Last night, Rachel Maddow interviewed Jeff Sharlet about his new book: C-Street. I have not seen it yet but I am aware that his reporting on his visit to Uganda takes up a chapter and will provide much detail about the Anti-Homosexuality Bill. Roll the tape:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Note the intent of Bahati for his legislation as described to Sharlet. He is not trying to close any gaps in law on child abuse. He believes the government there should put Leviticus into effect. Democracy requires that you get a law in place to do it.
Regarding the Fellowship and pressure to withdraw the bill. I am aware that American Felloship members have said to Ugandan members that the bill is a mistake and should be withdrawn. However, Bahati says he feel no pressure.
Here is my view of the situation. Bahati does not feel any threat to his standing in the Fellowship as the result of differing with the Americans and other Fellowship groups around the world about the anti-gay effort. It is clear to me that the bill has caused division between the Ugandan and American members. However, as Sharlet reported, Bahati describes no consequences for his stance. He hears words of disapproval regarding his bill but business as usual continues on other matters (e.g., “like defense contracts”). No consequences mean no need for a shift in ideology or policy.
Personally, I think the Fellowship is doing a lot of good in the world. I think much of their work in poor nations is a reflection of true religion. However, with the great reach comes great responsibility. If it is true that David Bahati continues to enjoy the brotherhood and benefits he describes, then I can understand why he would dismiss the public pressure. It seems clear that the Fellowship has great reach. The question is what will they do with their great responsibility in this situation.
At the rate you chaps are going, I think that Bahati Bill should be revised and its watered-down version renamed The Throckmorton–Kincaid–Sharlet Compromise Bill. Under this new version, our nation will be better equipped to continue beating gayism with huge stick until it flees back to where it originated outside Africa. I think it is a fair compromise to suggest to sex deviants that they can either—
[1] conform to African traditions or be jailed (not killed) for practising and promoting a sex crime.
OR
[2] emigrate to Western nations where gayism is seen as a “cool lifestyle” with the full knowledge that Uganda will never waste energy trying to seek their extradition.
Postscript—– This compromise bill shall not be subject to any changes whatsoever by external actors or their local proxies and international law is null and void only to the extent that its provisions contradicts the bill
U Vic prof offers insights on Ugandan anti-gay law – which reads in part:
Not sure of that last statement. I know Roman Catholic groups and even individual churches which are adopting projects in villages to not onlly fund but provide their own labors.
…
Yet another nonsense conspiracy theory peddled by euro-american gay propagandist lobby in order to deny the indigenous nature of Africa’s deep-seated antipathy to gayism based on culture and traditions. And you lot dare to suggest that Africans believe in conspiracy theories? Millions of Africans (myself included) do not care about any powerful group called The Family. Africans don’t base their vehement opposition to sexual depravity on the beliefs of this small christian group whose reach and influence has been deliberately exaggerated by American liberals in order to score cheap points against their conservative compatriots in the ongoing US Cultural Civil War.
At the rate you chaps are going, I think that Bahati Bill should be revised and its watered-down version renamed The Throckmorton–Kincaid–Sharlet Compromise Bill. Under this new version, our nation will be better equipped to continue beating gayism with huge stick until it flees back to where it originated outside Africa. I think it is a fair compromise to suggest to sex deviants that they can either—
[1] conform to African traditions or be jailed (not killed) for practising and promoting a sex crime.
OR
[2] emigrate to Western nations where gayism is seen as a “cool lifestyle” with the full knowledge that Uganda will never waste energy trying to seek their extradition.
Postscript—– This compromise bill shall not be subject to any changes whatsoever by external actors or their local proxies and international law is null and void only to the extent that its provisions contradicts the bill
Yet another nonsense conspiracy theory peddled by euro-american gay propagandist lobby in order to deny the indigenous nature of Africa’s deep-seated antipathy to gayism based on culture and traditions. And you lot dare to suggest that Africans believe in conspiracy theories? Millions of Africans (myself included) do not care about any powerful group called The Family. Africans don’t base their vehement opposition to sexual depravity on the beliefs of this small christian group whose reach and influence has been deliberately exaggerated by American liberals in order to score cheap points against their conservative compatriots in the ongoing US Cultural Civil War.
U Vic prof offers insights on Ugandan anti-gay law – which reads in part:
Not sure of that last statement. I know Roman Catholic groups and even individual churches which are adopting projects in villages to not onlly fund but provide their own labors.
…