Month: October 2010

Carl Walker-Hoover’s mom speaks her mind

I can’t add much to this statement from Sirdeaner Walker.

At some point, it might occur to the religious conservatives who are blaming the victims for their distress that they are talking largely to themselves.

Perkins says:

Some homosexuals may recognize intuitively that their same-sex attractions are abnormal–yet they have been told by the homosexual movement, and their allies in the media and the educational establishment, that they are “born gay” and can never change. This–and not society’s disapproval–may create a sense of despair that can lead to suicide.

Many problems, the first of which that occurs to me is that the common denominator is anti-gay bias, not gay identification. He has a theory that fits his biases about homosexuals but it doesn’t fit all the facts of the situation.

Perkins column is a case in point of something Albert Mohler wrote in a recent commentary about Tyler Clementi:

Yet, when gay activists accuse conservative Christians of homophobia, they are also right. Much of our response to homosexuality is rooted in ignorance and fear. We speak of homosexuals as a particular class of especially depraved sinners and we lie about how homosexuals experience their own struggle. Far too many evangelical pastors talk about sexual orientation with a crude dismissal or with glib assurances that gay persons simply choose to be gay. While most evangelicals know that the Bible condemns homosexuality, far too many find comfort in their own moralism, consigning homosexuals to a theological or moral category all their own.

Mohler barely scratches the surface of the biases involved, but he gets closer than most prominent evangelicals are willing to get.

Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill one year later

On October 14, 2009, David Bahati tabled the Anti-Homosexuality Bill in Uganda’s Parliament. As of now, it remains in committee awaiting a second reading. On this ocassion, LGBT groups in Uganda have issued a press release, which follows:

 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

KAMPALA – UGANDA

One Year since the introduction of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill – 2009

On October 14, 2009 the draft Anti Homosexuality Bill was introduced to the Parliament of Uganda by Ndoorwa West MP David Bahati. Mr Bahati’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill stipulates the death penalty for repeated same-sex relations and life imprisonment for all other homosexual acts. A person in authority who fails to report an offender to the police within 24 hours will face 3 years in jail. Likewise, the promotion of homosexuality carries a sentence of 5 to 7 years in jail.

This Bill is an expression of prejudice, intolerance, discrimination and violence. The bill abuses the dignity, privacy and equality of people with a different sexual orientation and identity other than heterosexual. If passed into law, it will further legitimize public and private violence, harassment and torture.

It has promoted hate-speech in churches, schools and the media. It has led to defamation, blackmail, evictions, intimidation, arbitrary arrests and unlawful detention, physical assault, emotional and mental assault of LGBT activists, our families and allies.

The bill has further led to increased violence incited by local media, particularly The Red Pepper tabloid and recently launched Rolling Stone newspaper. The headline of the Rolling Stone viciously screamed “100 pictures of Ugandan’s top homos leak- Hang them” in their Vol. 1 No. 05 October 02-09, 2010. They published pictures, names, residences and other details of LGBT activists and allies.

“When my neighbors saw my picture in the paper, they were furious. They threw stones at me while I was in my house. I was so terrified somehow I managed to flee my home to safety.” said Stosh [Programme Coordinator- Kulhas Uganda]

“The sad truth is that most evil in Uganda is done by people who end up never being held accountable for their deeds. The Rolling Stone publication has incited violence against a group of minorities making them seem like less of HUMAN BEINGS” Gerald [Admin – SMUG].

The bill constitutes a violation of the right to freedom of privacy, association, assembly and security of the person as enshrined in Constitution of Uganda’s and International Human Rights Law.

The impact of such legal and social exclusion is being felt in the lives of LGBTI Ugandans. Sexual Minorities Uganda strongly condemns such laws and media witch-hunt of homosexuals.

We would like to acknowledge Human Rights institutions and activists, local, regional and international Civil Society, Development partners and friends around the world for the  enormous support to the Uganda LGBTI community and request for your continued call to African governments to repeal the ‘sodomy laws’.

Contacts:

Frank Mugisha                                                Pepe Julian Onziema

[email protected]        [email protected]

///

Golden Rule Pledge joins National Bullying Prevention Month as national partner

October is National Bullying Prevention Month and various organizations support this initiative via awareness and shared vision for bullying prevention.

Recently, the Golden Rule Pledge was listed as a national partner on the organization’s website.

To do our part, I am asking church youth leaders to designate some time the week of October 20, 2010 (10.20.2010) to call on students to see bullying prevention as part of our witness. If anyone keeps the Golden Rule, it should be people of faith.

We have created a Facebook event page to mark 10.20.10 which has been designated by the PACER Center as a focus of awareness efforts. Click the link below to read more and sign up:

The End of Bullying Begins with Me

The homepage for the National Center for Bullying Prevention is here.

More on Martin Ssempa’s “meeting” with gay leaders

Last Thursday, I reported a statement from Martin Ssempa regarding his views of the Hang Them campaign initiated by the Ugandan tabloid, Rolling Stone.  Ssempa said he

…spent three hours with leaders of homosexuals along with Bishop Ssenyonjo-explaining to them his position as a father.

I understood the statement to refer to a meeting specifically set up to meet with gay leaders. However, there is more to this statement according to others who were involved. First, here again is Ssempa’s statement in full:

STATEMENT ON THE ROLLING STONE ARTICLE.

Dr. Martin Ssempa would like to disassociate himself from the “Hang Them” article which appeared in the ‘Rolling Stone’ Newspaper October 02-092010 issue. While he has been opposed to homosexuality as a sin, a cultural taboo, and an act that breaks the laws of Uganda, he does not support violent efforts of “hang them” as indicated in the Rolling Stone-a new sensational tabloid. Being an outspoken preacher on the subject, he was interviewed by a writer from the paper but his language and tone of message was unfortunately not portrayed.

Pastor Ssempa does not believe that outings in Newspapers is an appropriate method. Pastor Ssempa is counselling homosexuals and victims of homosexuality whose confidence he has kept until they have been willing to go public.

At a meeting last week, Dr. Ssempa spent three hours with leaders of homosexuals along with Bishop Ssenyonjo-explaining to them his position as a father. Homosexuality is a sin and God’s grace is there for all who need redemption. He shared how he counsels university boys and girls who are suicidal because they were raped in single sex boarding schools and no one was there to defend them. It is this that drives his passion for educational and legislative reforms to protect Africa’s Youths. The meeting ended on a pleasant note with Pastor Ssempa taking a group photo with the team.

I called Bishop Ssenyonjo to get his perspective on the meeting and he told me that the “meeting” was a series of speeches given by people of various points of view regarding homosexuality sponsored by a research group from Makerere University School of Law. The sessions were held over several days from September 29 through October 2nd. Bishop Ssenyonjo said he spoke about “The God who does not discriminate.” According to the Bishop, there were few gay people in attendance, with most being people invited to speak by those organizing the sessions. Bishop Ssenyonjo heard Martin Ssempa’s session which he said lasted about an hour. In it, Ssempa said he favored the passage of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill but did not want the dealth penalty included. According to the Bishop, Ssempa called for restrictions on free speech, via bans on what he called “promotion” of homosexuality.

In short, the meeting with homosexual leaders turns out to be a series of sessions where many people spoke, many of whom were not homosexual. Apparently, the series of meetings was organized by unnamed researchers from Makerere University.

The Tennessee house fire: The tales of Good and Bad Samaritans

According to this AP report, Gene and Paulette Cranick forgot to pay their $75 fire protection fee and the local fire department let their house burn to the ground.

Paulette Cranick said they had paid the fee in the past, although sometimes late, but it slipped their mind this year.

I have forgotten my yearly car registration before and paid extra for my attention deficit. I have forgotten other things too, but right now I forget what they were. So I can believe the Cranicks forgot to pay the fee.

I have a harder time believing the justifications for failing to extinguish the blaze. Some say the Cranicks didn’t pay the fee so they should accept the consequences. If you do the crime, you have to do the time, the thinking goes. Something just seems wrong about that. At risk of age stereotyping, I will bring in the fact that the Cranicks are in their upper 60s and certain memory functions show some wear and tear years before that time of life. For instance, some days, I have trouble remembering what I had for lunch. I can only imagine trying to remember if I paid a yearly bill for something as basic as fire protection.

So I would have been willing to cut them some slack and put out the fire, perhaps charging them for the real costs of the trip. Their animals might have been saved and the local authorities would have been reimbursed for their actual costs.

However, other people are not buying it. Bryan Fischer at the American Family Association brought religion into the situation by writing two columns saying Jesus would have let the house burn down. I doubt that, but thinking about Jesus reminded me of the parable of the Good Samaritan. Then I thought that the story might have gone a little differently if Bryan Fischer had been telling the tale. First, the real thing from Luke 25-37.

25On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

 26“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

 27He answered: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.'”

 28“You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

 29But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

 30In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. 35The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

 36“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

 37The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”  Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

Now, let me break in where the Samaritan finds the hapless fellow on the side of the road and suggest how it might have gone with Fischer’s “muscular Christianity.”

33But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he called out to him,

“Are you ok?” The Samaritan replied

The man replied, “No, I have been badly hurt by the attack of the robbers.”

Sizing up the situation, the Samaritan man asked “Have you paid your taxes?”

“What?” The wounded man groaned.

“Have you paid your taxes? You know, the ones which help pay for police protection and rescue services?” The Samaritan demanded.

“No, sir, I forgot to pay them. I paid them last year but forgot to pay them this year,” the man whispered, his breathing labored.

“I see. Well, that is too bad. In that case, my advice to you is to man up and accept the situation.” And the Samaritan man went on his way.

And everybody marveled and scratched their head at his teachings.

Which Samaritan was the neighbor?