Reader comments · UK government ‘concerned’ about Uganda’s anti-gay law · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


UK government ‘concerned’ about Uganda’s anti-gay law

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. How disappointing that the British Governments comment has to link HIV to gay rights. Actually in Uganda, most HIV transmission is heterosexual. Fighting homophobic laws should not require us to link homophobia to some more generalsocial ill. Why cannot our Government abandon its temerity and just say that it opposes the Bill because all people are equal and that it will cut off aid to countries with homophobic laws.

  2. What one can expect? This is Uganda. With the exception of South Africa, the rest of the continent is rabidly homophobic. But I must say that this new law isn’t about gay sex, but about sex with minors and disabled folks, which to me, gay or straight, is wrong. I’m not going to rally over it.

  3. @Zae
    “disabled folks” could be considered a “Broad Church”… Under UK employment laws, I could be considered “disabled” because of my stutter… I cannot be employed in certain jobs, nor wish to be: Take Air Traffic controller for example.

    But does this make me “disabled” enough not to engage in a consensual same sex relationship?

    I know that I’m “pushing” the boundaries of the term “disabled” as used by some.

    I find this proposed law distasteful: How do you “define” disability? Even if you quantify it as a “mental” disability: How do you quantify that?

    Even someone of low mental capacity can love someone else.

    I realise that protection has to be in place to eliminate evil ones taking advantage of the disabled, but the disabled have the right to decide if they want to be in a relationship.

    I express myself poorly.

  4. Jean-Paul Bentham 7 Nov 2009, 8:21am

    “This week, France’s foreign ministry released a statement condemning the bill.”

    Is there a difference betwen condemning a Bill and “expressing concern” over a Bill?


  5. JP: I agree. This is obviously the same “concern” this government had about Zimbabwe. ie: “We’ve clocked it for reference, just in case something flies back this way and bites us in the arse, we can say we were actively not supporting it.”

  6. Jean-Paul Bentham 8 Nov 2009, 7:39am

    The UK may be concerned a bout something – but it sure ain’t about the welfare of a bunch of “queers’ in Uganda.

    Don’t make me laugh!

  7. gentle lamb 8 Nov 2009, 4:50pm

    Will the Church of England call for an impaired fellowship with the church in Uganda?

  8. Yeap, Uganda -and other countries- only just one step away from gay genocide. Ah, ok, if gays are the persecuted, the word genocide is not used, I know. Ok.

  9. Mihangel apYrs 9 Nov 2009, 3:01pm

    let’s hope “concerned” is diplo-speak for disgusted and angry.

    Unfortunately “colonial guilt” stops the UK speaking out as loudly as it should: African leaders are too willing to shriek neo-colonialism and imperialism

  10. Just like Iran, we are dealing with a medieval and primitive way of thinking. Cruelty rules whether it is meeted out to people or to animals. Sadly, it may take centuries to witness a change in attitude.

  11. Liz maddison 9 Nov 2009, 5:18pm

    Something ought to be done – this is murder!

  12. Never Kissed a Tory 28 Nov 2009, 10:05am

    Gordon Brown has raised this directly with President Musaveni of Uganda in a private meeting at the Commonwealth Summit. This is brilliant – great that the UK PM has given it this level of importance, which is deserves. So glad we have Labour. Would the Tories even give a sh¤t about this? No way – too busy massaging the Law and Justice Party in Poland.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.