MassResistance links to Anti-Homosexuality Bill then misleads readers about it

Earlier today, anti-gay group MassResistance posted a link to the Anti-Homosexuality Bill and then misled their readers about what is in it. In a message to supporters, MassResistance said this about the Ugandan bill:

* The proposed Ugandan law that has liberals here in America so incensed proposed harsh punishments for those who knowingly expose people to AIDS and adults who seduce children or people with mental disabilities into homosexual sex acts. It’s not far out of line with most people’s sensibilities. But nevertheless, Lively did not propose the law; he simply told Ugandans his observations of the homosexual agenda.

Guess I’m a liberal.

I wonder if many of their readers will click through and read the bill. If they do, they will find that, in addition to the behaviors noted by MassResistance, people engaging in consensual adult homosexuality would receive the death penalty if they were repeat offenders or had HIV (even if unknown to them). They would also find this section of the bill:

2. The offence of homosexuality.

(1) A person commits the offence of homosexuality if-

(a) he penetrates the anus or mouth of another person of the same sex with his penis or any other sexual contraption;

(b) he or she uses any object or sexual contraption to penetrate or stimulate sexual organ of a person of the same sex;

(e) he or she touches another person with the intention of committing the act of homosexuality.

(2) A person who commits an offence under this section shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for life.

Apparently MassResistance does not view life in prison for two consenting adults intimately touching each other to be a harsh penalty. In addition, MassResistance does not tell readers that the bill would criminalize free speech and freedom of assembly, and would provide criminal penalties for failure to turn in gay people to the authorities.

MassResistance also tells readers that the Pink Swastika is well researched.   Well, I would say it differently. It seems to me that Lively and Abrams had to work very hard to read some of their sources and overlook the material which disconfirmed what they believed. Their selective citations were meticulous in some cases (see this one for example). For more on the book, see this page.

MassResistance refers readers to the WorldNetDaily tribute to the Pink Swastika but fails to tell their supporters that references to the Pink Swastika were removed from websites hosted by Campus Crusade for Christ, Exodus International, and the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. WorldNetDaily also told their readers that the only people who dislike the book are gays. I suspect CCC, Exodus and NARTH will be surprised to learn that they are liberal gay organizations?

MassResistance also wants you to believe Scott Lively got a raw deal from the Boston Globe. Given the couple of things I have pointed out, you should check it out for yourself.

Reporters say anti-gay bill has been shelved – Ugandan politicians disagree

Yesterday, the author of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, David Bahati, told me via email that he remains confident that his bill will be considered by Parliament before May. I asked him about a report in the Observer which implied the bill would not be passed. Bahati said in response:

My comment is the same as I gave you before. We are committed to ensuring that this legislation passes.

Wondering if Bahati’s optimism was misplaced, I today called Stephen Tashobya, the chair of the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs committee. This committee must act on the bill if it is to see action in Parliament. I first spoke with Mr. Tashobya in December, 2010. Today, Mr. Tashobya told me that nothing had changed regarding the time table for considering the bill. He said the Parliament will reconvene very soon after the February 18 elections and consider the remaining bills, including the Anti-Homosexuality Bill. I asked him specifically about his reaction to press reports that the bill had been shelved. He answered,

No. I think I can say with some authority that this is not true, because I would be one of the first to know this because it is before my committee.

Just last week the AP said the bill had been “shelved” and the Christian Science Monitor said the bill had “fizzled.” Note that these reports do not cite sources; the statement is made without attribution. As far as I can recollect, none of the reports saying the AHB has been withdrawn provide any sourcing. On the other hand, those who report that the bill is alive provide sources and interview those who are closest to the bill, as I have today.

Here is an example from the Christian Science Monitor writing about the recent court ruling barring the Rolling Stone from outing gays. Reporter Ioannis Gatsiounis said this about the AHB:

Homosexuality emerged as a hot-button issue in Uganda this year after a draft bill called for the death penalty for some homosexual offenders.

That bill fizzled amid significant pressure from the international community, but critics of the new antipornography bill say it, too, could be used as a pretext to target homosexuals.

Note that the reporter gives no source for the claim.

On the other hand, Jeff Sharlet reported a conversation with Bahati on the matter. CNN interviewed David Bahati who said clearly that the bill would be considered. In November, Bahati told me that the bill would be considered before the Parliament ended in May. He confirmed that again to Rachel Maddow in December when he was in the US. Finally, Stephen Tashobya, the chair of the Ugandan committee which has jurisdiction over the bill, told me that the Anti-Homosexuality would be considered after the nation holds elections in February. Today, he said nothing has changed.

Back in January, 2010, President Yoweri Museveni told his party members that the supporters of the bill needed to work with the Europeans and Americans on the issue; he did not say to shelve it – at least in public. Some sources have told me on the condition of anonymity that Museveni has assured the US that the bill will be vetoed. However, he has not to my knowledge said that publicly. Mr. Tashobya told me that the President has not indicated any position on the situation to him. Tashobya also told me he has no reason to think that the President will not allow the bill to become law, with possible amendments.

At least one prediction about the bill has not come true. In May, the New York Times reported that a government minister, Adolf Mwesige believed the bill would be voted down within weeks. Perhaps, this report has been taken as the end of the matter. However, the bill was not voted down, it remains before committee with the chair saying he intends to consider all bills before May.

The picture is complicated with some evidence that the bill might not pass. However, writing that the AHB has been shelved or not in play is not accurate reporting.

UPDATE: Here is a pretty accurate report… Also note that the opposition to Museveni does not favor criminalization of homosexuality.

See also: 

Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill: A status report (May, 2010)

Ugandan court rules against Rolling Stone tabloid; bars outing campaign

UPDATE: A coalition of Ugandan human rights groups just now issued a press release describing the ruling. After the text of the initial post, I have the details and a link to the press release.

I don’t have the details yet but according to Frank Mugisha and commenter  Richard Willmer, a Ugandan court issued a ruling today in favor of the plantiffs in the Rolling Stone case.

In early October, 2010, a Ugandan tabloid calling itself the Rolling Stone began a campaign of outing GLBT people in Uganda complete with pictures and personal information. Some people were attacked as a result and sexual minority advocates went to court to stop the campaign. A Ugandan court issued an initial order to stop the outing pending a hearing. Today’s ruling is the result of that hearing. No word yet whether the Rolling Stone will appeal. According to Rolling Stone editor, Giles Muhame, the tabloid will appeal the ruling.

Watch for details…

UPDATE: Here is the press release issued by the coalition of human rights groups with details of the ruling today from a Ugandan court barring the Rolling Stone from outing LBGT people.

The Civil Society Coalition on Human Rights and Constitutional Law in Uganda warmly welcomes and applauds today’s decision by High Court judge, Justice V.F. Kibuuka Musoke in the case of Kasha Jacqueline, Pepe Onziema & David Kato v. Giles Muhame and The Rolling Stone Publications Ltd.

Through its members Kasha Jacqueline, David Kato and Patience Onziema, the Coalition filed a complaint in the High Court against the Rolling Stone. The Court issued an interim order restraining the editors of the newspaper from any further publication of information about anyone alleged to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender until the case could be finally determined.

After an initial postponement, the merits of the case were heard on November, 2010. The final ruling was read today, 3rd January 2011. In considering whether the Rolling Stone’s publication of alleged homosexuals’ names, addresses and preferred social hang-outs constituted a violation of the applicant’s constitutional rights, the Court, ruled that:

1) The motion is not about homosexuality per se, but ‘…it is about fundamental rights and freedoms,’ in particular about whether ‘the publication infringed the rights of the applicants or threatened to do so’.

2) The jurisdiction of Article 50 (1) of the Constitution is dual in nature, in that it extends not just to any person ‘whose fundamental rights or other rights or freedoms have been infringed in the first place,’ but also to ‘persons whose fundamental rights or other rights or freedoms are threatened to be infringed.’

3) Inciting people to hang homosexuals is an attack on the right to dignity of those thus threatened: ‘the call to hang gays in dozens tends to tremendously threaten their right to human dignity.’

4) Homosexuals are as entitled to the right to privacy as any other citizens. Against the ‘objective test’, ‘the exposure of the identities of the persons and homes of the applicants for the purposes of fighting gayism and the activities of gays…threaten the rights of the applicants to privacy of the person and their homes.’

5) Section 145 of the Penal Code Act cannot be used to punish persons who themselves acknowledge being, or who are perceived by others to be homosexual. Court ruled that ‘One has to commit an act prohibited under section 145 in order to be regarded as a criminal.’ Clearly this applies only to a person who has been found guilty by a court of law.

In terms of the relief sought by the applicants, court issued a permanent injunction preventing The Rolling Stone and their managing editor, Mr. Giles Muhame, from ‘any further publications of the identities of the persons and homes of the applicants and homosexuals generally.’ The injunction thus provides broad protection to other Ugandans who are, or who are perceived to be homosexual, and the ruling provides an important precedent should any other media attempt to publish similar information. The court further awarded UGX. 1,500,000/= to each of the applicants, as well as ordering  that the applicant shall recover their costs from the respondents.

Read the rest of the press release here.

UN restores reference to sexual orientation in violence policy – UPDATED

UPDATE: Paul Canning has this story from all angles. He has the vote changes listed and notes that 47 countries switched votes from the last time this issue came up.

His summary demonstrates the striking changes in votes from the first time around when sexual orientation was removed as a basis for condemning executions.

This means that 23 nations changed their vote to yes, 15 didn’t vote no and nine more abstained – 47 in total went in a positive direction. This is a quarter of the UN membership.

  • One third of African countries changed their vote positively, including Rwanda and Angola voting yes. 
  • Almost the whole of the Caribbean changed their vote positively, including Jamaica.

In the debate at the UN the most moving contribution was from the Rwandan delegate who said that a group does not need to be “legally defined” to be targeted for massacres and referenced his countries experience. “We can’t continue to hide our heads in the sand” he said.”These people have a right to life.”

“These people have a right to life,” said the Rwandan delegate. Will this sentiment spread to neighboring nations, including Uganda? We shall see…

This just in from Reuters…

The United States succeeded on Tuesday in getting the United Nations to restore a reference to killings due to sexual orientation that had been deleted from a resolution condemning unjustified executions.

Western delegations were disappointed last month when the U.N. General Assembly’s human rights committee approved an Arab and African proposal to cut the reference to slayings due to sexual orientation from a resolution on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions.

The committee’s move also had outraged human rights activists and groups that lobby for gay rights. Philippe Bolopion of Human Rights Watch (HRW) said at the time that it was a “step backwards” and “extremely disappointing.”

The 192-nation General Assembly approved a U.S. amendment to the resolution that restored the reference to sexual orientation with 93 votes in favor, 55 against and 27 abstentions. The amended resolution was then adopted with 122 yes votes, none against and 59 abstentions.

The main opposition to the U.S. amendment came from Muslim and African nations, which had led the push to delete the reference to sexual preference from the resolution last month.