Homosexuals Can Forget About Human Rights
Jan 4th, 2010 | 123 responses
I always wonder what those who hold the view that homosexuality is wrong, a crime against God and nature, want. If it’s really that bad shouldn’t it be punished? It seems to me a binary choice, accept it and hold it to all the rights and obligations of society, or…
The title of this post is from Uganda’s minister of ethics and integrity, as quoted in this important NYTimes story on the role of Americans in Uganda’s anti-gay push. That “push” has resulted in a proposed bill to impose the death sentence for homosexual behavior, though now — bowing to international pressure — they’re apparently backing down to life in prison.
America’s role came in the form of a series of talks by evangelical Christian “experts” over three days on the threat homosexuals pose to Bible-based values and the traditional African family. Audio recordings [download] document what thousands of Ugandan police officers, teachers and politicians heard from the Americans.
Now they want to backtrack?
The three Americans who spoke at the conference — Scott Lively, a missionary who has written several books against homosexuality, including “7 Steps to Recruit-Proof Your Child”; Caleb Lee Brundidge, a self-described former gay man who leads “healing seminars”; and Don Schmierer, a board member of Exodus International, whose mission is “mobilizing the body of Christ to minister grace and truth to a world impacted by homosexuality” — are now trying to distance themselves from the bill.
“I feel duped,” Mr. Schmierer said, arguing that he had been invited to speak on “parenting skills” for families with gay children. He acknowledged telling audiences how homosexuals could be converted into heterosexuals, but he said he had no idea some Ugandans were contemplating the death penalty for homosexuality.
“That’s horrible, absolutely horrible,” he said. “Some of the nicest people I have ever met are gay people.”
Mr. Lively and Mr. Brundidge have made similar remarks in interviews or statements issued by their organizations. But the Ugandan organizers of the conference admit helping draft the bill, and Mr. Lively has acknowledged meeting with Ugandan lawmakers to discuss it. He even wrote on his blog in March that someone had likened their campaign to “a nuclear bomb against the gay agenda in Uganda.” Later, when confronted with criticism, Mr. Lively said he was very disappointed that the legislation was so harsh.
Love the sinner hate the sin should be exposed for the impossible lie that it is. It’s a cover for hateful bigotry that can reasonably lead to ugly violence. Not that Uganda needs much cover.
Box Turtle Bulletin says the NYTimes’ piece was a long time coming. The NYTimes has a companion piece on the isolation, insults, threats and violence experienced by gay people in Uganda along with four audio interviews with Ugandans — a gay activist, a transman, a cab driver, and an anti-gay politician.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) rights in Africa are limited in comparison to other areas of the world, with the BBC estimating that homosexuality is outlawed in 38 African countries. In 13 nations homosexuality is either legal or there are no laws pertaining to it. In 3 African countries — Mauritania, Sudan, and northern Nigeria — homosexuality is already punishable by death.
For more discussion, see Memeorandum.
LATER — Latoya Peterson at Jezebel:
The “love the sinner, hate the sin” argument only travels so far, particularly as we have seen the horrible effects of creating “others” — stripping people of their humanity through the words used to describe them. When these people crusade against the LGBTQ communities, they are creating a frightening other, a threat to their lives and children. Schmierer illustrates this willful ignorance beautifully, not daring to use the “some of my best friends” line, but still trying to distance himself from the fire of hatred he’s been stoking.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
123 Responses to “Homosexuals Can Forget About Human Rights”
JD,
Replying to one of your points, and perhaps veering a bit off topic, the commonly held belief that empires fail due to moral collapse is much in dispute. The Greco-Roman empires, as well as the Gnostic Christians included reverence of sexuality in their religious belief systems and celebrated it quite openly and often publicly. The Gnostics were run out by the church of Rome through of series of purges and campaigns of slander and violence. Other empires have been quite prim and proper, but still fallen apart (British, Spanish for example).
In the case of the Roman Empire, its fall came after the reign of Constantine who outlawed the prior multi god/goddess worship and associated religious/sexual ties, and adopted Christianity as the state religion. A strong case can be made that the Roman Empires' fall had far more to do with the inability to sustain, either financially or in human troops, the resources necessary to rule, i.e. it was spread too thin to maintain its control, exposing its weakness to attack from various foes. This failure to understand the limitations of empire and spreading resources too thin can be observed in virtualy any empirial domination, followed by a fall (British, Spanish, Portugese, Soviet). My fear is that the same over expansion and thinning of resources is now happening here.
We will not fail as a nation because we provide equal rights to non-heterosexuals. If we do fail, it will have more to do with our hubrus in believing we can control, though not openly colonizing, much of the rest of the world
We have a few of those here.
I'm a computer programmer. Thanks for sharing.
JD — Um…no. Most kids don't get “life decisions” class until at least 7th grade. I also assumed (wrongly, it seems) that when you were talking about how teaching kids about gay people is wrong, you meant acknowledging that gay people and gay families exist, perhaps in the context of a larger discussion about families or sex ed. However, it seems that you are advocating that schools not teach sex ed at all, in any context; just let 'em go out and figure it out themselves, more drawn to it by its mystique. Or perhaps we could have kids learn from that age old source, one whose use in sex ed is rampant among countries where sex ed in school is not common: porn! If that's what you're talking about: yeah, I think we should teach about sex in schools.
Were you also one of those who gave Obama flack about advocating teaching kindergardeners that they should tell their parents if an adult touches them in the wrong place? (Ah! You're teaching my 5-year-old about SEX!!!!!!1!)
It just seems that the things that I fear for my children are so, so different than what you fear for yours. I just don't think we're going to find much common ground here.
We had that once, you are correct. We had a country that found it moral to subjugate another race for the benefit of whites. We also had a country that considered homosexuality to be a mental illness. THis created a place where to be homosexual meant blending in so they married people of the opposite sex and had relatively miserable lives for obvious reasons, this also did great damage to the families they raised and all they touched, being a prisoner of societies rules and lacking any liberty whatsoever tends to create such social maladies. The race thing did not work out well either. When the baby boomers came of age they rejected the society of their parents because of these problems. By your definition of what makes aerial bombing moral Nazi Germany and all that fought for them did nothing wrong in any way, these decisions were made at the top so these were moral acts of genocide I suppose? How exactly does an act of congress or gov make a child not innocent? If you believe it can why does the supreme court not have such abilities to define what is moral as congress since they gave us abortion it is moral, right?
Along those same lines we would also need to change the constitution and bill of rights because that whole equality and justice for all and pursuit of happiness stuff that we are being asked to live up to is a lie in that case. Regardless of what any of us say they “meant” words have implications in a nation that believes in the rule of law.
I'm a pain in the a** but everyone here already knows that.
My attorney wants to know why TMV did not censor and publicly chastise Jefferson Davis for his lewd reference to his private parts in violation of your guidelines. He wrote:
that people avoided. Should open-sexuality be legislated? I'm not sure. I know that it is already legislated to some point – as I cannot walk down the street nude. (I have my impressive portions, but no one needs to see THAT!!!!). LOL
Right now, our culture is extremely shallow and without any sort of moral compass. I'm afraid it will cause our nation to fail or fall. Cultural implosion is no new concept. It has happened throughout history.
Purely out of curiosity sortaR, why would a lawyer hire an attorney to ask a moderator about a blog? Are you going to ask for your money back?
With all due respect, it doesn't take a lawyer to see that you're being petty. You're remarks, the ones that I saw, were way out of line, and you were warned with amazing patience. It's not that I can't be sympathetic to your position, but that doesn't justify your language or your threats.
If I might suggest, go back a few threads and just read. Find some old ones that interest you, and see how we interact. There's an amazing diversity of interests and opinions on here. Supporters and opponents change with the subject, with no hard feelings going from one to the other. It's possible, and beautiful, to see people who have wildly different views debate their sides without resorting to name-calling, threats, personal attacks, distortions, straw man attacks, and all those other avoidance schemes that people use elsewhere. Your viewpoint is valuable — all we ask (as fellow bloggers, anyway) is that you concentrate on the comment, and not the commenter.
” Other empires have been quite prim and proper, but still fallen apart (British, Spanish for example). In the case of the Roman Empire”
You are talking about political empires, tidbits. I was talking about cultural invasion – a means to overcome an “enemy” through culture without a shot being fired. It is the stated goal of both Islamic Globalists and humanists here in America.
Sorry to have misunderstood your point. Thanks for the clarification.
” I think that moral code is when we begin to run into problems because this country is supposed to be about liberty not about imposing moral codes, in fact that is one of the reasons people originally came here.”
You are confusing “liberty” with “anarchy”. You simply MUST have a “common rule book” that defines culture. I'm not necessarily talking about the legal code – it is a common moral code that bonds a society. Any society that fails to have a common moral code – be it religious, secular, humanist, or even pagan – will fall. We simply cannot exist as a nation with many groups playing by different rules. If this country were founded as a humanist nation, I wouldn't be speaking out right now. But it wasn't. It was founded as a pluralistic nation – with secular laws and a judeo-christian moral code.
“We had that once, you are correct. We had a country that found it moral to subjugate another race for the benefit of whites. We also had a country that considered homosexuality to be a mental illness.”
Why in God's name do you guys bring up slavery every time a mention of our “glorious” past is given?
Every nation and every single person on here right now has things in their past that is ugly and wrong. Does that make the entire nation's morality or the entire person's soul corrupt?
NO!
So, yes… America has many black eyes in its past. Slavery is wrong on every level – and should not be tolerated in ANY society. Now, you are telling me that, because I don't think that folks with particular sexual deviations should be vaulted into minority status or granted marriage “rights”, that I am like the proverbial slave-owner of old. That is rubbish.
I've said over and over, that gays should never be subjected to violence or hate. They'll NEVER get that from me. However, just because I do not believe that an addictive sexual habit (homosexuality) is “normal”; you confuse it with hate. As I've also said, this would not be an issue if sexuality were kept PRIVATE.
“Along those same lines we would also need to change the constitution and bill of rights because that whole equality and justice for all and pursuit of happiness stuff that we are being asked to live up to is a lie “
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness is in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution; and was a statement to England.
Marriage is an instutution reserved for men and women. If gays want something similar, they can already live together, share benefits (with some insurance companies), and just about everything else. If you want the tax exemption, then go for it. That's between you and the government. I have no problem with the government offering that type of perk to anyone who lives together under some sort of contract (one that cannot be walked away from easily).
With that said, gays presently have the “right” to sleep with whomever they choose – male or female. They currenty have the “right” to live with whomever they choose. They also have the right to enter into any legal contracts with whomever they choose. They can own a house with another person, share a bank account, and assign beneficiary benefits to one-another. What they cannot do is become married. It is not the “equality” that the GLBT is after – it is justification and acknowledgment of their being “normal” – as if somehow that will solve their problems.
I was speaking of “separate but equal” not slavery, slavery went beyond subjugation. Also who are “you people” I thought you were a Dem dude? Black eyes are only important when we are acting like we do not have them which we as a nation which we as a nation have a very long history of but I would note we are not the only nation with a slavery/segregation or even genocidal past its just something to keep in mind in the interest of learning from history. I think you are confusing sexual addiction which makes people addicted to all sex with an addiction I have only heard afflicting homosexuals much like female addiction afflicts me and clouds my brain. I believe it is from birth because of brain studies and because men repulse me physically, if I were attracted to them that would make me gay/bi which I really do not care about either way I am just not. The gaping hole in this theory for me is that our prison system would be shooting out nothing but homosexuals since the 70's but instead has shot out nothing but homophobes. The reason of course is that they are not meeting homosexuals but instead rapists and rape is a violent act not a sexual one. Either way not sure why you seem to think I am pushing a big gay agenda when I am just saying these guys are no better than eugenicists that helped the nazi's in germany, whether it was done for religious reasons or not(many older people still look at racism as ordained by the Bible ya know) is beside the point. They spread fear and hatred about a global gay agenda and low and behold they are firing up the ovens. Authoritarian governments believe in “moral” codes as did Milton Friedman to a point that he said they did not need to be believed but merely act like you believe them. Is that what you really want for us to “act” one way but live another or would you rather know who your neighbor actually is? Of course they do not live by those codes but it gives them a group to tell everyone to hate and fear and start the ovens.
My big beef is that they are barred from hospital access and the like. From my view marriage is a religious institution and gov should not recognize it for anyone. Instead domestic partnerships for all and religions can marry whoever they choose. Good catch on the Dec of Ind. but should we torch it too? See the key to America to me is that I have no right to not be offended whether or not I have kids.
Being a Humanist I had no idea I was at war with my own nation nor you but thanks for the info.
Role reversal time MSF. There is a strong anti-theistic (mostly against Christians) group out there that AustinRoth calls Atheists (capitalized). I've come across a few of their websites, where they're lashing out against all Christian morality as though it were against science. You need look no further than this very thread to see them in action. Having looked at the statistics for sexual relations, and still investigating child raising statistics, I can confidently say that nothing could be further from the truth.
One head-scratcher however was that a couple of these sites also bashed natural cures, which aren't exactly part of Christian teachings, and have been showing promise in the health field. I don't have time to ponder that one; it just struck me as odd.
I have seen them as well and they do concern me. I first noticed the large wave of it during the later W. years when being atheist was no longer enough, they became atheistic eugenicist types. They fight natural cures in every way possible since technology nor science “created” them from scratch. Also on this very thread there exists many I would have also enjoyed debating on the “left” side of this argument I just had little time and had already gotten into it with JD. If that was the intent of the “humanist” remark I see the point I just wish a different word would have been used since generic humanism also have given us liberty and many wonderful things and ideals. I would not call this new group humanists but atheistic ideologues and they are just as full of hate and lacking in humility in their heavy handed ideas and concepts as all other religious ideologues and are just as dangerous. I run into a lot of them on Reddit which is like an athiests version of the deep US south. No ideas short of atheistic are treated with anything short of open contempt and mockery.
After seeing enough of those, the “Army of God”, and several venom-fests, I've been mulling around asking for a guest post titled “Bigotry for Beginners – how to effortlessly hate or dismiss someone you've never met”, using some of these fringe websites as references.
I actually think that is an excellent idea. Those that fear the Army Of God tend to ignore the atheistic fundies in their midst and the fundies see an issue only with the atheists. Once I am done with this semester I am considering writing a Guest Post on debate style and how to make people ignore you if that is actually what you are shooting for since as we get into the 2010 election season I think things will likely get even more ugly which sadly will repel more people than it interests. BTW once I finish school in low about 4 years I get to take biology and CS, I eventually want to study human computer/robotic interactivity and bioinfromatics for the human mind. Thought that would amuse you with your programming background. I will just need to take my time with the programming part as I find it resistant to all of my investigations.
“Being a Humanist I had no idea I was at war with my own nation nor you but thanks for the info.”
You're not at war with “me” or your own nation, MSF.
You are at war with your nation's culture.
“The gaping hole in this theory for me is that our prison system would be shooting out nothing but homosexuals since the 70's but instead has shot out nothing but homophobes”
No big secret that some heterosexuals turn to gay sex while in prison. You would have me believe that they were “always like that from birth” and it just came out. It is a form of sexual release that is chosen. The psychology behind them not “churning out homosexuals” is pretty simple. Prisoners resent being incarcerated, and the homsexual sex represents a negative time in their lives. And there are, indeed, some who continue the homosexual lifestyle after being released.
All of this just doesn't play into the “I can't help what I am” assertion.
“After seeing enough of those, the “Army of God”, and several venom-fests, I've been mulling around asking for a guest post titled “Bigotry for Beginners – how to effortlessly hate or dismiss someone you've never met”, using some of these fringe websites as references”
And THAT is the key here, I believe. There are hate groups within every single belief system. Christians aren't immune to them, nor are humanists, Muslims, etc. These types of groups should be fought by every true Christian, humanist, and Muslim. And in my opinion, you, MSF, and I (and everyone else on TMV) should fight them at every opportunity.