The supporters of Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009 often say that restrictions are needed on homosexuality because gays seek to recruit children into sex. I asked Val Kalende for a comment on these allegations and she sent this statement in the form of an official policy statement.
Note that this statement makes clear that the homosexual community as represented by this statement oppose coercion and recruitment of children into sexual activities. Also note that existing law punishes those who engage in sexual activities with minors, whether the offense is against a girl or a boy. These persons agree with the need to impose penalties on sexual abuse and exploitation of minors.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
FREEDOM AND ROAM UGANDA STATEMENT ON SEXUAL ABUSE AND EXPLOITATION OF MINORS.
Our movement recognizes violence, harassment and sexual abuse of minors as violation of human rights. As a movement of people who stand for social justice, we express profound dismay at any form of sexual abuse whether hetero or homosexual.
We share Hon. David Bahati’s desires as expressed in the preamble of Bill 18:
- To strengthen the nation’s capacity to deal with emerging internal and external threats to the family unit. It is nevertheless important to point out that most of these can hardly be realized through the regulatory mechanism of the law.
- To protect the cherished culture of the people of Uganda, particularly the positive aspects of it.
- To protect Ugandan children and youth who are vulnerable to sexual abuse and exploitation—whether hetero or homosexual.
However, while we agree that we must seek ways of dealing with issues that threaten our families, we do not agree that consensual adult homosexual relationships is one of those issues. It is therefore our humble opinion that the Bill be unpacked and scrutinized so as to avoid a law that will be used to discriminate people who are not harming anyone. There is need to separate the concept of consensual sex and non-consensual sex. In other words, we implore Hon. Bahati to withdraw his private members Bill in its entirety. As Professor Ogenga Latigo, the Leader of the Opposition said of this ´kill-the-gays´ Bill, “we cannot plunge into a legislative process before looking at what is happening, the facts and what the trends are”.
Homosexuals form a small group of people who, when people feel vulnerable, are blamed for all society’s problems. Gays have been blamed for the spread of HIV, including certain government officials saying ´Gays are not Government? priority in the fight against HIV & AIDS.´ Let it be understood: it’s not homosexuality that spreads AIDS; it is the culture that brutalizes gay men and forces them underground that spreads AIDS. To blame the spread of HIV on a minority group of people is burying our heads in the sand and failing to deal with the real problem facing our country.
Homosexuals are not the rapists and child molesters who pounce on unsuspecting family members. Research shows that over 50% of child sexual abuse reports involve children below the age of 10, and the perpetrators are heterosexual men. (Study cited in Uganda Youth Development Link, Report on Sectoral Study on Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in Uganda, Commissioned by the International Labour Organisation and the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development- January 2004)
The 2006 national study on Domestic Violence by Law Reform Commission confirmed that 66% domestic violence (2006 national study on Domestic Violence of people in all regions of Uganda reported that Domestic Violence occured in their homes and the majority of the perpertratpors were ´male heads of household´. ( See Law Reform Commission, A Study Report on Domestic Violence, April 2006 at p.112)
The millions of Ugandan children orphaned by HIV & AIDS. The Uganda Aids Commission puts the cumulative number of orphans due to AIDS at 2 million. Homosexuals are not largely responsible for these figures since they are not considered as people who procreate.
In addressing what Pastor Martin Ssempa and his group are peddling as ´Public Outcry´, first and foremost it is not true that the Penal Code provision on ´Aggravated Defilement´ does not cover abused boys. Section 129 (3) clearly says: ´Any person who performs a sexual act with another person who is below the age of eighteen years commit a felony called aggravated defilement´. It does not limit the legal protection to girls.
As a movement, we respect and value the rights of all human beings regardless of who they are, who they have sex with and how they have sex. We SHALL be behind any efforts seeking to curb sexual abuse against minors just as we are committed to supporting any efforts seeking to curtail sexual abuse against curative rape against lesbians, and the unrealistic religious fundamentalist agenda that seeks to demonize homosexual abuses over heterosexual abuses.
As Freedom and Roam Uganda we:
- Totally oppose the Bill as a whole and therefore calls for its complete withdrawal.
- Do not support amendment of the Bill.
- Support criminalization of non-consensual sex, for example, rape and paedophilia, whether homosexual or heterosexual.
- Oppose the criminalisation of consensual sex between adults of sound mind.
- The Penal code should be amended to draw an effective distinction between consensual sex and non-consensual sex.
ISSUED BY:
Freedom and Roam Uganda- FARUG
Freedom and Roam Uganda is a member organisation of Sexual Minorities Uganda, a network of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people’s organisations based in Uganda.
For further details, contact:
Val Kalende
Freedom and Roam Uganda
Email: kalendenator@gmail .com
Frank Mugisha
Sexual Minorities Uganda
Email: [email protected]
It is wrong to conflate private adult homosexual conduct and sexual coercion or recruitment of minors. This statement is very clear that these groups oppose recruitment and oppose anyone of any sexual orientation who targets boys or girls.
Elizabeth,
Where do you get your statistics that show 10% of the world’s population are sodomites?
@Diane
How has your theory of theonomy worked out under the Lord’s Resistance Army in Northen Uganda? Is your hero Joseph Kony? Attempting to establish a government based on the ten commandments and the Old Testament is insane and ridculous. You are bearing false witness and advocating genocide and massive hate crimes throughout the world. Do you realize that 10% of the WORLD’S population are “sodomites’? Are you Hitler? what the hell?
How are you going to pick them all out? Are you planning big ovens or gas chambers because you are going to have a LOT of bodies to deal with.
I would submit that your ideas presented here are beyond sick, twisted and evil, the absolute opposite of EVERYTHING jesus taught.
Good luck with your plan, it is NEVER going to happen. NEVER.
Hello brother. I heard about you on Facebook and it seems a homosexual has a major bone to pick with you about curing homosexuality. It is not my place to evaluate those therapies because I am straight, but I did know a lesbian who had her prayers unanswered (and another lesbian who apparently married a man, my best friend said so and I trust him). I think you’re getting a poor trial on Facebook. I try to present Christianity balancedly on some of the gay forums. I even support gay marriage out of a belief in a free country, you know, taxes paid and services provided, a fair deal. “I try to be all things to all people so that I might save some.”
Diane–
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I still have issues though. You and your comrades (just a word not an implication) see quite clearly and without reservation that the clearly proscribed Biblical penalty for sodomy is death.
That death penalty is also the clearly proscribed Biblical penalty for adultery and fornication. Why is it then, when the religious folks brought the woman caught in adultery to Jesus and reminded him what the clearly proscribed Biblical penalty was for adultery, He didn’t sentence her. What’s up with that, Diane?
Many presume that that woman repented of her sin and became one of Jesus’ closest disciples. That isn’t entirely clear from the Biblical narratives. What I find significant is that Jesus first asked her accusers to search their own hearts for sinlessness…then He forgave her…and then He admonished her to ‘go and sin no more’.
I get flak here because I don’t stop with the ‘then He forgave her’. I firmly believe that homosexual behavior, all of it, even the homosexual behavior that is ‘loving’ or ‘in a committed relationship’ is sin. I believe that those who continue in that behavior are in danger of the fires of Hell. BUT, my years in the ministry, as an ex-gay trying to reach out to gays and ex-gays, convinced me completely that Christians who didn’t ‘rightly divide the Word of Truth’ weren’t representing Christ’s love and redeeming grace appropriately. My coming to Christ would not have happened with you as an agent of His redemptive message…I’ve yet to hear a word from you that even hints at that aspect of His mission here on earth. Some would say I got saved by accident. I worked with a sincere Christian. I’d watch and sometimes overhear as he talked and prayed with others but he never once talked to me…an overtly gay person. He claims that he prayed for me even though he never spoke to me; I hope that is true. I hope that is also true for you, Diane. I hope that you are praying fervently for the souls of these people that you seem so quick and eager to judge. I realize that this is a blogsite and perhaps not all of what you feel or mean to convey is coming through. ‘God is not willing than ANY should perish’. Anytime we Christians find ourselves eagerly desiring the physical death or elimination of someone, we need to ask ourselves why we are so willing to have them gone when He isn’t willing that they should perish. I realize your talking a corporal death penalty while the Bible was speaking of a spiritual one but–logic tells me that if you convict a person of a sin (such as sodomy) and then administer the death penalty to them, that kinda cinches the deal on the spiritual death too. Yeah, I know, people do come to accept Jesus as their savior on death row. I’d be willing to wager (if I was a gambler) though that more people than not whose lives ended on a death row…they ended with BOTH…they ended with a physical AND a spiritual death.
This whole notion of criminalization disturbs me. While I agree that we can and should criminalize any number of behaviors, I’ve always had a weird caution. You see, we Christians KNOW that it ain’t ‘being good’ that’s going to get us into heaven. The Bible tells us that, as far as heaven’s concerned, our personal ‘righteousness’ stinks. So, it’s always bothered me when Christians go on these crusades to legislate morality. Let’s say you stop that homosexual individual from doing anything sexual with anybody for his or her entire lifetime because they fear the death penalty. Tell me, once their span on earth is done, will that grant them access to heaven? This may be a personal bias but I’ve long suspected that many Christians would rather criminalize than evangelize. And that’s a bit weird since I can find the command to evangelize in the Bible but not the command to criminalize.
I do worry ofttimes about the approach I’ve taken; I wonder if I’m not as forthright and direct in confronting sin as I should be. It is my hope that you will also worry sometimes. That you’ll worry that your approach is selective…that it’s elevating one sin above others–and that’s it’s not balancing the messages of redemption and judgement.
In my opinion, those who claim that the only “genuine Christians” are those who agree with their hatred — and their grand scheme to kill off all sinners but themselves — are neither genuine nor Christian.
Well, and with any success, those one or two left standing can look around and have the whole world’s blood on their hands. Let me be the first, thank you for saving me from my sin —- ooops that thanks is supposed to go to God for his saving grace.
Diane, I am sorry that you live under the spell of death.
So we start with the ones who are easiest to pick on, kill them and then move on to the rest? Who’s going to do this mass extermination of sinners? Who is sinless enough to carry it out? That’s not genuine Christianity. Tell me where Jesus ever taught such a thing.
All have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God. There is NONE righteous. NO. Not ONE. That includes you, Diane. Tell me. What sin’s do you commit and how should we punish you — according to Scripture?
@Eddy:
I am not singling out anyone or any particular sin. Everyone must come under the authority of God and all sins will be judged. However, as noted above, when implementing a new legal regime over a reprobate civil society, implementation must be done in stages. It is far easier to begin with sodomites, who are widely reviled in Uganda and here. This establishes the principle that civil law should reflect God’s law, i.e., theonomy.
With this principle established, we can move on to setting the proper punishment for sodomy (death) and also expanding the civil application of Biblical law to encompass other, more widely practiced sin, such as heterosexual fornication and adultery. With the general principle firmly established, there will be no moral or logical objection to imposing Biblical punishment on heterosexual fornicators. In other words, if real Christians do their part and if the Lord wills it, then eventually the law will catch up to your nephews. Teach them to fear the Lord before that day arrives.
On the off chance that there are one or two genuine Christians on this site who wish to educate themselves about how Biblical law can and will be integrated into civil law, I recommend Institutes of Biblical Law by Rushdoony.
Diane, you strongly remind me of Serena Joy in the The Handmaid’s Tale, wishing for a Dominionist Republic of Gilead. When her wish is finally fulfilled, she is subjugated and her liberties are lost. I suggest you read the book, and reconsider the implications of your Dominionist views.
Diane–
If you follow my postings here, you will find that I’m far more conservative in my viewpoints than most of the posters yet I find your point of view disturbing. I realize that I may have gone over the top in my response to you earlier but please consider the reality of what this religious takeover intends to do.
Claiming a Biblical basis for their endeavors, they are attempting to establish a non-Biblical code of ethics. God did not authorize a ‘sin-meter’ whereby homosexual sin somehow was worse than heterosexual sin. As I’ve said on this site numerous times, even our ‘righteousness is as filthy rags’…even ‘lying lips are an abomination’. For any person or organization or collaboration of people to try to lay ‘God’s precepts’ over the land…it will always be tainted. It will always be infected by the bias of a person who says ‘whew, that ain’t my sin’ using the Bible to rail against one sin while ignoring or excusing another.
In my ‘over the top’ example to you earlier, I specified heterosexual sin. The sins of my nephews, of my neighbors. Any statistician can tell you there’s a lot more of that going on than homosexuality. Kinsey’s 1 in 10 statistics (however flawed they might be) will also back up that quantitatively there’s more heterosexual sin going on on this planet than homosexual. The simple fact that homosexual sin has hit their radar before or even instead of these other sins, demonstrates that there’s a ‘sin meter’ mentality at work. I reaffirm that my God, the God of the Bible, does NOT endorse that sin-meter mentality.
Go to the Old Testament and you’ll find that the word ‘abomination’ was used in connection with a number of sins including ‘lying lips’. (How common is that?!) In the New Testament, particularly in 1 Corinthians 6, homosexuality is neither at the top of the list as ‘the biggee’ or at the bottom of the list as ‘the unmentionable’. Please consider this as you pursue your crusade. I invite you to use 1 Corinthians 6 as your guide. Please do not begin your crusade in the middle of the list. If your crusade is just and worthy and in accordance with God’s will, please work through that list and incorporate the other sins that are mentioned in your campaign.
If you pick one sin out above the others, you may be reflecting part of God’s heart and intent, but you won’t be reflecting God’s heart as you aspire to do.
I don’t think that’s “generally accepted” at all! Can you substantiate that?
Are you seriously suggesting that Christians should work for a culture where all people are required by law to obey the Old testament? In “stages” that ultimately get back to all of the Old Testament Laws and their original punishments? Stoning? Who’s going to throw the first one, Diane, you or Scott Lively?
@Warren:
I listened to the audio file you linked to. If you read the literature from Chalcedon that I linked to above, you will see that it is generally accepted that civil society must be brought under Biblical law in stages. It can’t be imposed on a sinful culture all at once. The first step is to establish the principle that civil law should reflect God’s views. Once that general principle is established, Christians will work to see that Biblical law is reflected in all of its particulars.
So I think that Lively’s stance in favor of criminalization and mild punishment is fully consistent with a phased approach to the establishment of theonomy, or law based on Biblical principles and statutes. Inevitably, community service, fines, or forced “therapy” will fail to solve the problem, thus laying the groundwork for more Biblically appropriate measures to be adopted. Thus, I do maintain that he is a true Christian, even though at this time, he does not endorse the Biblically mandated punishment for sodomy.
I would point out to you that on his website Pastor Lively has called you out for changing your views and your casting your lot with wickedness. However, I have no doubt that, as a Christian, he would welcome you back into the fold if you would only admit your error and accept Biblical teaching.
PS – Diane – listen to this: http://www.alan.com/2010/01/04/rev-scott-lively-uganda-anti-gay-bill-a-step-in-the-right-direction/
Is Scott Lively not a real Christian?
For the record on this one I think Alan Colmes was right to be confused by his stance but I want to know what you think of Lively’s stance. Perhaps Lively is saying one thing to his friends at Chalcedon and one thing to the radio listeners?
Diane – Is it your understanding that Scott Lively believes that homosexuals should be killed or exiled? I assume it is since he could be considered a real Christian in your view.
Boy Warren. Hated from all sides. Some gay activists blame you for Uganda — accusing you of being a “gay-genocide” stone-thrower.
Some Christians despise you because you oppose the Bill — thinking you should join them throwing stones.
No fun being a compassionate and fair-minded Christian, is it? I am sure glad you put up with it. Thanks for all you do. And God Bless you.
Diane, Scott Lively “holding this site in such low regard” gives me more all the more reason to like it. 🙂
“Your spiritual advice will be greatly appreciated.”
Since you asked, my advice is: 1) accept Christ, 2) repent your sins, including your mocking Biblical law, and 3) go to http://www.chalcedon.edu/blog/blog.php and, coupled with your daily Bible study, start learning what real Christians believe.
I am not surprised that Mr. Lively holds this site in such low regard.
You go, Eddy. I know it doesn’t happen often, but I completely agree with you.
I may be wrong on this one…been trying to think back on my ‘ancient’ history but, it seems that, in Old Testament times…the religious leaders were also the political leaders. (The nation of Israel, for example, before they came under Pharoah’s rule was a religious nation under religious rule. In that context, the religious laws were also ‘the law of the land’.)
But when the religious folks were absorbed by or came under the dominion of a government, there was a distinction. “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.” Religious law did not supercede the law imposed by a government. Neither did the religious have the right to exact their laws or punishments on those who were not of their belief. Many religious laws (just as many customs) have many similarities to common law but the common law prevails. Even Jesus did not try to overturn this order. Instead he subjected himself to the prevailing laws and their judgements.
Should Christians and other religious folks try to influence the law. I do believe that it’s within their rights and responsibilities to do so just as it’s within the rights of any other citizen…even those of differing beliefs and values. But Christians and the other religious folks need to be mindful that Jesus seemed to speak more to the sins of pride, self-righteousness and hypocrisy than he did to any other sins.
Hypocrisy check: Diane, you said:
I really don’t know what I’m going to do. I don’t like it but I’ve got two nephews who I KNOW are having sex with their girlfriends. Shall I kill them tonight? Or where do you think I should exile them to? Oh, and the neighbors. Within the next two blocks, there are at least 5 co-habiting straight couples and a number of ‘sow your wild oats’ young people. What method should I use to exact the death penalty on them? The daughter of one of my neighbors has a child out of wedlock. I realize that the child is likely innocent but who will raise it after I enforce the death penalty? Sorry, I can’t. My hands will be full raising the orphans left behind by my nephews and their girlfriends. Your spiritual advice will be greatly appreciated.
In any event, the claim that this law is about child sexual abuse is deliberately misleading — and the supporters of the Bill know it. That is already illegal there.
What then, Diane? Should every prohibition in the Judeo/Christian Bible be enacted into civil law — with all citizens obliged to obey it under threat of imprisonment or death? Would you really want to live in such a society? I would not. And I don’t think the founders and framers of our democracy did either.
Diane: All are sinners, right Diane? Practically, however, I do think that in real and legal terms there are significant consequential differences among various sins; unless you believe in a theocracy where Diane gets to decide which sins get the noose (sexual ones) and which sins are overlooked (pride, gluttony, idolatry). If so, then we just need to know which ones those in power want to punish.
And yes, you have the correct website.
“It is wrong to conflate private adult homosexual conduct and sexual coercion or recruitment of minors.”
Well sir, then you are calling the Bible wrong. Because the Bible lists many sexual sins and does not distinguish between ones involving minors and ones involving nonconsent and ones involving consenting adults. All such sins warrant death or exile, as specified in Scripture.
It was my understanding that this was a Christian website by a professor at a Christian college.
Some confusions may be stemming from our American definition of ‘homosexuality’ as being a ‘condition’ or ‘orientation’ and from the Ugandan definition being a behavior. (Actually our American usage gives it two definitions…one being the condition or orientation of being attracted to one’s own gender and the other of ‘sexual activity with another of the same sex’.)
I’m presuming that since Ugandans do not seem to believe it’s an inborn condition or orientation, then their usage of ‘aggravated homosexuality’ simply means aggravated sexual activity with another of the same sex. Many of us can remember the lengthy and frustrating conversations we’ve had here trying to distinguish labelling and categorizing from condition and orientation. We never did sort that out satisfactorily.
But that’s all ‘pie in the sky’ abstraction. Applied it would mean that those involved in the debate need to be encouraged to refrain from using the term ‘homosexuality’ or ‘homosexual’ as a noun. If they must, then it should be called ‘aggravated homosexual acts’ to describe the one situation and ‘individuals engaging in homosexual acts’ in most others…and, throughout their conversations, whenever the words ‘homosexuality’ or ‘homosexual’ (as a noun) appears, it needs to be weighed. In our crazy and mixed up world, it’s possible that though they say they don’t believe in the ‘condition’ or ‘orientation’…that, in experience, as betrayed by their words, they do. Simply put, if it means one thing in one place and something else in another, it’s just another place for confusion to permeate.
To some, this might sound like gobbledygook but it actually goes directly to Lynn David’s distinction of some pedophile abusers of boys being heterosexual. (They are doing a same sex act (homosexual) but do not have the homosexual orientation. Honestly, I still can’t adequately articulate it or it’s ramifications on the discussions in and re Uganda, but by L D’s comments, it does seem to be a distinction that needs to be addressed even if it’s not completely grasped.
Ahh…. ok. I see it now. Starting off as they did by describing sexual abuse of minors as “any form of sexual abuse whether hetero or homosexual” got me into that defensive mode as abuse by an adult of a child of the same gender is not of necessity due to a homosexual orientation. FARUG seemed to lending authority to the wording in the bill which would unfairly define pedophilia upon a child of the same gender as the offender as ‘aggravated homosexuality.’
I think the order of wording may be responsible. I think the meaning is the perpetrators were heterosexual men and 50% were under 10.
I find it odd that FARUG would use language that somewhat harkens the Cameronesque view of pedophilia. Pointing out that “Research shows that over 50% of child sexual abuse reports involve children below the age of 10, and the perpetrators are heterosexual men,” seems to say that the other 50% of sexual abuse of children under 10 is by homosexual men (unless they want to throw in some women there). But it would seem that the study from the “Uganda Youth Development Link, Report on Sectoral Study on Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in Uganda, Commissioned by the International Labour Organisation and the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development- January 2004” might be one which sees sexual abuse through eyes tainted with the same homophobia as Paul Cameron. I would imagine that any government report in Uganda on that subject would be so tainted. It is certainly difficult to use a government report when that government’s viewpoint is skewed against a group from the start.
…
No bets gayuganda. But seems this site is the communication transfer for many of varying opinions. Let’s hope this gets through.
[grumble grumble]
any bets on whether this kind of thing can be released in Uganda? No, we cannot even deny that we are not pedophiles in Uganda…!!!!
Thanks, for giving us the forum. And, making us understand that this matters. Yes, it does get around to Uganda, even when we cant put it in the papers here. They are debating on how to kill us, and, we have no voice. Not funny. But, true.
[ps, you certainly know this particular jungle more than us…!]