very beginning of the Facebook group, folks there and elsewhere have been studying and discussing the bigger picture — disease, poverty, religion, political and economic issues, etc. I was never opposed to learning more. I just didn’t want to stop and do it then.
To use a metaphor: You don’t stop and ask why the other guy fired his gun. You attend to the victim on the ground. Yes, it’s important to know why if we are to prevent similar violence. It was about timing for me. You seemed to want to wait to say NO. I did not.
That’s the urgency I felt and still feel about this. The bill was about to be voted on. That “needed fixing”. Exodus and others needed to take a strong stand. Stop the bleeding. I felt that time was of the essence and what was needed most at that time was to clearly say NO.
We need to learn all we can. We can stop, or we learn as we go along. I spend hours each day researching these other issues and I encourage others to learn as much as they can. Yes, our “NO” needs to be the best-formed “NO” we can muster.
The questions you raised are good ones and you were right to bring them up. I just didn’t want to discuss them then. Other commenters here were free to do so then and still are. I just didn’t want to — at that time.
No need to back out. I am all in favor of learning as much as we can and asking the right questions. I was and still am strongly opposed to the idea of a “compromise”, however. I find that idea morally reprehensible.
Thank you to the voices that Michael is able to receive. I hope its not too late. I’m going to do my best to refrain from the dialogues. My penchant for seeing the gaps, breaches and holes and trying to fix or patch them before proceeding doesn’t go over well here and only ever seems to magnify the holes rather than lead to fixing them.
Over a month ago, Eddy, one of our frequent commentators, suggested that we sort of slow down a bit and look deeper into the factors within Uganda — cultural, religious, economic, political — that might help us to understand what is really going on “on the ground” in Uganda.
His suggestion was a very good one, but I resisted. Stongly. I have to admit, I wasn’t too keen, at that moment, about taking time to explore all of this. My first response was “no”, not “why”. The clock was ticking and I felt compelled to focus on helping to quickly mobilize voices of opposition to the Bill. I hope I have helped in that endeavor.
In my urgency about that, I did not mean to suggest that we should not look at the bigger picture. Eddy was and is right — we need to pray, study, listen and try to understand — if we are going to be the most effective wtiness we can be.
Today, on another thread, I posted excerpts from some excellent articles recenlty posted by Lynn David on the Facebook group — articles that might provide valuable insight into the Ugandan situation. I have done a ton of reading and research this past month and it has helped. I give Eddy the credit for urging me to do so and offer my sincere apology if my “tone” towards him was dismissive.
Here are links to those articles, posted by Lynn David, who frequently posts here and on the Facebook group:
http://www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/page.cfm?ID=482
http://www.independent.co.ug/index.php/component/content/article/106-myblog/2174-education-not-execution-ugandas-defilement-problem-
Oh…. so it’s actually outrage over Jennings idolization of Hay’s comments. Said negligence being that he made up his story in order to somehow iconize Harry Hay.
I once had this regret that I did not have a gay man older than myself in my life back in my late teens (or any gay man even a bit later, for that matter). I often wonder if that bit of yearning isn’t what is showing up in Jennings embellishments.
I think I should have used “casual” instead of “anonymous.”
My bad.
@ Lynn David,
From an earlier posting you may have missed:
My state sentator is fond of saying just that and produced a pamphlet for his voters as late as 2004 with that statement. Except he didn’t call himself a mother.
Which negligence? That represented by Jenning’s embellishment of the facts or that Jennings was supposed to out a student who was of the age of consent to possible sexual contact sought out by the studen [but which never actually happened] that the school did not condone?
Richard: Harry Hay was a life long supporter of NAMBLA. I contacted the GLBT History Month people and asked why Hay was an icon. They pointed me to some historians and said they might not have chosen him but they weren’t going to change it. I am disappointed that so few GLBT advocates had problems with Hay.
Ted Kennedy also collaborated with the Russians near the end of the Cold War. He would not be in my list of icons.
From what I have read, Jennings was praising Hay as an early leader in the fight for LGBT rights and made no mention of his elderly aberrations involving NAMBLA. If one significant error in a lifetime wipes out all the good a person has done, we would need to reject any praise for Ted Kennedy. That incident about a car accident on a bridge, does it far outweigh his work in the US Senate or not?
David: As I have done with the Uganda issue, I will do whatever I can to encourage gay activists and gay organizations to denounce Hay’s sympathy for NAMBLA — and ask that Jennings do the same. The silence also troubles me greatly as well. I honestly don’t think most gay people even know who these guys are.
I will try to do both, but I will focus on Uganda, since I believe the Uganda matter is much more pressing time-wise. I don’t think the USA is in any immediate danger of legalizing child abuse any time soon.
Between trying to get people to conservatives to speak up about Uganda and getting gays to speak out about the Hay “icon” fiasco, I have my work cut out for me. 🙂
@ Michael,
It might be easier if those in the GLBT expressed alarm and outrage over Hay’s comments or Jenning’s negligence….
Instead they are silent and then when others raise reasonable alarms about real comments and values, they are accused of being homophobic and haters.
It is the responsibility of the members of each community to set the moral tone, whether Conservative Christian or GLBT.
Yes, if we make it very clear that we are speaking of “nunances”, of a “subculture” — and I think it’s a tiny one — and not the whole.
Some don’t bother to make that distinction. And there are a considerable number of folks, I fear, that don’t get it even when the distinction is made. Remember this one?
From her lips to Uganda’s ears.
@ Michael,
Such conversations: “…are you implying,” sometimes degrade into attacking people’s motives…or an accusation that they are making generalized statements when they are not.
I think if you look at the thread I am taking exception Warren’s simplistic understanding of why people are concerned about intergenerational sex…Lively is not solely to blame…he is, in fact, a tiny figure compared to Hay and Jennings.
Can we talk about nuances and subcultures within communities without being accused of attacking the whole?
Probably not, unless the community wishes to highlight a subculture which is viewed favorably by the general population…then we talk about nuances gladly.
Not everyone was silent. Just as not all Christians have been silent on Uganda — just most of the major denominations.
David, are you implying that gays have some sort of an “agenda” to recruit kids or that they silently support NAMBLA? — or just that Hay, Jennings, and the numbskulls who called Hay an “icon” make the rest of us look bad? I hope it’s the latter.
Key word….”silently.”
David – On Hay, you have a point, which is why some of the gay folk I know silently cringed when the Hay icon status was given.
Now that would be a very refreshing change! For as long as I can remember, they have blamed the APA and gay activists for their inability to produce good science.
And that is a point well taken. We need to be careful not to assume that the “few” speak for the “whole”.
David, you should not suppose or suggest that the “gay community” does either. That one gay group was incredibly STUPID and CARELESS enough to use the word “icon” to describe him does not mean that the “gay community” thinks so — or that the “gay community” has some sort of agenda to recruit kids.
There is no NARTH, without a politicized APA…
There is no Scott Lively without Harry Hay and his ilk.
NARTH needs to be scientific regardless of the politics of the APA.
Lively, as a Christian first, needs to be more truthful (that risks to minors is greater for heterosexuals than for homosexuals), regardless of the agenda of Harry Hay.
@ Warren,
Can’t you see the flaw in your analysis here?
Heterosexual’s do not make Icons of men who propose such relationships.
We do not recommend people for national leadership who idealize such Icons, while relating stories of intergenerational sex where the risks to the minor are never discussed, or the behavior never condemned.
Some time ago, Ann raised a good question about why the HRC (Human Rights Campaign — a leading gay rights organization) was not speaking out against this bill since many were pressuring Exodus to do so.
I did some research and found that the HRC had already spoken out, through their involvement with the larger, internationally focussed group — the Council for Global Equality.
http://www.globalequality.org/
Here is more on the HRC’s stand against this bill:
http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2009/11/protesting-ugandas-proposed-anti-homosexuality-bill/
David – There are groups who advocate for older straight men to have access to litle girls. Does this make such activity a part of straight culture?
Whereas there may be some merit in discussing this, we can agree that adults preying on children is wrong no matter what the preferred target of the perpetrator is.
Let’s also remember that Kevin Jennings sees Hay as a hero. And repeatedly told a story about a mid-adolescent teen who had anonymous sex with an older man…with no injunction given expressing concern over the power difference in this relationship; for 20 years he told this story.
LIvely cannot exist without certain “uncomfortable” facts…
The Ugandan legislation is unnecessary; protect minors regardless the sexual orientation of the adult.
Repost:
You are being too simplistic here.
It has been demonstrated that an iconic figure within the GLBT community (Hay) advocates that gay men mentor minors sexually.
In my own state, as recently as a few years ago, Oregon State University sponsored a GLBT conference which was organized in part by a local leader in the GLBT community who advocates for this kind of mentoring.
There are no biblical injunctions stating the specific age when sex with someone younger is wrong.
We have come to such conclusions in a developmental and complex way. They can be dismantled in the same way divorce as taboo was.
@ Warren
The proponents of the bill have been extremely successful in conflating homosexuality with defilement of boys and the attempt to “recruit”. There is therefore little, if any, distinction in the minds of ordinary Ugandans who think all are one and the same. Thanks to the rhetoric of anti-gay activists, to a Ugandan, a person being gay means one is molesting, and recruiting innocent boys – by default.
Ugandans are being told that passing this bill is the only way to ensure the safety of their young boys. (Most are not concerned with the details, and very few have actually read it.) However, many legal experts have pointed out that Ugandan law already caters for the protection of the boy child from sexual violation as well, in its penal code. The public strangely seems not to be aware of this – and I doubt the backers of the bill will volunteer such knowledge to them. Their goal, after all is to “rid Uganda of the ‘homosexual scourge’ “.
James – Thanks for this insight into the process. At least one of the Americans who went to Uganda, Scott Lively, is responsible for continuing the lore that gays recruit as a part of being gay.
Even if some recruitment is taking place, the AHB addresses much more than pedophilia as you know. Is the bill widely available for review there or do people really think it only addresses “the boy child?”
Hi,
I was at this dialogue and I’m the one who asked Mr. Langa about Exodus’ position on this bill. When given a chance to respond to the audience he said (with great bombast) that it was false, and that such a claim (that Exodus had denounced the bill) was nothing more than the gay agenda of lies, deceit and manipulation. I retorted that this information was on the Exodus website. He dismissed my point, and responded by warning everyone that the “gay movement” even knew how to hack into people’s e-mails and websites, so we should be careful, etc..etc…they are the ‘masters of deception’ etc, etc.. (sigh)
Later I met him in private and asked him if he REALLY didn’t know about Exodus’ position. He confessed that he simply was not aware of it and would have to check. Ha ha.
I also spoke to MP Bahati and asked him about the issue of ‘recruitment’. The answer I got from him is the same one I got from Pastor Ssempa the day before – that THEY HAVE NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. I asked, for example how one could follow up on where ‘recruitment’ was taking place, how many had been ‘recruited’, etc. Also, was it an organisation that was ‘recruiting’? Or a few individuals? Where is the data that shows that any ‘recruitment’ is taking place?
None of them could provide me with answers, and instead said “Come on, you KNOW these people are recruiting!” I told them I didn’t, which is why I wanted to know where I could go to get the facts. None of them could give me an answer that amounted to anything more than unverifiable anecdotes.
What has become obvious is that on the issue of “recruitment”, every one is really relying on the single testimony of a one George Oundo (former gay rights activist – now active de-campaigner of gay rights), without bothering to seek evidence that corroborates his claims of ‘recruitment’ in a qualitative way.
Of course, its true that certain adult males have solicited sex from male minors (in just the same way adult males have solicited sex from under age girls – in significantly greater proportion, I might add). Pedophilia, basically. But I get the sense that these cases of pedophelia of boys is being touted by anti-gay activists as being part of an organised “larger global conspiracy to recruit.” But this is fallacious. Again, the number of reported cases of defilement of under age girls is exponentially higher than the reported cases of defilement of under age boys – yet I don’t think anyone is claiming that there is an organised “larger global conspiracy to recruit” girls into a life of sex with men. It just means that there are pedophiles in our midst. Therefore the crime here is not sexual orientation, but it is pedophelia. Anti-gay advocates are ever so reluctant to make this important distinction, and sadly this distinction seems to have also eluded the minds of our legislators.
I therefore feel that the subject of “recruitment”needs to be thoroughly investigated, dissected and analysed further. We should ask if “recruitment” is even a valid term, in context of the discussion on homosexuality in Uganda. How is “recruitment” being defined? I feel the issue is alot more complex than is being portrayed by the simplistic conspiracy theory being peddled by Mr. Langa and Pastor Ssempa courtesy of George Oundo. Or is it the other way round? Is Oundo simply a pawn being used to drive an agenda? Hmm…
Either way, I think Oundo’s claims need to be investigated objectively and vigorously, since it is specifically his claim of “recruitment” that is fuelling the exponential amount of homophobia, and providing, for many Ugandans, the rationale for supporting this horrendous bill.
I suspect gays and lesbians provide convenient scapegoats much like in other times and places Jews and suspected witches did. (Though in parts of Africa suspected witches are still convenient villains but one can no longer easily use the law to prosecute ‘witches’.) The real problems can be ignored as long as it looks like the government is doing something.
I must whole-heartedly also agree with you, Eddy. This bill is a symptom of what could happen in the greater Ugandan society as it completely ignores two or more articles of Uganda’s constitution concerning basic human rights.
.
However….
I get the feeling that you are questioning if this is a human rights concern.
.
Is who one loves, is homosexuality a human rights concern? Certainly if a government can criminalize it, then homsexuality is not a human right. If it is a sin in Christian thinking then is homosexuality a human right? If what was written in allAfrica.com is true, “Dr Warren said that homosexuality is not a natural way of life and thus not a human right,” Rick Warren does not think homosexuality is a human right. “We shall not tolerate this aspect at all,” Warren was directly quoted as saying. This aspect apparently meaning homosexuality as a human right.
.
Also there is the Roman Catholic Church, that organization’s somewhat confused viewpoint was put forth in a document concerning a possible human rights declaration by the UN. It appears that the the most important reason that the Roman Catholic Church has with calling homosexual conduct/love a right has to do with the possibility of the Catholic Church calling homosexuality a sin. The Church said the UN Declaration “challenges existing human rights norms.” That ‘existing human rights norm‘ with which the Church is most concerned being religious rights. The only reason the Catholic Church does speak out against ‘unjust discrimination’ and encourages “States to do away with criminal penalties” is that it believes we gays and lesbians are all psychologically flawed or disordered. Thus the Roman Catholic Church is expressing its compassion (except not in Uganda – so far). But any law criminalizing homosexuality would not then be an attack on human rights since even a homosexual despite their supposed ‘psychological disorder’ is able to understand fully the meaning of the law.
Certainly, those Christians such as PFOX, Antonin Scalia, Scott Lively, etc. do not think that homosexuality represents anything approaching a civil right. By definition, it would seem to me that Christianity would not consider that which is sin to be a human right. I’m getting the feeling from your statement that you feel that way also. That it is not a human rights concern per se as to homosexuality, but that you would take a position with the Catholic Church. That those with psychological problems should not be imprisoned. But then why not?
Yes, our concerns should remain constant and consistent when it comes to the christian treatment of others. Uganda has many social issues to face.
FYI, I hope you don’t mind Eddy, but I quoted this (without naming the source) on the Facebook page. Even though the focus of that group is opposition to this bill, I thought your was a point very well taken.
Once this crisis is past — and even now if I can somehow — I vow to find other ways to help out. Currently, our church participates in the Heifer Project:
http://www.heifer.org/
I agree. I am not highlighting the abuses against gays as though they were the most important concern. Sounds like poverty, disease, corruption, mob rule, child prostitution, and illiteracy are huge problems.
I posted this information to point out that religious representatives traveling to speak there would have had this information — if they had done some basic research about “what was on the ground” in Uganda. It is easy to come by. Alan says they didn’t really know or understand. Warren and others say they were warned.
All I am saying is that a bit more research, consultation and preparation might have have helped. Maybe not. Who knows? What’s done is done. You know how I feel about it. I won’t harp on that any more. Happy Thanksgiving.
Eddy – No problem agreeing there. I heard just yesterday from a missionary friend of mine that a person working on a project was beaten badly by a mob for reasons that are unclear. Investigation has been slow. I can’t go into more but there are multiple problems there and actually homosexuality is among the least of their concerns. I hope this issue can focus us on the multiple abuses and needs in that area.
The information just provided by Michael in his 5:00PM post is a clear indicator that, once this anti-homosexuality bill is thwarted, concerned individuals, Christian or otherwise should not forget the many many human rights violations going on in Uganda. Michael bolded the travesties meted out against homosexuals; that is but a small fragment of the travesties that seem to be commonplace–as evidenced by the rest of the reference he quoted.
If our concern is genuine…if it’s a human concern…if it’s a human rights concern, then our concern and calls for action need to continue and need to address these other areas as well.
This information on Ugand’s poor Human Rights record,would have been available as well: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2007/100510.htm
Here’s another suggestion. Think about declining an invitation from any group or nation that does not endorse and uphold the UN Declaration on Human Rights.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml
I doubt they will approve any comment at the PFOX blog.
I honestly cannot say if Lively speaks one way for public consumption and another way in private for those who he feels are ‘true believers.’ I strongly suspect that he does. At any rate Lively’s prevarication in The Pink Swastika would seem to mean that he strays in other areas.
Perhaps it was naive, but I posted the following at Lively’s post. That is if it is approved….
Pray tell…. what parent or friend of a gay person would condone forced therapy or imprisonment of their gay child or friend? And failing to do so, should that child’s parent or friend be imprisoned for not speaking out to authorities? What parent or friend of a gay would condone the silencing of their loved ones voice to keep them from speaking what they feel to be true even if they do not hold to the same truth?
This is emnity you have helped to put between the parent and the child, between friends in the country of Uganda. Is that what PFOX is about?
Debbie,
Ok, I understand – takes me awhile I guess – of course you would be responding to Scott Lively and not PFOX – sorry I didn’t get that to begin with. I have heard his name frequently mentioned here but don’t know much about him. Will do some research. I hope he and PFOX receive your post with an open mind and be willing to see another perspective.
Michael,
Very good suggestions – thank you.
Oops. That last one is #5 🙂
Maybe some lessons learned:
I. When invited to speak somewhere, slow way down and find out who is sponsoring the event, who else will be presenting and what they all stand for. Today, unlike 30 years ago, you have the internet to help you. Really read up.
2. When traveling to another nation, find out what the prevailing mood is about homosexuality and human rights. Is homosexuality criminalized there? Does the country have a strong stand on human rights? Is there a problem of corruption and mob justice?
3. If the other folks on the panel do not represent your beliefs — or the host organization does not have a strong human rights stand — consider declining — or go to speak up clearly against those extreme beliefs.
4. Make it clear to them where you stand. Share your ministry and mission, but speak out against the criminalization of homosexuality on the grounds that it would violate human rights and impede your ability to minister there.
4. Before you go, consult others who are not part of your organization — friends and foes. Find out what is being said about the proposed trip. Listen to those who disagree with you and find out why. They may help you avoid a whole lot of grief later on.
Thank you. 🙂 I have only commented to Scott Lively directly and not to PFOX. They just happen to be hosting his commentary.
Debbie,
Yes, I know you are right and appreciate the verse – one of my favorites. I am only asking that they be understood for where they are coming from – I honestly don’t think they would be playing the political card if they had other support and/or the resources they initially sought and did not receive. Their pain precedes all they do and many times interferes with discernment. Anger covers up pain and pain covers up anger. I know whatever you write to them will be right as you come from a Godly point of view rather than a wordly or self centered view on these matters.
Ann, I have talked with Regina Griggs before. I know about her own family situation, and I know other parents with gay kids. My heart goes out to all such parents. Regina is a likable person, and I understand what PFOX is seeking to do. They do have a certain political agenda, beyond just providing support to parents and families. What Scott Lively represents and what he said there and elsewhere really does need to be challenged.
Paul even confronted Peter and others over issues of hypocrisy in the New Testament. I do think there is a time and place to remain silent and a time to speak up. Ecclesiastes 3:7. I know what you are saying.
Please try to remember the individuals who are on the PFOX site come from a different place than most (I think) people here. They are parents who are hurting -and huring deeply. They feel there is no other place to go for support. They have been chastised and their feelings have been dismissed as though they had no validity. They will take in any support they can get, albeit support that might not be credible or sustainable. Please be gentle in understanding where they are coming from. When C. S. Lewis lost his son he said “don’t come talking to me about the consolations of religion or I shall suspect that you don’t understand. I’m afraid it is somewhat of a similar story with PFOX – as long as people tell them that they are wrong in their grief, they will feel misunderstood and continue to grasp whoever and whatever consoles them. I am not asking to endorse or advocate them as a group or the things they do – I am asking to try and understand their hurt and pain and what it must feel like to not only feel as though you have lost a son or daughter, but also feel the pain that few people can or want to understand what that feels like.
Warren, I just went to the PFOX blog and attempted to post a comment, much longer than what I said above. We will see if gets approved. If not, I will repost it here.
Hey Debbie, how about saying that over here: http://pfox-exgays.blogspot.com/2009/11/warren-throckmorton-grove-city-college.html
Wonder if your comment would get posted?
I don’t see how any defense can be made of Scott Lively’s views. The man is a blight on the Church. No need to mince words. I believe he could appropriately be described as a “stumbling block.” The fate of such folks is spoken of in Luke 17:1-2. Only God can judge the man’s heart. But we are given the task to judge the fruit we see and hear.
From gug:
And yet back in March:
But as some pointed out then, why should Lively be a part of a lobby for a bill to criminalize homosexuality when it already was a criminal offense in Uganda? Lively would say that he simply was proposing that therapy be the consequence of the crime rather than imprisonment. But certainly, Langa feels that Lively was on his side. That leads one to wonder if Lively speaks one way for public consumption and in a more hard-line manner concerning homosexuality in private? If so then Lively is keeping up the public pretense or stating the truth in his interview with WorldMag:
But then here Lively is mentioned to have said that ‘he believes Uganda should maintain its law‘ which is one that would have ‘people being thrown in jail simply for homosexual conduct‘ even now. Is Lively getting his public and private messages mixed up or did WorldMag.com make mistake in paraphrasing him? What might be an indication is what Lively added to the mix in the WorldMag.com article, when he added that in keeping the law “that they should use that as a way to basically say, ‘No, you’re not going to be able to promote this behavior because it’s illegal behavior.’”
.
Obviously, Lively would love that he or goverments could silence the voice of every gay civil rights activist on earth, if not in the United States then perhaps eastern Europe and Uganda. However he knows that just having homosexuality illegal in the US did not silence voices here. Was Lively then also ‘privately‘ behind that portion of the bill which called for criminalizing favorable speech concerning homosexuality? That he used that language would seem to say that he was. And yet I am not so sure of that. This was a post by Kasha at the IGLHRC website during the Kampala conference in March which paraphrased what Scott Lively said:
LIvely chooses his ideas, if not his words, quite well; he is afterall an attorney. He proposes ideas meant to speak to those with a true homophobia and confirm the fear in the believer. However, even in all of that talk, when he says that they have decided to recruit the youth, I do not believe that Lively means as Bahati, a true homophobe, believes that gays are out to turn all of Uganda homosexual. I think Lively means that ‘the gay agenda’ would recruit the youth into a tolerant attitude towards gays and lesbians. But then Lively does not care to elucidate that opinion unless he is called on his views. Instead he can simply allow the homopobia of his audience to come to the worst conclusion.
.
Though I could be wrong. This exchange was also from the IGLHRC blog:
But even here is that phrase “turn the whole world gay” really meant in the literal sense? Or does it speak to Lively’s real fear of a world tolerant of gays and lesbians? He doesn’t have to say, his homophobic audiences will believe the worst. So what actually exists inside the mind of Scott Lively? He claims he is being vilified and misquoted. For instance in March Lively had this to say about his proposal to compel Ugandan gays and lesbians into forced therapy:
Well, that’s hardly a choice for many of us. But that statement brings us back to Langa and Gay Uganda’s characterization of how Langa considers Scott Lively as “the prophet” of Langa’s crusade. Does not one follow the word of his prophet? So is Langa, in his zeal, interpretting Lively literally? Or is it in that more homophobic manner which Lively would likekly hope his audience would take his speech, so that he, Lively, can then claim deniability?
.
It does not seem to matter one bit.
…
Cold hope. Also from gug:
I love it!!! 🙂
Wow. What a turn of events! Still shocking to hear how perverse sentiments are being used to support this bill. Tamale really nailed it with her report. Praying the tide will turn and Uganda will look to its long list of problems.