U.S. Christian Power Cult "The Family" Sponsors Anti-Gay Pogrom Law in Uganda

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Gelfin, Dec 2, 2009.

  1. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #1
    Just when you thought all the stupid had been wrung out of the human race, a bill before the Ugandan Parliament would:

    • Prescribe life in prison for any act of homosexuality.
    • Demand the death penalty for repeat offenders (don't know how that's supposed to happen, but it may be explained through ex post facto law), if one is HIV+, or if any intoxicant, including alcohol, was used prior to a homosexual act.
    • Carry a seven year sentence for supporting gay rights, which would presumably include any attempt to overturn this law should it pass.
    • Carry a three year sentence for seeing evidence of homosexuality and failing to report it to the police within 24 hours.

    The authors of this bill are members of the bizarre Washington Christian totalitarian cult called "The Family," which I recently saw best described on another forum as being like something out of a terrible airport novel. In part this may be an element of a larger wedge strategy to both scapegoat gays and sow mistrust in Europe and increase American ties, as Ugandan President Museveni, The Family's strongman of choice in Africa, has been spreading word among young people that gay Europeans are "recruiting" in Africa.

    For his part, American Pillar of Morality Rick Warren has suddenly decided God does not call him to exert influence in political matters.
     
  2. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #2
    I ws going to quote your post to point out the most bizarre portions, but I don't see a point in quoting the whole thing.

    Frankly, this should have been posted in Current Events. I can't think of anybody who would side with this legislation or Warren's stance. In its own freakish way, it isn't controversial enough to merit debate. At least I hope not.

    I wonder though - what are the chances that anybody with a Ugandan presence will stand up against it? Doing so would be dangerous for people on the ground, especially if this thing passes. And I suspect that being part of an organization that opposes or condemns this would be enough to trigger "supporting gay rights."

    Although, there is one point that I could support it if were modified a little. I would be all for bringing down the hammer harder on people that commit crimes of negligence while under the influence. Ok, so that's a big modification. But still, looking for positives and all that.
     
  3. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #3
    I can think of a few frequent PRSI participants who might support it.
     
  4. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #4
    It's like wringing wet out of water.
     
  5. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    You're kidding, right? Just wait...they'll be along shortly. You probably already know who they are too.

    Rick Warren is an a**hole, and most likely a closet homo himself. Ever see that guy?

    It'll be a new kind of holocaust.
     
  6. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #6
    Chances are I can think of the names you are talking about and even I doute they would support a law this exterme.

    Your post is an example of part of the problem with the boards of labeling any one who is a Christian as a gay hater who wants them to die.
    It is dumb ass groups like this who give all Christians a bad name.
     
  7. Tomorrow macrumors 604

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #7
    Not sure why any group of Americans, Christian or otherwise, gives a rat's fart about trying to pass this law in Uganda. What makes me curious is this - why Uganda? If you're based in Washington and you're that anti-homosexual, why aren't you trying to pass that law here instead?

    Don't get me wrong, I don't support this legislation in Uganda or anywhere else - I'm just wondering why they decided to try to get it passed there. If there was a particular piece of legislation that I was particularly interested in, I would lobby to have it passed in my own country. This doesn't make sense to me. :confused:
     
  8. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #8
    Then "Christians" like Rick Warren should condemn them. Otherwise, we can only assume he is complicit. That's the problem- no one ever speaks up. Ask moderate Muslims what happens when this continues.

    I'm sure they figure they have to start somewhere. Why not Uganda?
     
  9. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #9
    They know it would have no chance of passing here, but getting it passed in any country is a victory to them. The fewer gays on earth, the better. That's their belief.
     
  10. arkitect macrumors 601

    arkitect

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Location:
    Bath, United Kingdom
    #10
    I read about this as it "broke" last week…

    Link…

    Peter Tatchell's piece:
    Link
     
  11. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #11
    That is a crap argument and you know it. If the more conservitive came out with something as piss poor as your argument right there you would have them for lunch.

    You are throwing all Christan under the bus for the small minority. Most of which do not know about these laws. Plus the ones condemning it or going against it are going to be harder to fine because well it is not news. Or at least it does not sell papers.
     
  12. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #12
    Yep- and we won't get any of our "conservative" members come in here to condemn it. You can bet the farm on that one.

    I'm not throwing all Christians under the bus. Does no one here know what putting a term in quotes means?
     
  13. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #13
    Self-serving, yes. But I wouldn't go beyond that. Supporting this doesn't win him anything, but neither does opposing. So he stays out.

    That's what worries me. And Africa doesn't have the major economies and alliances that Europe had to spur involvement there.

    The articles seem to imply that the act is limited to gay sex. If that is the case, unless you have cops busting into apartments, how is this going to be enforced? If I have a buddy over to play XBox or whatever they do in Uganda, are they going to accuse us of getting freaky?

    Some more disturbing thoughts:

    The supporting requirement places organizations in a quandary. Either they oppose this and put their people at risk, or they do nothing and look bad for abandoning a targeted group. No organization that thinks this through will want to put their people at risk, thus allowing the government to claim that it is only outsiders who are opposed to this bill

    Reporting what you see in 24 hours will result in fear ruling the day. First, you will have people rushing to turn in their neighbors for looking at each other - just in case.
     
  14. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #14
    Then it should be quite obvious what he values- power, not morality. He had no problem supporting Prop 8.



    And that's exactly what the "Christian" right wants.
     
  15. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #15
    For what it's worth, I have sent a strongly worded email to the Commonwealth Secretary General demanding that he makes public representations to the Ugandan government and the 39 other Commonwealth states which criminalise homosexuality, or otherwise to explain why he is in dereliction of his duty to uphold the Human Rights and dignity of Commonwealth citizens.
     
  16. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #16
    You are awesome. :)
     
  17. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #17


    I love your agurmnet though. Based on what you wrote you are saying because they do not speak out against it then they must support it.
    I could eave go farther and point out from another post you made stating that you believe christian want this and we all know that is a load of crap.
    And you wonder why the considertive leave these boards it is because of blantant attacks like that and they get flamed for there beliefs and then you make it worse than it really is.
     
  18. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #18
    Umm...what other conclusion could possibly be drawn? Rick Warren knows all about, but won't condemn it. The f***er also supported Prop 8. What is anyone supposed to think?

    Jesus, Rodimus- do I really have to explain this?

    Any time you put a word in quotes, like this: "Christian", it means so-called. It doesn't refer to all Christians. It refers to people who call themselves Christians, but are anything but. Are we clear? Rick Warren and Fred Phelps are people I would call "Christian".

    And yeah, if people like him won't condemn something this heinous, they deserve to be called out for it.
     
  19. No1451 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Location:
    Ottawa, ON
    #19
    This seems like the sort of thing that just doesn't happen, or only happens in really bad narratives.

    I'm still not sure how this law was drafted, as long as the sex is consensual and not breaking an indecency laws(in public or somesuch), why shouldn't it be allowed? These law-makers need to get their heads checked.
     
  20. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #20
    I'll agree with you that it is power that he probably is after. Prop 8 he could benefit from supporting, not this. But this is with the caveat I give about other groups. If he has people there or some other direct tie to people in Uganda, I could see him abstaining from comment. Of course, you would think he would mention it his reasoning.

    I'm not sure how you are tying 8 to this. If you opposed 8, you will probably oppose this. Are you suggesting that if you support 8, you should support this? Or that if you don't condemn it, you implicitly support 8? I'm just a little lost. Prop 8, whatever your view, was at its core social issue. This is a not getting killed issue.

    Fixed
     
  21. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #21
    It's not obvious? Rick Warren supported Prop 8, and won't say anything against this. You don't see a conclusion to be drawn? You would think Warren would have a problem with killing...but it doesn't exactly look that way, does it?

    And don't edit my post. It's quite obvious what kind of group is supporting this.
     
  22. abijnk macrumors 68040

    abijnk

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #22
    I'm on Lee's side on this. While the point doesn't extend to all Christians, of course, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what Warren is getting at here. Have you read what he said? This is one of the most outspoken pastors in the country against gay rights, and yet, when he is asked to comment on a gay rights stance that is extreme he suddenly clams up? :confused: What the hell else are we supposed to think?

    I don't think Lee's intentions were to project that onto all of the conservative posters here, but I guess I could be wrong. Goodness knows there are some backwards views on these forums. But I personally doubt the conservatives here capable of forming coherent arguments/thoughts (ufcgrad comes to mind) would agree with this. Some of the ones who have shown themselves to be no more than idealogues, however, do worry me.
     
  23. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #23
    Exactly right on all points.
     
  24. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #24
    If we charge individuals or organizations in the United States for acts that amount to support of international terrorism, I don't see why we should not prosecute these people for supporting what clearly amounts to state-sponsored terrorism.
     
  25. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #25
    Huh? Is that really what you meant?
     

Share This Page