5 responses

  1. Scott
    February 13, 2012

    Laws such as this eventually lead to the destruction of the culture. You are indeed looking at Germany in the lead up to WWII. Once the upper echelons of the government are accused, it will all come to a sad end.

    And they WILL be accused.
    And it will end sadly.

  2. Timothy Kincaid
    February 13, 2012

    I noted an oddity. Bisexual is defined by attraction, while gay, homosexual, and lesbian are all defined by acts. I wonder how that came to be.

  3. TrogL
    February 13, 2012

    The death penalty provision has been removed in word only. The provision has been replaced with a reference to another piece of legislation whose penalty is death.

  4. Jim Burroway
    February 13, 2012

    TrogL

    Actually, the death penalty provision hasn’t even been removed in word only yet. It was only a recommendation, one that has not been acted on. You do however have the recommendation right. I hope to have more on that tomorrow.

    Timothy,
    I hadn’t noticed that. I noticed that “bisexual” was defined but not referenced anywhere else in the bill. I suspect they are less threatened by bisexuals because, in their imagination, bi’s can always marry/sleep with the opposite sex. It’s almost as if bi’s were some sort of afterthought in this bill.

    Another point: the earlier draft contained ex-gay language in the prologue (wonder where they got that from?):

    This legislation further recognizes the fact that same sex attraction is not an innate and immutable characteristic and that people who experience this mental disorder can and have changed to a heterosexual orientation. It also recognizes that because homosexuals are not born that way, but develop this disorder based on experiences and environmental conditions, it is preventable, especially among young people who are most vulnerable to recruitment into the homosexual lifestyle.

    (Only a truncated portion of that first sentence remained in the prologue of the bill when it was introduced in Parliament.)

    Of course, it is very nearly ex-gay dogma that there are no such things as homosexuals, just “heterosexuals with homosexual problems”. In other words, homosexuality is an act, not an innate characteristic of a person. For some, the existence of bisexuals proves the point. Illogical, I know. But you only have to look at the right’s reaction to Cynthia Nixon to see how that plays out.

  5. Dennis W
    February 20, 2012

    Jim, “It also recognizes that because homosexuals are not born that way, but develop this disorder based on experiences and environmental conditions, it is preventable, especially among young people who are most vulnerable to recruitment into the homosexual lifestyle.”

    Reading this statement makes me wonder if the law in Uganda has any provision to hold parents of young people, schools, Churches or other social systems accountable for creating the experiences or environmental conditions that make people homosexual?

    Should not all of the people in these systems be prosecuted for creating homosexuals? After all, if homosexuality is not an innate characteristic of a person they must have learned this from somewhere.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

Back to top
mobile desktop