Ugandan Leaders to Strategize Ways to Re-Enact Anti-Homosexuality Act

Jim Burroway

August 11th, 2014

Daily Monitor reports that the Parliamentary caucus of the National Resistance Movement, Uganda’s ruling party, will meet today to discuss the way forward for re-enacting the Anti-Homosexuality Act, which was nullified by the Constitutional Court just days before President Yoweri Museveni was to attend a White House dinner in Washington, D.C. Museveni has confirmed that he will attend the meeting, according to MP David Bahati, who sponsored the original bill in 2009. According to Daily Monitor, there is a great deal of impatience among some of the MPs to get the law back on the books:

These MPs want Parliament to put on hold the handling of the ongoing Budget process and first ensure the restoration of the anti-gays law. There is also a request to the Speaker for the suspension of the House rules of procedure to allow the Bill to be passed without going through all the lengthy phases.

The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kampala Cyprian Kizito Lwanga has reportedly given his support for the act.

Kampala is rife with rumors about how and why the AHA came to be struck down, especially since Ugandan courts are not known for acting with the kind of speed the Constitutional Court acted. The Ugandan magazine The Independent has a lengthy report outlining why they believe the law was nullified and Museveni’s options going forward. It’s hard to know how much stock to place in this report. None of the article’s sources are identified, and the point where the Independent discusses the judiciary’s independence — “No judge who opposes gay rights is ever appointed, according to those familiar with the process” — seems very unlikely. But it does show the kinds of rumors that are floating around Kampala.

Mark F.

August 11th, 2014

“The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kampala Cyprian Kizito Lwanga has reportedly given his support for the act.”

Surprise, surprise!


August 11th, 2014

Burroway and Kincaid –

Please take a break from posting historical notes which have already been posted a dozen times and instead do an analysis of the latest Regnerus survey on LGB and Christian attitudes towards sex and relationships. You guys were one of the first to take apart Regnerus and your multi-part analyses of other sham anti-gay research and talking points are what have made this blog an extremely valuable resource.

You need to get back to that greatness, and here’s the perfect opportunity:


Jim Burroway

August 11th, 2014

This comment is off topic, but I’ll address it anyway. First, I cannot “take apart” a brief commentary that doesn’t discuss methodology or sampling techniques, and wouldn’t even try to do so. Bue more broadly, what Regnerus seems to have “uncovered” is that people, including Christians, who support same-sex marriage tend to have a healthier laissez-faire attitude toward sexuality generally and tend to be less judgmental of how other people order their lives. I find neither alarming nor surprising. In fact, I’d be surprised if that weren’t the case. A broken clock can still be right twice a day. Unless I’m really missing something, the only thing I can see to watch out for would be the “slippery slope” argument, which he explicitely disavows in the Public Discourse piece and I think we can hold him to that. Besides, with majorities just south of 60% supporting SSM, it’s going to be a tall argument to convince those majorities that they now have to support polygamy, an argument that hasn’t gained any traction no matter how many times they try to bring it up.

That said, the real key would be how he defines “gay and lesbian Christians,” and “gay and lesbian non-Christians.” If I can ever get a copy of his study — and so far it does not appear to have been published — then I can maybe uncover something there. But until then, I don’t really have anything to look at just yet.


August 11th, 2014

I’m fine with the historical notes, which is something that very few other sites offer.

The BTB editors are volunteers; so, they get to choose what they want to write about.

Thomas, considering how important this is to you, why not do your own analysis of the Regnerus survey and publish it?

Jim Burroway

August 11th, 2014

Actually, Thomas’s suggestion was a good one. I didn’t take offense to it. If I can free the time, I may turn to it and give it a few more thoughts. But even if I do, it could probably be distilled in the comment I already posted.

Helen in Ireland

August 12th, 2014

Well, from the bits that I have seen Regnerus doesn’t have figures for heterosexual non – Christians, and my guess is that the figures for us are very similar to our LGBT friends. Not only that, the questions asked should be repeated to ask if the respondent would actually do any of those things themselves. My belief is that no matter how liberal the answer one gives with regards to non – interference in another person’s life or choices, it is very probable that you personally would not indulge in certain behavior (infidelity or polyamorous encounters).

Lynn David

August 12th, 2014

Lwanga is reversing his position? Or does he even remember that he came out against the bill back in 2009 or 2010? That earlier position was in line with Roman Catholic decrees.

Chris McCoy

August 13th, 2014

Lynn David,

It appears that Lwanga reversed his position back in 2012.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.


Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.