Comments on: Bahati sidesteps questions about threats to BBC reporter https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/ A [retired] college psychology professor's observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues Wed, 30 May 2018 19:26:44 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3 By: Richard Willmer https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-89230 Wed, 30 May 2018 19:26:44 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-89230 I wonder if Bahati’s been told to ‘shut up’ – hence his ‘answer’ to your question?

]]> By: Richard Willmer https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-89229 Wed, 30 May 2018 19:26:44 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-89229 In response to your first comment:-

No, darling – Mills didn’t have the armed guard – it was your boy that called out the cavalry!

As for the UG High Commission’s decision to grant a visa: well, ask them.

Rather embarrassing for you, I admit – you like to try to appear reasonable, but then up pops a loony and blows your cover.

Anyway … on the matter of ‘being reasonable’: how do YOU (in your habitual capacity as an anti-gay propagandist) justify punishing gay people for activities (such as consensual* sex outside of marriage) for which straight people are not to be punished? What jurisprudential principles do you cite for doing so?

In response to your second comment:-

I suspect that the Saudi authorities would not grant visas for people to go and film a documentary on this subject. One must assume that the UG authorities did, for whatever reason, allow this.

]]> By: hazemyth https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-86211 Wed, 30 May 2018 19:00:32 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-86211 Thanks for the additional info and fact-checking, btw!

]]> By: Richard Willmer https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-46879 Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:10:06 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-46879 You mean this article, don’t you, ‘Maazi’?

http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/20/703994/homosexuality

I wouldn’t call it exactly PRO-gay (more like ‘anti-machete-waving-lunacy’) … but I can see that it might be rather too sensible for people like you.

]]> By: Richard Willmer https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-46878 Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:54:03 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-46878 I didn’t read the NV in those days! But you have to admit, ‘Maazi’, it is unusual to have such ‘tolerance’ (which I know you deplore!) should be mentioned two weeks running in the government organ.

I don’t think your rudeness is a figment of anyone’s imagination!

Anyway, sweetheart, you haven’t answered my earlier question, so here it is again:-

How do YOU (in your habitual capacity as an anti-gay propagandist) justify punishing gay people for activities (such as consensual sex outside of marriage) for which straight people are not to be punished? What jurisprudential principles do you cite for doing so?

]]> By: Maazi NCO https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-46877 Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:03:46 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-46877

But it is the first time that such statements have been printed in the New Vision

Actually, your statement is false. John Nagenda published an article in the New Vision newspaper advocating tolerance for gayism in December 2009. I am surprised that your Ugandan “contacts” (i.e. spies) failed to tell you of this and get you newspaper cuttings of it.

I also take some comfort from your rudeness – it suggests that I might just have hit a ‘raw nerve’!!!

Another figment of your imagination. 😀

]]> By: Richard Willmer https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-85546 Mon, 14 Feb 2011 18:10:06 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-85546 You mean this article, don’t you, ‘Maazi’?

http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/20/703994/homosexuality

I wouldn’t call it exactly PRO-gay (more like ‘anti-machete-waving-lunacy’) … but I can see that it might be rather too sensible for people like you.

]]> By: Richard Willmer https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-46876 Mon, 14 Feb 2011 18:05:38 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-46876 Anyway, honey, you haven’t answered my earlier question, so here it is again:-

How do YOU (in your habitual capacity as an anti-gay propagandist) justify punishing gay people for activities (such as consensual* sex outside of marriage) for which straight people are not to be punished? What jurisprudential principles do you cite for doing so?

]]> By: Richard Willmer https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-46875 Mon, 14 Feb 2011 18:03:45 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-46875 If you say so, dear! But it is the first time that such statements have been printed in the New Vision. All previous mentions of ‘homosexuality’ in the NV have, without exception, been in a ‘negative’ or ‘defamatory’ context.

Nice to know that there are presidential advisers who hold sensible views. I hadn’t realised that Nagenda advised M7.

Obviously, I wouldn’t have made such a comment based SOLELY on NV articles, by the way …

I also take some comfort from your rudeness – it suggests that I might just have hit a ‘raw nerve’!!!

]]> By: Richard Willmer https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/02/13/bahati-sidesteps-questions-about-threats-to-bbc-reporter/#comment-85544 Mon, 14 Feb 2011 17:54:03 +0000 http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=8628#comment-85544 I didn’t read the NV in those days! But you have to admit, ‘Maazi’, it is unusual to have such ‘tolerance’ (which I know you deplore!) should be mentioned two weeks running in the government organ.

I don’t think your rudeness is a figment of anyone’s imagination!

Anyway, sweetheart, you haven’t answered my earlier question, so here it is again:-

How do YOU (in your habitual capacity as an anti-gay propagandist) justify punishing gay people for activities (such as consensual sex outside of marriage) for which straight people are not to be punished? What jurisprudential principles do you cite for doing so?

]]>