Box Turtle Bulletin

Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill Put Off Until 2010

Martin Ssempa

The anonymous blogger GayUganda steeled himself to watch an hour-long program on Uganda’s NBS television station featuring Pentecostal pastor Martin Ssempa. He was a guest on the talk show Barometer along with Member of Parliament Hon. David Bahati, who was the prime sponsor of the Anti-Homosexuality Act introduced into Parliament last week. According to GayUganda, the bill is scheduled to be brought back before Parliament in January 2010:

Oh, and I gathered from MP Bahati that the bill has been scheduled to be brought back in Jan 2010. Parliament was too busy, just now, to handle the important matter of the Anti- Homosexuality bill. Apparently it is very, very far ahead in the future, but that gives you time to check in with your MP and tell them how much you support the Bahati Bill.

As we have noted, the proposed bill not only reaffirms the penalty of lifetime imprisonment for homosexuality, but adds a category of “aggravated homosexuality” which imposes a death penalty on conviction. The bill also criminalizes all advocacy on behalf of LGBT citizens in Uganda, and imposes up to three years imprisonment for friends, family members and co-workers who do not report gay people to the police. It also contains extra-territorial and extradition clauses which extend the reach of Ugandan law to those citizens and permanent residents who enter into a same-sex marriage or participate otherwise in same-sex relationships or LGBT advocacy while outside the country.

GayUganda notes that Martin Ssempa has particularly menacing during the program, announcing that anyone who didn’t fully support the bill “actually support homosexuality.” This charge, given this year’s anti-gay vigilante campaigns, means that opposing the bill is not only political suicide, but quite possibly an act of physical suicide as well.

Martin Ssempa is a darling of many powerful American evangelicals, including Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church. Ssempa also played a key role in the forced “outing” of prominent Ugandans — regardless of whether they were actually gay or not. In particular, Ssempa took the opportunity of the anti-gay hysteria to accuse another popular rival pastor of homosexuality, a charge that was investigated by police and found lacking. But they did find evidence that Ssempa and other pastors were manufacturing “evidence” to get back at rivals.

Click here to see BTB\’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

A Simple Anglican/Catholic Proposal

The Vatican has announced that they have set up a special structure in which disaffected Anglicans and their clergy can become Roman Catholics while keeping their married priests, the Anglican liturgy and Book of Common Prayer. The Vatican wants to woo Anglicans who are angry over the church’s acceptance of women and gay clergy and the blessings of same-sex unions.

This news reportedly was sprung on Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury and head of the Anglican Communion, just hours before it was made public. Archbishop Rowan tried to put a positive spin on the move, calling it an “end to uncertainty for such groups who have nurtured hopes of new ways of embracing unity with the Catholic Church.”

But I think this represents an interesting pathway that could be a two-way street. After all, there are many disaffected Catholics (myself included) who find great comfort in the Roman liturgy and customs, a deeply felt comfort and meaning that, to us, the Anglican liturgy and the Book of Common Prayer just can’t approach. I don’t mean this as a knock against Anglican traditions. The Vatican move recognizes the deep fondness dissafected Anglicans hold for their familiar Anglican rite and makes room for it within Roman Catholicism. But the same is true both ways: the Roman Missal embodies all of our cherished touchstones just as the Anglican liturgy and customs embodies theirs.

So why not set up a similar structure within the Anglican Communion where disaffected Catholics can continue to worship using the great historical richness of the Roman liturgy and customs while simultaneously entering the 21st century?

Sen. Vitter Won’t Comment on JP’s Denial of Interracial Marriage

Sen. David Vitter (Ted Jackson, New Orleans Times-Picayune)

You’d think that denouncing the Louisiana Justice of the Peace who refused to marry an interracial couple would be the easiest thing in the world to do.  The easiest — even in Louisiana, where virtually every other major elected public official has done so. I mean after all, Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruling has made interracial marriages legal in all fifty states — that includes Louisiana — for 42 years now. This isn’t controversial anymore, right?

Well it may not be for everyone else on the planet, but Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) isn’t ready to be pinned down. He not only won’t go on the record, and he can’t believe that every other major Louisiana elected official has. I guess he wants to keep his options open. You know, wait and see which way the wind blows:

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal (R) and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) both want JP Keith Bardwell out, and Tangipahoa Parish President Gordon Burgess has called for his resignation. Vitter, on the other hand, smiles and nervously ducks inside an elevator.

New Washington Ref 71 Ad

Charlene Strong’s partner Kate Fleming, died in 2006. While Kate was in the hospital, Charlene was initially denied access to see her. This is why approving Washington’s Referendum 71 is so important, and it’s why it’s important that this ad goes on the air.  Please do your part today.

Maine’s Q1 “Yes” Spokesman Admits to Lying

Protect Maine Equality has a new ad:

Meanwhile, Maine Public Broadcasting got an amazing admission from Marc Mutty of Stand for Marriage Maine:

We understand that schools will not be mandated to provide one curriculum or another, but neither will they be discouraged or will they be unable to provide the kind curriculum that they so choose that well could include teaching about same-sex marriage.

… We have never said that schools will be mandated — or, actually, perhaps we did in one ad, or certainly led people to believe that, inadvertently.

Give me a break. These ads are focus-grouped to within an inch of their lives. These people do nothing inadvertently. In fact, they are following Frank Shubert’s playbook to the letter. The Maine Public Broadcasting report was right to say that the “No on 1” side “veered off message” to address the lies behind Stand for Marriage Maine’s latest ad. This is one of my beefs with the Protect Maine Equality campaign. They are still letting the anti-equality side drive the agenda, and they have yet to put them on the defensive.

Mutty also told Maine Public Broadcasting that they will be branching out into new topics — again, straight out of their playbook. In the last days of California’s Prop 8 campaign, they circulated materials that implied that then-candidate Barack Obama backed Prop 8’s passage. Last week, we saw the President and the White House issue important statements opposing ballot measures to strip LGBT people of their rights. Will Protect Maine Equality use those statements pre-emptively? Or will they wait until Stand for Marriage Maine calls out the next dance card?

We certainly can’t say we didn’t see it coming.

By the way, I donated so I get to bellyache. You can donate too, right here, or you can volunteer.

Supreme Ct. Justice Blocks Release of Ref 71 Petition Names

Last week we reported that a three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals authorized the state of Washington to release the namesof those who signed the petition to put Referendum 71 on the ballot. Today, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy temporarily blocked the release while considering a request from Protect Marriage Washington to reverse the appeals court ruling.

Protect Marriage Washington had circulated a petition to put Washington’s Domestic Partnership Registry before the voters. If Referendum 71 passes, the Domestic Partnership Registry will be preserved. In September, U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle temporarily barred state officials from releasing the identities of those who signed the referendum petitions, saying that releasing the names could chill the First Amendment rights of petition signers. The Appeals court disagreed, saying that the petition process is a legislative process that is subject to the state’s open records laws.

Take Action: Tell Uganda To Respect Human Rights And Dismiss the Anti-Homosexuality Bill

The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission has issued an Action Alert, asking everyone to write to the Ugandan authorities to express your concern about their latest attempts to criminalize homosexuality and institute the death sentence in certain circumstances.

According to the text of the bill introduced in the Ugandan Parliament last week, the new law would:

• Reaffirm the lifetime sentence currently provided upon conviction of homosexuality, and extends the definition from sexual activity to merely “touch[ing] another person with the intention of committing the act of homosexuality.”
• Create a new category of “aggravated homosexuality” which provides for the death penalty for “repeat offenders” and for cases where the individual is HIV-positive.
• Criminalizes all speech and peaceful assembly for those who advocate on behalf of LGBT citizens in Uganda with fines and imprisonment of between five and seven years.
• Criminalizes the act of obtaining a same-sex marriage abroad with lifetime imprisonment.
• Adds a clause which forces friends or family members to report LGBT persons to police within 24-hours of learning about that individual’s homosexuality or face fines or imprisonment of up to three years.
• Adds an extra-territorial and extradition provisions, allowing Uganda to prosecute LGBT Ugandans living abroad.

According to the IGLHRC, the bill’s impacts are wide-ranging:

The bill effectively bans any kind of community or political organizing around non-heteronormative sexuality. It will lend itself to misapplication and abuse, and implicitly encourages persecution of LGBT people by private actors. HIV prevention activities in Uganda, which rely on an ability to talk frankly about sexuality and provide condoms and other safer-sex materials, will be seriously compromised. Women, sex workers, people living with AIDS, and other marginalized groups may also find their activities tracked and criminalized through this bill.

The IGLHRC provides contact information (email and phone numbers, where available) and a sample letter. You can also send a letter to Exodus, the International Healing Foundation, and Abiding Truth Ministries, as well as  and demand that they speak out on the latest outrage which stems from their representatives’ participation in a three-day anti-gay conference in Kampala. The currently proposed anti-homosexuality bill is a direct result of that conference put on by Exodus International board member Don Schmierer, Abiding Truth Ministry’s Scott Lively, and International Healing Foundation’s Caleb Lee Brundidge. For more information on the role their activists played in this latest outrage, please see the links to our coverage at the end of this post.

Please send your letter to:

President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni
State House Nakasero
email: info@statehouse.go.ug

Prime Minister Apollo Nsibambi
email: ps@opm.go.ug

Speaker of the Parliament
Edward Ssekandi Kiwanuka
email: speaker@parliament.go.ug

Minister of Gender, Labour, and Social Affairs
Honorable Opio Gabriel
email: ps@mglsd.go.ug

Chair of the Uganda Human Rights Commission
Med Kaggwa
email: uhrc@uhrc.ug

Directorate for Ethics and Integrity
email: info@dei.go.ug

Chair of the Uganda Diplomatic Human Rights Working Groups
Mathisen Gørild
email: gorild.mathisen@mfa.no

Please also send a copy to:
Ambassador to the Republic of Uganda Embassy of the United States of America
Jerry P. Lanier
email: kampalawebcontact@state.gov

IGLHRC
email: communications+action.alert@iglhrc.org

Send an email and fax to:
Ambassador to the US
Perezi K. Kamunanwire
Fax: 1-202-726-1727
email: pkamunanwire@ugandaembassyus.org

Dr. Ruhakana Rugunda
Permanent Representative of the Republic of Uganda to the United Nations
336 East 45 Street
New York, NY 10017
Tel: 1-212-949-0110
Fax: 1-212-687-4517
email: ugandaunny@un.int

Sample Letter

Your Excellencies:

I am writing to express concern about legislation that would severely restrict the rights of Ugandan citizens, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people and their defenders, in direct contravention of domestic and international law. The Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 would not only reaffirm penalties for homosexuality, but would criminalize the “promotion of homosexuality,” including funding and sponsoring LGBT organizations and broadcasting, publishing, or marketing materials on homosexuality. Any person in authority who fails to report known violations of the law within 24 hours will also be subject to a significant fine and up to 3 years in prison – even when this means turning in their colleagues, family, or friends.

The negative repercussions of the bill in Uganda will be immediate and severe. It effectively bans the free association and expression that are necessary for a flourishing civil society, and creates a climate of fear and hostility that undermines the citizenship and solidarity of all Ugandans. It will lend itself to misapplication and abuse, and implicitly encourages persecution of LGBT people by private actors. Effective HIV prevention activities in Uganda, which rely on an ability to talk frankly about sexuality and provide condoms and other safer-sex materials, will be difficult, if not impossible.

The Anti-Homosexuality Bill violates National Objective 5(2) of the Ugandan Constitution, which provides that “the State shall guarantee and respect the independence of non-governmental organizations which protect and promote human rights.” Moreover, it directly violates the right to equality and freedom from discrimination (Article 21), the right to privacy (Article 27), the right to freedoms of speech, expression, association, and assembly (Article 29), the protection of minorities (Article 36), and the protection of civic rights and activities (Article 38) to which all Ugandans are entitled. It also violates the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and other international human rights treaties to which Uganda is a party. This bill undermines Uganda’s commitment to the international human rights regime and threatens the basic human rights of all its citizens.

The Bill’s revocation of fundamental rights would also seriously undermine the country’s reputation and credibility in the international arena. Because it claims jurisdiction over Ugandans who violate its provisions while outside of the country, the Bill will strain Uganda’s relations with regional and international partners.

While people may hold differing opinions about sexual orientation and gender identity, the legislation before Parliament is an ineffective and fundamentally illegal way to express opposition to a minority group. In recognition of the importance of a diverse, dynamic civil society and the domestic and international commitments that Uganda has made, I urge you to swiftly dismiss the Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 and reaffirm the rights and responsibilities of all Ugandans.

Truly yours,
Name:
Organization:
Country:

Click here to see BTB\’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

Uganda’s Daily Monitor: All Ugandans Should Fear Anti-Homosexuality Bill

While the three American anti-gay activist and Exodus International are either too cowardly or callous to speak out against the latest proposed Anti-Homosexuality bill before Uganda’s Parliament, the opposition newspaper The Daily Monitor today raises its voice on behalf of the defenseless. Everyone in Uganda well knows the abject terror of the nighttime knock on the door, and The Monitor reminds all of us of the legacy behind Uganda’s latest drive to add the death penalty for homosexuality:

Do you know the fear which arrives with the knock on the door in the middle of the night? If you were an outspoken opponent of any government from 1962 until today you felt it even if it never happened to you. Do you know the terror of women who lived through the civil war in Luweero or LRA atrocities in the north? They went out every day knowing they faced rape and murder, suffering because they were women.

If you are a gay man or woman living in Uganda today, then you carry the same burden of persecution for your identity. You risk death or torture or public humiliation at the hands of a community blinded by hate and religious dogma. Your plight is about to worsen, since another bill making you illegal will soon pass into law.

Gay people are not the only ones who should fear the new bill criminalising homosexuality. Measures which make who you are a crime are easy to manipulate. It\’s easy to persecute gay people in Uganda because they are a very small group which has no political or mainstream social support.

If you think those two groups deserve what they get, then recall the days not so long ago when you felt unfairly targeted for what you are. The last 47 years were not kind to many of us. So it is astonishing that we seem to have learned nothing about the importance of diversity to stability and development.

Uganda’s latest bid to terrorize that country’s LGBT citizens is being facilitated by the conspiracy of silence from Exodus board member Don Schmierer, Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively, and the International Healing Founation’s Caleb Brundidge. It was their three-day anti-gay conference in Kampala last March which started this mess. But with Uganda’s bloody history during the Idi Amin era, the current reign of terror by with the Lord’s Resistance Army, and the government’s ongoing repressive policies pitting one ethnic group against another (policies which led to widespread riots on Kampala last month), these three Americans are feeding at the trough of a long and troubling legacy. After nine months, their silence can mean only one thing: assent. Bloody assent. Very soon, the bloodstains will no longer wash off.

Click here to see BTB\’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

The Real Reason they don’t like Kevin Jennings

A group of 53 Republican congressmen sent a letter to President Obama asking him to fire Kevin Jennings from his job running the Education Department’s Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. No, there are no surprises on the list.

The congressmen lay out four reasons why they oppose Jennings, with the first one serving as their primary objection. And the real reason why they don’t like Kevin Jennings is… wait for it… because HE’S GAY!!!

Well, actually, it’s because he’s a homosexual activist. But, then again, so is every single gay person who isn’t masquerading as a doormat.

As the founder of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), Mr. Jennings has played an integral role in promoting homosexuality and pushing a pro-homosexual agenda in America\’s schools—an agenda that runs counter to the values that many parents desire to instill in their children. As evidence of this, Mr. Jennings wrote the foreword for a book titled Queering Elementary Education: Advancing the Dialogue About Sexualities and Schooling. Throughout his career, Mr. Jennings has made it his mission to establish special protections for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered students to the exclusion of all other students. The totality of Mr. Jennings\’ career has been to advocate for public affirmation of homosexuality. There is more to safe and drug free schools than can be accomplished from the narrow view of Mr. Jennings who has, for more than 20 years, almost exclusively focused on promoting the homosexual agenda.

Translation: “He’s gay, gay, gay, gay, gay, gay, gay!”

They also object to:

Two: The now debunked Brewster misinterpretation:

Mr. Jennings recounts a 15-year old student confiding in him that he had a sexual relationship with a much older man… Mr. Jennings\’ only response was to ask if the underage boy used a condom.

Those of us who bother to care about honesty will note that even if one were to pretend that the story was supposed to be strictly factual rather than allegorical in nature, Jennings never said the man was “much older” or “And that’s all I ever told him.” And I’m sure they forgot to note that Brewster himself told us that he wasn’t having sex.

Ah but honest concern is seldom a real component of anti-gay outrage.

Three: a failure to oppose drugs

In his memoir, Mama\’s Boy, Preacher\’s Son, Mr. Jennings describes his use of illegal drugs, without expressing regret or acknowledging the devastating effects illegal drug use can have on a person\’s life.

I will give the benefit of the doubt and assume none of them actually read the book. Otherwise they’d know that the “illegal drugs” they reference was a single sentence about smoking pot once with a boy who was a bad influence during a period when Jennings was desperately trying to fit in.

But that doesn’t fit their agenda quite so well

And lest you think that either of these two additional “concerns” are central to their objection, they close with the following:

You should replace him with someone who has a record of educating children in a safe and moral environment. [emphasis added]

In other words, someone who isn’t gay.

CDC: “Down Low” Men Not Responsible For HIV Among Black Women

African-American women make up 61% of all new HIV cases among women in the U.S., and they are 18 times more likely to become infected than White women. Until now, it was believed that this exceptionally high infection rate was due to bisexual African-American men. But a new statement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention throws cold water on that theory:

Heterosexual black men with multiple sex partners — not bisexual men who secretly have sex with men — are responsible for high rates of HIV among black women, according to a senior CDC official.

“We have looked to see what proportion of infections is coming from male partners who are bisexual and found there are actually relatively few,” said Dr. Kevin Fenton, director of the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention. “More are male partners who are having female partners and are injecting drugs or using drugs or have some other risks that may put those female partners at risk of acquiring HIV.”

…”What we\’re seeing is a concentration of the epidemic among the poor, among ethnic minorities and racial minorities in the United States,” Fenton said.

Among gay men, African-Americans are bearing a disproportionate brunt of HIV infections. In the most tragic example, Black teens make up only 13% of the nation’s teen population but they account for 69% of new HIV/AIDS cases for those among the 13-19 age group.

White House Opposes Anti-Gay Ballot Measures

Kerry Eleveld at The Advocate is reporting that the White House has come out against efforts in Maine and Washington state to strip LGBT Americans their marriage and partnership rights:

In response to an inquiry from The Advocate, the White House issued the following statement regarding President Barack Obama\’s position on same-sex relationship recognition voter referenda in Maine and Washington.

“The President has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples, and as he said at the Human Rights Campaign dinner, he believes ‘strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away.\’ Also at the dinner, he said he supports, ‘ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country.\'”

Update: This statement builds on what President Barack Obama said at the HRC dinner last weekend:

Will we uphold the ideals on which this nation was founded:  that all of us are equal, that all of us deserve the same opportunity to live our lives freely and pursue our chance at happiness?  I believe we can; I believe we will. And that is why I support ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country.   I believe strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away and passing laws that extend equal rights to gay couples.

Buju Banton: “No End To the War Between Me and Gays”

Back row, L - R: Buju's PR rep Jonathan Mack, SF Supervisor Bevan Dufty, Andrea Shorter of Equality California, Eric Mar, Rebecca Rolfe and Tracii McGregor of Gargamel Music. Front row, LGBT activist Michael Petrelis and Buju Banton.

So much for dialog. Buju Banton, speaking by telephone to a Jamaican talk show, completely disavowed his meeting with three California LGBT activists, saying he will not “surrender” to the group’s proposals, claiming they would contradict his “religion and culture”:

“This is a fight, and as I said in one of my songs ‘there is no end to the war between me and faggot’ and it’s clear. The same night after I met with them (gay associates), they pepper-sprayed the concert. So what are you trying to tell me?” claimed Banton who phoned Mutabaruka’s Cutting Edge talk-show on Wednesday in order to clarify his meeting in the US gay capital. “I owe dem nothing, they don’t owe I nothing.”

…”Them come with demands which I and I a go flop dem right now, because give thanks to my culture and upbringing I coulda never endorse them things. I can’t sell myself out, neither would I do that in a thousand years,” he continued. “I love everyone in the world. I don’t love no special group from another group. There are other needy organisations out there.”

It looks like Peter Tatchell was right. J-FLAG is was skeptical about the meeting as well.

[Hat tip: GLBTQ Jamaica]

Does Exodus Support Criminalizing Homosexuality?

Scores of Human Rights activists around the world have publicly denounced Uganda’s proposed anti-homosexuality bill which, in addition to lifetime imprisonment for those convicted of homosexuality, adds the death penalty for those who are HIV-positive. It also criminalizes all advocacy on behalf of LGBT citizens in Uganda, and contains an extra-territorial clause which extends the long arm of Ugandan “justice” to LGBT Ugandans abroad. Reading the text of the bill, it’s hard to imagine anyone crafting a worse piece of legislation.

L-R: Don Schmierer, Scott Lively, Caleb Lee Brundidge

The three Americans who kicked off this latest spasm of anti-gay hostility have really outdone themselves. This whole thing started last March when Exodus board member Don Schmierer, Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively, and Caleb Lee Brundidge of Richard Cohen’s International Healing Foundation conducted a three-day anti-gay conference in Uganda. Schmierer was there as the “ex-gay expert.” The result of that conference was the initiation of an anti-gay task force calling for strengthening Uganda’s already draconian anti-homosexuality laws. It also unleashed a wave of anti-gay vigilantism which led to arrests, torture, blackmail and ruined careers. According to Sexual Minorities Uganda, it has also led to several deaths, including the death of Brian Pande at Mbale Hospital as he awaited trial. And it has led to where we are today, with Parliament Wednesday giving first reading to this new proposal to effectively ban all freedoms — even the freedom to exist — for LGBT people and those who would support them and provide safe haven.

While human rights activists around the world have been quick to raise their voices for the defenseless, one might ask where’s Exodus in all this? Early signs indicate that you needn’t bother looking. Exodus Vice President Randy Thomas left a comment on Warren Throckmorton’s blog in which, speaking strictly for himself and not on behalf of Exodus, he condemned the proposed bill. It’s interesting that he can only say this speaking strictly for himself. Would Exodus be willing to say the same thing officially? Will they try to tamp down the wildfire their own board member helped to ignite? Thomas says don’t count on it:

Not sure that a statement from Exodus will happen. As for the past, Don never needed our permission to spend his own money to attend a non-Exodus conference to talk about topics from his books. He is one of the most caring people I have ever met and am glad those folks had a kind person to minister to them. That said I\’ll be praying for doors to open for ways to try and speak love and redemption into what is obviously a very hostile environment.

This is a cop out. They knew about the conference long before it took place, when it was still possible to do something about it. And since then, they’ve tried every way they knew how to wash their hands of their board member’s handiwork. And they’ve refused to address the situation in Uganda where it really matters — in Uganda. This isn’t beyond their facility to do so. Uganda media has telephones, fax machines and email just like everyone else, and Don Schmierer has contacts over there. Exodus is not helpless or without resources.

And Exodus leaders certainly aren’t incapable of raising their voice when they want to. Anyone following Exodus International knows that this is not a shy outfit. We know well that they are very eager to have their voices heard on issues they really care about. They quickly went on record as being “troubled” by the ELCA’s vote to affirm same-sex relationships. On something like that they have no problem whatsoever finding their voice, loud and clear. Obviously, the decisions of a church to minister to those who are comfortable with their same-sex attractions — a decision which has no impact to conversion therapy or ministry to those who are “struggling with unwanted same-sex attractions” — is something that Exodus nevertheless cares deeply about.

But ask them to take responsibility for their own handiwork in Uganda, and we get unofficial excuses, denials, and crocodile tears. But no official statement, even though, according to Sexual Minorities Uganda, Exodus already has blood on its hands. And Exodus may well end up with more blood on their hands when the first HIV-positive gay person is executed by the Ugandan government.

Does Exodus Support Criminalizing Homosexuality?
Exodus’ silence is puzzling. But as disturbing as this silence is, it is in keeping with Exodus’ pattern of saying one thing to one audience and saying something else (or keeping silent) for another audience. And we see this whenever the subject of criminalizing homosexuality comes up.

For example, Alan Chambers told the American publication The Christian Post that Exodus doesn’t support Uganda’s policy of criminalizing homosexuality. He added that “neither Schmierer nor the ministry agrees or endorses Uganda\’s criminalization of homosexuality law, imprisonment of homosexuals or compulsory therapy.”

That’s great as far as it goes. But this statement appeared in one specific forum to one specific audience concerning one specific set of circumstances. Uganda’s current law, which provides for lifetime imprisonment for those convicted of homosexuality, ought to be an easy law to denounce. So good on them for doing so. But they did it to that limited American Evangelical audience only, addressing only this particular set of circumstances. There was no attempt to make their position known to leaders in Uganda, not even to the evangelical Ugandan leaders who hosted the conference where the three Americans spoke. That’s where the message counts, not on the pages of the Christian Post.

So what if someone who hadn’t seen the Christian Post article wanted to know if Exodus supports criminalizing homosexuality? One would hope that the simple answer is no. And to find that simple answer, a natural place to look might be on Exodus’ own web site. But it turns out that the answer is not that simple, and perhaps not that “no” we were hoping for. It turns out that when one searches Exodus’ web site, one is left with the distinct impression that Exodus actually supports criminalization — at least as it existed in the U.S. before the Supreme Court struck down anti-sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas.

I have found only two statements on the Exodus web site related to criminalizing homosexuality, and both are reactions to the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision. In this “News Media Highlights,” Randy Thomas posted excerpts from “one who believes sodomy to be a sin and is directed to people who share that belief.” Thomas quotes the reaction of that unnamed writer with no further comment:

If the Supreme Court does repeal these laws, it will rob citizens, of all beliefs, the opportunity to enter their voice into the public record over this issue. Yet on the same hand it is this writers conviction that sodomy laws work against our redemptive witness.

So clearly that unnamed writer that Thomas quoted was against the Lawrence v. Texas ruling. But what about Exodus themselves? The only other statement I could find, this one quoting Alan Chambers, is equally negative:

As a result of today’s ruling, young people will be led into further confusion. Alan chambers [sic] states, “Our young people are not going to grow up under the same teachings about morality that we did. The school books will simply state that homosexuality was legitimized by the Supreme Court on June 26, 2003. We are risking the moral upbringing of all the generations to come. …”

Unfortunately, the political pendulum could swing harshly the other way. Americans of all conservative faiths are facing a serious problem; now that this decision damages the traditional view of sexuality and relationships, progay initiatives across the country will gain momentum. People of faith could potentially experience marginalization if we do not implement loving concern and active civic involvement.

Why won’t Exodus Speak Up Where It Matters Most?
So the question remains: What is Exodus International’s position on the criminalization of LGBT people? And if their position is any different from these two examples posted on their official web site — as Alan Chambers implied in the Christian Post — then why can’t they just say so on their own web site?

And more pressing, why can’t they raise their voice in Uganda? They ought to be able to do that pretty easily. After all, their own board member has some pretty powerful contacts over there.

One possible explanation for Exodus’ silence — and if this is true, then it means that they are far more petty than anyone can imagine — is that they don’t want to be seen as caving to “gay-identified activists.” But look at what’s happening. This isn’t some comparatively petty culture war over employment non-discrimination legislation or Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. We’re talking about a very real and imminent matter of life and death in Uganda. At some point, if Exodus had an ounce of integrity or a smidgen of conscience, they would have to see that it’s time to suck it up, drop the defensive ego trip, screw whatever the “gay-identified activists” might say and do what they know in their hearts what needs to be done to try to fix what Schmierer helped break.

But so far — and you don’t know how eager I am to be proven wrong in this! — it looks like they have neither the integrity nor conscience. Their silence — or their actions; it’s their choice — will tell us everything we need to know about their character. Everything.

Click here to see BTB\’s complete coverage of recent anti-gay developments in Uganda.

Buju Banton’s Cancelled LA Show Rebooked On the Downlow?

That’s what seems to have happened:

Jamaican Reggae star Buju Banton, whose upcoming performance in Los Angeles was initially canceled after outcry over his homophobic lyrics, may be slated to perform Thursday night.

A woman speaking for Hollywood’s Cabana Club told Advocate.com on Thursday that the event had yet to be confirmed — five hours before the scheduled start time, 9 p.m. However, the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center has announced it will be holding a silent protest in front of the club on Thursday.

Banton’s North American tour has experienced multiple cancellations over the past few months as LGBT activists have protested his music advocating the murder of gay people. On Monday, LGBT advocates Michael Petrelis, San Francisco Supervisor Bevan Dufty, EQCA\’s Andrea Shorter met with Banton and pressed him with several ideas on how to diffuse the controversy. Despite the fact that Banton rejected every suggestion out of hand, the LGBT advocates hailed it as a “good first step.” Karen Ocamb found that hard to take:

And now that photo op, glowing press from the SF Weekly, and a few quotes from Dufty and Petrelis about how this was a “good first step” are being used by Banton\’s PR team to put a crack in the wall of what up to this point has been a successful boycott with promoters cancelling concerts.  That pictures made newspapers, TV stations and blogs from South Miami to Jamaica.

News of the meeting met with glowing reviews from The Jamaica Gleaner and the Jamaica Observer, which asks “Buju Breaks Under Pressure?” The clear message in both articles is for Banton to hold firm.

Karen Ocamb asked UK activist Peter Taschell for comment on the meeting. Tatchell has been at the forefront of the long-running campaign to stop murder music by asking artists to sign the Reggae Compassionate Act. Tatchell reports that Banton signed the document in 2007, only to repudiate it in the weeks following.  In the email to Ocamb, Tatchell described the photo-op as “a big propaganda victory for Banton”:

Despite their reported failure to secure anything from Banton, LGBT activists agreed to allow his concert at the Rock It Room to go ahead. If true, I am stunned that Banton\’s demand for a concert was conceded in exchange for nothing tangible from him.

…This meeting is a big propaganda victory for Banton. He can now use it to show that he has dialogue with the LGBT community. It will be ruthlessly exploited by his management to undermine the LGBT campaign and the concert cancellations.

Meanwhile, Banton’s tour continues:

• Oct 15: Los Angeles, CA: Rescheduled at the Cabana Club. If you’re in the LA area, the protest is tonight at 1439 Ivar Ave, Los Angeles.
• Oct 17: Solana Beach (San Diego), CA: Still on at the Belly Up,  (858) 481-8040, emails for management and booking: booking@bellyup.com, production@bellyup.com, meryl@bellyup.com, beth@bellyup.com. A protest is being organized at the club Saturday night, at 143 S. Cedros Ave, Solana Beach.
• Oct 19: Albuquerque, NM: Still on at the Sunshine Theater, 505-764-0249.
• Oct 20: Dallas, TX: Still on at the Palm Beach Reggae Club, (214) 742-4743. This is surprising, as the club is located in the heart of the progressive and hip Deep Ellum neighborhood.
• Oct 21: Austin, TX: Still on at the Flamingo Cantina, (512) 494-9336.
• Oct 22: Houston, TX: Canceled.
• Oct 22: Katy, TX: Still on at The Red Zone, (281) 391-1155.
• Oct 24: Atlanta, GA: Still on at Center Stage, (404) 885-1365, emails for management and booking: chad@rivalentertainment.com, lucy@rivalentertainment.com, brandon@rivalentertainment.com.
• Oct 27: Charleston, SC: Canceled.
• Oct 28: West Melbourne, FL: NEW SHOW scheduled at Levelz, (321) 409-5385, info@levelznightclub.com.
• Oct 29: Jacksonville, FL: Still on at Plush, (904) 743-1845.
• Oct 30: Tampa, FL: Canceled.
• Oct 30: St. Petersburg, FL: NEW SHOW scheduled at Janus Landing Courtyard, (727) 896-2276.
• Oct 31: Miami, FL: Still on at Reggae Bash 2009 at the James L. Knight center, along with fellow murder music performer Beenie Man. This concert is sponsored by FM103.5 The Beat.
• Nov 1: Orlando, FL: Still on at Club Destiny, (407) 351-9800, Fax (407) 351-9803.

Names of Ref 71 Petition Signers To Be Made Public

A three-member panel of the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals has reversed a decison by U.S. district judge who blocked the release of the names of those who signed the petitions putting Referendum 71 on the Washington Ballot. Referrendum 71 asks voters to approve or reject Washington’s domestic partnership law.

Washington’s Public Records Act requires names of petitions to be part of the public record. Last month, Judge Ben Settle in Tacoma set aside that law and approved Protect Marriage Washington’s request to keep the names hidden. Washington’s Atturney General’s Office argued that the law is important to ensure transparency in government and the release of these records is a vital part of that transparency.