African Media Watchdog: NRM Caucus Misinterpreted Ministry of Health Report on Homosexuality

Earlier this week, Peter Mwesige of the African Centre for Media Excellence scrutinized the way the Ugandan press handled the facts surrounding President Museveni’s decision to sign the Anti-Homosexuality based on a report by an ad hoc committee of the Ministry of Health. In his article on the matter, Mwesige points out that the president’s political party caucus distorted the committee report by saying homosexuality was “an abnormal behavior.” Significantly, Mwesige quoted one of the committee members, psychologist Paul Bangirana. Bangirana accused the caucus of leaving out vital information which influenced many media reports.
While there are problems with the committee report, Mwesige is correct that the NRM press release did not accurately portray the report. Mwesige ends his article by pointing out that Uganda’s press should have included input from those who will feel the effects of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill:

And [balanced] factual or accurate reporting would also include journalists not ignoring the human rights-based argument that the gay community invokes in defending their sexuality.

 

Mark Driscoll’s Citation Errors At A Glance

Since November 2013, Mars Hill Church pastor Mark Driscoll has been at the center of a controversy surrounding “citation errors” in his books. In addition to other bloggers (e.g. Janet Mefferd, Wenatchee the Hatchet), I have examined various claims and located several problems which involve multiple books and publishers.  Publishers Crossway, NavPress and Thomas Nelson have announced that they are in various stages of examining and/or correcting these problems.

Click the image below to go to an identical table with live links to my posts on the subject. Just click on the cells with letters in them to read the relevant post. Note the key below which explains the four types of problems found. Following the table is a listing of the books involved. I should note that this chart might need to be updated if new material surfaces.

R= Recycled Material (using material from a previous work without citation)
P= Plagiarism (as defined in the MLA Style Manual)
FE= Factual Error
G = Ghostwriting

Source material:

Allender, D. (2008). The wounded heart: Hope for adult victims of childhood sexual abuse. Carol Stream, IL:NavPress.
Chapman, G. (2003). Covenant marriage: Building communication & intimacy. Nashville: B & H Publishing.
David, D., & Brannon, R. (1976). The male sex role: Our culture’s blueprint of manhood, and what it’s done for us lately. In D.David & R. Brannon (Eds.),The forty nine percent majority. New York: Random House.
Hawthorne, G. F., Martin, R. P., Reid, D. R. (Eds.). (1993). Dictionary of Paul and his letters: A compendium of contemporary biblical scholarship. Wheaton, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Holcomb, J., & Holcomb, L. (2011). Rid of my disgrace: Hope and healing for victims of sexual assault. Wheaton, IL: Crossway.
Jones, P. (1999). Gospel truth/pagan lies: Can you tell the difference? Enumclaw, WA: Winepress Publishing.
Jones, P. (2010). One or two: Seeing a world of difference. Escondido, CA: Main Entry Editions.
Ryken, L. (1990). Worldly saints: The puritans as they really were. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Wenham, G., Motyer, J. A., Caron, D., France, R. T. (Eds.) (1994). New bible dictionary: 21st century edition. Wheaton, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Driscoll’s works:
Driscoll, M., & Chamberlain, M. (2013). Call to resurgence: Will Christianity have a funeral or a future? Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.
Driscoll, M. (2013). Who do you think you are? Finding your true identity in Christ. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
Driscoll, M., & Driscoll, G. (2012). Real marriage: The truth about sex, friendship, and life together. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
Driscoll, M., & Breshears, G. (2011). Doctrine: What Christians should believe. Wheaton, IL: Crossway.
Driscoll, M. (2009). Trial: 8 witnesses from 1 & 2 Peter. Seattle, WA: Mars Hill Church.
Driscoll, M. (2009). Religion saves: And nine other misconceptions. Wheaton, IL: Crossway.
Driscoll, M., & Breshears, G. (2008). Death by love: Letters from the cross. Wheaton, IL: Crossway.

Additional posts on the topic:
Would Mark Driscoll Fail A Course In His Own School?
Mark Driscoll And His Church On Plagiarism
Spokesperson: Thomas Nelson Working With Driscolls to Address Real Marriage Citation Issues
Publisher Thomas Nelson Alters Mark Driscoll’s Book Real Marriage To Correct Citation Problems
Mark Driscoll Plagiarism Controversy Rated #3 Plagiarism Scandal of 2013
Janet Mefferd Breaks Silence in Slate Article on Driscoll Controversy
Mars Hill Church, Mark Driscoll and the Case of the Disappearing Links
Mars Hill Church Alters Statement on Mark Driscoll Plagiarism Controversy (UPDATED)
IVP Says Bible Commentary Improperly Appeared In Book by Mark Driscoll; Mars Hill Church Responds, Blames Researcher Mistakes for Errors
Mark Driscoll and Tyndale House Release Statement of Apology to Christian Post

I want to thank Megan Hurst for her assistance in preparing the chart.

Uganda's President Museveni Misuses Letter from Scientists and Researchers

I don’t know how President Museveni came up with the conclusion he did but it is obvious that he misread our letter about scientific consensus on sexual orientation.  On the website of Uganda’s State Department, the following was posted yesterday:

While attending the NRM Parliamentary Caucus Retreat at the National Leadership Institute (6th -16th February 2014), President Museveni promised to circulate a letter in response to his request to rule out a possibility that some human beings are genetically born homosexual.
The President partially read out the response by over 200 international experts on the science of homosexuality written to him on the 5th of February 2014 before he said he would sign the anti-homosexuality bill on grounds that no evidence was adduced to the effect that there are human beings homosexual by genetics, by both the international experts and the department of genetics of Makerere University Medical School.
The letter states clearly that “While it is unlikely that there is one simple biological or genetic cause for homosexuality in all people, there are neural, cognitive and personality differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals which appear to have at least some basis in biology.”

Elsewhere in the letter, we were clear that choice plays no role in the onset of sexual attractions:

For the vast majority of people, homosexual and heterosexual, sexual attractions emerge spontaneously without any prior sexual experience, exposure or recruitment. Sexual orientation is not a matter of choice.

There was risk involved in writing the letter and engaging in this process. However, we felt it important to go on record in the manner we did. The signers of our letter are united in condemnation of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, and it is completely false to imply otherwise. After getting the Ugandan Ministry of Health report, President Museveni expressed his desire to pass the buck to others for his decision. However, the world is watching, and if Mr. Museveni signs that bill, history will record that he is responsible for that action.

Note to One News Now: The New Genetics Study Replicated Xq28

When I read the recent One News Now blurb attempting to attack the reports of the linkage study involving gay brothers, I thought of Inigo Montoya:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk[/youtube]
Replication refers to finding the same or similar results in a research study. Peter LaBarbera says lack of replication is a problem for genetics studies of homosexuality. Inconvenient for LaBarbera is the fact that the new study, which he claims to know something about, replicates the finding of linkage at Xq28. While it is true that prior efforts have been mixed regarding Xq28, there has been prior support for the region and this study found linkage there. Thus, this study replicated prior studies, including the work of Dean Hamer.
I would be willing to bet Mr. LaBarbera has not read the study. If he had, he would know that he told ONN something opposite of the truth.

Meeting Minutes from Uganda's Ministry of Health Task Force Debate on Homosexuality

Although Yoweri Museveni has not yet signed the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, he has signaled his intent to do so based on information presented to him from a task force set up by Uganda’s Ministry of Health. Museveni passed the buck to that committee and claims to be taking steps in line with their recommendations. I posted the committee’s report here last week.
Apparently, the task force only met two times prior to presenting their findings. According to minutes of those two meetings which I present here, the entire process seemed to be thrown together at the last minute.
Minutes for the first meeting:

Minutes of the 1st task force on the homosexuality debate held at the Ministry of Health on 3rd February 2014

Members Present
Dr. Isaac Ezati                                     Chair, Director Planning, Ministry of Health
Dr. Sylvester Onzivua                     Senior Pathologist, Mulago Hospital
Dr. Misaki Wayengera                    Geneticist, Makerere University
Prof. Seggane Musisi                      Psychiatrist, Makerere University
Dr. Sheila Ndyanabangi                 Head, Mental Health Desk, Ministry of Health
Dr. Paul Bangirana                           Psychologist, Makerere University
Assoc. Prof. Eugene Kinyanda    Psychiatrist, Makerere University
Dr David Basangwa                          Director, Butabika Hospital
Min 1: The Chair briefed members that the President needs an opinion from experts whether homosexuality is abnormal.
Min 2: The team agreed to answer the following questions;
a)      Is there a scientific basis for homosexuality, if yes what is it?
b)      Is it a disease (disease process) or not?
c)       Is it an abnormality. What drives it? Include the social, psychological and religious causes.
Min 3: They also noted the need to mention the following in the report;
a)      The protection of families and that the act needs to be regulated i.e. no recruiting, public displays so as to protect children and families.
b)      The controversies of the literature. No literature in Uganda about homosexuality, most studies done in the West. There is need to balance between the evidence from the west and protecting our culture.
c)       Studies are needed to study homosexuality/sexuality in Uganda.
Min 4: To meet again on Wednesday at 6pm with answers to the question, is there a scientific basis for this?

Minutes for the second meeting:

Minutes of the 2nd task force on the homosexuality debate held at the Ministry of Health on 5th February 2014

Members Present

  1. Dr. Isaac Ezati                                     Chair, Director Planning, Ministry of Health
  2. Dr. Sylvester Onzivua                     Senior Pathologist, Mulago Hospital
  3. Dr. Misaki Wayengera                    Geneticist, Makerere University
  4. Prof. Seggane Musisi                      Psychiatrist, Makerere University
  5. Dr. Sheila Ndyanabangi                 Head, Mental Health Desk, Ministry of Health
  6. Dr. Paul Bangirana                           Psychologist, Makerere University
  7. Dr Jacinto Amandua                        Commissioner, Ministry of Health

Absent with apology

  1. Assoc. Prof. Eugene Kinyanda    Psychiatrist, Makerere University
  2. Dr David Basangwa                          Director, Butabika Hospital

Min 1: Dr Ezati nominated Prof Seggane to Chair the scientific arm of the task force. He reiterated the question the Minister wanted answered; what is the scientific or genetic basis of homosexuality and can it be learned or unlearned.
Min 2: Prof Seggane presented his report. He gave a background on sexuality and overview of the biological basis. He concluded that homosexuality is not an abnormality nor a habit but a normal biological variant of sexuality. It needs to be regulated as was in the traditional African society.
Min 3: Dr Bangirana presented evidence showing that that the hypothalamus in both homosexual men and heterosexual women was activated by androgen containing odours. All brains of the three groups processed other odours similarly. These findings imply that homosexual men have a different brain response to male odours compared to heterosexual men but they respond to other odours like heterosexuals. It is not clear whether this differing physiological response exists at birth or developed after homosexual experience later in life.
Min 4: Dr Onzivua made his presentation. He mentioned that there is no biological basis for homosexuality. There is no biological basis to promote homosexuality, different body parts are adapted for their functions, eg pinna to collect sound waves etc.  The anatomy of the human being is not designed homosexuality. There are no conclusive studies on the genetics of homosexuality. However the environmental influence can not be ignored.
Min 5: Dr Wayengera presented his report. There are statistical correlations between the behaviour and structural and genetic factors. The current based on the dearth of genetic studies imply that it is a learned behaviour (social influence). Chromosomal studies have not produced consistent results when replicated. Animal studies have shown a genetic basis of homosexuality (in Drosophila and mice) but have not replicated in humans. Evolutionary biology where the main role for sex is procreation implies there is no structural basis for homosexuality.
Min 6: A discussion followed these presentations. It was suggested that simple explanations are needed to explain homosexuality since the lay public will not understand the science presented above. Need to look at it from all angles i.e. biological, psychological and social.
Min 7: Conclusions:
a)      There is no definitive gene for homosexuality
b)      Homosexuality is not a disease
c)       Homosexuality is not an abnormality
d)      In every society, there is a small number of people with homosexual tendencies
e)      It can be influenced by environmental factors (e.g. culture, information, permissiveness)
f)       The practise needs regulation like any other behaviour

It is stunning to think that a decision as important as whether to endorse the Anti-Homosexuality Bill could be decided in this manner. Clearly this committee did not consider all of the evidence and ignored some that was presented. At least as reported here, the committee did not reflect on the inappropriate use of science requested by the president, and even discussed simplifying the complexity of the issues for public consumption. There is something very wrong about this process; the right to exist should not depend on research studies.