Ugandan blogger: Anti-homosexuality bill tabled until January, 2010

Blogger Gay Uganda reports on a public television talk show in Uganda featuring the member of parliament who introduced the Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009 (David Bahati) and Pastor Martin Ssempa.

GU noted:

Oh, and I gathered from MP Bahati that the bill has been scheduled to be brought back in Jan 2010. Parliament was too busy, just now, to handle the important matter of the Anti- Homosexuality bill. Apparently it is very, very far ahead in the future, but that gives you time to check in with your MP and tell them how much you support the Bahati Bill.

Gay Uganda also described in detail the appearance of Martin Ssempa. The blogger said that Ssempa is squarely behind the bill and believes any legislator who votes against it is pro-gay. According the GU, Ssempa issued warnings:

  • Warning all Ugandan politicians. this is the time to get off the fence about homosexuality. You are either pro or anti-homosexual. No middle ground.
  • If you dont support the bill, political suicide. Because Ugandans support the bill.
  • Ssempa appears to be taking the lead on the support for the Anti-Homosexuality Bill.

  • He has formed a new organisation (must have a conglomerate by now) called the Family Policy Centre.
  • He gave the phone number, and his email address [email protected] for anyone with questions.
  • And, he told people to send him money.
  • American Christians have some culpability for this situation by going to Uganda and failing to speak against this error. American Christians need to step up and speak now. I call upon those supporting Ugandan Christian groups to work with their Ugandan brethren to withdraw this bill.

    For more information, join this Facebook group.

    Exodus comments about Ugandan situation on blog

    On their blog, Exodus International commented today about the proposed “Anti-Homosexuality 2009” bill.

    The Ugandan government is seeking to further stigmatize and criminalize (to death or extreme punishment) people who deal with homosexuality. It seems that the government has no respect for freedom.  Especially as it pertains to free will or self-determination on what a person does with their own same sex attractions. This sweeping, hateful, public policy being promoted threatens anyone struggling with same sex attractions, and their loved ones, with death or imprisonment.

    Then the post refers to Don Schmierer, one of the American participants in the infamous ex-gay conference in Kampala, Uganda back in March.

    I asked Don, who travels all around the world, about his thoughts on what is happening now in Uganda.  He responded:

    “What this David Bahati is introducing does not reflect the Ugandans that I have ministered too.  The only place where I have run into this thinking is from some former Russian hardliners and that was only a very small percentage of the participants attending my seminars. After some challenges from me (except for one person) they softened up and came around to a more redemptive position.”

    Hard to see where anyone softened. 

    The individuals who hosted the conference where Mr. Schmierer spoke, Family Life Network, were identified today by conservative Ultimate Media as “fighting against what they call a proliferation of homosexuality in the country…”

    We can agree with Thomas when he writes:

    We definitely need to be praying for Uganda and working with whatever contacts we have there to try and stop this horrible legislation from passing.

    Additional links:

    Uganda’s strange ex-gay conference

    More on the Ugandan ex-gay conference

    Ugandan ex-gay conference goes political: Presenter suggests law to force gays into therapy

    Reparative therapy takes center stage at Ugandan homosexuality conference

    Gay Ugandan man seeks asylum in UK: EU group condemns Ugandan ex-gay conference

    Open forum: Report from the Ugandan conference on homosexuality

    Christian Post article on the Ugandan ex-gay conference

    Scott Lively on criminalization and forced therapy of homosexuality

    Christianity, homosexuality and the law

    Uganda anti-gay group holds first meeting

    Follow the money: Pro-family Charitable Trust

    NARTH removes references to Scott Lively from their website

    Aftermath of the Ugandan conference on homosexuality

    Uganda: The other shoe drops

    Ugandan travelogue from Caleb Brundidge and the International Healing Foundation

    Dispatch from Uganda: Family Life Network identified as backing effort

    Ugandan travelogue from Caleb Brundidge and the International Healing Foundation

    Back in the Spring, I reported on an ex-gay conference in Kampala, Uganda and hosted by Family Life Network (see links at the end of this post). Three Americans spoke by invitation of the FLN – Don Schmierer, Caleb Brundidge and Scott Lively.

    ugandabrundidge

    (L to R, unknown woman, Scott Lively, Caleb Brundidge, Don Schmierer, Stephen Langa).

    At the time, Schmierer and Lively received much critical attention for their presentations but the role of the International Healing Foundation and Caleb Brundidge went largely under the radar. No one from IHF, including Brundidge commented on the Ugandan trip at the time. However, Brundidge has broken his silence in the most recent IHF newsletter available on Richard Cohen’s website. Given the recent introduction of a bill in Uganda which would impose the death penalty on some offenses involving homosexuality and dramatically suppress free speech and assembly, it is appropriate to examine how IHF portrayed the conference and effects to the organization’s constituents.

    brundidge

    Note that Cohen bills the trip to Uganda as a mission trip and seems proud of being represented there by Brundidge. As noted here and in footage provided by ExGayWatch, Cohen’s materials have been used by the group which convened after the ex-gay conference. 

    According to a report from an unidentified person in the ex-gay conference, Brundidge supported the continued criminalization of homosexuality.When he was asked by someone in the crowd: “Do you feel it is okay to decriminalise homosexuality?” he did not speak against it, instead indicating

    That for the law to be effective, one must be caught in the Act. Laws should be done through a value of standards from which legislators draw a given law.

    I am not sure what the last sentence means. While this may not be what Brundidge said, he has not replied to requests to describe what he said in Uganda.

    However, in the IHF newsletter, he referred to the repressive situation in Uganda.

    My trip was extremely busy and event filled. Here is a brief synopsis of what took place: My first engagement was to give a brief two to five minute testimony to the Ugandan Parliament.

    Believe it or not, in present-day Uganda, homosexual behavior is either punishable by life in prison or death! Also pornography is illegal. The members of parliament are being pressured by Western and European sources to make pornography and homosexuality legal. Yes, homosexual behavior is incompatible with God’s Word, however, we tried to make them understand that there are definite causes for someone’s same-sex attraction (SSA), and therefore, change and transformation are possible. Our efforts were to help them understand a more compassionate response to anyone who experiences SSA.

    While he says now that he advocated for compassion, I cannot find a clear statement that he opposed criminalization. Elsewhere in the article, Brundidge said:

    One thing that God showed me while there is that many people are suffering in silence because of their SSA. As I mentioned, homosexual behavior is illegal and punishable by life in prison or even death. They have fear to go. On the other hand, the word is out on the street to the young people: If you want to make good money, pretend to be “gay.”

    Reading the entire account, I don’t get the impression that Brundidge or Cohen would support death for homosexuals. However, there is little indication that they comprehend the dire situation there. Brundidge ends his account with a surreal appeal for more money.

    I would like to thank those who supported my mission to Uganda. Please know that the work of IHF is being carried into all corners of the world. We so appreciate your contributions to keep hope alive!

    On the contrary, the situation now is more dangerous and less conducive to hope than when Brundidge went to Uganda. Instead of appeals for money, I hope that IHF will issue an appeal to their Ugandan hosts to defeat the proposed bill.

    Additional links:

    Uganda’s strange ex-gay conference

    More on the Ugandan ex-gay conference

    Ugandan ex-gay conference goes political: Presenter suggests law to force gays into therapy

    Reparative therapy takes center stage at Ugandan homosexuality conference

    Gay Ugandan man seeks asylum in UK: EU group condemns Ugandan ex-gay conference

    Open forum: Report from the Ugandan conference on homosexuality

    Christian Post article on the Ugandan ex-gay conference

    Scott Lively on criminalization and forced therapy of homosexuality

    Christianity, homosexuality and the law

    Uganda anti-gay group holds first meeting

    Follow the money: Pro-family Charitable Trust

    NARTH removes references to Scott Lively from their website

    Aftermath of the Ugandan conference on homosexuality

    Uganda: The other shoe drops

    Uganda: The other shoe drops

    According to this article from Ugandan news source, New Vision, a bill was introduced and then tabled in the Ugandan parliament yesterday.

    The bill would make homosexual relations with someone under 18 punishable by the death penalty.

    Here’s more:

    The Bill, entitled the Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009, also states that anyone who commits the offence of homosexuality will be liable to life imprisonment.

    This was already the case under the current Penal Code Act.

    However, it gives a broader definition of the offence of homosexuality.

    A person charged with the offence will have to undergo a mandatory medical examination to ascertain his or her HIV status.

    The bill further states that anybody who “attempts to commit the offence” is liable to imprisonment for seven years.

    “The same applies to anybody who “aids, abets, counsels or procures another to engage in acts of homosexuality” or anybody who keeps a house or room for the purpose of homosexuality.

    The bill also proposes stiff sentences for people promoting homosexuality.

    They risk a fine of sh100m or prison sentences of five to seven years.

    This applies to people who produce, publish or distribute pornographic material for purposes of promoting homosexuality, fund or sponsor homosexuality.

    Where the offender is a business or NGO, its certificate of registration will be cancelled and the director will be liable to seven years in prison.

    Failure to disclose the offence within 24 hours of knowledge makes somebody liable to a maximum sh5m fine or imprisonment of up to three years.

    This chilling development was promised by those who promoted the ex-gay conference back in the Spring which featured three Americans, Scott Lively, Don Schmeirer and Caleb Brundidge. Lively backed measures to keep homosexuality illegal at the time.

    This bill would make ex-gay ministry such as promoted by the conference impossible as just knowing about someone who is gay could lead to fines or imprisonment.

    For previous posts, click here.

    Another article on the bill. Boxturtlebulletin has the text of the bill. Here is a plank justifying the harsh measures:

    This legislation further recognizes the fact that same sex attraction is not an innate and immutable characteristic and that people who experience this mental disorder can and have changed to a heterosexual orientation.  It also recognizes that because homosexuals are not born that way, but develop this disorder based on experiences and environmental conditions, it is preventable, especially among young people who are most vulnerable to recruitment into the homosexual lifestyle.

    I don’t think one’s view of etiology matters in the context of freedom. Determined or not, people are free to engage in relationships as adults and of course the state should protect minors. However, it now seems clearer than ever that the ex-gay conference was designed to give the government cover for the line of thinking presented in this bill. All involved in the ex-gay conference presented out-dated, easily falsified information in the Kampala conference. All involved have refused to bring their theories under the scrutiny of science and research. What if the Americans who went to Uganda presented accurate information about homosexuality to the Ugandan authorities? Would the authors of this bill been able to present this inadequate view of etiology unchallenged?

    UPDATE from the BBC:

    Shame and attachment loss: Reparative therapy and father-son estrangement

    Picking up the narrative on the new book from Joseph Nicolosi, Shame and attachment loss: The practical work of reparative therapy, I want to focus on the family dynamics Nicolosi proposes to be at the source of male homosexuality. There are two basic types of family soil which Nicolosi believes grows some same-sex love: the “classic-triadic family” and the “narcissistic family.” If you are looking for the “relatively-normal-often-happy family” in this book, you won’t find it. According to Nicolosi, they don’t produce same-sex attracted men.

    In the classic triadic family, the boy “experiences the father as an unsafe/unworthy object of identification,” mothers are “over-involved, intrusive, possessive and controlling,” and the sons are “temperamentally sensitive, timid, passive, introverted, artistic (!), and imaginative.” The result is that the mother and father do not have a good relationship, the father is distant and/or hostile with the son, the son avoids masculine play, the father fails to bring out the son’s masculinity, the mother smothers the boy and robs him of his assertion.

    The narcissistic family is worse, it seems to me. The parents are more into themselves than the children. The family is invested in looking good to the world but has many family secrets which must be protected at all costs. I could say more about this family but I will save that for another post. What I want to get to is Nicolosi’s concept of “shared delight.” He says same-sex attracted males didn’t have any of that with their fathers. In a section with the heading, “The ‘Delight-Deprived’ Boy,” Nicolosi expounds on the experiences he says same-sex attracted males missed.

    In my search for the particular quality of father-son bonding that is fundamental to the development of the boy’s masculine identity, I have been led to what I call a “shared delight.” I am convinced that the healthy development of masculine identification depends on this phenomenon. This special emotional exchange should be between the boy and his father, although a father figure or grandfather may serve the purpose where no father is available. It is not a single event or one-time occurrence, but should characterize the relationship.

    This particular style of emotional attunement is especially important during the critical time of gender identification. Homosexual men rarely if ever recall father-son interaction that includes activities that they both enjoy together. In this vital experience father and son share in the enjoyment (“delight”) in the boy’s success. (p.52).

    Nicolosi then declares that homosexual men have great difficulty recalling childhood father-son times which were fun and exciting and which included success for the son. He stacks the deck a bit in favor of his thesis here by saying that gay men infrequently remember being coached by their fathers in an activity that “involves bodily activity or strength.” I say he stacks the deck because he is no doubt aware of research which finds a strong correlation between childhood gender nonconformity and adult homosexuality. While not true of all gay males, many do not remember such activities because neither father nor son liked those activities. And where dad did like them and son did not, it is often a sign of sensitivity that the dad did not force the son to pursue a sport for which the son has no interest or aptitude.  An aspect of what Nicolosi defines as “shared delight” sounds like having fun playing sports or active games together.

    He then gives an excerpt of Malcolm Muggeridge’s autobiography where he describes going to his father’s office.

    When he saw me, his face always lit up, as it had a way of doing, quite suddenly, thereby completely altering his appearance; transforming him from a rather cavernous, shrunken man into someone boyish and ardent. He would leap agilely off his stool, wave gaily to his colleague…and we would make off together. There was always about these excursions an element of being on an illicit spree, which greatly added to their pleasure. They were the most enjoyable episodes in all my childhood. (Wolfe, 2003, p.26).

    He then contrasts this depiction of father-son bliss with clinical tales of clients who were not delighted with their fathers.

    When I read this section, I was reminded of stories my clients have told me about their fathers over the years. Most of those clients were straight, and many of those stories were sad and empty. People do benefit when they feel approved by their fathers and indeed people with clinical concerns often relate pain from their upbringing. Here again, Nicolosi seems to be oblivious to the fact that his clients are unhappy and experiencing various problems which bring them to counseling. That these men fail to remember happy office visits may not say anything generalizable to all gay men.

    Then I also thought of an email exchange I had with a gay man who wanted to understand my positions on various issues related to sexual orientation. The man is well educated and was raised in the Catholic church. He also sought reparative therapy for several years in an effort to reverse his homosexuality. He eventually determined the effort was futile and accepted that he was attracted to the same sex and worked toward a resolution within his faith. I asked him what he remembered about his father and he wrote:

    My father was probably one of the most honest men I ever knew.  Being Italian, FAMILY was important and he showed his love by making sure that we did things as a family.  We ate dinner together always and took many educational vacations.  Dad was very handy with his hands and could fix almost anything around the house that “broke.”  I often helped him when he needed a “third” hand.  He was intelligent and hardworking.  When I was young, he tried very hard to get me interested in sports and other traditionally “masculine” activities, etc., but I just wasn’t interested.  So…what I was able to give him — something that he also valued — was being good in my studies, ultimately obtaining my Ph.D.  He was very proud of me.  When my mother was so rigid in her religious beliefs that she was not able to accept me as a “gay son,” it was my dear father who told me he loved me and who kept the family together. 

    Does this sound like a distant father and son? It is clear that this man loves his dad, knows his dad loved him and was proud of him and viewed him as a salient father. If we are to believe adult recollections as Nicolosi does when they come from unhappy men, then what keeps us from believing this man? If the reparative therapist complains that this man is in denial, I will respond that reparative therapist’s clients have been indoctrinated. Or perhaps a more neutral response would be to say that the therapist’s clients are correct and so is my email friend. In which case, perhaps “shared delight” is a feature of the child development of many fortunate boys, gay and straight, but has little, if anything, to do with eventual sexual attractions.

    I emphasize attractions here because I do think a poor relationship with father could affect self-control and thus influence a person to gravitate to a more behaviorally promiscuous life, whether gay or straight. I also wonder if some men are so damaged by their fathers that they respond to any kindness and their sexual responses are guided and shaped by their emotional hunger. Although it is possible that father-deprived males compose some important share of the caseload at Nicolosi’s Thomas Aquinas Psychological Services, I do not believe the lion’s share of gay males who are not in therapy would describe their lives this way.

    In fact, father-son estrangement is as universal as fathers and sons. Books and movies (note this website with this theme in 25 movies) use this theme constantly as it tugs at the experience of so many men, gay or straight. For a description of this estrangement from a straight male, see this book (I Thought We’d Never Speak Again) and especially the story of Paul Howerton (“There was nothing about his father that Paul wanted to emulate…”).

    The next post will address more of the father-son issues raised by Nicolosi’s book and discuss the concerns I have about Christian groups ratifying them uncritically.

    Related post:

    Shame and Attachment Loss: Going from bad to worse

    Also read Fathers, Sons and Homosexuality for a father’s view of the reparative thesis.