From Randy Thomas on the Exodus Blog [http://blog.exodusinternational.org/2009/10/19/ugandan-government-poised-to-harshly-prosecute-homosexuals/comment-page-1/#comment-1024]: I asked Don… about his thoughts on what is happening now in Uganda. He responded:

What this David Bahati is introducing does not reflect the Ugandans that I have ministered too. The only place where I have run into this thinking is from some former Russian hardliners and that was only a very small percentage of the participants attending my seminars. After some challenges from me (except for one person) they softened up and came around to a more redemptive position.

____________________________________

How does Schmierer’s statement compare with what one of his associates in Uganda, Stephen Langa of the Family Life Network, has been doing – after the conference Schmierer attended, for instance [http://www.monitor.co.ug/artman/publish/news/Homosexuality_threat_to_Ugandans_activists_83727.shtml]:

Activists against homosexuality in Uganda stormed parliament on Tuesday protesting against the practice and demanded a probe into the practice in the country. The activists who were holding banners denouncing the activity were led by the Family Life Network in conjunction with religious leaders.

The groups led by the Executive Director of Family Life Network, Mr Stephen Langa while handing over their petition to the Deputy Speaker, Ms Rebecca Kadaga said the Parliamentary select committee should also assess the extent of the damage homosexuality has caused to children and Ugandans.

…Mr Langa said the homosexuals under the group Sexual Minorities Uganda spend huge sums of money to recruit University students and those in secondary schools into homosexuality. They did not give details.

____________________________________

Another Uganda news outlet, UGPulse [http://www.ugpulse.com/articles/daily/news.asp?about=Civil%20society%20petitions%20Parliament%20over%20homosexuality%20vice&ID=9749], reported that Deputy Speaker Kadaga “promised to push for the amendment of Article 31 of the Constitution which prohibits homosexual marriages. Langa had earlier noted that the article prohibits gay marriages but not the actions.”The Daily Monitor’s article indicates that the group explained that they wanted the proposed amendment to be broadened to “openly prohibit homosexuality, bisexuality, transsexuality and other related practices.”
____________________________________

Then there was the time Langa sponsored a press conference in which another allegedly “former gay activist” Paul Kagaba accused a very popular Catholic priest and gospel singer, Fr. Anthony Musaala, of being gay.
____________________________________

The blogger GayUganda is has reported that Stephen Langa, the director of Family Life Network, spoke on Ugandan FM radio stations advocating the arrests of Ugandan LGBT leaders. [http://gayuganda.blogspot.com/2009/03/anti-gay-agenda.html]
____________________________________

Now how is it that these actions by Langa are not supportive of Bahati’s bill on homosexuality? Schmierer certainly didn’t “soften up” Langa and get him to “come around.”

… … …

I apologize to any person who may have gotten that impression that my words were Eddy’s. I did not intend to use punctuation to make it seem as though Eddy was saying something that I was saying.

I apologize for my sloppiness in my use of quotations. Here is what Eddy said:

A statement from EXODUS, if not thoughtfully and prayerfully constructed, could get EXODUS dismissed as just another agent of corruption closing any doors to having any impact in the future.

The following are MY words — not a quote from Eddy — but using some of his sentence structure and word choice to make MY point:

The failure or refusal by Exodus to issue an official statement condemning the Ugandand legisation could get EXODUS dismissed as just another agent of anti-gay corruption closing any doors to having any impact in the future — Michael Bussee

I am grateful Exodus took the risk.

That’s something that’s not proper by rules of the English language. (Read up on the rules for using quotation marks.) It’s unfair; it’s impolite; it’s misleading; it’s a waste of my time…I take my time when I post and I carefully consider my words. Having you follow me, respond to what I’ve said and then slightly alter my words while pretending it’s a quote…that’s an offense, especially in the sticky conversations we have here.

I note that you offered an explanation; I’ll continue to wait for the apology.

MY point was: If Exodus had not made this statement, the general public could dismiss Exodus as just another agent of “anti-gay”(my word, not Eddy’s) “corruption closing any doors to having any impact in the future”.

I was not quoting you, There were risks for Exodus either way. I was trying to point out that the dangers for Exodus NOT making the statement might be greater then the dangers of doing the good thing they did today.

I think we have lame excuse #8 — Uganda might think Exodus is light on sin. Uganda might think so no matter how thoughtfully and prayerfully Exodus expresses itself.

But how will Exodus look to the rest of the world if it does not? Exodus could get “dismissed as just another agent of anti-gay corruption, closing any doors to having any impact in the future.”

Exodus has put itself in a very tough spot. They are kinda damned if they do and damned if they don’t — but hey, they did this to themselves by not being more thoughtful and prayerful in the first place.

I believe I’ve endured this tackiness of yours long enough. Either have the courage to discuss your exceptions to my logic with me…rationally and point for point…or remain silent. This rephrasing and repackaging my content disrespects honest and truthful discussion. It certainly complicates it needlessly.

1) Did I say “light on sin”. No. My words went more to ‘being morally corrupt’. We’re dealing with cross-cultural understanding and misunderstandings here…why you feel the need to change my words is beyond me. (‘light on sin’ speaks to the issue of judgement; ‘morally corrupt’ speaks to being impaired and tarnished. There’s a difference even if you can’t see it.
2) Thoughtfully and prayerfully may be just a meaningless phrase to you…but, while prayer may only take minutes, thought (including research and seeking advice and counsel) can take days. I waited patiently several days…while I researched and while Debbie researched…and offered Alan more thoughtful advice than if I had written him on Friday or Saturday. Get over it. Thoughtful response isn’t a bad thing and thoughtfulness takes time.

WARREN: This next point warrants your attention

3) I request a formal apology for this one:

Exodus could get “dismissed as just another agent of anti-gay corruption, closing any doors to having any impact in the future.”

I’ve copied and pasted this from Michael’s post. The quotation marks are his…implying that this is a direct quote, not a paraphrase, of someone’s words. And, you’d think they were my words…except Michael added the words ‘anti-gay’ in front of ‘corruption’. It changes what I said; it distorts my meaning and it violates the ethics of quoting.

I know some folks here think I am trying to make Exodus look bad. Actually, the reverse is true. For Exodus to stand officially against this “sweeping, hateful, public policy” that “threatens anyone struggling with same sex attractions, and their loved ones, with death or imprisonment” is to Exodus’ credit. And I am glad, if it is Exodus’s official stand, that it did not take as long as I expected.

Now, we need similar statements from the other players — and I pray that Exodus ask them to join Exodus in its official and unequivocal denunciation of this legislation, about which Randy rightly observes: “It seems that the government has no respect for freedom. Especially as it pertains to free will or self-determination on what a person does with their own same sex attractions.