This from the Archbishop’s website:
Archbishop condemns murder of Ugandan gay human rights activist
Friday 28 January 2011
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who is currently in Dublin for the Primates’ meeting, has made the following statement regarding the murder of the gay human rights activist David Kato Kisulle in Uganda:
“The brutal murder of David Kato Kisule, a gay human rights activist, is profoundly shocking. Our prayers and deep sympathy go out for his family and friends – and for all who live in fear for their lives. Whatever the precise circumstances of his death, which have yet to be determined, we know that David Kato Kisule lived under the threat of violence and death. No one should have to live in such fear because of the bigotry of others. Such violence has been consistently condemned by the Anglican Communion worldwide. This event also makes it all the more urgent for the British Government to secure the safety of LGBT asylum seekers in the UK. This is a moment to take very serious stock and to address those attitudes of mind which endanger the lives of men and women belonging to sexual minorities.”
Note his support for “asylum seekers.” I wonder if a decision on Brenda Namigadde will come today.
QED!
To all on the causes of sexual orientation: Listen to Jack Drescher at about 1:30 into this clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh6v9aysfQI
He is on target.
Maazi, religion isn’t immutable either. Given sufficient torture or threats of bodily harm, most people will renounce their faith. So, why should religion be a protected category.
As for atonement for colonialism, you can kiss my gay white ass. Christendom has been murdering gays for thousands of years.
And which law would this be? English law? French law? American law?—or is it the amorphous international law which the US government works hard to prevent from having any jurisdiction over its own citizens?
(Read the “Hague Invasion Act” and a laws passed by certain states in USA to prevent international law from influencing its conduct and even US government’s refusal to sign the recent declaratory UN resolution against executions of people on the basis of sexual [dis]orientation which it campaigned tirelessly for because the declaration contains provisions that implicitly condemn US drone bombings of Afghan civilians).
Sexual orientation can not be caught or taught.
“Family fears of catching homosexuality, or of being recruited at school
or elsewhere are utterly without scientific foundation.”
~ Dr. Jack Weinberg, President American Psychiatric Association,
October 6, 1977.
Sexual orientation is not a choice.
Sexual orientation is deep-seated and not something one chooses to be
or not to be.
~ Dr. Alan P. Bell, senior author of “Sexual Preference”, Bell, Weinberg
& Hammersmith, Indiana University Press, 1981.
Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early
in the life cycle, possibly even before birth.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
It is believed that there are several factors which determine sexual orientation.
Sexual orientation is likely to be the result of several different factors,
including genetic, hormonal, and environmental. None of these factors
alone are responsible for determining sexual orientation. Psychological
and social influences alone cannot cause homosexuality.
~Tineke Bodde’, “Why is My Child Gay? ” Federation of Parents and Friends
of Lesbians and Gays, Inc., 1988.
“There is evidence that parents have very little influence on the outcome
of their children’s sexual orientation under normal upbringing conditions.”
~June Machover Reinisch, Ph.D. (Response from brochure) “Why is My
Child Gay?” Federation of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays,
Inc., 1988.
Gays & lesbians discover their sexual orientation. They are not recruited or brainwashed into the “gay lifestyle”.
Gay and lesbian children are often aware of being different at a very early
age. They generally become aware of their sexual orientation during
adolescence or early adulthood.
~ R.R. Troiden, “The Formation of Homosexual Identities”, The Journal
of Homosexuality, 17, 43-73.
Homosexuality is not a mental or emotional disorder.
The research on homosexuality is very clear. Homosexuality is neither
mental illness nor moral depravity. It is simply the way a minority of
our population expresses human love and sexuality. Study after study
documents the mental health of gay men and lesbians. Studies of
judgment, stability, reliability, and social and vocational adaptiveness
all show that gay men and lesbians function every bit as well as
heterosexuals.
~ The American Psychiatric Association and The American Psychological
Association, July 1994
Efforts to change sexual orientation are ineffective and can be harmful.
Research findings suggest that efforts to repair homosexuals are
nothing more than social prejudice garbed in psychological accouterments.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
No scientific evidence exists to support the effectiveness of any therapies
that attempt to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals.
~ John C. Gonsiorek and James D. Weinrich, eds., Homosexuality:
Research Implications for Public Policy, Newbury Park, Calf.: Sage, 1991.
All attempts fail when gay people try to become heterosexual.
~D. C. Haldeman, “The Practice and Ethics of Sexual Orientation Conversion
Therapy”, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, p.221-227, 1994.
“Groups who try to change the sexual orientation of people through so-called
conversion therapy are misguided and run the risk of causing a great
deal of psychological harm to those they say they are trying to help.”
~Dr. Raymond Fowler, American Psychological Association Executive Director
Clinical experience suggests that any person who seeks conversion therapy
may be doing so because of social bias that has resulted in internalized
homophobia, and that gay men and lesbians who have accepted their sexual
orientation positively are better adjusted than those who have not done so.
~American Psychiatric Association
The incidence of homosexuality is constant regardless of new laws or social attitudes.
It [homosexuality] is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure
which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different
moral values and standards of a particular culture.
Contrary to what some imply, the incidence of homosexuality in a population
does not appear to change with new moral codes or social mores.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
Gay and lesbian youth are at greater risk of committing suicide.
Gay and lesbian youth are two to three times more likely to attempt suicide
than their heterosexual peers.
Gay and lesbian teens account for thirty percent of all completed suicides
among adolescents.
~U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “Report of the Secretary’s
Task Force on Youth Suicide”, Washington D.C., 1989.
Gay and lesbian people are just as capable of being good parents as are heterosexual parents.
Children who are raised in gay or lesbian homes are no different in any
aspects of psychological, social, or sexual development from children in
heterosexual families.
~C.J. Patterson, “Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents”, Child Development,
63, 1025-1042.
Thirty-five different studies have shown that children of gay and lesbian
parents are no more likely to become homosexuals than children of
heterosexuals, and are just as well adjusted.
~Jane Gross, “New Challenge of Youth: Growing up in Gay Homes”,
New York Times, February 11, 1991.
Gay men and lesbian women are rarely involved in child sexual abuse.
In the U.S. ninety percent of all sexual child abuse is committed by
heterosexual men. The molesters are almost always family members,
close family friends or the mother’s boyfriend.
~P.J. Falk “Lesbian Mothers: Psychological Assumptions in Family Law”,
American Psychologist, 44, 941-949, 1989.
~Mary Koss, et al. “No Safe Haven: Male Violence Against Women At Home,
At Work, And in the Community”,
American Psychological Association, 1994.
Gay people are not obsessed with sex.
Gay men and lesbian women share the same amount of interest in sexual
activity as heterosexual persons, neither more nor less.
~Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, for the Institute for Sexual Research,
“Homosexuality: A Study in Human Diversity”, Simon and Schuster, 1978.
There is no single Gay Lifestyle.
The lives of gay men and lesbian women are just as varied as the lives of
heterosexuals.
~Linda D. Garnets and Douglas C. Kimmel, “Psychological Perspectives on
Lesbian and Gay Male Experiences”, Columbia University Press, 1995.
©1996-1998 C. Ann Shepherd
Those are bisexuals David. Maazi just keep quacking your defunct Cameron/Lively nonsense. Its amusing that you have not a clue how you sound touting your 40 plus year old quackery. Cameron has been well rebuked, not that your masters will tell you that. LOL
Its funny how straight people claim to know more about being gay than gay people do. That’s like me telling you Maazi how it is to be African. We can have those convo’s right after you provide proof of your straight gene.
Wendy,
Actually this is a falsehood:
Change of attractions is possible, but very rare. It is much more likely for lesbians than it is for gays; but unusual for both. We do not know precisely the mechanism for change.
As a cultural issue for all people: sexual expression (not attractions) is able to be guided, sublimated, suppressed and repressed through a variety of frontal lobe activities we call “executive function.” This is encouraged in all cultures regardless of religious demands.
It is a myth of Freudian psychology that sexual repression, suppression and sublimation lead to mental illness or are necessarily in violation of one’s true nature.
Again, I am speaking of the demands on sexuality placed on all human sexual behavior (not just Same Sex Behavior).
@ Wendy
Good points. Thankfully, Bahati has now provided a clear indication that Brenda is indeed gay; even if she is not, Bahati’s public statement makes it dangerous for her to go back to UG. I think – I HOPE – she will now be afforded the opportunity to make a new life in the U.K.. (She could even use my little spare room, rent free, until she gets set up on her ‘own two feet’! I’m sure she would forgive the peeling paint!)
The judge in all his homophobia and brilliance concluded that Brenda did not have gay books or magazines to “prove” her sexuality. How utterly stupid. The phobes create this ficticious box with which to portray gays and then punish when they dont fit into the sexually ravenous and sex-obsessed box that they have created. Thats rich.
Actually Maazi, there is no straight gene either, so based on that theory you are not straight. Again, you are citing false homophoc blather. Recent studies have actually indicated that sexuality is determined in-utero by a combination of gene interactions like how ones eye color is determined and the pigmentation of ones skin. Please update your factoids dear or continue to come off sounding like an unintelligent schlep.
Clearly Maazi you do not know everything. She would have no reason to fear Uganda if she was lieing. There is no test to which one can prove their sexuality, including the men in Malawi. You actually cannot prove that you are straight. There is actually more reason to suspect that Bahati directed and Ssempa paid some chaps to kill David and make it look like a robbery, although I find it entirely easy to think that as long as person was willing to steal David’s life in his own home, why not steal his posessions on your way out.
‘Maazi’
Let’s be logical about all this.
Ugandan law does not seek to punish straight people who engage in consensual sexual acts. Why should people, who – for whatever reason – are attracted to their own sex, be punished for exactly the same activities?
It’s a very simple question, honey.
I see, sweetie-pie, that you have already ‘judged’ Brenda to be a liar.
Evidence please?
I mean, that IS Ssempas MO it would seem.
So, dear, you think Bahati is lying?
Wendy,
I am not shocked to hear your conspiracy theory. Pro-gay propagandists are notorious for their ability to spin fanciful tales. Perhaps, you have psychic powers that may be useful to your country’s FBI and CIA?
I cannot prove that I am “straight” because the whole “Gay–Straight” dichotomy is fake and nothing, but a Western construction. In reality, people either engage in normal “man-to-woman” relations or they engage in sexual deviance. A person’s claim to be “gay” cannot be proven credibly by any scientific measure because it is not genetic, immutable or in-born. One is regarded as “gay” if he/she says so. Despite work to find “gay gene” and the “study of twins”, the pro-gays cannot provide any credible conclusive proof that their sexual behaviour is actually an identity akin to Race.
From what I hear, Bahati approached ‘Lezgetsreal’. He took the initiative, it seems.
I don’t think the British Government feels ‘blackmailed’. The reprieve was a matter for the High Court, of course. Bahati’s statement was effectively ‘new evidence’, and the Court may have felt that this was a good reason to ‘reopen’ the case. Such is ‘standard practice’ in a democratic society.
If you suggesting that Bahati has been ‘useful’, then I agree with you.
Also, dear: from what he said, Bahati wants her back in UG – so there’s something else on which you two seem to disagree.
Bahati was used by Brenda’s supporters to extend her stay in the UK. These supporters sought Bahati’s views knowing fully well what the response would be. Bahati did not lie. He simply believed that Brenda was “gay” based on information supplied by her supporters and he restated his view that anyone violating the laws of Uganda will be prosecuted. Bahati’s statement was then used by Brenda’s supporters to blackmail the UK government and judiciary into extending her stay. To be frank, I hope she wins the right of domicile she craves for reasons posted in my previous commentary.
The point being that BOTH Brenda AND Bahati say she is a lesbian.
If (as I think you might be trying to suggest above) Brenda is lying, then so is Bahati.
My view is that, is saying Brenda is a lesbian, both Brenda and Bahati (for once) are being truthful.
The Archbishop of Cantebury speaks from both sides of the mouth. Nobody takes him seriously or likes him, including Western gay sex practitioners.
Well since Obama is obssessed with gayism, why not US government send a presidential jet to whisk her from London to San Francisco? The UK government have already declared her “not homosexual” which means she will have to return home. Unlike Bahati, I think that lady is not a gay sex practitioner, but someone who is desperate to remain in Europe for economic reasons and is therefore, prepared to humiliate herself by claiming what she is not.
The judges in UK looked at all the evidence (or lack of it) before them and arrived at the conclusion that Brenda was telling lies. Methinks that her stories do not add up at all, especially the one about fleeing Uganda with her Canadian bed-mate. She has been in the UK since 2003, so why did she wait so long to claim asylum in the UK? Why did she not flee to Canada with her bed-mate back in 2003 and seek asylum there? How come I have never heard of her until recently?
What’s it with the continued use of the term
“gay sex practitioner” ?
It implies that being gay or lesbian is a choice/practice and I find it rather offensive!
I lived in UK as a university student and have been back there a couple of times. Though the judiciary is not as politicized as that of the USA, it does respond or flinch some times when under populist pressure. There is a lot of emotional blackmail and hysteria deliberately whipped up following the unfortunate murder of Mr. David Kato for reasons which may not be related to his gay sex activities. I reckon the judge had no choice than to suspend his better judgment rather than face highly politicized allegations that “he was sending a poor woman to her death in Africaaah !” It will be interesting if Brenda finally manages to beat the British government’s xenophobia to gain right of domicile. Regardless of her lies, she deserves to get her UK residency because the British did not ask permission before they arrived and settled in Africa for a century of colonial repression.
Bahati should have said ‘no comment’; I would have in his position.
I wish her good luck in her quest to retain right of domicile in the UK using whatever means (including lies). Come to think of it, as a way of atoning for their colonial oppression of the native peoples of Africa, the UK should open its borders wide for immigration.
Temporary reprieve granted: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12311319
Bahati’s ‘interference’ may have helped to bring this about; I’m sure the Archbishop’s statement, and pressure from our elected representatives, have been most helpful.
We hope that Brenda’s case will now be reviewed in the light of Bahati’s conviction that she is indeed gay.
Good.
Glad he spoke up…and talked about living under the threat of harm.
How fitting. I had the pleasure of hearing and meeting Wayne B. this evening.
I’m assuming that our friend Maazi is citing Nicolosi.
@ Richard, it would appear that PooPoo Ssempas little bribery business includes bigger fish, including Bahati and Lady M7i too. The murder of David Kato becomes clearer.
‘Maazi’
Returning to the central point, remembering that David Kato was your fellow Ugandan, and that the High Court of your country had found in his favour three weeks before he was bludgeoned to death: what ‘justification’ can there possibly be for punishing gay people for activities for which straight people are not punished?
Frank,
That must have been fun to say…but take it easy.
This is more to the point. Especially since religious practices such as coerced marriage to minors is still common in some parts of Africa and the Middle East.
Moreover, it is explicitly protected in the 1948 UN Declaration on Human Rights. Gayism is not mentioned in the declaration at all. The declaration’s article 16 is explicit in saying that marriage is between men and women without limitations on nationality, race or religion.
It is protected because the Ugandan people want it to be. Gayism is not protected because we reject it for socio-cultural reasons.
If you want to atone for colonialism then stop interfering in our internal affairs and stop seeking to impose the idiosyncrancies of your culture on us. BTW, I have no intention of kissing anything. Thank you.
And which law would this be? English law? French law? American law?—or is it the amorphous international law which the US government works hard to prevent from having any jurisdiction over its own citizens?
(Read the “Hague Invasion Act” and a laws passed by certain states in USA to prevent international law from influencing its conduct and even US government’s refusal to sign the recent declaratory UN resolution against executions of people on the basis of sexual [dis]orientation which it campaigned tirelessly for because the declaration contains provisions that implicitly condemn US drone bombings of Afghan civilians).
Maazi, religion isn’t immutable either. Given sufficient torture or threats of bodily harm, most people will renounce their faith. So, why should religion be a protected category.
As for atonement for colonialism, you can kiss my gay white ass. Christendom has been murdering gays for thousands of years.
This is a perspective that is encouraged by social constructionists generally.
It is valid when applied to politics and religion as “identities.”
We have sensations and beliefs and we form affiliations and relationships around those beliefs.
It is important to note that the notion of identities, especially individual identities, is a relatively recent phenomenon in modern man.
Corporate identities (I am someone based upon the group I belong too) seems to predate individual identities (I am someone based upon what I believe and feel).
For example: I belong to the male heterosexual community because of my physical body (or female heterosexual); or I belong to the gay male community because of my physical body, sensations and my belief about what is the best way to express the union of those two.
‘Maazi’
Returning to the central point, remembering that David Kato was your fellow Ugandan, and that the High Court of your country had found in his favour three weeks before he was bludgeoned to death: what ‘justification’ can there possibly be for punishing gay people for activities for which straight people are not punished?
Frank,
That must have been fun to say…but take it easy.
This is more to the point. Especially since religious practices such as coerced marriage to minors is still common in some parts of Africa and the Middle East.
Moreover, it is explicitly protected in the 1948 UN Declaration on Human Rights. Gayism is not mentioned in the declaration at all. The declaration’s article 16 is explicit in saying that marriage is between men and women without limitations on nationality, race or religion.
It is protected because the Ugandan people want it to be. Gayism is not protected because we reject it for socio-cultural reasons.
If you want to atone for colonialism then stop interfering in our internal affairs and stop seeking to impose the idiosyncrancies of your culture on us. BTW, I have no intention of kissing anything. Thank you.
This is a perspective that is encouraged by social constructionists generally.
It is valid when applied to politics and religion as “identities.”
We have sensations and beliefs and we form affiliations and relationships around those beliefs.
It is important to note that the notion of identities, especially individual identities, is a relatively recent phenomenon in modern man.
Corporate identities (I am someone based upon the group I belong too) seems to predate individual identities (I am someone based upon what I believe and feel).
For example: I belong to the male heterosexual community because of my physical body (or female heterosexual); or I belong to the gay male community because of my physical body, sensations and my belief about what is the best way to express the union of those two.
(It should be noted that I have not made any ‘scientific assertions’ – although I have an ‘opinion’ on the matter of the origins of one’s sexual orientation. My ‘thesis’ is based on principles of justice and law.)
QED!
I think our terms of reference differ a lot. Unlike you, I do not recognize the existence of “straight” and “gay” people. The manner in which people wish to engage in sexual intercourse is not an immutable genetic identity. A person either engages in sexual deviance or he/she doesn’t. In Uganda, if you engage in deviant behaviour contrary to the law then you will be punished. It is as simple as that.
‘Social paradigm’ is no excuse for dodging fundamental issues of justice.
So I ask you again: what ‘justification’ do you offer for punishing gay people for activities for which straight people are not punished?
May I add that I have lived long enough in the UK and USA to understand the general socio-political context under which all organizations (including scientific ones) operate in the Western world. Social paradigm also plays a role. It is no accident that Presbyterian Church in Scotland will accept gayism while a branch of the same church in Malawi rejects it vehemently or that an Anglican bishop in England will describe gayism in glowing terms while his counterpart in Ghana blasts gayism.
‘Maazi’
You, my dear, make all kinds of ‘assertions’ without a shred of evidential, moral or philosophical justification.
Americans always think that everything revolves round them. So much that Wendy deludes herself into believing that I have anything to do with Mr. Scott Lively, her bitter enemy on the ongoing US Cultural Civil War. A war in which I , as an African, have absolutely no interest or stake in. For instance, I couldn’t care less if the whole United States Congress was occupied by gay sex practitioners or if every state of the union legalised gay marriage, provided the Gay Agenda is not exported to countries that do not want it. With regards to spurious allegations that I am influenced by foreign anti-gays, I will say that I am sufficiently educated to think for myself and therefore do not need hectoring or lectures from Westerners.
Please allow me to express my skepticism for the utterances of researchers who “dance around the edges of the cliff” by asserting that gayism might be natural, but nevertheless fail to “jump off the cliff” by providing credible and conclusive evidence of such bold assertions. Moreover, the background of the researchers may have influence on the research outcomes. Just, like that of the researcher who claimed that “gay gene” has been found. The pro-gay socio-political context within which the quoted American professional bodies operate must be taken into account whenever we examine statements they issue in favour of gayism. After all is said and done, there still is no conclusive credible scientific proof that gayism is innate nor genetic. Let me reiterate once again that Uganda will continue to regard gayism as a sex crime and no external pressure will not change that.
(It should be noted that I have not made any ‘scientific assertions’ – although I have an ‘opinion’ on the matter of the origins of one’s sexual orientation. My ‘thesis’ is based on principles of justice and law.)
I think our terms of reference differ a lot. Unlike you, I do not recognize the existence of “straight” and “gay” people. The manner in which people wish to engage in sexual intercourse is not an immutable genetic identity. A person either engages in sexual deviance or he/she doesn’t. In Uganda, if you engage in deviant behaviour contrary to the law then you will be punished. It is as simple as that.
‘Social paradigm’ is no excuse for dodging fundamental issues of justice.
So I ask you again: what ‘justification’ do you offer for punishing gay people for activities for which straight people are not punished?
May I add that I have lived long enough in the UK and USA to understand the general socio-political context under which all organizations (including scientific ones) operate in the Western world. Social paradigm also plays a role. It is no accident that Presbyterian Church in Scotland will accept gayism while a branch of the same church in Malawi rejects it vehemently or that an Anglican bishop in England will describe gayism in glowing terms while his counterpart in Ghana blasts gayism.
‘Maazi’
You, my dear, make all kinds of ‘assertions’ without a shred of evidential, moral or philosophical justification.
Americans always think that everything revolves round them. So much that Wendy deludes herself into believing that I have anything to do with Mr. Scott Lively, her bitter enemy on the ongoing US Cultural Civil War. A war in which I , as an African, have absolutely no interest or stake in. For instance, I couldn’t care less if the whole United States Congress was occupied by gay sex practitioners or if every state of the union legalised gay marriage, provided the Gay Agenda is not exported to countries that do not want it. With regards to spurious allegations that I am influenced by foreign anti-gays, I will say that I am sufficiently educated to think for myself and therefore do not need hectoring or lectures from Westerners.
Please allow me to express my skepticism for the utterances of researchers who “dance around the edges of the cliff” by asserting that gayism might be natural, but nevertheless fail to “jump off the cliff” by providing credible and conclusive evidence of such bold assertions. Moreover, the background of the researchers may have influence on the research outcomes. Just, like that of the researcher who claimed that “gay gene” has been found. The pro-gay socio-political context within which the quoted American professional bodies operate must be taken into account whenever we examine statements they issue in favour of gayism. After all is said and done, there still is no conclusive credible scientific proof that gayism is innate nor genetic. Let me reiterate once again that Uganda will continue to regard gayism as a sex crime and no external pressure will not change that.
How fitting. I had the pleasure of hearing and meeting Wayne B. this evening.
I’m assuming that our friend Maazi is citing Nicolosi.
@ Richard, it would appear that PooPoo Ssempas little bribery business includes bigger fish, including Bahati and Lady M7i too. The murder of David Kato becomes clearer.
To all on the causes of sexual orientation: Listen to Jack Drescher at about 1:30 into this clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh6v9aysfQI
He is on target.
Wendy Leigh# ~ Jan 31, 2011 at 5:41 pm
“Claims are empty. Cite your sources Ken.”
I’d be happy to, but you’ll need to be a bit more specific as to what you’d like me to cite.
It is believed that there are several factors which determine sexual orientation.
Sexual orientation is likely to be the result of several different factors,
including genetic, hormonal, and environmental. None of these factors
alone are responsible for determining sexual orientation. Psychological
and social influences alone cannot cause homosexuality.
~Tineke Bodde’, “Why is My Child Gay? ” Federation of Parents and Friends
of Lesbians and Gays, Inc., 1988.
Sexual orientation is not a choice.
Sexual orientation is deep-seated and not something one chooses to be
or not to be.
~ Dr. Alan P. Bell, senior author of “Sexual Preference”, Bell, Weinberg
& Hammersmith, Indiana University Press, 1981.
Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early
in the life cycle, possibly even before birth.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
Research findings suggest that efforts to repair homosexuals are
nothing more than social prejudice garbed in psychological accouterments.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
I’ll speak slower.
No scientific evidence exists to support the effectiveness of any therapies
that attempt to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals.
~ John C. Gonsiorek and James D. Weinrich, eds., Homosexuality:
Research Implications for Public Policy, Newbury Park, Calf.: Sage, 1991
Wendy,
Ahhhhh….I enjoy carefully qualified assertions, rather than global statements.
Claims are empty. Cite your sources Ken.
Wendy,
Cannot tell if you have corrected your falsehood. Although all your citings are worthy of perusal. Sexual attractions are not like eye-color, or hair color. They are much more complexly derived as Ken suggests. And cannot find anything to support your assertion that the people I refer to are bi-sexual.
Change is rare, more likely for lesbians than gays.
‘Maazi’
After your ‘evidence’, you might wish to explain why a gay person should be punished for an activity for which a straight is not punished.
(Talking of ‘evidence’: it seems that there may be ‘evidence’ that naughty people like PPP* have been bribing little boys to tell porkie-pies# about a rival pastor. Tut tut! On, and people used to say that David Kato ‘recruited’ children, but there has been no evidence ever offered for that particular smear.)
* a UG pointman for the ‘new KKK’, perhaps?
# a bit of cockney rhyming slang for you, dearie!
Maazi, your research, and while you’re at it, that “evidence of recruitment?”
Ken, I never said “only” as reflected by research posted however, recent research is trending that way and most reflected in questionably unethical treatments to prevent inter-sex and lesbianism currently underway.
I fully agree Richard.
I tend to agree with you, Wendy; but even if ‘Maazi’ were to be (partly) correct, that would still NOT validate his desire to bash gays for things for which straights are neither punished nor subjected to violent malice.
Wendy Leigh# ~ Jan 31, 2011 at 2:52 pm
“Those are bisexuals David.”
No Wendy, David was not simply referring to bisexuals in his comment about changes in sexual orientation. Nor has a person’s orientation been proven to be determined in-utero. While, most recent research into sexual orientation has focused on biological factors, nothing has shown that orientation depends only on biological factors.
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
Sexual orientation and homosexuality
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx
Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture
Ryan D. Johnson April 30, 2003
http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html
APA Officially Rejects Reorientation Treatment for Homosexuals — Overwhelming research from the past hundred years rejected due to “serious design flaws.”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/aug/09080608.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION
POSITION STATEMENT Homosexuality and Civil Rights
Approved by the Board of Trustees, December 1973
Approved by the Assembly, 1973
http://www.psych.org/Departments/EDU/Library/APAOfficialDocumentsandRelated/PositionStatements/197310.aspx
POSITION STATEMENT Therapies Focused on Attempts to Change Sexual Orientation (Reparative or Conversion Therapies)
Approved by the Board of Trustees, March 2000
Approved by the Assembly, May 2000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
AMA Policy Regarding Sexual Orientation
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/about-ama/our-people/member-groups-sections/glbt-advisory-committee/ama-policy-regarding-sexual-orientation.shtml
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
Policy Statement: Homosexuality and Adolescence (RE9332)
http://web.archive.org/web/20031212181440/http://www.aap.org/policy/05072.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Issues
http://www.socialworkers.org/resources/abstracts/abstracts/lesbian.asp
Position Statement: “Reparative” and “Conversion” Therapies for Lesbians and Gay Men
http://www.socialworkers.org/diversity/lgb/reparative.asp?print=1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UNITED PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS REJECT “REPARATIVE THERAPY” also called “CONVERSION THERAPY”
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_expr.htm
The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American Psychological Association, American School Health Association, Interfaith Alliance Foundation, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Social Workers, and National Education Association formed the “Just the Facts Coalition.” They developed and endorsed “Just the Facts About Sexual Orientation & Youth: A Primer for Principals, Educators and School Personnel” in 1999.
The primer says, in part:
“The most important fact about ‘reparative therapy,’ also sometimes known as ‘conversion’ therapy, is that it is based on an understanding of homosexuality that has been rejected by all the major health and mental health professions. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, together representing more than 477,000 health and mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus there is no need for a ‘cure.’
“…health and mental health professional organizations do not support efforts to change young people’s sexual orientation through ‘reparative therapy’ and have raised serious concerns about its potential to do harm.”
This is the tip of the iceberg. Okay Maazi, cite your sources LOL
Well, the science is indeed complex, but the fact remains that – for whatever reason(s) – some people are attracted to those of the same sex.
What ‘Maazi’ CONSISTENTLY fails to do is to offer any logically-, morally- or philosophically-based ‘justification’ for punishing gay people for engaging in activities for which straight people are NOT punished. We can talk about the science until the cows come home, but the science is NOT the key issue here; the key issue is what constitutes just legislation and moral behaviour in terms of the treatment of others in word, in action and in law.
Bahitler’s proposal to exterminate gay people for activity X, while not punishing straight people for the same activity, is a moral and jurisprudential turpitude of the highest order. And ‘Maazi’ supports this immoral and unjust approach.
Sexual orientation can not be caught or taught.
“Family fears of catching homosexuality, or of being recruited at school
or elsewhere are utterly without scientific foundation.”
~ Dr. Jack Weinberg, President American Psychiatric Association,
October 6, 1977.
Sexual orientation is not a choice.
Sexual orientation is deep-seated and not something one chooses to be
or not to be.
~ Dr. Alan P. Bell, senior author of “Sexual Preference”, Bell, Weinberg
& Hammersmith, Indiana University Press, 1981.
Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early
in the life cycle, possibly even before birth.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
It is believed that there are several factors which determine sexual orientation.
Sexual orientation is likely to be the result of several different factors,
including genetic, hormonal, and environmental. None of these factors
alone are responsible for determining sexual orientation. Psychological
and social influences alone cannot cause homosexuality.
~Tineke Bodde’, “Why is My Child Gay? ” Federation of Parents and Friends
of Lesbians and Gays, Inc., 1988.
“There is evidence that parents have very little influence on the outcome
of their children’s sexual orientation under normal upbringing conditions.”
~June Machover Reinisch, Ph.D. (Response from brochure) “Why is My
Child Gay?” Federation of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays,
Inc., 1988.
Gays & lesbians discover their sexual orientation. They are not recruited or brainwashed into the “gay lifestyle”.
Gay and lesbian children are often aware of being different at a very early
age. They generally become aware of their sexual orientation during
adolescence or early adulthood.
~ R.R. Troiden, “The Formation of Homosexual Identities”, The Journal
of Homosexuality, 17, 43-73.
Homosexuality is not a mental or emotional disorder.
The research on homosexuality is very clear. Homosexuality is neither
mental illness nor moral depravity. It is simply the way a minority of
our population expresses human love and sexuality. Study after study
documents the mental health of gay men and lesbians. Studies of
judgment, stability, reliability, and social and vocational adaptiveness
all show that gay men and lesbians function every bit as well as
heterosexuals.
~ The American Psychiatric Association and The American Psychological
Association, July 1994
Efforts to change sexual orientation are ineffective and can be harmful.
Research findings suggest that efforts to repair homosexuals are
nothing more than social prejudice garbed in psychological accouterments.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
No scientific evidence exists to support the effectiveness of any therapies
that attempt to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals.
~ John C. Gonsiorek and James D. Weinrich, eds., Homosexuality:
Research Implications for Public Policy, Newbury Park, Calf.: Sage, 1991.
All attempts fail when gay people try to become heterosexual.
~D. C. Haldeman, “The Practice and Ethics of Sexual Orientation Conversion
Therapy”, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, p.221-227, 1994.
“Groups who try to change the sexual orientation of people through so-called
conversion therapy are misguided and run the risk of causing a great
deal of psychological harm to those they say they are trying to help.”
~Dr. Raymond Fowler, American Psychological Association Executive Director
Clinical experience suggests that any person who seeks conversion therapy
may be doing so because of social bias that has resulted in internalized
homophobia, and that gay men and lesbians who have accepted their sexual
orientation positively are better adjusted than those who have not done so.
~American Psychiatric Association
The incidence of homosexuality is constant regardless of new laws or social attitudes.
It [homosexuality] is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure
which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different
moral values and standards of a particular culture.
Contrary to what some imply, the incidence of homosexuality in a population
does not appear to change with new moral codes or social mores.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
Gay and lesbian youth are at greater risk of committing suicide.
Gay and lesbian youth are two to three times more likely to attempt suicide
than their heterosexual peers.
Gay and lesbian teens account for thirty percent of all completed suicides
among adolescents.
~U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “Report of the Secretary’s
Task Force on Youth Suicide”, Washington D.C., 1989.
Gay and lesbian people are just as capable of being good parents as are heterosexual parents.
Children who are raised in gay or lesbian homes are no different in any
aspects of psychological, social, or sexual development from children in
heterosexual families.
~C.J. Patterson, “Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents”, Child Development,
63, 1025-1042.
Thirty-five different studies have shown that children of gay and lesbian
parents are no more likely to become homosexuals than children of
heterosexuals, and are just as well adjusted.
~Jane Gross, “New Challenge of Youth: Growing up in Gay Homes”,
New York Times, February 11, 1991.
Gay men and lesbian women are rarely involved in child sexual abuse.
In the U.S. ninety percent of all sexual child abuse is committed by
heterosexual men. The molesters are almost always family members,
close family friends or the mother’s boyfriend.
~P.J. Falk “Lesbian Mothers: Psychological Assumptions in Family Law”,
American Psychologist, 44, 941-949, 1989.
~Mary Koss, et al. “No Safe Haven: Male Violence Against Women At Home,
At Work, And in the Community”,
American Psychological Association, 1994.
Gay people are not obsessed with sex.
Gay men and lesbian women share the same amount of interest in sexual
activity as heterosexual persons, neither more nor less.
~Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, for the Institute for Sexual Research,
“Homosexuality: A Study in Human Diversity”, Simon and Schuster, 1978.
There is no single Gay Lifestyle.
The lives of gay men and lesbian women are just as varied as the lives of
heterosexuals.
~Linda D. Garnets and Douglas C. Kimmel, “Psychological Perspectives on
Lesbian and Gay Male Experiences”, Columbia University Press, 1995.
©1996-1998 C. Ann Shepherd
Those are bisexuals David. Maazi just keep quacking your defunct Cameron/Lively nonsense. Its amusing that you have not a clue how you sound touting your 40 plus year old quackery. Cameron has been well rebuked, not that your masters will tell you that. LOL
Its funny how straight people claim to know more about being gay than gay people do. That’s like me telling you Maazi how it is to be African. We can have those convo’s right after you provide proof of your straight gene.
Wendy Leigh# ~ Jan 31, 2011 at 5:41 pm
“Claims are empty. Cite your sources Ken.”
I’d be happy to, but you’ll need to be a bit more specific as to what you’d like me to cite.
It is believed that there are several factors which determine sexual orientation.
Sexual orientation is likely to be the result of several different factors,
including genetic, hormonal, and environmental. None of these factors
alone are responsible for determining sexual orientation. Psychological
and social influences alone cannot cause homosexuality.
~Tineke Bodde’, “Why is My Child Gay? ” Federation of Parents and Friends
of Lesbians and Gays, Inc., 1988.
Sexual orientation is not a choice.
Sexual orientation is deep-seated and not something one chooses to be
or not to be.
~ Dr. Alan P. Bell, senior author of “Sexual Preference”, Bell, Weinberg
& Hammersmith, Indiana University Press, 1981.
Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early
in the life cycle, possibly even before birth.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
Research findings suggest that efforts to repair homosexuals are
nothing more than social prejudice garbed in psychological accouterments.
~ Taken from the American Psychological Association Statement on
Sexual Orientation, July, 1994.
I’ll speak slower.
No scientific evidence exists to support the effectiveness of any therapies
that attempt to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals.
~ John C. Gonsiorek and James D. Weinrich, eds., Homosexuality:
Research Implications for Public Policy, Newbury Park, Calf.: Sage, 1991
Wendy,
Ahhhhh….I enjoy carefully qualified assertions, rather than global statements.
Claims are empty. Cite your sources Ken.
Wendy,
Cannot tell if you have corrected your falsehood. Although all your citings are worthy of perusal. Sexual attractions are not like eye-color, or hair color. They are much more complexly derived as Ken suggests. And cannot find anything to support your assertion that the people I refer to are bi-sexual.
Change is rare, more likely for lesbians than gays.
Wendy,
Actually this is a falsehood:
Change of attractions is possible, but very rare. It is much more likely for lesbians than it is for gays; but unusual for both. We do not know precisely the mechanism for change.
As a cultural issue for all people: sexual expression (not attractions) is able to be guided, sublimated, suppressed and repressed through a variety of frontal lobe activities we call “executive function.” This is encouraged in all cultures regardless of religious demands.
It is a myth of Freudian psychology that sexual repression, suppression and sublimation lead to mental illness or are necessarily in violation of one’s true nature.
Again, I am speaking of the demands on sexuality placed on all human sexual behavior (not just Same Sex Behavior).
‘Maazi’
After your ‘evidence’, you might wish to explain why a gay person should be punished for an activity for which a straight is not punished.
(Talking of ‘evidence’: it seems that there may be ‘evidence’ that naughty people like PPP* have been bribing little boys to tell porkie-pies# about a rival pastor. Tut tut! On, and people used to say that David Kato ‘recruited’ children, but there has been no evidence ever offered for that particular smear.)
* a UG pointman for the ‘new KKK’, perhaps?
# a bit of cockney rhyming slang for you, dearie!
Maazi, your research, and while you’re at it, that “evidence of recruitment?”
Ken, I never said “only” as reflected by research posted however, recent research is trending that way and most reflected in questionably unethical treatments to prevent inter-sex and lesbianism currently underway.
I fully agree Richard.
I tend to agree with you, Wendy; but even if ‘Maazi’ were to be (partly) correct, that would still NOT validate his desire to bash gays for things for which straights are neither punished nor subjected to violent malice.
Wendy Leigh# ~ Jan 31, 2011 at 2:52 pm
“Those are bisexuals David.”
No Wendy, David was not simply referring to bisexuals in his comment about changes in sexual orientation. Nor has a person’s orientation been proven to be determined in-utero. While, most recent research into sexual orientation has focused on biological factors, nothing has shown that orientation depends only on biological factors.
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
Sexual orientation and homosexuality
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx
Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture
Ryan D. Johnson April 30, 2003
http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html
APA Officially Rejects Reorientation Treatment for Homosexuals — Overwhelming research from the past hundred years rejected due to “serious design flaws.”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/aug/09080608.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION
POSITION STATEMENT Homosexuality and Civil Rights
Approved by the Board of Trustees, December 1973
Approved by the Assembly, 1973
http://www.psych.org/Departments/EDU/Library/APAOfficialDocumentsandRelated/PositionStatements/197310.aspx
POSITION STATEMENT Therapies Focused on Attempts to Change Sexual Orientation (Reparative or Conversion Therapies)
Approved by the Board of Trustees, March 2000
Approved by the Assembly, May 2000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
AMA Policy Regarding Sexual Orientation
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/about-ama/our-people/member-groups-sections/glbt-advisory-committee/ama-policy-regarding-sexual-orientation.shtml
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
Policy Statement: Homosexuality and Adolescence (RE9332)
http://web.archive.org/web/20031212181440/http://www.aap.org/policy/05072.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Issues
http://www.socialworkers.org/resources/abstracts/abstracts/lesbian.asp
Position Statement: “Reparative” and “Conversion” Therapies for Lesbians and Gay Men
http://www.socialworkers.org/diversity/lgb/reparative.asp?print=1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UNITED PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS REJECT “REPARATIVE THERAPY” also called “CONVERSION THERAPY”
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_expr.htm
The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American Psychological Association, American School Health Association, Interfaith Alliance Foundation, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Social Workers, and National Education Association formed the “Just the Facts Coalition.” They developed and endorsed “Just the Facts About Sexual Orientation & Youth: A Primer for Principals, Educators and School Personnel” in 1999.
The primer says, in part:
“The most important fact about ‘reparative therapy,’ also sometimes known as ‘conversion’ therapy, is that it is based on an understanding of homosexuality that has been rejected by all the major health and mental health professions. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, together representing more than 477,000 health and mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus there is no need for a ‘cure.’
“…health and mental health professional organizations do not support efforts to change young people’s sexual orientation through ‘reparative therapy’ and have raised serious concerns about its potential to do harm.”
This is the tip of the iceberg. Okay Maazi, cite your sources LOL
Well, the science is indeed complex, but the fact remains that – for whatever reason(s) – some people are attracted to those of the same sex.
What ‘Maazi’ CONSISTENTLY fails to do is to offer any logically-, morally- or philosophically-based ‘justification’ for punishing gay people for engaging in activities for which straight people are NOT punished. We can talk about the science until the cows come home, but the science is NOT the key issue here; the key issue is what constitutes just legislation and moral behaviour in terms of the treatment of others in word, in action and in law.
Bahitler’s proposal to exterminate gay people for activity X, while not punishing straight people for the same activity, is a moral and jurisprudential turpitude of the highest order. And ‘Maazi’ supports this immoral and unjust approach.
Wendy,
You are entitled to your bold assertions which are not backed up by any scientific evidence. Gayism is not a genetic condition nor is immutable. I am not impressed by politically correct statements made by organizations which are supposedly science-orientated. Let them present the “gay gene” as evidence that gayism is a natural trait. If the West wishes to romanticise sexual deviance, it is free to do so. But in Uganda, Africa and large swatches of world, gayism shall continue to remain a criminal offence. No amount of external pressure from EU, Canada and USA will change this reality. Please concentrate on fighting your opponents in the ongoing US Cultural Civil War.
Wendy,
You are entitled to your bold assertions which are not backed up by any scientific evidence. Gayism is not a genetic condition nor is immutable. I am not impressed by politically correct statements made by organizations which are supposedly science-orientated. Let them present the “gay gene” as evidence that gayism is a natural trait. If the West wishes to romanticise sexual deviance, it is free to do so. But in Uganda, Africa and large swatches of world, gayism shall continue to remain a criminal offence. No amount of external pressure from EU, Canada and USA will change this reality. Please concentrate on fighting your opponents in the ongoing US Cultural Civil War.
Being gay is not a “condition”. It is a human trait no more changeable than race, hair color, eye color, etc. You may have been told, persuaded and now believe otherwise. However, those professionals who study such matters disagree vehemently with your beliefs.
You asked about science. Here are some resources.
These professional bodies unanimously state:
1. Homosexuality is an normal, naturally occurring trait… See More
2. “Reparative therapy” or “conversion therapy” does not work and is harmful to those subjected to it.
@ Richard, were you REALLY expecting the truth from Maazi who has to date, provided NO evidence for ANY of his “fanciful” tales and lies willingly for Bahati, who is also a “fanciful” spinmiester of rediculous tales to decieve the Ugandan people. Here are the facts from CREDIBLE associations
The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, together representing more than 477,000 health and mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus there is no need for a ‘cure.’
Looks like Bahati DID ‘take the initiative with ‘Lezgetsreal’:
Here’s what Mel of LGR has to say:-
“He [Bahati] contacted me a month ago after he visited USA because he had read my articles about him which were picked up in US Press. I did an hour phone conversation. Then He called me beginning January to tell me he found it very amusing that I had made him a zero in my annual heroes and zeroes. Then after the Virst Brenda Article – the first article written – he contacted me out of the blue – unsolicited by calling my home phone which he had to give me the message to deliver to her … “
Being gay is not a “condition”. It is a human trait no more changeable than race, hair color, eye color, etc. You may have been told, persuaded and now believe otherwise. However, those professionals who study such matters disagree vehemently with your beliefs.
You asked about science. Here are some resources.
These professional bodies unanimously state:
1. Homosexuality is an normal, naturally occurring trait… See More
2. “Reparative therapy” or “conversion therapy” does not work and is harmful to those subjected to it.
@ Richard, were you REALLY expecting the truth from Maazi who has to date, provided NO evidence for ANY of his “fanciful” tales and lies willingly for Bahati, who is also a “fanciful” spinmiester of rediculous tales to decieve the Ugandan people. Here are the facts from CREDIBLE associations
The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, together representing more than 477,000 health and mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus there is no need for a ‘cure.’
Looks like Bahati DID ‘take the initiative with ‘Lezgetsreal’:
Here’s what Mel of LGR has to say:-
“He [Bahati] contacted me a month ago after he visited USA because he had read my articles about him which were picked up in US Press. I did an hour phone conversation. Then He called me beginning January to tell me he found it very amusing that I had made him a zero in my annual heroes and zeroes. Then after the Virst Brenda Article – the first article written – he contacted me out of the blue – unsolicited by calling my home phone which he had to give me the message to deliver to her … “
Bahati also annoyed the FCO.
A further point: his little ‘foray’ into the internal affairs of the U.K. provided a useful opportunity to undermine him. Useful.
It indeed was Bahatis own pontifications that was introduced as evidence that earned her a reprieve.
@ Wendy
Good points. Thankfully, Bahati has now provided a clear indication that Brenda is indeed gay; even if she is not, Bahati’s public statement makes it dangerous for her to go back to UG. I think – I HOPE – she will now be afforded the opportunity to make a new life in the U.K.. (She could even use my little spare room, rent free, until she gets set up on her ‘own two feet’! I’m sure she would forgive the peeling paint!)
The judge in all his homophobia and brilliance concluded that Brenda did not have gay books or magazines to “prove” her sexuality. How utterly stupid. The phobes create this ficticious box with which to portray gays and then punish when they dont fit into the sexually ravenous and sex-obsessed box that they have created. Thats rich.
Actually Maazi, there is no straight gene either, so based on that theory you are not straight. Again, you are citing false homophoc blather. Recent studies have actually indicated that sexuality is determined in-utero by a combination of gene interactions like how ones eye color is determined and the pigmentation of ones skin. Please update your factoids dear or continue to come off sounding like an unintelligent schlep.
Bahati also annoyed the FCO.
A further point: his little ‘foray’ into the internal affairs of the U.K. provided a useful opportunity to undermine him. Useful.
It indeed was Bahatis own pontifications that was introduced as evidence that earned her a reprieve.
‘Maazi’
Let’s be logical about all this.
Ugandan law does not seek to punish straight people who engage in consensual sexual acts. Why should people, who – for whatever reason – are attracted to their own sex, be punished for exactly the same activities?
It’s a very simple question, honey.
Wendy,
I am not shocked to hear your conspiracy theory. Pro-gay propagandists are notorious for their ability to spin fanciful tales. Perhaps, you have psychic powers that may be useful to your country’s FBI and CIA?
I cannot prove that I am “straight” because the whole “Gay–Straight” dichotomy is fake and nothing, but a Western construction. In reality, people either engage in normal “man-to-woman” relations or they engage in sexual deviance. A person’s claim to be “gay” cannot be proven credibly by any scientific measure because it is not genetic, immutable or in-born. One is regarded as “gay” if he/she says so. Despite work to find “gay gene” and the “study of twins”, the pro-gays cannot provide any credible conclusive proof that their sexual behaviour is actually an identity akin to Race.
I mean, that IS Ssempas MO it would seem.
Clearly Maazi you do not know everything. She would have no reason to fear Uganda if she was lieing. There is no test to which one can prove their sexuality, including the men in Malawi. You actually cannot prove that you are straight. There is actually more reason to suspect that Bahati directed and Ssempa paid some chaps to kill David and make it look like a robbery, although I find it entirely easy to think that as long as person was willing to steal David’s life in his own home, why not steal his posessions on your way out.
Gabriele –
‘Maazi’ (not his real name – he’s too frightened to tell us who he really is) likes to offend. For him, it’s a substitute for honest debate.
I think there is more to this story than what we’ve heard. The asylum system in the U.K. is pretty ‘rudimentary’ in jurisprudential term these days (the proper involvement of the courts has been whittled away over recent years).
Now the whole thing will be carefully considered, we hope.
What’s it with the continued use of the term
“gay sex practitioner” ?
It implies that being gay or lesbian is a choice/practice and I find it rather offensive!
Gabriele –
‘Maazi’ (not his real name – he’s too frightened to tell us who he really is) likes to offend. For him, it’s a substitute for honest debate.
I think there is more to this story than what we’ve heard. The asylum system in the U.K. is pretty ‘rudimentary’ in jurisprudential term these days (the proper involvement of the courts has been whittled away over recent years).
Now the whole thing will be carefully considered, we hope.
The judges in UK looked at all the evidence (or lack of it) before them and arrived at the conclusion that Brenda was telling lies. Methinks that her stories do not add up at all, especially the one about fleeing Uganda with her Canadian bed-mate. She has been in the UK since 2003, so why did she wait so long to claim asylum in the UK? Why did she not flee to Canada with her bed-mate back in 2003 and seek asylum there? How come I have never heard of her until recently?
I see, sweetie-pie, that you have already ‘judged’ Brenda to be a liar.
Evidence please?
I lived in UK as a university student and have been back there a couple of times. Though the judiciary is not as politicized as that of the USA, it does respond or flinch some times when under populist pressure. There is a lot of emotional blackmail and hysteria deliberately whipped up following the unfortunate murder of Mr. David Kato for reasons which may not be related to his gay sex activities. I reckon the judge had no choice than to suspend his better judgment rather than face highly politicized allegations that “he was sending a poor woman to her death in Africaaah !” It will be interesting if Brenda finally manages to beat the British government’s xenophobia to gain right of domicile. Regardless of her lies, she deserves to get her UK residency because the British did not ask permission before they arrived and settled in Africa for a century of colonial repression.
Bahati should have said ‘no comment’; I would have in his position.
That is not true. The American woman who runs that blog contacted Bahati first and asked his views on the subject. I am aware that he later re-contacted the American to clarify some of the things he had said earlier when the woman called him.
Also, dear: from what he said, Bahati wants her back in UG – so there’s something else on which you two seem to disagree.
From what I hear, Bahati approached ‘Lezgetsreal’. He took the initiative, it seems.
I don’t think the British Government feels ‘blackmailed’. The reprieve was a matter for the High Court, of course. Bahati’s statement was effectively ‘new evidence’, and the Court may have felt that this was a good reason to ‘reopen’ the case. Such is ‘standard practice’ in a democratic society.
If you suggesting that Bahati has been ‘useful’, then I agree with you.
Bahati was used by Brenda’s supporters to extend her stay in the UK. These supporters sought Bahati’s views knowing fully well what the response would be. Bahati did not lie. He simply believed that Brenda was “gay” based on information supplied by her supporters and he restated his view that anyone violating the laws of Uganda will be prosecuted. Bahati’s statement was then used by Brenda’s supporters to blackmail the UK government and judiciary into extending her stay. To be frank, I hope she wins the right of domicile she craves for reasons posted in my previous commentary.
The point being that BOTH Brenda AND Bahati say she is a lesbian.
If (as I think you might be trying to suggest above) Brenda is lying, then so is Bahati.
My view is that, is saying Brenda is a lesbian, both Brenda and Bahati (for once) are being truthful.
So, dear, you think Bahati is lying?
I wish her good luck in her quest to retain right of domicile in the UK using whatever means (including lies). Come to think of it, as a way of atoning for their colonial oppression of the native peoples of Africa, the UK should open its borders wide for immigration.
Bahati’s ‘interference’ may have helped to bring this about; I’m sure the Archbishop’s statement, and pressure from our elected representatives, have been most helpful.
We hope that Brenda’s case will now be reviewed in the light of Bahati’s conviction that she is indeed gay.
Temporary reprieve granted: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12311319
That is not true. The American woman who runs that blog contacted Bahati first and asked his views on the subject. I am aware that he later re-contacted the American to clarify some of the things he had said earlier when the woman called him.
Good.
Glad he spoke up…and talked about living under the threat of harm.
The Archbishop of Cantebury speaks from both sides of the mouth. Nobody takes him seriously or likes him, including Western gay sex practitioners.
Well since Obama is obssessed with gayism, why not US government send a presidential jet to whisk her from London to San Francisco? The UK government have already declared her “not homosexual” which means she will have to return home. Unlike Bahati, I think that lady is not a gay sex practitioner, but someone who is desperate to remain in Europe for economic reasons and is therefore, prepared to humiliate herself by claiming what she is not.