Anti-Gay Christians Lead to Ugandan Law: Execution for Homosexuals

mykevermin

CAGiversary!
Feedback
34 (97%)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html?hp

January 4, 2010
U.S. Evangelicals’ Role Seen in Uganda Anti-Gay Push
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN

KAMPALA, Uganda — Last March, three American evangelical Christians, whose teachings about “curing” homosexuals have been widely discredited in the United States, arrived here in Uganda’s capital to give a series of talks.

The theme of the event, according to Stephen Langa, its Ugandan organizer, was “the gay agenda — that whole hidden and dark agenda” — and the threat homosexuals posed to Bible-based values and the traditional African family.

For three days, according to participants and audio recordings, thousands of Ugandans, including police officers, teachers and national politicians, listened raptly to the Americans, who were presented as experts on homosexuality. The visitors discussed how to make gay people straight, how gay men often sodomized teenage boys and how “the gay movement is an evil institution” whose goal is “to defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of sexual promiscuity.”

Now the three Americans are finding themselves on the defensive, saying they had no intention of helping stoke the kind of anger that could lead to what came next: a bill to impose a death sentence for homosexual behavior.

One month after the conference, a previously unknown Ugandan politician, who boasts of having evangelical friends in the American government, introduced the Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009, which threatens to hang homosexuals, and, as a result, has put Uganda on a collision course with Western nations.

Donor countries, including the United States, are demanding that Uganda’s government drop the proposed law, saying it violates human rights, though Uganda’s minister of ethics and integrity (who previously tried to ban miniskirts) recently said, “Homosexuals can forget about human rights.”

The Ugandan government, facing the prospect of losing millions in foreign aid, is now indicating that it will back down, slightly, and change the death penalty provision to life in prison for some homosexuals. But the battle is far from over.

Instead, Uganda seems to have become a far-flung front line in the American culture wars, with American groups on both sides, the Christian right and gay activists, pouring in support and money as they get involved in the broader debate over homosexuality in Africa.

“It’s a fight for their lives,” said Mai Kiang, a director at the Astraea Lesbian Foundation for Justice, a New York-based group that has channeled nearly $75,000 to Ugandan gay rights activists and expects that amount to grow.

The three Americans who spoke at the conference — Scott Lively, a missionary who has written several books against homosexuality, including “7 Steps to Recruit-Proof Your Child”; Caleb Lee Brundidge, a self-described former gay man who leads “healing seminars”; and Don Schmierer, a board member of Exodus International, whose mission is “mobilizing the body of Christ to minister grace and truth to a world impacted by homosexuality” — are now trying to distance themselves from the bill.

“I feel duped,” Mr. Schmierer said, arguing that he had been invited to speak on “parenting skills” for families with gay children. He acknowledged telling audiences how homosexuals could be converted into heterosexuals, but he said he had no idea some Ugandans were contemplating the death penalty for homosexuality.

“That’s horrible, absolutely horrible,” he said. “Some of the nicest people I have ever met are gay people.”

Mr. Lively and Mr. Brundidge have made similar remarks in interviews or statements issued by their organizations. But the Ugandan organizers of the conference admit helping draft the bill, and Mr. Lively has acknowledged meeting with Ugandan lawmakers to discuss it. He even wrote on his blog in March that someone had likened their campaign to “a nuclear bomb against the gay agenda in Uganda.” Later, when confronted with criticism, Mr. Lively said he was very disappointed that the legislation was so harsh.

Human rights advocates in Uganda say the visit by the three Americans helped set in motion what could be a very dangerous cycle. Gay Ugandans already describe a world of beatings, blackmail, death threats like “Die Sodomite!” scrawled on their homes, constant harassment and even so-called correctional rape.

“Now we really have to go undercover,” said Stosh Mugisha, a gay rights activist who said she was pinned down in a guava orchard and raped by a farmhand who wanted to cure her of her attraction to girls. She said that she was impregnated and infected with H.I.V., but that her grandmother’s reaction was simply, “ ‘You are too stubborn.’ ”

Despite such attacks, many gay men and lesbians here said things had been getting better for them before the bill, at least enough to hold news conferences and publicly advocate for their rights. Now they worry that the bill could encourage lynchings. Already, mobs beat people to death for infractions as minor as stealing shoes.

“What these people have done is set the fire they can’t quench,” said the Rev. Kapya Kaoma, a Zambian who went undercover for six months to chronicle the relationship between the African anti-homosexual movement and American evangelicals.

Mr. Kaoma was at the conference and said that the three Americans “underestimated the homophobia in Uganda” and “what it means to Africans when you speak about a certain group trying to destroy their children and their families.”

“When you speak like that,” he said, “Africans will fight to the death.”

Uganda is an exceptionally lush, mostly rural country where conservative Christian groups wield enormous influence. This is, after all, the land of proposed virginity scholarships, songs about Jesus playing in the airport, “Uganda is Blessed” bumper stickers on Parliament office doors and a suggestion by the president’s wife that a virginity census could be a way to fight AIDS.

During the Bush administration, American officials praised Uganda’s family-values policies and steered millions of dollars into abstinence programs.

Uganda has also become a magnet for American evangelical groups. Some of the best known Christian personalities have recently passed through here, often bringing with them anti-homosexuality messages, including the Rev. Rick Warren, who visited in 2008 and has compared homosexuality to pedophilia. (Mr. Warren recently condemned the anti-homosexuality bill, seeking to correct what he called “lies and errors and false reports” that he played a role in it.)

Many Africans view homosexuality as an immoral Western import, and the continent is full of harsh homophobic laws. In northern Nigeria, gay men can face death by stoning. Beyond Africa, a handful of Muslim countries, like Iran and Yemen, also have the death penalty for homosexuals. But many Ugandans said they thought that was going too far. A few even spoke out in support of gay people.

“I can defend them,” said Haj Medih, a Muslim taxi driver with many homosexual customers. “But I fear the what? The police, the government. They can arrest you and put you in the safe house, and for me, I don’t have any lawyer who can help me.”

This is sickening.
 
So after reading that article I see that three people went and spent three days preaching that homosexuality is a sin and tried to show Ugandan's how to stop it from increasing. I'm missing the direct correlation to the missionaries and the politician sponsoring the bill, and also see nothing in the article that refers to the fact that this bill does way more then just say hang homos. It will pull them out of:

• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its protocols;
• The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;
• The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women;
• The Convention on the Rights of the Child, and
• The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights

http://humanrightshouse.org/Articles/12254.html

Is the law wrong? Yep. Is it the fault of three random Americans? LOL.
 
The word, dear perpetual contrarian, is "catalyst."

You willingly ignore their presence, their conference, their vitriol as a necessary part of the causal process in Uganga. It doesn't matter that it was unintentional on their part - the three Christians even have a apologetic tone to their "we didn't mean for this to happen" claims.

In short, they accept partial responsibility and you're unwilling to accept that because it clashes with either (1) your worldview or (2) your need to be nothing more than a vapid, trite troll in the vs forums.

"lol."

Lastly, use words that mean what you intend them to. These are three people who traveled to and hosted a conference on homosexuality in Uganda, which they all spoke at. They are not "three random Americans."

"Three random Americans" are Robert Johnson from Denver, Colorado, Edith Pertwee from Des Moines, Iowa, and Luther Sanchez from Missoula, Montana. Who are they? I have no bloody idea - they were just randomly made up selected.

Make your words mean something for a change.
 
Robert Johnson is a pretty cool dood, actually. Edith is a. bitch. on the other hand.

Story in OP makes me sick. Sigh. I'm amazed there are people - in the treasure trove of evil subjects that ought to be addressed - still lose their shit when it comes to same sex sex.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The word, dear perpetual contrarian, is "catalyst."

You willingly ignore their presence, their conference, their vitriol as a necessary part of the causal process in Uganga. It doesn't matter that it was unintentional on their part - the three Christians even have a apologetic tone to their "we didn't mean for this to happen" claims.
[/QUOTE]

Must have read over the first paragraphy where I asid what they were doing their.

[quote name='mykevermin']
Lastly, use words that mean what you intend them to. These are three people who traveled to and hosted a conference on homosexuality in Uganda, which they all spoke at. They are not "three random Americans."

"Three random Americans" are Robert Johnson from Denver, Colorado, Edith Pertwee from Des Moines, Iowa, and Luther Sanchez from Missoula, Montana. Who are they? I have no bloody idea - they were just randomly made up selected.
[/QUOTE]

Restating the same thing you already said in your first two paragraphs.

[quote name='mykevermin']Make your words mean something for a change.[/QUOTE]

Coming from the guy with more fluff in his posts then a twinkie.

Also, homosexuality was already outlawed in uganda. It's not like they magically made everyone hate the gays. Regardless, you'll try to spin it however you want, and I don't really care. Your head is already set, you don't come in here looking to learn anything, you just come in here to post the same thing over and over again so it isn't really even worth anyones time to bother arguing with you.
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']Also, homosexuality was already outlawed in uganda. It's not like they magically made everyone hate the gays.[/QUOTE]

Well then, that makes killing them okay!

Thanks for posting this, myke. I had first heard about it last week, and was just sickened by the whole thing. Stupid motherfucking Ugandans. Stupid motherfucking Christians.
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']Must have read over the first paragraphy where I asid what they were doing their.[/quote]

Awesome. Awesome to the max.
 
How thick can you be? Uganda, and Africa as a whole, is in a delicate state. What we can't have, are American charlatans preaching hate in a place already dug out and rotting from biblical thought. The three evangelicals must be held partially responsible for each homosexual execution from here on out.
 
We should also hold the airline these religious nuts flew on partially responsible as well for enabling them to get to Uganda in the first place.
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']Must have read over the first paragraphy where I asid what they were doing their.[/QUOTE]

sentences have clauses.

[quote name='mykevermin']You willingly ignore their presence, their conference, their vitriol as a necessary part of the causal process in Uganga.[/QUOTE]

there's one!
 
This is revolting but can't really be blamed on the missionaries. This is just another faux-warlord who wants power by associating his agendas with religion and the United States. It's not like Islam is all that accepting of it either.
 
Missionaries know which countries are most susceptible to their hostile messages. They know well the results of preaching hate against gays in a country already in the thick of it.

Picture someone throwing a stick of dynamite in a cave of explosives.
 
[quote name='rabbitt']Picture someone throwing a stick of dynamite in a cave of explosives.[/QUOTE]

Surely everything is the fault of the person who put the explosives in the cave, the person who set them off shares none of the responsibility. Regardless of whether or not they knew they were in there.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Surely everything is the fault of the person who put the explosives in the cave, the person who set them off shares none of the responsibility. Regardless of whether or not they knew they were in there.[/QUOTE]

Of course they share some of the responsibility.

And it's not that someone else put the sticks of dynamite there, it's that each stick of dynamite represents individuals who are just there. Come along with a flame and you'll set them all off at once.

Give the evangelists credit where credit is due. I'm sure they would love to be known as the men who eliminated homosexuality in Uganda if it ever came to it. I'm talkin' real Christian heroes.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']sentences have clauses.



there's one![/QUOTE]

You become such a bore after awhile, you can cut the cute act of self-rightous posing by 33% and still keep your title of an asshole to the other religious intolerant and liberal drones that plague this site.

I forgot that Christians have such influence over free will that a politician may or may not have listened to these guys and then decided to enact a law of his own making which there is no proof that these 3 men ever proposed any type of extreme hostile acts towards. Point your anger at the idiot who enacted this bit of legislation and not the men who enacted their free speech and views, which as a liberal drone yourself your party advocates. Try to keep your bias and religious hate out of every article you read, and don't let the NYT do all your thinking for you. And try not to take yourself so seriously, because many on here don't take you very seriously. (here is a :) speeling :) error for you to correct me on, oh sacastic wonder)
 
jesus_action.jpg
 
Are the gays brown people?

Is it possible for our military to train and supply the death squads?

Perhaps we can up a third hole on our War of Terror.
 
But, my analogy is a bit too simple. Because, you're right, some of that dynamite was placed there. Some by politicians, some by Uganda's institutions, and some by earlier evangelicals.
 
We also need to blame our ancestors who invented language. If not for them we wouldn't have ever had to deal with hate speech in the first place. Bunch a jerks.
 
I learned about cause and effect in first grade. Amazing to see so many people who failed elementary school around here.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']We also need to blame our ancestors who invented language. If not for them we wouldn't have ever had to deal with hate speech in the first place. Bunch a jerks.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. If we put any responsibility on anyone other than the one person who pushes the button then where does it end?! It's impossible to know!

Just like inciting riots. If a person encourages a riot that they clearly weren't participating in, then how can we say they share any responsibility? Who else do we charge?! That person's mother?! The manufacturer of the megaphone they use?! What an unsolvable predicament!
 
[quote name='cochesecochese']Yes, but at least this should take some heat off The Witches.[/QUOTE]

You should hear what they do to Albinos.
 
so 3 christians made a guy that tried to ban miniskirts crazier? cmon... its not like uganda was a fun loving place for gays before this law was proposed.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']so 3 christians made a guy that tried to ban miniskirts crazier? cmon... its not like uganda was a fun loving place for gays before this law was proposed.[/QUOTE]

You obviously don't understand how persistant these three christians were for the three days they were there. They had amazing powers of persuasion that they used on the poor people of uganda.
 
troy's right. we'll just chalk the timing up to circumstance. that's all it is, and there ain't no more to the story. my apologies to paul harvey.
 
This is sickening that this law would be passed, as it violates the basic unalienable rights of a human being. Obviously, the radical Christians who were fear mongering about homosexuals at the conference have some of the blame for what has happened, as it was their fear mongering that inflamed certain people's resentment toward gays, but most of the blame lies with the ones who put forth this law.
 
...Indeed.

Sorry, that's all I've got to say. I just watched most of the Wire for the first time and
Omar's death is still ringing with me. One of the best characters on any TV show. His testimony in the Bird case was his defining moment.

On topic, yeah this is terrible. Correlation doesn't always imply causation, but there is a strong correlation here.
 
They aren't seeing the results they want here in the states, so they take their message of hate and intolerance to unsuspecting Ugandans?

They must be feeling pretty defeated here at home.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Sorry, that's all I've got to say. I just watched most of the Wire for the first time and
Omar's death is still ringing with me. One of the best characters on any TV show. His testimony in the Bird case was his defining moment.
[/QUOTE]

"I got the shotgun. You got the briefcase. It's all in the game though, right?"
 
if the place you live in is already a shit hole why would you pass laws to actively make it worse?
 
[quote name='Strell']I learned about cause and effect in first grade. Amazing to see so many people who failed elementary school around here.[/QUOTE]

Clearly we need to blame elementary school for this debacle as well.
 
First time I heard of this, but I'm definitely interested in hearing what happens.

Although I'm sure that there are some people secretly hoping that this bill will pass.

Dunno. Maybe it's my hate for Christianity talking there.

Probably.

(I just honestly can't take the whole "Gay Agenda!" thing seriously, or anyone who thinks that it's some sort of real threat to the American people. Sorry, I guess.)
 
Sad thing is, if you took this story and replaced Muslim with Christian and the anti-homosexual legislation with burning Christian Bibles you'd be getting all kinds of "where are the moderate Muslims" posts from the religious right.
 
[quote name='camoor']Sad thing is, if you took this story and replaced Muslim with Christian and the anti-homosexual legislation with burning Christian Bibles you'd be getting all kinds of "where are the moderate Muslims" posts from the religious right.[/QUOTE]

What does that prove? The only reason nobody ever asks "where are the moderate Christians" in stories like this is because everyone knows the vocal majority already is.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']What does that prove? The only reason nobody ever asks "where are the moderate Christians" in stories like this is because everyone knows the vocal majority already is.[/QUOTE]

Your "vocal majority of moderate Christians" banded together to elect fundamentalist Christian crusader George W. Bush. Twice.
 
[quote name='camoor']Your "vocal majority of moderate Christians" banded together to elect fundamentalist Christian crusader George W. Bush. Twice.[/QUOTE]

oh cmon. george bush being elected to a second term had far more to do with terrorism and a weak democrat candidate than it did with some sort of fundamentalist christian movement.
 
Well, leave it to a budding politician to figure out a path to power and popularity. While I am an Atheist, there are some awesomely open-minded Christians out in the world, they just don't get a lot of press. Unfortunately, the ones that think Homosexuals have an Agenda other than not getting beat up in public, staying healthy, and living lives, do get most of the press.

So, that said, I think these Christians were used. I do think they played a role, and while it does not absolve them, I think it was not their intention to fan the flames of Violence. I think they were eager to preach their message, and while it could be called a message of hate, they were talking about a "cure". I bet people were more interested in hearing about how it was evil than a cure.

So, they have learned a lesson about agendas, lots of people have them. This does make me very sad, but I also see it as an opportunity for everyone to agree on non violence. The conference speakers should go back and speak against persecution, hanging, and life imprisonment. Can we get some nice Christians to hold a tolerance conference out there?

Oh, do we need to find a previously unknown politician who is looking for an angle first?

Also, both things played a role in Bush's popularity, I think we can agree on that. Kinda besides the point though.

-part time punk
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']What does that prove? The only reason nobody ever asks "where are the moderate Christians" in stories like this is because everyone knows the vocal majority already is.[/QUOTE]

Firstly, there's no vocal majority really, of any group, and the most vocal Christians aren't moderate. The vocal of ____ are rarely, if ever, moderate, because moderates generally aren't vocal (no matter how much they may think they're moderate, as most people seem to, regardless of their position on an issue), since they don't feel the need to be.

It doesn't have to do purely with who's vocal, people talk about Muslims speaking up against radical Muslims because they're othered and lumped together. They have to say that they're not radical fundamentalists while Christians are assumed not to be radical fundamentalists because most of the people asking the question are Christians who aren't (or don't think they are) radical fundamentalists. There could be crazy radical Christians on TV like there are crazy radical Muslims, but they still wouldn't be treated the same way.

It's just assumption, it's not based on much of anything other than the grouping the person puts themselves and others into. Obviously most Christians aren't trying to kill non-Christians and most Muslims aren't trying to kill non-Muslims, but it's the foreign/other aspect that makes people 1) underestimate the numbers of the other group and 2) label them all by the actions of a few. Which is why if you know more ____ people you're not going to be as likely to assume things about/dislike all ____ people.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Firstly, there's no vocal majority really, of any group, and the most vocal Christians aren't moderate. The vocal of ____ are rarely, if ever, moderate, because moderates generally aren't vocal (no matter how much they may think they're moderate, as most people seem to, regardless of their position on an issue), since they don't feel the need to be.

It doesn't have to do purely with who's vocal, people talk about Muslims speaking up against radical Muslims because they're othered and lumped together. They have to say that they're not radical fundamentalists while Christians are assumed not to be radical fundamentalists because most of the people asking the question are Christians who aren't (or don't think they are) radical fundamentalists. There could be crazy radical Christians on TV like there are crazy radical Muslims, but they still wouldn't be treated the same way.

It's just assumption, it's not based on much of anything other than the grouping the person puts themselves and others into. Obviously most Christians aren't trying to kill non-Christians and most Muslims aren't trying to kill non-Muslims, but it's the foreign/other aspect that makes people 1) underestimate the numbers of the other group and 2) label them all by the actions of a few. Which is why if you know more ____ people you're not going to be as likely to assume things about/dislike all ____ people.[/QUOTE]

Bingo.

Glad someone got the point, thanks Spazx.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']oh cmon. george bush being elected to a second term had far more to do with terrorism and a weak democrat candidate than it did with some sort of fundamentalist christian movement.[/QUOTE]

I do think the point about Dubya is significant though. Regardless of why he eventually got elected, someone thought it was a good idea to enter the primaries backing a dyed-in-wool close-minded fundamentalist Christian presidential candidate against a field of what were mostly religious moderates and they backed a winner. People in fundamentalist muslim countries often have their leaders forced upon them, but Dubya was a fundamentalist Christian leader who was chosen over a wide spectrum of other more moderate options. Twice.
 
[quote name='camoor']dyed-in-wool close-minded fundamentalist Christian presidential candidate[/QUOTE]

I was only 14 for that election so I don't remember a whole lot, but I really don't remember anybody talking about Bush's faith, and I was in the very religious deep south where little else mattered. I think the relevance of Bush's faith was diminished by his established ability to separate his own ideals from issues of governance. Abortion is really the only issue which he ever related to his faith and I think that much is excusable. If he had had a record of governance by faith, like Huckabee, I'd understand the quoted description... but as it stands I don't think that's a fair way to paint the 2000 election (and as RAM pointed out, especially not the 2004 election).
 
bread's done
Back
Top