Why don’t you, in a calm and reasoned manner, tell us what provisions you think a ‘watered-down Bahati Bill’ should contain? We can then evaluate your position logically.

Why do you keep shying away from the opportunity to set out your position in a calm, well-reasoned, manner. Is it because your ‘position’ is simply not reasonable, I wonder? Think about it.

Let’s try again. Why do you now support measures to intrude on people’s privacy? You implied that you were against such measures a year ago. Why the change? If such intrusions were wrong then, surely they are wrong now (it’s a matter of principle, isn’t it).

Also, I enjoy rational debate.

A research fellow at Makerere hints at a figure rather higher that 700,000 (and he even supports aspects of the Bahati Bill!!!). I’m a very realistic, reasonable chap! The 700,000 I cite is a little under 5% of UG’s adult population.

If this “research fellow” really exists then he/she must have used black magic to work out those figures !!

Since the Bahati Bill dramatically broadens the criminalisation of private homosexual acts pursuant to informed consent, anyone accepting the idea of decriminalisation should oppose it. That’s plain logic, isn’t it?

No it isn’t plain logic because I never supported decriminalization in the first place. Once, I supported status-quo ante, but now I know better. My position is that the revised version of the Bahati Bill should become law since status-quo is not adequate to tackle emerging gay militancy choreographed by Western hedonists.