The campaign in Uganda is heating up and Martin Ssempa is calling on all candidates to bash gays in advance of the elections on February 18. Watch Ssempa’s call for opposition candidate Dr. Kiiza Besigye to re-con-si-der his view that prosecuting homosexuals is a waste of state resources.
132 thoughts on “Martin Ssempa scolds Besigye on gays”
Comments are closed.
No I did not confuse the two men. The local press are too engrossed in other matters to report Besigye’s comments on gayism. The press are equally not interested in reporting Ssempa’s response to Besigye’s comment for exactly the same reasons. Like I said earlier, gayism is law enforcement issue not election matter.
Well, the same can be said about you and your online pal, Anteros.
Maazi says,
Consent is
no excuse to engage in
behaviour which Africans
consider to be anti-social,
abhorrent, inhuman and
degrading.
Still playing dumb.
You stopped short of claiming that all non-Africans will seek any excuse to engage in homosexuality because all non-Africans are so homophilic that they might as well all be homosexuals and leave heterosexuality up to Africans, the righteous and morally superior race – according to your personal morality yardstick.
When countries around the world began decriminalizing homosexuality, do you honestly believe that they “approved” homosexuality and thereby encouraged their citizens to engage in homosexuality? Please answer that question, Maazi.
Let me encourage you to consider Africa’s entire population and incredible diversity before you selfishly assume the role of Africa’s spokesperson by making statements on behalf of all Africans, Mr. Africa.
There are millions of Africans who regularly do a lot more than offer their personal consent to personally engage in what you personally consider anti-social, abhorrent, inhuman and degrading. With such poor regard for personal consent, it’s little wonder why those Africans who insist on clinging onto last century’s cultural norms and practices would force unwilling children and widows into marriage. This is 2011… Africans are no longer governed by the say-so of their ancestors, “elders” and outdated customs… we won’t have morally corrupt authorities, or anybody else, poking their noses into our bedrooms offering and denying consent on our behalf for every little sexual thing.
Maazi, Africa isn’t your little puppy for you to train, discipline and brag about the breed, genealogy and behavior you wish it had.
Africans are no less entitled to privacy than other human beings. It’s a human right, found in the Ugandan Constitution – put there to protect all Ugandan citizens from nosy violators of human rights.
And because privacy is a constitutional internationally recognized human right… whatever consenting adults choose to do in privacy cannot be policed because that would infringe on their right to privacy… no matter how African they are… no matter what your ninety whatever percent of Ugandans would have to say about it if they ever got to know… and I am pretty sure that most wouldn’t care to find out… and if they did care to find out, then the problem would lie in their unconstitutional nosiness, not in their neighbors’ bedrooms.
Anteros
In his ‘excitement’, has ‘Maazi’ confused Besigye with Ssempa, I wonder? My recent comment said that SSEMPA’S latest public statement had not been reported – i.e. the ANTI-gay statement was not covered. As far as I know, only MTN News covered it and, like the Sanyu FM interview that preceded it, the coverage was ‘neutral’, rather than ‘pro-Ssempa’ or ‘pro-homophobia’.
But, ‘Maazi’, if ‘homosexuality’ is (as you claim) such an important issue with regard to ‘African culture’, why is Ssempa being ignored these days?
Anteros and I have made a wide range of points, none of which you have answered satisfactorily, despite the large quantity of verbiage you inflict upon us.
‘Pewpew’! How very droll!
There was an interview, which I heard, just over a week ago (Thursday 13th, I think).
Richard, it was neutral on NTV news too. They let him speak for himself… and he basically made a rocking fool of himself. When he gets attention, I don’t think he realises that people are laughing at him, his nutty obsessions, and his lost cause.
On Sanyu fm news, right after playing a brief recording of him yelling his lungs out at besigye, they talked about him facing charges for bribing and manipulating boys into claiming that they were sexually abused by another pastor.
Funny how he accuses ordinary lgbti ugandans of using foreign money to “recruit” minors into homosexuality, then decides to use foreign money to recruit minors as pawns in his dirty and deceitful anti-gay crusades.
Ever since eat da poo poo hit youtube, he’s firmly holding on to his title as the reigning national buffoonery champion… it’s no surprise that none other than pastor doctor himself is the proud chairman of… wait for it… the national task force against homosexuality. lol!
On this thread, if you recall, I said the following :
‘Maazi’
You write a lot, but you say nothing new.
i still dont understand how he got away with showing porn to public crowds with kids… not once…
i didnt know he had an interview on sanyu fm… what i heard days ago on sanyu fm’s early morning news sounded like a recording from his statement, the same statement that got 5-10 seconds on NTV news the night before.
i’m amazed that he’s still trippin over pewpew.
I must confess that I heard the Sanyu FM interview in full; ‘p** p**’ featured strongly in Ssempa’s dialectic! In fact, ‘p** p**’ just about sums it all up!
In the Feb. ‘pastoral porn show’, children could be seen in the audience; in May, he remembered to send the children out half way through (a small improvement on before, I suppose!) – after certain sexual techniques had been described with reference to ice cream (maybe so the children could ‘relate better’ to the subject matter)!
A serious point: those public porn shows would almost certainly have led to Ssempa being up on a criminal charge in the (decadent – according to ‘Maazi-boy’) U.K..
Now to address some assertions you made earlier—-
It is not possible to get everyone to agree on any single subject matter on earth. Not all Americans agree with the necessity for the death penalty, but what counts is that majority of the population sees the necessity of that sort of “punishment”. Not all Brits agree that drugs should be illegal, but a simple majority still do. Of course, not all Africans (including the sex deviants themselves) condemn gayism. So what?! The fact remains that the overwhelming majority of Africans condemn it and want it to remain illegal.
Oh yes, it is indeed the African argument—-and what about it?!! Our worldview is completely different from yours. You chaps in the West believe in the libertarian ideology and the supremacy of individuality and the sacrosanctness of so-called “informed consent”. We in Africa believe in the concept of communal rights/interests being put before selfish individual rights/interests. For us, responsibility to one’s family and community is more important than that person’s right to indulge their compulsive sexual fantasies. The honourable judges of Botswana used arguments not too dissimilar to mine to dismiss three desperate attempts by a bunch of western-sponsored gay sex advocates to have the sodomy laws there quashed. In Uganda, we are confident that gayism shall not only be condemned by most, but it shall be strongly discouraged by law.
It is no brainer really. On January 14, I explained why it was “politically-safe” for Kizza Besigye to SAY what he said and get away with it.
You lot can have your SAY, but the African people will always have their WAY. We have our culture to protect and sexual perversion of any kind will never be tolerated and in the words of the President Salva Kiir of South Sudan to a Dutch radio station, “it shall always be condemned by all”. Consent is no excuse to engage in behaviour which Africans consider to be anti-social, abhorrent, inhuman and degrading.
Ah, it’s the ‘African’ argument again!
BTW, I notice that Ssempa’s latest little tantrum has not been reported in the main ‘quality’ UG daily newspapers (which I read every day).
‘Maazi’
What you might consider ‘turning yourself into’ is someone who looks at issues objectively. After all, how can one objectively support the idea of imprisoning X for a particular action, when Y can engage in the same action and not be imprisoned?
‘Maazi’
What you have consistently failed to do is to back up your assertions with credible evidence or reasoning.
I think you will find that most Ugandans share Ssempa’s rejection of gayism, but his methods may not be universally shared. It really doesn’t matter what Ssempa says or doesn’t say. Gayism is a crime and shall be handled as a law enforcement matter as it was done in 2000 and 2005 without fanfare or politics.
I have answered all questions put to me appropriately. May be you are not satisfied because I refused to turn myself into a raging Western libertarian ideologue for so-called “gay rights”.
An well, ‘Maazi’: I wish Uganda well … but things ain’t looking too good at the moment.
Maybe people like Ssempa could start thinking of something sensible to say. You too, come to think of it.
‘Maazi’
None of what you’ve said justifies the unjust treatment of gay Ugandans in consensual relationships. You keep talking about Europeans and Americans, yet you want to treat your gay fellow Ugandans unfairly, by imprisoning them for doing things that their straight counterparts also do. This is nonsense, pure and simple, however ‘humbly’ you express it.
Better to go to this link (the one above has, in the past, been associated with viruses:
http://www.thegrio.com/news/ugandan-anti-gay-pastor-airs-gay-porn-in-church.php
ok, so blockquote isnt my friend today. fine!
Agreed, all cultures are dynamic, but all cultures also have red-lines or “no-go” areas. As one would not expect European culture to evolve dynamically to legalize polygamous marriages so would African cultures reject gayism in its evolutionary trend.
Yes, as a matter of fact, it is indeed solution-oriented. If a bunch of sex perverts in collaboration with Western donor blackmailers are trying to impose behavioural patterns which are un-adaptable to the existing traditions and values that constitute African culture, then the culture will use its “self-preservation mechanism” to solve the problem by enacting stringent laws to keep itself from being corrupted unnecessarily.
Maazi, what do you think are some of the consequences of denying homosexuals the right to marry each other and forcing them to pretend that they are heterosexuals?
…suicide?
…fake heterosexual marriages?
…gay men who marry women but who are regularly forced to secretly respond to their natural same-sex inclinations?
and what are the health consequenses of such an arrangement?
…all of that is okay… just as long as homosexuals don’t marry each other, right? besides, the outdated african culture you constantly refer to insists that all men are entitled to a ‘side-dish’, right?
Blackmailers Maazi? I’m sure you have “evidence” of that charge?
LMAO! Gay people have been the part of EVERY culture since the beginning of time, including yours.
Like I said earlier, I find it highly offensive when statements like ‘oh but in Africa…’ and ‘we as Africans…’ are used to defend poor reasoning. No different to ‘African time’ as an excuse for lack of punctuality.
Maazi, I actually pity those who torture themselves by resisting inevitable change… do yourself a favor and get a headstart by visualizing and appreciating how much better Uganda will be when homosexuality is decriminalized and Ugandans learn that their sexually active lgbti brothers and sisters aren’t really evil demons to be punished by law… and that what some may consider ‘deviant’ private sexual behaviors between consenting adults is not worth the fuss and criminalization. dont get left behind… after all the discussions on this blog and elsewhere, you have everything you need to help you adjust and move with the times. unless you want to be laughed at as one of the world’s last living homophobes in your old age.
I agree, Anteros: religious fundamentalism is, at least partly, responsible for many depravities (the Kampala bombs, the unjust treatment of gay Africans, the state-sponsored murder of those who are found guilty of ‘blasphemy’, totalitarian politico-religious systems of state control, …).
Africans, Americans and Europeans who understand the dangers of religious fundamentalism are right in uniting to oppose it.
As for ‘culture’: again, I agree with you – culture is a dynamic thing. I also detect changes in attitude among my Ugandan friends, particularly when it comes to the current unjust treatment of their gay compatriots. After all, they understand that it is hardly in Uganda’s interest for Ugandans needlessly to ‘bash’ other Ugandans!
‘Maazi’s’ repeated cry does sound rather like ‘I can’t help thinking this way, because I’m African’. Sounds like an insult to Africans to me.
exploitation. anything to swell the crowds.
what a shame.
What I’m really saying, ‘Maazi’, is that you (and Ssempa) seriously underestimate the intelligence (and capacity for logical reasoning) of many of your compatriots.
I like that, Anteros: “contemporary african culture is more flexible, tolerant and solution-oriented”.
I think you are correct in many ways, although there is still a lot of ‘blind prejudice’ around’.
‘Maazi’s’ problem is probably that he would, in general terms, approve of a “more flexible, tolerant and solution-oriented” approach to life. After all, he is highly educated. What he fails to understand is that one cannot be SELECTIVE in the application of this approach. It’s no good saying “let’s be logical and solution-oriented when it comes to child sacrifice and witchcraft, but let’s stick to our tired old prejudices when it comes to gays”.
An aside: one of deeply shocking aspects of ‘anti-gay’ campaigns in UG, is the use of children in ‘anti-gay’ propaganda and protests (those pictures one sometimes sees of small children holding up signs that talk about homosexual acts are appalling). This effective ‘sexualization’ of children is utterly deplorable, and all right-thinking people should oppose it with every fibre of the being.
Here’s link to details of one of those ‘children’s protests’:
http://www.freeuganda.net/article93-Thousands-of-children-demonstrate-in-favour-of-anti-gay-bill
‘Maazi’
I didn’t say anything of the sort about Jesus.
The point at issue, ‘Maazi’, is not what people ‘like’ or ‘don’t like’ – it is about morality, philosophy and jurisprudence. There are many things I don’t like, but I do not propose that there should be unjust penal legislation against those who do those things.
The reason you make silly jokes about serious points (e.g. why should a gay couple be prosecuted for consensual oral or anal sex, and not a straight couple?) is because you cannot answer them satisfactorily. All you ever seem to say is ‘I can’t help supporting unjust penal legislation because I’m African’. Pathetic.
May I humbly add that the stringent laws may be unwritten as it was in pre-colonial times or codified in written form in colonial and post-colonial times
Maazi, going back to the issue of consent…
if two adults of the same sex agree to marry each other, and the whole of africa spits on their marriage in disgust… is that better or worse than the common african cultural practices of forced ‘widow inheritance’ and forced ‘child marriage’?
and as for adoption, it’s not like orphans in africa are spoilt for choice when it comes to adoption… and that’s because there are still too many africans who view adoption with cultural suspicion… most orphans live with their weak and destitute grandparents or they become street kids… some end up being used as labor by single parent/adopters who offer them nothing more than basic shelter and meagre food rations in exchange for their labor… kids open to all kinds of abuse as domestic assistants, soldiers, factory workers, bartenders, farm workers… let’s not pretend that the outdated version of african culture that you continuously refer to has all the answers. i fail to see why a willing, responspible, capable and loving couple who happen to be of the same sex should be stopped from taking care of a parentless child and giving them the love, attention and education that kids deserve… especially considering the culturally-sanctioned typical fate of african orphans.
the african culture you refer to is sadly outdated and fraught with issues. thankfully, culture is dynamic. contemporary african culture is more flexible, tolerant and solution-oriented. your abuse of african culture to blindly justify your hate is highly offensive and cannot be excused… and you know it.
Great to discuss with you, Ann!
By way of a P.S. …
The main passage cited by those who refer to Christianity when saying that same-sex relationships are ‘always wrong’ is probably Romans 1 : 18 – 32. I, and many others, take serious issue with those who use that passage in that way.
The I Corinthians 6 : 9 reference to ‘homosexuality’ (found in some translations of the Bible) is probably the result of the mistranslation of the rather unusual Greek word that S. Paul actually used.
Richard Willmer,
Thank you – think I understand. If a person is looking for confirmation as how to be sexually ethical, it can be found in the new testament. If they are looking for confirmation to engage in same gender sex, there is nothing explicitly forbidding it. It is mostly what they are taught by the church, synagogue, mosque, etc., parents, etc. that can influence how they feel about sex.
Richard Willmer,
To this, I completely agree.
As to the other point – I was just curious if there was anything specific in the new testament that was a grounding point for those individuals who reference their Christian religion as the reason they are abstaining from same gender sex. I think it is in the interpretation of the new testament and our conscience that guide this decision. Thanks again for all your great responses to my questions.
Richard,
If you are expecting me to quote Socrates, Plato, Thomas Aquinas or Voltaire, then you are wasting your time. If you are expecting me to quote the late British Judge, Lord Alfred Denning (Master of the Rolls, 1962-1982), then you are wasting your time equally. The only reality that matters is that gayism is opposed by Africans for the same set of cultural reasons I have given in the past. This negative African view of gayism is analogous to the German/Austrian view of holocaust denial as a taboo and a terrible crime.
Ann
It’s a complex business. I don’t think anyone can credibly claim that the New Testament contains any affirmation of same-sex relationships per se either.
What IS clear is the kind of violent malice peddled by the likes of Ssempa is totally indefensible.
Ann, Richard and Atheist,
Interesting religious discussions, even though I did detect Richard’s attempt to adopt Elton John style “Jesus-is-a-compassionate-gay-man” arguments to defend gayism. Anyways, regardless of what Christianity or Islam has to say about that deviant behaviour, the most important thing is that most African cultures abhor gayism and concepts such as “same-sex marriage” or “child adoption rights for gays” are fundamentally incompatible with African traditions, customs and practices. Thanks.
‘Maazi’
My question again:-
What ‘justification’ do you offer for sending gay people to prison for sexual activity X (pursuant to informed consent), while NOT sending straight people to prison for the same activity?
It is no secret that I have no love for religion for many reason. The biggest is because of my undying love of truth and reason. The other is because I can never understand how my people who have been enslaved for centuries could so willingly adopt their slave master’s God and willingly bow before yet another master, the great overseer in the sky. Sorry, I bow to no one. The other is because I think it impedes people’s ability to reason clearly and it has turned my friends and family into yet another mindless zombies. And the biggest is because the religion I grew up with, Christianity, is filled with hate and intolerance which has spawned millions of hateful intolerant people who justify their hatred with the bible. And before you say that these people are misinterpreting the bible please read it. I think you’d be surprised.
In Leviticus 20:11 the Lord says unto Moses: “If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”
How can a religion that on its surface professes to be so peaceful and loving contain such hate? But more importantly how can genuinely sweet and loving people accept it? How can the very people this hatred is aimed at still accept it?
I have never understood how people can read such hateful intolerant crap in the bible and say “Well, I don’t believe that part.” or, “I don’t accept everything the bible says.” or, “I choose to interpret it differently.” How many different ways can you interpret hate? How many different ways can you interpret the fact that the bible says all homosexuals should be put to death? How then can we continue to call this wrathful intolerant deity the God of love? Remember the laws governing chain of evidence? Garbage in. Garbage out. If you can admit that there are things in the bible that are contrary to your beliefs, thing that you believe to be false, vicious, nasty, and hateful, things you do not accept, how then can you believe any of it? Garbage in. Garbage out.
There seems to me to be no ambiguity about it, no room for interpretation. It says quite clearly that God is a homophobe who thinks all homosexuals should be put to death despite the fact that he created their very nature. Yet, we have gays who flock to the Christian church, struggling to hold onto a faith that has clearly expressed hatred for their very existence. What sense does this make? The Pope is against gay marriage yet we have gay priests, bishops, and cardinals and I would not doubt that there has been a gay pope or two. How can they rectify their faith with the fact that their own religion has commanded their extinction?
The church’s hatred of gays isn’t the only twisted morality in the bible, however. For those who cling to Leviticus as their excuse to hate all homosexuals please read the rest of that lovely little chapter. It also says that eating pork and rabbit and lobster and crab is a sin. Getting a tattoo is a sin. A woman on her period should be kept in isolation for seven days when she is menstruating and whoever touches anything she sits or lays upon will be unclean. And if a man has sex with a woman who is menstruating then both of them should be exiled from their people. And if a woman is the daughter of a priest and she becomes promiscuous than she should be burnt to death. If a man masturbates he should be put to death. It also condones making slaves of heathens and buying and selling their children. That’s right. The King James Bible condones slavery. So, if you believe that homosexuals are sinners do you also believe all the rest of this crap and if not then why not? You want your pork and lobster and tattoos but lets stone all the gays? Is your faith so arbitrary that you can pick and choose what of it to believe and what of it to reject? Is the bible the infallible word of God or is it not? Is it merely a matter of fashion and convenience?
I apologize if I sound hostile but all the people who talk about “True Christianity” and call the extremists and hate mongers who burn crosses on lawns and blow up abortion clinics and perform exorcisms on their gay children “false Christians” should perhaps read the bible again and not just the user-friendly New Testament. Read the whole damn thing.
I have never understood how Black people could be Christians when it was a religion that was force fed to us by our slave owners. When our enslavement is condoned in the bible, since we were then those heathens Leviticus talks about making “bondsmen and bonds maids” out of and giving our children to their children as “possessions”. Now the bible is used by racists to condemn “The children of Ham”. Another excuse to hate. I have never understood how Mexicans could be some of the most devout Christians on the planet when Conquistadors murdered Mexicans by the tens of thousands and stole their gold while missionaries of the Christian church, baptizing Mexican babies before smashing their heads with stones.
And I certainly cannot understand how homosexuals can be Christians when it is the Christian right that opposes gay marriage, gay rights, gay existence and even some of the most liberal Christians, like my loving cousin, still believe that you are all mentally disturbed.
There are many good Christians who love all of humanity and are tolerant of everyone’s differences. There are many that are not. That’s really not the question here. The question is of the religion itself, the bible itself. Is it homophobic? I don’t see how you can read it and think otherwise. Are the churches who say to homosexuals, “Come on in! We welcome you and we are here to help you to stop being an abomination against our God with your sinful lifestyle,” really what you consider to be loving and accepting? Or are they destructive to impressionable youths who might be gay and scared and confused and probably depressed and suicidal or who might have gay classmates they are thinking about bashing the hell out of. And if God is a homophobe can we still call him the god of love? Should good, loving people still worship him?
Can you call yourself a good person even while you are voting against another human being’s right to marry the person they love just because your religion tells you to? Isn’t that like the Nazi’s who claimed they were just following orders? Isn’t it your duty as a good person, Christian or not, to stand up for what you know to be right regardless of what it says in the bible, just like you did against slavery and locking women away during their menstrual cycles and murdering men who “giveth his seed unto Molech”? Does being a good Christian inhibit you from being a good human being? All I’m asking is that you think about it. Put your faith aside for one moment and use your heart and mind.
TAKE TWO!
Ann
I take the view that people’s decisions are based on a range of thoughts and emotions. I can see why some comments in especially Saint Paul’s epistles might lead one to suppose that there is some kind of ‘blanket ban’ on same-sex relationships, although I would argue against such an interpretation of those passages – on linguistic and contextual grounds, as well as from my own ‘gut feelings’.
As far as people ‘abstaining’ from sex is concerned: there are all sorts of reasons why someone might decide that this is best for them – their own interpretation of the (apparent) New Testament references to ‘homosexuality’ possibly among them. Of course, it is also the case that the Church has traditionally taught that same-sex relationships are wrong, although this ‘traditional line’ is now a matter for open discussion (rather than simply ‘accepted’) by Christians, even in Uganda.
Ssempa’s behaviour is ‘something else’, of course. He is in the business of active persecution. This is considered utterly reprehensible, even wicked, by many many Christians (including some I know in Uganda – any ‘unease’ they may have regarding ‘homosexuality’ per se notwithstanding).
Ann
I take the view that people’s decisions are based on a range of thoughts and emotions. I can see why some comments in especially Saint Paul’s epistles might lead one to suppose that there is some kind of ‘blanket ban’ on same-sex relationships, although I would argue against such an interpretation of those passages – on linguistic and contextual grounds, as well as from my own ‘gut feelings’.
As far as people ‘abstaining’ from sex is concerned: there are all sorts of reasons why someone might decide that this is best for them – their own interpretation of the (apparent) New Testament references to ‘homosexuality’ possibly among them. Of course, it is also the case that the Church has traditionally taught that same-sex relationships are wrong, although this matter is now openly discussed (rather than simply ‘accepted’) by Christians, even in Uganda.
Ssempa’s behaviour is ‘something else’, of course. He is in the business of active persecution. This is considered utterly reprehensible, even wicked, by many many Christians (including some I know in Uganda – any ‘unease’ they may have regarding ‘homosexuality’ per se).
Atheist
You make the mistake of confusing the Old Testament (which is there to indicate the ‘provenance’ of Christianity – the ‘historical background’) and the New Testament (which forms the scriptural basis of Christianity itself). They are fundamentally different, because the latter was written AFTER the ‘ultimate revelation’ of God in Christ.
Those who use little bits of the O.T. to justify the unjustifiable are ignoring the fact that the human revelation of God is more important than that which is ‘on paper’. ‘The Word was made Flesh and dwelt among us … full of grace and truth’ – and this ‘trumps’ all the ‘nasty stuff’ in the O.T..
(A further point: when it says ‘the Lord said to Moses …’ etc., we must remember that this is not a literal, scientific truth, but an interpretation on the part of the writer in question. Much of the earlier part of O.T. is ‘narrative’, rather than ‘teaching’ – lessons to be learned from this narrative must be understood in the light of the teaching and example of Christ. It is also the case that, in the latter part of the O.T., much of the teaching of the prophets is filled with compassion; the prophets continually warn those to whom they address their words that God has no time for those who oppress or exploit others.)
The ungracious, dishonest squawking of Ssempa and Co. is not Christian – not at all. In fact, people like him are bringing Christianity into disrepute.
I have already spoken at length about our “social paradigm” and “worldview” which is miles apart from the western-centric libertarian ideology pervasive in your country. Please carefully read my previous comments again in other thread to refresh your mind.
This might even be helpful – even our own ‘Maazi NCO’ thinks that Ssempa is a nutter!
It should have read:
….if possible, chain your American religious fundamentalist opponents to the Statue of Liberty so that THEY do not come to interfere in Ugandan affairs [as well]
The problem with Ssempa,he dehumanise gays by not recognising their loving commitment to one another.
Africans should know that the hatred against gays is identical to the hatred white racists feel towards blacks. Being black is not a choice, being gay is not a choice. And the only reason why religionists insist that homosexuality is a choice is so that they can say that people who “choose” to be gay must be punished the same as murderers and rapists.
Yet another dip in the canard. There is no credible, conclusive scientific proof your bold statement. But I agree that gayism should not be a capital offence, rather a prison sentence is okay for the abominable sex crime. If you are American, please stick to fighting against your religious compatriots in the ongoing US Cultural Civil War over gayism and spin-offs such as gay marriage and child adoption rights for gays in all 50 states. Do not stick your nose into our affairs and if possible, chain your American religious fundamentalist opponents to the Statue of Liberty so that do not come to interfere in Ugandan affairs.
Atheist,
I am not too supportive of religious organizations that impose their beliefs on others and then judge them negatively if that belief system is not accepted or practiced. Separate from that though, where do you think our concious and/or ability to feel comes from?
On the contrary, I think Ssempa is a brilliant man !!— but his strategy for opposing gayism is NOT the one I would follow or recommend to anyone. Nevertheless, his passionate opposition to gayism is in line with that of the vast majority of the Ugandan people, myself included. In the final analysis, enacting a revised version of the Bahati Bill will remain a law enforcement issue not an election issue
Ann
Life is full of ironies. For example, liberal Judaism is generally tolerant of same-sex relationships that are based on mutual respect and care (a couple of verses in the Book of Leviticus notwithstanding); liberal Christianity similarly.
There is no clear ‘blanket’ prohibition of same-sex relationships in the New Testament (and, I would argue, in the Old Testament either … once a proper analysis of the Leviticus material, which is thought by many scholars to refer to ritual same-sex prostitution in Babylonian temples, and not to loving same-sex partnerships, is taken into account). It is true that ‘marriage’ is presented as an ideal in, for example, Genesis – though even such high-profile characters as King Solomon and King David deviated significantly from the ideal as stated! More recently, the startling reference to male prostitutes made by the Pope indicates an evolving line of thought in the Catholic Church. Of course, the Pope’s reference to morality makes clear that ‘ideals’ and ‘morals’ are not the same thing; being ‘morally aware’ is not about conforming to ideals – it is about making real choices in the real world.
‘Maazi’
You have not address my question in an objective manner (at least not to my satisfaction – I don’t accept arguments based on ‘cultural relativism’), as was the case over those claims of systematic ‘recruitment’.
Very well, let’s move on …
What ‘justification’ do you offer for sending gay people to prison for sexual activity X (pursuant to informed consent), while NOT sending straight people to prison for the same activity?
Richard Willmer,
When a person says they are gay, however, will not have same gender sex because of their religious beliefs, what do they base this religious belief on – the new or old testament? Obviously, those of the Jewish religion would base it on the old testament but what about a Christian – does the new testament have any reference forbidding same gender sex? I also think, in some cases, religion plays no part in someone making a personal decision to abstain from same gender sex.
The above quote should have read:
There is no credible, conclusive scientific proof OF your bold statement…
I find something puzzling: since Maazi NCO (non-commissioned officer?) is filled with such contempt for us and all our gayistic corrupt decadent western ways… why does he feel the constant need to keep coming here to tell us?
‘Ssempa brilliant?’
That wasn’t quite how it sounded in your earlier post, but thanks for the clarification.
Anyway, perhaps you’d now like to give us your philosophical and jurisprudential ‘justifications’ for drawing a parallel between rape, robeery and murder, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, consensual sexual relations?
An well, ‘Maazi’: I wish Uganda well … but things ain’t looking too good at the moment.
Maybe people like Ssempa could start thinking of something sensible to say. You too, come to think of it.
‘Maazi’
What you might consider ‘turning yourself into’ is someone who looks at issues objectively. After all, how can one objectively support the idea of imprisoning X for a particular action, when Y can engage in the same action and not be imprisoned?
‘Maazi’
What you have consistently failed to do is to back up your assertions with credible evidence or reasoning.
I think you will find that most Ugandans share Ssempa’s rejection of gayism, but his methods may not be universally shared. It really doesn’t matter what Ssempa says or doesn’t say. Gayism is a crime and shall be handled as a law enforcement matter as it was done in 2000 and 2005 without fanfare or politics.
I have answered all questions put to me appropriately. May be you are not satisfied because I refused to turn myself into a raging Western libertarian ideologue for so-called “gay rights”.
But, ‘Maazi’, if ‘homosexuality’ is (as you claim) such an important issue with regard to ‘African culture’, why is Ssempa being ignored these days?
Anteros and I have made a wide range of points, none of which you have answered satisfactorily, despite the large quantity of verbiage you inflict upon us.
No I did not confuse the two men. The local press are too engrossed in other matters to report Besigye’s comments on gayism. The press are equally not interested in reporting Ssempa’s response to Besigye’s comment for exactly the same reasons. Like I said earlier, gayism is law enforcement issue not election matter.
Well, the same can be said about you and your online pal, Anteros.
‘Pewpew’! How very droll!
There was an interview, which I heard, just over a week ago (Thursday 13th, I think).
i still dont understand how he got away with showing porn to public crowds with kids… not once…
i didnt know he had an interview on sanyu fm… what i heard days ago on sanyu fm’s early morning news sounded like a recording from his statement, the same statement that got 5-10 seconds on NTV news the night before.
i’m amazed that he’s still trippin over pewpew.
I must confess that I heard the Sanyu FM interview in full; ‘p** p**’ featured strongly in Ssempa’s dialectic! In fact, ‘p** p**’ just about sums it all up!
In the Feb. ‘pastoral porn show’, children could be seen in the audience; in May, he remembered to send the children out half way through (a small improvement on before, I suppose!) – after certain sexual techniques had been described with reference to ice cream (maybe so the children could ‘relate better’ to the subject matter)!
A serious point: those public porn shows would almost certainly have led to Ssempa being up on a criminal charge in the (decadent – according to ‘Maazi-boy’) U.K..
Richard, it was neutral on NTV news too. They let him speak for himself… and he basically made a rocking fool of himself. When he gets attention, I don’t think he realises that people are laughing at him, his nutty obsessions, and his lost cause.
On Sanyu fm news, right after playing a brief recording of him yelling his lungs out at besigye, they talked about him facing charges for bribing and manipulating boys into claiming that they were sexually abused by another pastor.
Funny how he accuses ordinary lgbti ugandans of using foreign money to “recruit” minors into homosexuality, then decides to use foreign money to recruit minors as pawns in his dirty and deceitful anti-gay crusades.
Ever since eat da poo poo hit youtube, he’s firmly holding on to his title as the reigning national buffoonery champion… it’s no surprise that none other than pastor doctor himself is the proud chairman of… wait for it… the national task force against homosexuality. lol!
Anteros
In his ‘excitement’, has ‘Maazi’ confused Besigye with Ssempa, I wonder? My recent comment said that SSEMPA’S latest public statement had not been reported – i.e. the ANTI-gay statement was not covered. As far as I know, only MTN News covered it and, like the Sanyu FM interview that preceded it, the coverage was ‘neutral’, rather than ‘pro-Ssempa’ or ‘pro-homophobia’.
‘Maazi’
You write a lot, but you say nothing new.
Maazi says,
Consent is
no excuse to engage in
behaviour which Africans
consider to be anti-social,
abhorrent, inhuman and
degrading.
Still playing dumb.
You stopped short of claiming that all non-Africans will seek any excuse to engage in homosexuality because all non-Africans are so homophilic that they might as well all be homosexuals and leave heterosexuality up to Africans, the righteous and morally superior race – according to your personal morality yardstick.
When countries around the world began decriminalizing homosexuality, do you honestly believe that they “approved” homosexuality and thereby encouraged their citizens to engage in homosexuality? Please answer that question, Maazi.
Let me encourage you to consider Africa’s entire population and incredible diversity before you selfishly assume the role of Africa’s spokesperson by making statements on behalf of all Africans, Mr. Africa.
There are millions of Africans who regularly do a lot more than offer their personal consent to personally engage in what you personally consider anti-social, abhorrent, inhuman and degrading. With such poor regard for personal consent, it’s little wonder why those Africans who insist on clinging onto last century’s cultural norms and practices would force unwilling children and widows into marriage. This is 2011… Africans are no longer governed by the say-so of their ancestors, “elders” and outdated customs… we won’t have morally corrupt authorities, or anybody else, poking their noses into our bedrooms offering and denying consent on our behalf for every little sexual thing.
Maazi, Africa isn’t your little puppy for you to train, discipline and brag about the breed, genealogy and behavior you wish it had.
Africans are no less entitled to privacy than other human beings. It’s a human right, found in the Ugandan Constitution – put there to protect all Ugandan citizens from nosy violators of human rights.
And because privacy is a constitutional internationally recognized human right… whatever consenting adults choose to do in privacy cannot be policed because that would infringe on their right to privacy… no matter how African they are… no matter what your ninety whatever percent of Ugandans would have to say about it if they ever got to know… and I am pretty sure that most wouldn’t care to find out… and if they did care to find out, then the problem would lie in their unconstitutional nosiness, not in their neighbors’ bedrooms.
Now to address some assertions you made earlier—-
It is not possible to get everyone to agree on any single subject matter on earth. Not all Americans agree with the necessity for the death penalty, but what counts is that majority of the population sees the necessity of that sort of “punishment”. Not all Brits agree that drugs should be illegal, but a simple majority still do. Of course, not all Africans (including the sex deviants themselves) condemn gayism. So what?! The fact remains that the overwhelming majority of Africans condemn it and want it to remain illegal.
Oh yes, it is indeed the African argument—-and what about it?!! Our worldview is completely different from yours. You chaps in the West believe in the libertarian ideology and the supremacy of individuality and the sacrosanctness of so-called “informed consent”. We in Africa believe in the concept of communal rights/interests being put before selfish individual rights/interests. For us, responsibility to one’s family and community is more important than that person’s right to indulge their compulsive sexual fantasies. The honourable judges of Botswana used arguments not too dissimilar to mine to dismiss three desperate attempts by a bunch of western-sponsored gay sex advocates to have the sodomy laws there quashed. In Uganda, we are confident that gayism shall not only be condemned by most, but it shall be strongly discouraged by law.
On this thread, if you recall, I said the following :
It is no brainer really. On January 14, I explained why it was “politically-safe” for Kizza Besigye to SAY what he said and get away with it.
It is no brainer really. On January 14, I explained why it was “politically-safe” for Kizza Besigye to what he said and get away with it.
BTW, I notice that Ssempa’s latest little tantrum has not been reported in the main ‘quality’ UG daily newspapers (which I read every day).
Also, what you say is untrue: not all Africans condemn their gay compatriots; millions of Africans accept them as their fellow Africans. (Given his dubious record in places like Dafur, I hardly think that Kiir can be held up as a ‘beacon of moral rectitude’!)
Ah, it’s the ‘African’ argument again!
You lot can have your SAY, but the African people will always have their WAY. We have our culture to protect and sexual perversion of any kind will never be tolerated and in the words of the President Salva Kiir of South Sudan to a Dutch radio station, “it shall always be condemned by all”. Consent is no excuse to engage in behaviour which Africans consider to be anti-social, abhorrent, inhuman and degrading.
Anteros –
It is indeed exploitative, hypocritical and profoundly ironic, since the ‘anti-gay’ mob so often claim to be the ‘protectors’ of children.
It is no brainer really. On January 14, I explained why it was “politically-safe” for Kizza Besigye to what he said and get away with it.
Also, what you say is untrue: not all Africans condemn their gay compatriots; millions of Africans accept them as their fellow Africans. (Given his dubious record in places like Dafur, I hardly think that Kiir can be held up as a ‘beacon of moral rectitude’!)
Anteros –
It is indeed exploitative, hypocritical and profoundly ironic, since the ‘anti-gay’ mob so often claim to be the ‘protectors’ of children.
Homophobia and discrimination based on religious fundamentalism is one of those “NO GO” areas Maazi.
Homophobia and discrimination based on religious fundamentalism is one of those “NO GO” areas Maazi.
exploitation. anything to swell the crowds.
what a shame.
Better to go to this link (the one above has, in the past, been associated with viruses:
http://www.thegrio.com/news/ugandan-anti-gay-pastor-airs-gay-porn-in-church.php
Here’s link to details of one of those ‘children’s protests’:
http://www.freeuganda.net/article93-Thousands-of-children-demonstrate-in-favour-of-anti-gay-bill
An aside: one of deeply shocking aspects of ‘anti-gay’ campaigns in UG, is the use of children in ‘anti-gay’ propaganda and protests (those pictures one sometimes sees of small children holding up signs that talk about homosexual acts are appalling). This effective ‘sexualization’ of children is utterly deplorable, and all right-thinking people should oppose it with every fibre of the being.
Blackmailers Maazi? I’m sure you have “evidence” of that charge?
LMAO! Gay people have been the part of EVERY culture since the beginning of time, including yours.
Like I said earlier, I find it highly offensive when statements like ‘oh but in Africa…’ and ‘we as Africans…’ are used to defend poor reasoning. No different to ‘African time’ as an excuse for lack of punctuality.
I agree, Anteros: religious fundamentalism is, at least partly, responsible for many depravities (the Kampala bombs, the unjust treatment of gay Africans, the state-sponsored murder of those who are found guilty of ‘blasphemy’, totalitarian politico-religious systems of state control, …).
Africans, Americans and Europeans who understand the dangers of religious fundamentalism are right in uniting to oppose it.
As for ‘culture’: again, I agree with you – culture is a dynamic thing. I also detect changes in attitude among my Ugandan friends, particularly when it comes to the current unjust treatment of their gay compatriots. After all, they understand that it is hardly in Uganda’s interest for Ugandans needlessly to ‘bash’ other Ugandans!
‘Maazi’s’ repeated cry does sound rather like ‘I can’t help thinking this way, because I’m African’. Sounds like an insult to Africans to me.
ok, so blockquote isnt my friend today. fine!
‘Maazi’
None of what you’ve said justifies the unjust treatment of gay Ugandans in consensual relationships. You keep talking about Europeans and Americans, yet you want to treat your gay fellow Ugandans unfairly, by imprisoning them for doing things that their straight counterparts also do. This is nonsense, pure and simple, however ‘humbly’ you express it.
Maazi, I actually pity those who torture themselves by resisting inevitable change… do yourself a favor and get a headstart by visualizing and appreciating how much better Uganda will be when homosexuality is decriminalized and Ugandans learn that their sexually active lgbti brothers and sisters aren’t really evil demons to be punished by law… and that what some may consider ‘deviant’ private sexual behaviors between consenting adults is not worth the fuss and criminalization. dont get left behind… after all the discussions on this blog and elsewhere, you have everything you need to help you adjust and move with the times. unless you want to be laughed at as one of the world’s last living homophobes in your old age.
May I humbly add that the stringent laws may be unwritten as it was in pre-colonial times or codified in written form in colonial and post-colonial times
Agreed, all cultures are dynamic, but all cultures also have red-lines or “no-go” areas. As one would not expect European culture to evolve dynamically to legalize polygamous marriages so would African cultures reject gayism in its evolutionary trend.
Yes, as a matter of fact, it is indeed solution-oriented. If a bunch of sex perverts in collaboration with Western donor blackmailers are trying to impose behavioural patterns which are un-adaptable to the existing traditions and values that constitute African culture, then the culture will use its “self-preservation mechanism” to solve the problem by enacting stringent laws to keep itself from being corrupted unnecessarily.
I like that, Anteros: “contemporary african culture is more flexible, tolerant and solution-oriented”.
I think you are correct in many ways, although there is still a lot of ‘blind prejudice’ around’.
‘Maazi’s’ problem is probably that he would, in general terms, approve of a “more flexible, tolerant and solution-oriented” approach to life. After all, he is highly educated. What he fails to understand is that one cannot be SELECTIVE in the application of this approach. It’s no good saying “let’s be logical and solution-oriented when it comes to child sacrifice and witchcraft, but let’s stick to our tired old prejudices when it comes to gays”.
Maazi, what do you think are some of the consequences of denying homosexuals the right to marry each other and forcing them to pretend that they are heterosexuals?
…suicide?
…fake heterosexual marriages?
…gay men who marry women but who are regularly forced to secretly respond to their natural same-sex inclinations?
and what are the health consequenses of such an arrangement?
…all of that is okay… just as long as homosexuals don’t marry each other, right? besides, the outdated african culture you constantly refer to insists that all men are entitled to a ‘side-dish’, right?
Maazi, going back to the issue of consent…
if two adults of the same sex agree to marry each other, and the whole of africa spits on their marriage in disgust… is that better or worse than the common african cultural practices of forced ‘widow inheritance’ and forced ‘child marriage’?
and as for adoption, it’s not like orphans in africa are spoilt for choice when it comes to adoption… and that’s because there are still too many africans who view adoption with cultural suspicion… most orphans live with their weak and destitute grandparents or they become street kids… some end up being used as labor by single parent/adopters who offer them nothing more than basic shelter and meagre food rations in exchange for their labor… kids open to all kinds of abuse as domestic assistants, soldiers, factory workers, bartenders, farm workers… let’s not pretend that the outdated version of african culture that you continuously refer to has all the answers. i fail to see why a willing, responspible, capable and loving couple who happen to be of the same sex should be stopped from taking care of a parentless child and giving them the love, attention and education that kids deserve… especially considering the culturally-sanctioned typical fate of african orphans.
the african culture you refer to is sadly outdated and fraught with issues. thankfully, culture is dynamic. contemporary african culture is more flexible, tolerant and solution-oriented. your abuse of african culture to blindly justify your hate is highly offensive and cannot be excused… and you know it.
What I’m really saying, ‘Maazi’, is that you (and Ssempa) seriously underestimate the intelligence (and capacity for logical reasoning) of many of your compatriots.
‘Maazi’
I didn’t say anything of the sort about Jesus.
The point at issue, ‘Maazi’, is not what people ‘like’ or ‘don’t like’ – it is about morality, philosophy and jurisprudence. There are many things I don’t like, but I do not propose that there should be unjust penal legislation against those who do those things.
The reason you make silly jokes about serious points (e.g. why should a gay couple be prosecuted for consensual oral or anal sex, and not a straight couple?) is because you cannot answer them satisfactorily. All you ever seem to say is ‘I can’t help supporting unjust penal legislation because I’m African’. Pathetic.
Ann, Richard and Atheist,
Interesting religious discussions, even though I did detect Richard’s attempt to adopt Elton John style “Jesus-is-a-compassionate-gay-man” arguments to defend gayism. Anyways, regardless of what Christianity or Islam has to say about that deviant behaviour, the most important thing is that most African cultures abhor gayism and concepts such as “same-sex marriage” or “child adoption rights for gays” are fundamentally incompatible with African traditions, customs and practices. Thanks.
Richard,
If you are expecting me to quote Socrates, Plato, Thomas Aquinas or Voltaire, then you are wasting your time. If you are expecting me to quote the late British Judge, Lord Alfred Denning (Master of the Rolls, 1962-1982), then you are wasting your time equally. The only reality that matters is that gayism is opposed by Africans for the same set of cultural reasons I have given in the past. This negative African view of gayism is analogous to the German/Austrian view of holocaust denial as a taboo and a terrible crime.
Great to discuss with you, Ann!
By way of a P.S. …
The main passage cited by those who refer to Christianity when saying that same-sex relationships are ‘always wrong’ is probably Romans 1 : 18 – 32. I, and many others, take serious issue with those who use that passage in that way.
The I Corinthians 6 : 9 reference to ‘homosexuality’ (found in some translations of the Bible) is probably the result of the mistranslation of the rather unusual Greek word that S. Paul actually used.
Richard Willmer,
To this, I completely agree.
As to the other point – I was just curious if there was anything specific in the new testament that was a grounding point for those individuals who reference their Christian religion as the reason they are abstaining from same gender sex. I think it is in the interpretation of the new testament and our conscience that guide this decision. Thanks again for all your great responses to my questions.
Ann
It’s a complex business. I don’t think anyone can credibly claim that the New Testament contains any affirmation of same-sex relationships per se either.
What IS clear is the kind of violent malice peddled by the likes of Ssempa is totally indefensible.
Richard Willmer,
Thank you – think I understand. If a person is looking for confirmation as how to be sexually ethical, it can be found in the new testament. If they are looking for confirmation to engage in same gender sex, there is nothing explicitly forbidding it. It is mostly what they are taught by the church, synagogue, mosque, etc., parents, etc. that can influence how they feel about sex.
TAKE TWO!
Ann
I take the view that people’s decisions are based on a range of thoughts and emotions. I can see why some comments in especially Saint Paul’s epistles might lead one to suppose that there is some kind of ‘blanket ban’ on same-sex relationships, although I would argue against such an interpretation of those passages – on linguistic and contextual grounds, as well as from my own ‘gut feelings’.
As far as people ‘abstaining’ from sex is concerned: there are all sorts of reasons why someone might decide that this is best for them – their own interpretation of the (apparent) New Testament references to ‘homosexuality’ possibly among them. Of course, it is also the case that the Church has traditionally taught that same-sex relationships are wrong, although this ‘traditional line’ is now a matter for open discussion (rather than simply ‘accepted’) by Christians, even in Uganda.
Ssempa’s behaviour is ‘something else’, of course. He is in the business of active persecution. This is considered utterly reprehensible, even wicked, by many many Christians (including some I know in Uganda – any ‘unease’ they may have regarding ‘homosexuality’ per se notwithstanding).
Ann
I take the view that people’s decisions are based on a range of thoughts and emotions. I can see why some comments in especially Saint Paul’s epistles might lead one to suppose that there is some kind of ‘blanket ban’ on same-sex relationships, although I would argue against such an interpretation of those passages – on linguistic and contextual grounds, as well as from my own ‘gut feelings’.
As far as people ‘abstaining’ from sex is concerned: there are all sorts of reasons why someone might decide that this is best for them – their own interpretation of the (apparent) New Testament references to ‘homosexuality’ possibly among them. Of course, it is also the case that the Church has traditionally taught that same-sex relationships are wrong, although this matter is now openly discussed (rather than simply ‘accepted’) by Christians, even in Uganda.
Ssempa’s behaviour is ‘something else’, of course. He is in the business of active persecution. This is considered utterly reprehensible, even wicked, by many many Christians (including some I know in Uganda – any ‘unease’ they may have regarding ‘homosexuality’ per se).
Richard Willmer,
Thank you.
When a Christian says they are abstaining from same gender sex based on their religious beliefs, I wonder what they are referring to? I know my own beliefs on faith and about the new testament and the miracle of redemption and transformation, however, I wonder what people are referring to when they say it is their religious beliefs, if, in fact, there are no specific reference forbidding same gender sex in the new testament.
Ann
Life is full of ironies. For example, liberal Judaism is generally tolerant of same-sex relationships that are based on mutual respect and care (a couple of verses in the Book of Leviticus notwithstanding); liberal Christianity similarly.
There is no clear ‘blanket’ prohibition of same-sex relationships in the New Testament (and, I would argue, in the Old Testament either … once a proper analysis of the Leviticus material, which is thought by many scholars to refer to ritual same-sex prostitution in Babylonian temples, and not to loving same-sex partnerships, is taken into account). It is true that ‘marriage’ is presented as an ideal in, for example, Genesis – though even such high-profile characters as King Solomon and King David deviated significantly from the ideal as stated! More recently, the startling reference to male prostitutes made by the Pope indicates an evolving line of thought in the Catholic Church. Of course, the Pope’s reference to morality makes clear that ‘ideals’ and ‘morals’ are not the same thing; being ‘morally aware’ is not about conforming to ideals – it is about making real choices in the real world.
Richard Willmer,
When a person says they are gay, however, will not have same gender sex because of their religious beliefs, what do they base this religious belief on – the new or old testament? Obviously, those of the Jewish religion would base it on the old testament but what about a Christian – does the new testament have any reference forbidding same gender sex? I also think, in some cases, religion plays no part in someone making a personal decision to abstain from same gender sex.
Atheist
You make the mistake of confusing the Old Testament (which is there to indicate the ‘provenance’ of Christianity – the ‘historical background’) and the New Testament (which forms the scriptural basis of Christianity itself). They are fundamentally different, because the latter was written AFTER the ‘ultimate revelation’ of God in Christ.
Those who use little bits of the O.T. to justify the unjustifiable are ignoring the fact that the human revelation of God is more important than that which is ‘on paper’. ‘The Word was made Flesh and dwelt among us … full of grace and truth’ – and this ‘trumps’ all the ‘nasty stuff’ in the O.T..
(A further point: when it says ‘the Lord said to Moses …’ etc., we must remember that this is not a literal, scientific truth, but an interpretation on the part of the writer in question. Much of the earlier part of O.T. is ‘narrative’, rather than ‘teaching’ – lessons to be learned from this narrative must be understood in the light of the teaching and example of Christ. It is also the case that, in the latter part of the O.T., much of the teaching of the prophets is filled with compassion; the prophets continually warn those to whom they address their words that God has no time for those who oppress or exploit others.)
The ungracious, dishonest squawking of Ssempa and Co. is not Christian – not at all. In fact, people like him are bringing Christianity into disrepute.
Atheist,
I am not too supportive of religious organizations that impose their beliefs on others and then judge them negatively if that belief system is not accepted or practiced. Separate from that though, where do you think our concious and/or ability to feel comes from?
Richard Willmer,
Thank you.
When a Christian says they are abstaining from same gender sex based on their religious beliefs, I wonder what they are referring to? I know my own beliefs on faith and about the new testament and the miracle of redemption and transformation, however, I wonder what people are referring to when they say it is their religious beliefs, if, in fact, there are no specific reference forbidding same gender sex in the new testament.
It is no secret that I have no love for religion for many reason. The biggest is because of my undying love of truth and reason. The other is because I can never understand how my people who have been enslaved for centuries could so willingly adopt their slave master’s God and willingly bow before yet another master, the great overseer in the sky. Sorry, I bow to no one. The other is because I think it impedes people’s ability to reason clearly and it has turned my friends and family into yet another mindless zombies. And the biggest is because the religion I grew up with, Christianity, is filled with hate and intolerance which has spawned millions of hateful intolerant people who justify their hatred with the bible. And before you say that these people are misinterpreting the bible please read it. I think you’d be surprised.
In Leviticus 20:11 the Lord says unto Moses: “If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”
How can a religion that on its surface professes to be so peaceful and loving contain such hate? But more importantly how can genuinely sweet and loving people accept it? How can the very people this hatred is aimed at still accept it?
I have never understood how people can read such hateful intolerant crap in the bible and say “Well, I don’t believe that part.” or, “I don’t accept everything the bible says.” or, “I choose to interpret it differently.” How many different ways can you interpret hate? How many different ways can you interpret the fact that the bible says all homosexuals should be put to death? How then can we continue to call this wrathful intolerant deity the God of love? Remember the laws governing chain of evidence? Garbage in. Garbage out. If you can admit that there are things in the bible that are contrary to your beliefs, thing that you believe to be false, vicious, nasty, and hateful, things you do not accept, how then can you believe any of it? Garbage in. Garbage out.
There seems to me to be no ambiguity about it, no room for interpretation. It says quite clearly that God is a homophobe who thinks all homosexuals should be put to death despite the fact that he created their very nature. Yet, we have gays who flock to the Christian church, struggling to hold onto a faith that has clearly expressed hatred for their very existence. What sense does this make? The Pope is against gay marriage yet we have gay priests, bishops, and cardinals and I would not doubt that there has been a gay pope or two. How can they rectify their faith with the fact that their own religion has commanded their extinction?
The church’s hatred of gays isn’t the only twisted morality in the bible, however. For those who cling to Leviticus as their excuse to hate all homosexuals please read the rest of that lovely little chapter. It also says that eating pork and rabbit and lobster and crab is a sin. Getting a tattoo is a sin. A woman on her period should be kept in isolation for seven days when she is menstruating and whoever touches anything she sits or lays upon will be unclean. And if a man has sex with a woman who is menstruating then both of them should be exiled from their people. And if a woman is the daughter of a priest and she becomes promiscuous than she should be burnt to death. If a man masturbates he should be put to death. It also condones making slaves of heathens and buying and selling their children. That’s right. The King James Bible condones slavery. So, if you believe that homosexuals are sinners do you also believe all the rest of this crap and if not then why not? You want your pork and lobster and tattoos but lets stone all the gays? Is your faith so arbitrary that you can pick and choose what of it to believe and what of it to reject? Is the bible the infallible word of God or is it not? Is it merely a matter of fashion and convenience?
I apologize if I sound hostile but all the people who talk about “True Christianity” and call the extremists and hate mongers who burn crosses on lawns and blow up abortion clinics and perform exorcisms on their gay children “false Christians” should perhaps read the bible again and not just the user-friendly New Testament. Read the whole damn thing.
I have never understood how Black people could be Christians when it was a religion that was force fed to us by our slave owners. When our enslavement is condoned in the bible, since we were then those heathens Leviticus talks about making “bondsmen and bonds maids” out of and giving our children to their children as “possessions”. Now the bible is used by racists to condemn “The children of Ham”. Another excuse to hate. I have never understood how Mexicans could be some of the most devout Christians on the planet when Conquistadors murdered Mexicans by the tens of thousands and stole their gold while missionaries of the Christian church, baptizing Mexican babies before smashing their heads with stones.
And I certainly cannot understand how homosexuals can be Christians when it is the Christian right that opposes gay marriage, gay rights, gay existence and even some of the most liberal Christians, like my loving cousin, still believe that you are all mentally disturbed.
There are many good Christians who love all of humanity and are tolerant of everyone’s differences. There are many that are not. That’s really not the question here. The question is of the religion itself, the bible itself. Is it homophobic? I don’t see how you can read it and think otherwise. Are the churches who say to homosexuals, “Come on in! We welcome you and we are here to help you to stop being an abomination against our God with your sinful lifestyle,” really what you consider to be loving and accepting? Or are they destructive to impressionable youths who might be gay and scared and confused and probably depressed and suicidal or who might have gay classmates they are thinking about bashing the hell out of. And if God is a homophobe can we still call him the god of love? Should good, loving people still worship him?
Can you call yourself a good person even while you are voting against another human being’s right to marry the person they love just because your religion tells you to? Isn’t that like the Nazi’s who claimed they were just following orders? Isn’t it your duty as a good person, Christian or not, to stand up for what you know to be right regardless of what it says in the bible, just like you did against slavery and locking women away during their menstrual cycles and murdering men who “giveth his seed unto Molech”? Does being a good Christian inhibit you from being a good human being? All I’m asking is that you think about it. Put your faith aside for one moment and use your heart and mind.
‘Maazi’
My question again:-
What ‘justification’ do you offer for sending gay people to prison for sexual activity X (pursuant to informed consent), while NOT sending straight people to prison for the same activity?
I find something puzzling: since Maazi NCO (non-commissioned officer?) is filled with such contempt for us and all our gayistic corrupt decadent western ways… why does he feel the constant need to keep coming here to tell us?
It should have read:
….if possible, chain your American religious fundamentalist opponents to the Statue of Liberty so that THEY do not come to interfere in Ugandan affairs [as well]
The above quote should have read:
There is no credible, conclusive scientific proof OF your bold statement…
Yet another dip in the canard. There is no credible, conclusive scientific proof your bold statement. But I agree that gayism should not be a capital offence, rather a prison sentence is okay for the abominable sex crime. If you are American, please stick to fighting against your religious compatriots in the ongoing US Cultural Civil War over gayism and spin-offs such as gay marriage and child adoption rights for gays in all 50 states. Do not stick your nose into our affairs and if possible, chain your American religious fundamentalist opponents to the Statue of Liberty so that do not come to interfere in Ugandan affairs.
The problem with Ssempa,he dehumanise gays by not recognising their loving commitment to one another.
Africans should know that the hatred against gays is identical to the hatred white racists feel towards blacks. Being black is not a choice, being gay is not a choice. And the only reason why religionists insist that homosexuality is a choice is so that they can say that people who “choose” to be gay must be punished the same as murderers and rapists.
‘Maazi’
You have not address my question in an objective manner (at least not to my satisfaction – I don’t accept arguments based on ‘cultural relativism’), as was the case over those claims of systematic ‘recruitment’.
Very well, let’s move on …
What ‘justification’ do you offer for sending gay people to prison for sexual activity X (pursuant to informed consent), while NOT sending straight people to prison for the same activity?
I have already spoken at length about our “social paradigm” and “worldview” which is miles apart from the western-centric libertarian ideology pervasive in your country. Please carefully read my previous comments again in other thread to refresh your mind.
‘Ssempa brilliant?’
That wasn’t quite how it sounded in your earlier post, but thanks for the clarification.
Anyway, perhaps you’d now like to give us your philosophical and jurisprudential ‘justifications’ for drawing a parallel between rape, robeery and murder, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, consensual sexual relations?
On the contrary, I think Ssempa is a brilliant man !!— but his strategy for opposing gayism is NOT the one I would follow or recommend to anyone. Nevertheless, his passionate opposition to gayism is in line with that of the vast majority of the Ugandan people, myself included. In the final analysis, enacting a revised version of the Bahati Bill will remain a law enforcement issue not an election issue
This might even be helpful – even our own ‘Maazi NCO’ thinks that Ssempa is a nutter!