<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Latitude News covers the relationship between Scott Lively and Uganda&#8217;s anti-gay bill	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/07/19/latitude-news-covers-the-relationship-between-scott-lively-and-ugandas-anti-gay-bill/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/07/19/latitude-news-covers-the-relationship-between-scott-lively-and-ugandas-anti-gay-bill/</link>
	<description>A [retired] college psychology professor&#039;s observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 17:53:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Richard Willmer		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/07/19/latitude-news-covers-the-relationship-between-scott-lively-and-ugandas-anti-gay-bill/#comment-76987</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Willmer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 17:53:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=11810#comment-76987</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In one way, it could plausibly be argued that Bahati and his cronies would probably have proceeded in trying to get enacted their programme of violent repression whatever Lively did or did not do; I&#039;m sure that such an argument will be Lively&#039;s principal line of defence in the forthcoming court case.



However, it is also true that Lively himself has, in the past, trumpeted his own &#039;importance&#039; with respect to this whole situation, with his talk of being a founder of the so-called &#039;pro-family&#039; movement in Uganda and his &#039;nuclear&#039; crowing (which continues in a different form, by the way - on his blog, he likens his &#039;case&#039; against the SMUG lawsuit to the nuclear-power aircraft carrier, the Nimitz!).  And if Bahati was going to &#039;do it anyway&#039;, why did Scottie bother to go jetting off to UG?  Hmmm.



My own view is that, from a purely legal perspective, Lively will probably &#039;get away with it&#039; - at least this time (on the grounds that &#039;incitement&#039; cannot be adequately proven?), although we must not forget that Bahati himself has talked of receiving &#039;inspiration&#039; and &#039;technical support&#039; from (unnamed) US extremists.  Could one such extremist have been Scott Lively (although, in his defence. it must be admitted that the detail of the Bill that so shocked the civilized world in October 2009 is not as Lively probably would have wished)?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In one way, it could plausibly be argued that Bahati and his cronies would probably have proceeded in trying to get enacted their programme of violent repression whatever Lively did or did not do; I&#8217;m sure that such an argument will be Lively&#8217;s principal line of defence in the forthcoming court case.</p>
<p>However, it is also true that Lively himself has, in the past, trumpeted his own &#8216;importance&#8217; with respect to this whole situation, with his talk of being a founder of the so-called &#8216;pro-family&#8217; movement in Uganda and his &#8216;nuclear&#8217; crowing (which continues in a different form, by the way &#8211; on his blog, he likens his &#8216;case&#8217; against the SMUG lawsuit to the nuclear-power aircraft carrier, the Nimitz!).  And if Bahati was going to &#8216;do it anyway&#8217;, why did Scottie bother to go jetting off to UG?  Hmmm.</p>
<p>My own view is that, from a purely legal perspective, Lively will probably &#8216;get away with it&#8217; &#8211; at least this time (on the grounds that &#8216;incitement&#8217; cannot be adequately proven?), although we must not forget that Bahati himself has talked of receiving &#8216;inspiration&#8217; and &#8216;technical support&#8217; from (unnamed) US extremists.  Could one such extremist have been Scott Lively (although, in his defence. it must be admitted that the detail of the Bill that so shocked the civilized world in October 2009 is not as Lively probably would have wished)?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Richard Willmer		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/07/19/latitude-news-covers-the-relationship-between-scott-lively-and-ugandas-anti-gay-bill/#comment-61588</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Willmer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 02:25:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=11810#comment-61588</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In one way, it could plausibly be argued that Bahati and his cronies would probably have proceeded in trying to get enacted their programme of violent repression whatever Lively did or did not do; I&#039;m sure that such an argument will be Lively&#039;s principal line of defence in the forthcoming court case.



However, it is also true that Lively himself has, in the past, trumpeted his own &#039;importance&#039; with respect to this whole situation, with his talk of being a founder of the so-called &#039;pro-family&#039; movement in Uganda and his &#039;nuclear&#039; crowing (which continues in a different form, by the way - on his blog, he likens his &#039;case&#039; against the SMUG lawsuit to the nuclear-power aircraft carrier, the Nimitz!).  And if Bahati was going to &#039;do it anyway&#039;, why did Scottie bother to go jetting off to UG?  Hmmm.



My own view is that, from a purely legal perspective, Lively will probably &#039;get away with it&#039; - at least this time (on the grounds that &#039;incitement&#039; cannot be adequately proven?), although we must not forget that Bahati himself has talked of receiving &#039;inspiration&#039; and &#039;technical support&#039; from (unnamed) US extremists.  Could one such extremist have been Scott Lively (although, in his defence. it must be admitted that the detail of the Bill that so shocked the civilized world in October 2009 is not as Lively probably would have wished)?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In one way, it could plausibly be argued that Bahati and his cronies would probably have proceeded in trying to get enacted their programme of violent repression whatever Lively did or did not do; I&#8217;m sure that such an argument will be Lively&#8217;s principal line of defence in the forthcoming court case.</p>
<p>However, it is also true that Lively himself has, in the past, trumpeted his own &#8216;importance&#8217; with respect to this whole situation, with his talk of being a founder of the so-called &#8216;pro-family&#8217; movement in Uganda and his &#8216;nuclear&#8217; crowing (which continues in a different form, by the way &#8211; on his blog, he likens his &#8216;case&#8217; against the SMUG lawsuit to the nuclear-power aircraft carrier, the Nimitz!).  And if Bahati was going to &#8216;do it anyway&#8217;, why did Scottie bother to go jetting off to UG?  Hmmm.</p>
<p>My own view is that, from a purely legal perspective, Lively will probably &#8216;get away with it&#8217; &#8211; at least this time (on the grounds that &#8216;incitement&#8217; cannot be adequately proven?), although we must not forget that Bahati himself has talked of receiving &#8216;inspiration&#8217; and &#8216;technical support&#8217; from (unnamed) US extremists.  Could one such extremist have been Scott Lively (although, in his defence. it must be admitted that the detail of the Bill that so shocked the civilized world in October 2009 is not as Lively probably would have wished)?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
