It would be a real pity if other countries felt compelled to ‘make an example’ of Uganda in order to deter other countries from the kind of ‘transparently insane, inhuman, degrading and abhorrent’ behaviour that Bahati proposes.

I seem to remember that the Nigerian Senate President asked Davey-Boy Cameron of UK and his colleagues in the International Mafia of Western Nations to cut their aid package just before he brusquely called a parliamentary vote on the gay marriage bill that passed unanimously. Why not urge Baby-faced Cameron to use Nigeria as an example? I keep hearing good news about our colleagues in the Ghanaian Parliament working on something to keep sexual deviancy in its place in the dust bin. So how many African scapegoat parliaments do you imperialist chaps in the Western world need? One, Two, Three, Four, Five….Ten?

how could i forget the recently rushed signing of that oil deal, and all the other scandals and crises dominating current affairs in uganda, all of which clearly aren’t as important and urgent as debating a law that makes it mandatory to snoop around ugandans’ bedrooms to make sure all ugandans are having “traditional and holy”* intimate relationships

I can see you are clearly upset, but the parliament will act in the interests of the Ugandan people with regards to the issue of gayism. Stop trying to mix apples and biscuits together. The Tullow Oil matter is a completely separate matter that has to be addressed by Parliament. The Bahati Bill is something different and will be equally addressed when MPs are ready.

Now it seems that he’s ‘baying for blood’.

It would be a real pity if other countries felt compelled to ‘make an example’ of Uganda in order to deter other countries from the kind of ‘transparently insane, inhuman, degrading and abhorrent’ behaviour that Bahati proposes.

(I’m not sure that Ugandans generally want a bahatistic killing spree at all; I suspect that they are much more concerned about violent crime, corruption and inflation.)

I must admit that the signing of the ‘final’ deal with Tullow did rather take me by surprise. Perhaps it could be seen as a sign of the determination by the Executive to get on with ‘practical matters’ rather than mess about with irrelevant (and bloodthirsty and totalitarian) nonsense like the Bahati Bill.

If passed, the Bahati Bill would do no good (for anyone); rather it will only create new problems.

I think anteros’ point is that the Bahati Bill might be seen by some irresponsible MPs as a way of distracting attention from their own failure. He is also calling what some of us are beginning to suspect might be a bahatistic bluff.

Bluff or not, the Bill has already done damage to Uganda, and, if passed, will result in more damage … effectively self-inflicted. (If one sticks one’s fingers in the fire, one gets burnt.)