Apr 08

This article is part 13 in a multi-part series about the Ugandan anti-homosexuality bill of 2009, better known as the Ugandan kill-the-gays bill. The first 12 articles can be accessed at the following links:

There has been a change of opinion on the Ugandan anti-homosexuality bill of 2009. 1) Ethics minister, James Buturo, said to the media that ‘homosexuals can forget about human rights’, and 2) President Museveni has decided that the death penalty parts of the bill will be removed before passage.

There has also been a very troubling clarification from Bob Hunter of The Family concerning who decides when and where United States Senators and Congressmen travel on The Family’s business. Senator James Inhofe has bragged to his colleagues that when he goes to Uganda or anywhere in Africa, he can open doors because of his American political position. This is quite a revelation about the separation of church and state in this country. Who do our Congresspersons and Senators really work for when they are members of The Family? Who do they represent?

Please watch the video (7 min). Much of the discussion is based on its content.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Here is the link to Box Turtle Bulletin with a lot more of Scott Lively’s videos. Lively equates gays to sociopaths, Nazis, mass murders, serial killers, and the cause of the Rwandan genocide. He claims to know more about homosexuality than anyone else in the world? Really? Is Lively secretly gay and telling the truth? Has he participated in murder and genocide? I don’t think so. Watch the videos if you can stomach the lies and hate. After this false input into a society in a “sexual knowledge and education” vacuum, it’s no wonder Ugandans hate gays even more than they did before. (Again, Scott Lively is not associated with or a member of The Family).

Here is the link to Jeff Sharlet’s response to the Bob Hunter interview. Jeff says he doesn’t know why Hunter said he denied his own reporting. He clearly doesn’t. It would benefit The Family considerably if the most persistent investigative reporter about them said he was wrong. It would let them all off the hook about everything Jeff has written about them. The whole article is an important read, but the most important quote from it is posted below the link. What the Family isn’t saying about the kill-the-gays bill in Uganda

Working with two documents Hunter prepared for government and Family leaders, “Re: organizing the invisible” and “A Trip to East Africa—Fall 1986,” and Family leader Doug Coe’s account of Hunter’s trip, I argued that Hunter traveled at the behest of the U.S. government. Hunter’s correction? He didn’t go at the government’s behest; American politicians went to Uganda at his behest. He didn’t work for them; they worked for him. Emphasis mine.

American politicians go on trips at Bob Hunter’s behest. That means The Family and it’s church(es) control a part of the U.S. government. It decides which members will go where, when, and on our tax dollars. So much for separation of church and state. This is the exact kind of problem the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was meant to prevent.

I (charitably) don’t think Bob Hunter fully understands the conflict with the First Amendment that he is creating when our legislators travel at his behest. It doesn’t matter if the trips are for good works or not. It conflicts with the solemn oath sworn by legislators to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. That includes leaving religion out of trips abroad and sticking to U.S. policy. I’m not sure why Senators and Congresspersons are permitted to travel out of the country representing the U.S. without the State Department’s knowledge and blessing.

Here is Bob Hunters reply to Jeff Sharlet’s written response on the TRMS website.

Bob Hunter’s article is a bit rambling, but it is definitely worth reading. He concludes his thoughts as follows:

While Jeff and I still argue vigorously about important (to us) details, we do agree on the only critical thing: the Uganda Anti-homosexual[ity] Bill must be stopped. I commit to continue working on that with Jeff and others who seek that important outcome, including friends in high position in Uganda. This discussion demonstrates the essence of how the Fellowship works; learning to love one another while not giving up our individual positions, even on issues we feel deeply about.

NEWS FLASH

After preparing this post, I learned that President Museveni appears to be moving in the right direction. I am sure that Jeff is as pleased as I am to hear the good news!

Perhaps the kill-the-gays bill will be dropped after all. However, it’s not over yet. I’ll keep you posted.

Part 14 may be accessed here.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

written by Sherri Joubert \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Dec 30

This is part 3 of a multi-part series of articles on the Ugandan kill-the-gays bill. Parts one and two can be read at these links. Part 4 will be published in a couple of days.

Evangelicals like Rick Warren and “The Family” (conservative U.S. Senators Ensign, Inhofe, Brownback and Coburn;and Congressmen Pitts and Stupak), who are heavily involved in Uganda and tout their big influence with the government there, haven’t spoken up to Uganda that criminalizing being gay and proposing to imprison gays for life or execute them is wrong.

When asked, some say they have no business influencing other governments. Others condemn the legislation to The Rachel Maddow Show, but not to Ugandan government officials. Some leave it to the U.S. State Department to clean up their mess. They can influence Uganda to walk down this path, but they can’t say anything to stop it? Hypocrites.

Where are their voices? Why aren’t they protesting this legislation loudly to Uganda on the grounds of being pro-life and compassionate? I have always thought “compassionate conservatism” is an oxymoron.

Video (9 min):

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This proposed legislation is clearly not intended to reduce the spread of HIV-AIDS. Because of their own extremely conservative ideology, the Ugandan government is turning a blind eye to the real at-risk populations and not providing prevention and treatment programs to them. They seem to blame the spread of HIV-AIDS on gay men. A conviction for being gay and HIV-positive results in the death penalty. (1)

Heterosexual transmission is currently the most prevalent mode of new infections by far, followed by rate increases in men having sex with men, IV drug use, and medical injections in clinics not always using sterile needles. A person is 2.35 times more likely to contract HIV if they’ve had 5 or more injections in a year. There has been a decrease in the spread of HIV from mothers to babies by providing testing and antiretroviral drugs to an increasing percentage of pregnant HIV positive women. Their blood supply wasn’t always 100% safe until quite recently. (3)

AIDS and HIV infection rates in Uganda declined significantly with the ABC program from 1991 to 2001. ABC stands for abstinence, be faithful and condoms. Infection rates dropped from 15% to 5% during that time period. (1)

Infection rates stopped declining and began slowly climbing again to nearly 6% today (2). Condom billboards were torn down. A radical Ugandan pastor burned condoms in bonfires on the streets. That pastor was a guest of The Family in the U.S. and his radical behavior began after that association.

Compassionate conservatives snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. They again failed to craft policies based on scientific facts (condoms are the best prevention of HIV infection outside of abstinence and monogamy). It is socially tolerated that men frequently have sex outside their marriages with both women and men in Africa, so being faithful isn’t an effective HIV prevention strategy. (3)

Instead conservatives based policies on their ideology. Abstinence and being faithful became the only American-funded programs to prevent the spread of HIV with the passage of George W. Bush’s law to massively focus HIV-AIDS resources on Africa, and specifically Uganda, in 2003. The resources America provided didn’t include condoms, which are very inexpensive. They included HIV antiretroviral drugs, which are very expensive.

Other countries providing funding continued teaching about condom use, but lack of U.S. participation has stagnated progress in stopping the spread of infection. (3)

For each new HIV infection that would probably have been prevented with condom use, the U.S. and other developed countries are providing antiretroviral drugs at great cost over each infected person’s lifetime.

And the saddest fact of all? Less than 50% of the people in Sub-Saharan Africa as a whole who need antiretroviral drugs are able to get them, so they progress to AIDS and die of its complications. (3)

What can we the people do? Write, call and pressure the Americans directly involved in this human rights disaster. Demand they speak out and stop this legislation from becoming law in Uganda.

While we’re at it, we need to make sure the aid America sends now includes condoms and instruction on proper condom use.

Sources:
(1) TRMS
(2) UNAIDS 2008 Global AIDS Epidemic Report
(3) UNAID AIDS Epidemic Update December 2009

The story continues in part 4 here about HIV-AIDS statistics in Uganda.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

written by Sherri Joubert \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,