Reader comments · Ugandan President threatens to reject homophobic bill · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Ugandan President threatens to reject homophobic bill

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Vincent Poffley 22 Dec 2009, 3:25pm

    What on earth do the ravings of a deluded little madman like Stephen Green have to do with this story? Why does he deserve undue publicity here? He has no support or followers as far as can be told – he is a bigoted nobody entirely unworthy of the media attention he gets.

    This is a story about the politics of Uganda. Next time please refrain from bringing in irrelevancies like Stephen Green – why not quote an actual Ugandan MP or campaigner or somebody who actually matters instead?

  2. The importance of Stephen Green, Vincent, is that he is clever enough to get a lot of media attention, which makes it appear that he carries a lot of weight. My personal opinion is that he is a hyperactive idiot! Unfortunately our government pays undue attention to all religious lunatics.

  3. Simon Murphy 22 Dec 2009, 4:23pm

    I hope it doesn’t pass.

    If it does pass then Uganda needs to be immediately expelled from the Commonwealth and action must be taken to ensure that not a single penny of British aid money being sent to Uganda is allowed anywhere near the genocidal government of Uganda. Britain cannot fund genocide despite Gordon Brown’s babblings that Uganda still deserves British aid.

  4. Stuart Neyton 22 Dec 2009, 4:40pm

    “have influenced the simple mentality of blacks in Uganda”

    What does race have to do with this? This is a terrible law by horrible people, simple as. There’s no need to start a race war.

  5. Simon Murphy 22 Dec 2009, 4:48pm

    No 5: Stuart Neyton: “What does race have to do with this? This is a terrible law by horrible people, simple as. There’s no need to start a race war. ”


    It is appalling however that the Ugandan Parliament has made the genocide of gay people a race issue.

    They pretend that it is the white colonialists who have brought homosexuality to Africa and that is why it is OK to engage in the mass murder of Ugandan homosexuals.

    The racist reasoning for sexual genocide of the Ugandan government shows how ignorant, savage, bigotted and stupid they are.

  6. I still don’t understand why our governments don’t try to repeal laws that places like Nigeria and Iran have that executes gays?

  7. Simon,
    Your post comes out as rascist. This is unfortunate. The Ugandans are the target, not the so called ímporters’of it, as you claim.

  8. jonnielondon 22 Dec 2009, 6:20pm

    Lawmakers and politicians in Uganda who enact this law and carry it out should be subject to prosecution by the International Court of Justice in the Hague. To Mr. Museveni, a word of warning: be careful where you travel if you do not veto this horrendous law!

  9. Niki, at #7, how on earth do you construe Simon Murphy’s post as being racist? What Simon has said is absolutely bloody true. It is reality. There is not an ounce of racism in it. GET REAL!

    If you can’t see that there’s no racism in Simon’s post, then please post a deconstruction of what he has written and illustrate how you derive an interpretation of “racism” from it.

    In other words, JUSTIFY your accusation. Or keep such nonsensical interpretations to yourself.

  10. Ooer: Eddy’s blown a gasket.

    I think the line of thinking is:
    Africans = Stupid
    Africans >= Black

    QED Therefore:

    Blacks = Stupid

    The problem is the Africans see themselves as rulers of their own destiny until the sh!t hits the fan and they have another drought / war / genocide / epedemic etc etc and then they are the first to run to us for aid. If they want to come up with nutcase solutions like murdering gay men to protect the family, so be it, but don’t come pandering to the West for help.

    You’ve made your bed, so you can paddle your own canoe.

  11. Jean-Paul Bentham 22 Dec 2009, 10:17pm

    And so the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights takes another baby step. Yea!

  12. Jean-Paul Bentham 22 Dec 2009, 11:49pm

    “The Family” expert Jeff Sharlett on Uganda – Advocate dot com


  13. Jean-Paul Bentham 23 Dec 2009, 7:04am

    Put a sock in it, Museveni:

    Pow! Right to da moon!!

  14. Jean-Paul Bentham 23 Dec 2009, 8:11am

    “Ugandan President threatens to reject homophobic bill.”

    Threatens!! Gasp!


  15. Simon Murphy 23 Dec 2009, 11:52am

    No 7: Niki: you say: “Simon, Your post comes out as rascist.”

    How is it racist to point out that it is the Ugandan politicians who are making their proposed genocide against gay people a race issue?

    It is not me who is making racist statements blaming white colonialists for Uganda’s ‘problem’ with homosexuality.

    That is racism on the part of Ugandan polticians.

    And they are ignorant, bigotted, stupid, backward savages if they introduce this genocidal law.

    I’m sure you agree with that. Unless of course like the BBC you think that the merits of genocide against gay people is a debate worth having.

  16. @Simon Murphy (15):’How is it racist..?’ ‘They are ignorant, bigotted, stupid, backward savages.’

    Like, DUH…

  17. Adam Kadmon 23 Dec 2009, 12:19pm

    This homophobic bill enjoys widespread support in Uganda. As that is the case then I assume that the Ugandan people will be prepared to suffer for their family values if aid and trade are stopped. Let’s see, starting at once. If that doesn’t work, there is always regime change and the summary execution of every MP that voted for the bill.
    Oh yes, and if the rest of Africa objects, re-colonisation is a viable option.

  18. Adam Kadmon 23 Dec 2009, 12:21pm

    Oh yes, and before you accuse me of rascism, remember this: black people in America, Britain, the Caribbean and Africa generally loathe gays. They are not our friends.

  19. Sister Mary Clarence 23 Dec 2009, 1:10pm

    Adam Kadmon, you might actually find that it is their religious beliefs rather than the colour of their skin that account for their views towards homosexuality.

  20. Simon Murphy 23 Dec 2009, 1:21pm

    No 16: Charlie: “‘They are ignorant, bigotted, stupid, backward savages.’Like, DUH… ”

    How is it racist if it is entirely true?

    If the government of Uganda legislates for genocide against gay people (which is highly likely) then they are indeed, vicious, evil, stupid, backward savages.

    How would you like me to describe supporters of genocide?

    People who support genocide are all those things and worse.

  21. Sister Mary Clarence 23 Dec 2009, 3:08pm

    Maybe we could all drop the race thing. The belief that homosexuality is wrong stems from religious teaching has not nothing to do with ethnicity. The flames have been fanned (and arguably the fire lit in the first place) by American Evangelical God-botherers – probably of assorted colours.

    I am black (African). I am neither stupid not religious, and I have no problem with homosexuality whatsoever.

    Gay people of all people should no better than to tar everyone with the same brush, but seemingly they are equally, if not more happy to do it than the rest of society.

  22. Father Andrew Gentry 23 Dec 2009, 4:04pm

    There are essentially two types of people in the world, flat earth ones and round earth ones. The flatists and yes there still are people who really do believe the earth is flat, see all of human history through a tunnel created in their own minds, justified by their own ignorance and fear, and dedicated to the eradication of anyone and everyone who disagrees with them, sadly and blasphemously in the Name of God or the State whichever is readily available and effective. The roundists on the other hand see the absolute interconnectedness of all people, believe in one race, human, expressed in many cultural forms, accept the inherent dignity of every living creature, and have essentially one credo if they choose to be people of faith and that is God is Love. The international battle going on is ultimately between these two irreconcilable visions of the planet and the life upon it. Good will ultimately triumph if the world is to survive but Good has to be very vigilant and very smart.

  23. Sister Mary Clarence at #21 wrote: “I am black (African). I am neither stupid not [sic] religious, and I have no problem with homosexuality whatsoever.”

    “Sister Mary Clarence”, you’ve forgotten a thing or two about yourself, yet again. (But this is not surprising because you have seemed to possess some kind of identity-problem or one sort or another.)

    In total you have clearly stated on these threads over the months that you are:

    black (African),
    a Tory,
    “a practising Christian”

    Yet on Dec 23, above, you have stated that you are not religious.

    Please amuse us all by advising us how you manage to be both “a practising Christian” AND “not religious”.

  24. For once, I think I have to go with Eddy:
    Sorry, Sister Mary, but even with a name like that, how can you possibly justify not being religious?

    I doubt you are one of those “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” we once saw on our streets, (Whatever happened to them?) – so either come out of the pulpit, or desist.

  25. Sister Mary Clarence 24 Dec 2009, 4:31am

    Eddy – as previously stated you might want to go back and read the other thread properly. I NEVER stated I was religious – someone else did.

    ‘Say it enough and it becomes true’, might work for you and your Labour party chums but doesn’t wash with me mate.

    So, consider yourself ‘advised’. Read what is being written and by who and you might make a start at getting a few facts right. However as I have said before why spoil the argument with facts, eh? Its certainly never bothered you before.

    Rather ironic as well don’t you think you defending Simon’s comments on here against allegations of racism? Its been under two weeks since Pinknews took the unusual step of closing a comments page because of the racist comments posted by you and others.

    How long is it going to be before you start ‘amusing’ us all with a bit more racist cr@p?

    RobN – I picked the name of a character from a Whoopi Goldberg film, because my name was being used by someone else. By your logic, I take it you’ll be assuming that the person posting under the name ‘Tom Tom’ is actually a satellite navigation device, and the person posting under the name ‘Yewtree’ is actually a small to medium sized evergreen tree believed to have some cancer curing properties.

    It would be nice if for a change we could have a few discussions on here without people wading in with all this black white rubbish.

  26. Jean-Paul Bentham 28 Dec 2009, 5:18am

    Both Yoweri Museveni and David Bahati have been members of the ‘Family” since 1986, and I for one am wondering why American evangelicals have persuaded the Ugandan authorities to believe that homosexuality is part of a conspiracy originating in Europe.

    Skin color’s got nothing to do with it.

    What would American evangelicals have to gain from turning Uganda against Europe? Oil contracts perhaps?? A home-base to control the neighboring countries? What kind of a church doesn’t have a collection basket; I believe some call it an ‘offertory’ basket?

    Ugandans have been brainwashed by Richard Cohen, Rick Warren and a number of Republican senators from “C Street” in Washington. The law has been 25 years in the making. Check Rachel Maddow’s video clips on YouTube. No mention there of skin color.

  27. So, according to Stephen Green, Christian values mean to murder human beings for something that God instilled on them. Remember that God, allegedly, made us in his image, so every human reflects the nature of God, a varied and diverse nature. Stephen Green rejects the will of God and incites to murder. Very Christian. “Thank god I am an atheist”

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.