Defend The Family
Google
Search the web
Search this site
    PFRC Home Page    Bookstore    Resource Archives    News Archives    Our Resources
News Archives menu

View most recent news

View archives by topic:
  · "Gay" Recovery
  · Business World
  · Crime
  · Funding of "Gay" Agenda
  · Hate Crimes & Fraud
  · History
  · Homofascism
  · International
  · Legal Issues
  · Marriage and Family
  · Media and Culture
  · Military
  · Miscellaneous
  · Politics
  · Pro-Family Advocacy
  · Religion
  · Russia
  · Schools and Colleges
  · Science and Medicine
  · Sexual Orientations
  · Sports
  · Street Activism
  · Uganda
  · Youth


Abiding Truth Ministries
PO Box 2373
Springfield MA 01101


Bookstore | Resource archives | News archives



My Letter to the Ugandan Parliament and Reply
perspective: pro-family
from the 'Uganda' topic
27-Jan-2011

Source: In House
Author:
Abstract:
The liberal media continues to lie about the Ugandan anti-homosexuality bill and my role in it so I have decided to release my letter to the Ugandan Parliament from March 8, 2010, and the reply from a legal advisor to the Parliament.
[ send this article to a friend ]

Defend the Family International
PO Box 2373, Springfield, MA 01101, www.defendthefamily.com


March 8, 2010

The Speaker of Parliament
Hon Edward Ssekandi
The Parliament of Uganda
Kampala Uganda

Dear Mr. Ssekandi,

In March of 2009, it was my great honor to address members of the Ugandan Parliament in your legislative assembly hall regarding the anti-homosexuality bill that was being contemplated at that time. My advice was to discourage all forms of sexual promiscuity, including homosexuality, by such things as promoting a marriage-centered culture through your public school system. Regarding homosexuality specifically, I urged an emphasis on rehabilitation as an alternative to incarceration. Although my ideas were well received at the time, the bill that was eventually drafted followed a more traditional approach emphasizing deterrence through strong criminal sanctions.

As the duly elected representatives of a sovereign democratic nation, it is certainly within your prerogative to regulate criminal conduct in your society through the threat of harsh punishment. Indeed, until recent decades similar laws were used successfully in the United States and other Western countries to suppress the spread of sexual deviance. It is also Uganda’s right and responsibility as a member of the community of nations to advocate the social policies it deems necessary for the preservation and advancement of civilization, and I applaud the Ugandan government for taking a firm stand against the legitimization of homosexuality in the face of intense opposition from nations with different views.

However, as a long-time pro-family attorney, pastor and human rights activist with service in more than thirty countries, I believe there are aspects of the current draft of the anti-homosexuality bill that, if passed into law, will actually work against the interests you seek to serve.

First and foremost, the inclusion of capital punishment for what you have classed as “aggravated homosexuality” is, in my view, a disproportionately harsh penalty. You may not be aware that capital punishment has been banned in numerous countries, even for the most extreme cases of aggravated murder. This is held as such an important policy that these nations will often refuse to extradite criminals to their home countries (including the United States) if there is any possibility that they will be subject to capital punishment there. Advocating the “death penalty” for “mere” sexual crimes evokes such a severe negative reaction in most Western nations that all other aspects of the law, and the rationale for drafting it is ignored, and very “gay” movement we seek to oppose is strengthened by public sympathy they would not otherwise enjoy.

Conversely, if the “death penalty” provision were removed, it would take the wind out of the sails of their current campaign against the bill. With so much of the international opposition rooted in the idea that this is a “Kill the Gays” law, the removal of this provision would represent enough of a concession on your part that a great many of the people who are now siding with the homosexual movement out of sympathy would consider the matter resolved. The “gay” activists and their political allies will, of course, continue to attack the bill, but from a much weaker position.

Second, the provision in the bill subjecting individuals to criminal penalties for failure to report the homosexual activity of others is very problematic as written because it is too vague and because it targets people who may live as homosexuals in their private lives, but who do not seek to recruit others or legitimize their lifestyle in the larger society. It is my understanding that your primary goal is to prevent the spread of homosexuality through the recruitment of young people into the “gay” lifestyle. I believe you could better achieve this goal by revising this provision along the lines of child abuse reporting requirements in the U.S.. All 50 states require that professionals who work with children report reasonable suspicions of child abuse while some states require that anyone with suspicions report it. I am attaching a typical model policy for such a law which was adopted by a school district in Illinois which I found in a simple Internet search. Your legislative research department could find other examples on the Web for comparison.

I believe you could easily adapt this model to your purposes by imposing this same reporting requirement on anyone with knowledge of homosexuals who involve themselves with anyone under a certain age. If, for example, you encompassed all youths under the age of twenty-five within this shield of protection, you would stop virtually all “gay” recruitment in your country, since normal young men and women are usually firmly set in their heterosexual identity by their mid-twenties. On the other hand, you would preserve the right to privacy of adults who are not activists or pederasts but simply want to live their lives in relative peace. This would function much like the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in the United States military. Adult homosexuals would remain subject to the law, but not actively pursued if they are discrete about their lifestyle.

This approach is especially important in that Uganda currently has no provision for treatment or rehabilitation to help homosexuals overcome this powerfully enslaving disorder. Moreover, by sticking closely to the U.S. model on child abuse reporting, which is very effective and enjoys near universal public support here, you could much more easily deflect criticism of the revised provision in your bill.

This brings me to my final concern. I believe that as a Christian nation, Uganda could and should set an example for the world by providing the option for therapy and rehabilitation for homosexuals in your public policy. I have been informed that it is not possible to include this in the current bill because there is currently no funding in the budget to implement such a provision. Monetary concerns are further heightened in that some existing foreign aid funding may be withheld by some strongly pro-homosexual governments if the anti-homosexuality bill becomes law.

Allow me to propose a possible solution to both problems. I suggest that you offer to the foreign funding countries and agencies to incrementally liberalize the criminal law on homosexuality in exchange for funding to implement a rehabilitation program. You can prove by this proposal that your true goal is the protection of your society in the least punitive manner, and at the same time force the funding sources to reveal whether their true motive in threatening the withdrawal of aid is to protect homosexuals from the risk of incarceration or to legitimize homosexuality in your society.

Meanwhile, I urge you to add some non-binding verbiage in the current bill, perhaps in the preamble, stating that the government views rehabilitation as a long-term goal of its public policy even if it is not possible to implement at this time. Such language would be enormously valuable to those of us who will work internationally and in our own countries to defend the bill once it is passed into law. It would also introduce this idea into the international debate on homosexuality and perhaps inspire other nations with greater financial resources to implement such a policy in their own laws.

In closing, while I have been critical of a few points in this bill, and remain personally opposed to the incarceration of homosexuals because of my knowledge of the effectiveness of rehabilitation, I nevertheless commend the courage of the Ugandan Parliament for addressing this issue and am ready to vigorously support a revised version that addresses these issues.

Respectfully,

Dr. Scott Lively
President

Cc. The Honorable David Bahati,



My letter was forwarded to Members of Parliament by Dr. Martin Ssempa. This was the reply.

March 10, 2010

Dr. Ssempa,

Thanks for sending Dr. Lively's Letter. His proposals can be considered
as we make our revisions, but, while I appreciate the need to have
people like Lively campaign for the Bill and the law when passed, there
are obvious dangers in trying to equalise the policy and law on
homosexuality between USA and Uganda. The two countries are dealing with
totally different situations. The time when USA should have enacted a
preventive law like we are contemplating passed a long time ago and they
are faced with a huge and financially and politically powerful gay
population recruited into homosexuality because no one foresaw the need
for a preventive law in time (probably in the 1940s). If such
comprehensive law (not merely about sodomy) had been in place, people
like Alfred Kinsey would not have done so much damage by opening the
door wide for homosexuality.

The situation in Uganda today is different because homosexuality is
still a budding problem. We either nip it in the bud now with a strong,
preventive law or give it a foothold to grow from.

The danger I see in Dr. Lively's suggestions is in proposing to
normalise homosexual practice for adults (whatever age they may be).
That is the Western approach generally which has failed miserably,
because what is held as normal practice by adults will be adopted by
children and youth automatically. It's just a matter of time before the
whole culture is swamped in homosexual practice. That's how pornography
broke barriers in Western society and became insidious. It's like the
proverbial "Camel and herdsman story". Today it is a foot in the hut,
tomorrow it is a leg in the hut, next day its the head in the hut;
before long, the herdsman is tossed out of the hut.

I agree with Dr. Lively that the Death Penalty can be removed, but it
must be replaced by equally strong and detterent penalties. The purpose
of penalties is to detter people from behaviour with far-reaching
consequences. What the Bill needs, to me, is solid research into the
consequences of homosexuality. Its huge health-risks and social,
cultural and economic disruption need to be documented and not merely
talk about defending our "religious and cultural practices". In
countries or territories with legalised homosexuality, parents and
religious bodies have lost the right to teach against homosexuality; a
property owner will not refuse to rent a house or hotel room to a
homosexual couple based on belief, conscience or fear of influence on
neighbouhood children; teachers must teach that homosexuality is normal
lyfestyle or lose their licences; children in Kindergarten are
introduced to homosexual books and other indoctrination e.t.c. All these
are reasons we must do everything to stop and prevent homosexual
practice.

Ultimately, I see no way out in taking a stand and paying the price. We
cannot adopt an innefective policy against homosexuality just to prevent
loss of donor funds. Our friends in the West must stand with Uganda as
we take a serious stand against homosexual infiltration. What we need is
more nations to stand up and do the same. There will be no place for
lukewarmness, the way I see this situation. It's time for nations to
stand up for what is right and pay the price. The more nations do this,
the more the tide will turn against the homosexual movement. Christians
in the West must know that it is time to pay the price for truth.
Unwillingness to do this is responsible for infiltration and takeover of
virtually every western insitution by homosexuals, including the church.

I admire the courage of my friend Dr. Lively, because he has stood up to
homosexual intimidation for so long as a lone voice. We need more people
like him in the days, weeks, months and years ahead. The homosexual
machine is well organised and its agenda is not conciliation with anyone
but total take-over of society. Africa is probably is the last place
they are trying to take-over that has the best hope to turn the tide, if
we do not mess-up the opportunity.

Charles Tuhaise

(P/S: You can forward my comments to Dr. Scott Lively)


Useful Links:

· Accuracy in Media
· America Asleep Know More
· American Family Association
· Americans for Divorce Reform
· Americans For Truth
· Beam Research Center
· Campaign for Working Families
· Catholic League
· Catholic Medical Association
· Center for Reclaiming America
· Choice 4 Truth
· Christian Coalition
· Citizens for Community Values
· Citizens for Parents' Rights
· Concerned Women For America
· Coral Ridge Ministries
· Corporate Resource Council
· Democrats for Life of America
· Dr. Judith Reisman
· Eagle Forum
· Family Dynamics Institute
· Family Policy Network
· Family Research Council
· Family Research Institute
· Focus on the Family
· Howard Center for Family, Religion & Society
· Institute for American Values
· Jews For Morality
· Laigles Forum
· Libertarians for Life
· Love Won Out
· Massachusetts Citizens For Life
· Mission: America
· National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality
· National Network of Youth Ministries
· National Right to Life
· Parent's Rights USA
· Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays
· Parents Rights Coalition
· Portland Fellowship
· Preserve Liberty
· Revolution Ministry
· RSVP America
· Society for Law, Life, and Religion
· Susan B. Anthony List
· TeenPact
· The Bible As History & Literature
· The Heritage Foundation
· The Heritage Foundation
· The Justice Foundation
· The Leadership Institute
· Traditional Values Coaltion
· True Knights
· Urban Conservative
· ValuesUSA

© 2002-2014 Abiding Truth Ministries, all rights reserved.