Connect with us

National

U.S. Congress moves against anti-gay Uganda bill

Published

on

U.S. Sen. Susan Collins, who’s supporting a resolution condemning a harshly anti-gay Uganda bill, said the measure is ‘appalling and I want to convey that.’ (DC Agenda photo by Michael Key)

Lawmakers in both chambers of Congress last week introduced resolutions condemning a harshly anti-gay bill pending in Uganda.

In the Senate, the sponsor of the resolution is Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), chair of the Foreign Relations African Affairs subcommittee. The sponsor of the resolution in the House is Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Homosexual acts are already illegal in Uganda, but the African nation’s pending legislation would, among other things, institute the death penalty in some cases for LGBT people and require citizens to report LGBT people to the police.

In a statement, Berman said passage of the Uganda bill could interfere with efforts to address the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the country.

“The proposed Ugandan bill not only threatens human rights, it also reverses so many of the gains that Uganda has made in the fight against HIV/AIDS,” he said. “This issue has united leaders of different political and religious views in Uganda and worldwide in one common belief in the rights of all human beings regardless of sexual orientation.”

The Senate resolution goes further than the House measure, calling for repeal of the criminalization of homosexuality in other countries and urging the State Department to closely monitor human rights abuses against LGBT people abroad.

Both resolutions enjoy considerable support from lawmakers of both parties. More than three-dozen House members joined to introduce the House measure, including gay Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), as well as Congressional Black Caucus Chair Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.). On the other side of the aisle, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) has signed on in support.

Lynne Weil, spokesperson for the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the panel would make a decision on how to proceed with the resolution in the coming weeks.

For the Senate resolution, a politically diverse group of lawmakers are co-sponsors. In addition to Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), original co-sponsors included Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine).

Collins told DC Agenda she was interested in co-sponsoring the Senate resolution because of the draconian nature of Uganda’s bill.

“This is an appalling proposal in Uganda, which suggests the death penalty for homosexual acts,” she said. “I think it’s self-evident that I would think that that’s appalling and I want to convey that.”

Mark Bromley, chair of the Council for Global Equality, said bipartisan support for the resolution shows the tremendous attention that Uganda’s bill has received from human rights advocates.

“Senators from across the ideological divide are expressing that this is a significant human rights issue and an issue that the U.S. government takes seriously,” he said.

Bromley said the resolutions are “not simply symbolic” and have a chance of passing in both chambers of Congress.

On Monday, another lawmaker expressed opposition to Uganda’s bill during a demonstration outside the Uganda mission to the United Nations in New York City, according to Human Rights First.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) said in a statement that the “officially sanctioned bigotry” in the legislation is “profoundly disturbing.”

“It constitutes a gross violation of the universal values of individual liberty and human rights,” she said. “Such a measure goes far beyond ugliness and ignorance: it is hate in its rawest form, and it has no place in the laws of any nation.”

Maloney was joined at the demonstration by about two dozen other participants, including members of Human Rights First, Immigration Equality, the International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission and Human Rights Watch. The lawmaker called on Ugandan officials to meet with human rights groups to discuss the widespread opposition to the bill.

Paul LeGendre, director of the Fighting Discrimination Program at Human Rights Watch, said during the demonstration that Uganda’s bill “represents one of the harshest discriminatory measures ever proposed in any country.”

“This bill would have disastrous effects for gay men and women in Uganda, would aggravate an already alarming trend of criminalization of homosexuality across Africa, and could spur Ugandan homosexuals to flee this persecution by attempting to seek refuge outside of the country,” he said. “The international community must continue to voice its concern to the Ugandan authorities until the text of this bill is shredded and removed from consideration.”

The path for the legislation in Uganda parliament remains in question. Bromley said he’s “been hearing different stories” about the timeline for the bill, but that it’s likely to come up for debate in the next few weeks.

“To be honest, my suspicion is that the president of Uganda would like to see this legislation disappear and so my hope is that they will sort of stretch out the consideration so that eventually the interest dies down a bit, and then, perhaps they can move from it,” he said.

Obama, Clinton stand against Uganda bill

In related news, President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reiterated their opposition last week to the Uganda legislation in remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast in D.C.

Clinton said she contacted Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni to directly express U.S. concerns about the anti-gay legislation.

“I recently called President Museveni, whom I have known through the prayer breakfast, and expressed the strongest concerns about a law being considered in the parliament of Uganda,” she said.

Obama called the Uganda measure an “odious” bill in remarks that more broadly drew attention to LGBT issues.

“We may disagree about gay marriage, but surely we can agree that it is unconscionable to target gays and lesbians for who they are — whether it’s here in the United States or, as Hillary mentioned, more extremely in odious laws that are being proposed most recently in Uganda,” he said.

Obama and Clinton’s participation at the National Prayer Breakfast was somewhat controversial because the evangelical Christian group staging the event, known as “The Family,” has ties to Ugandan officials. David Mahati, the author of the anti-gay bill in the country’s parliament, attended past National Prayer Breakfasts, but didn’t attend this year’s event.

LGBT activists praised Obama and Clinton for their remarks. Wayne Besen, executive director of Truth Wins Out, commended Obama for “having the courage to confront those responsible for the heinous anti-gay bill in Uganda.”

Besen helped to coordinate the American Prayer Hour, protest events involving pro-LGBT religious leaders intended to counter the National Prayer Breakfast. The counter-event took place in 20 cities across the country.

“We hope that the president’s laudable stand makes it clear to Family members in the United States and Uganda that the world is watching,” Besen said in a statement. “Religion can no longer be used to justify bigotry, intolerance and persecution anywhere on the face of the Earth.”

Bromley also said Obama and Clinton’s decision to speak out against the Uganda legislation during the National Prayer Breakfast was a “very positive” move because of the religious nature of the event.

“I think clearly there were some religious voices behind the bill in Uganda, so we thought it was incredibly powerful that the president and first lady attended the breakfast, spoke from a personal perspective about religion and how this bill from any religious perspective just is unacceptable,” Bromley said.

But according to the French news agency Agence France-Presse, Uganda’s Ethics Minister James Buturo responded angrily to Obama and Clinton for speaking out against the Uganda bill.

“Somebody should tell President Obama that the parliament is doing its legislative duty in the interest of the people of Uganda,” Buturo was quoted as saying. “We cannot tell the Senate what to do. We cannot tell Congress what to do. So why do they feel that they can tell us what we should do in the interest of our people?”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
6 Comments

6 Comments

  1. Peter the Saint

    February 9, 2010 at 6:05 pm

    A few of the specific “offenses” Uganda seeks to punish, from their legislation:

    (d) the following will be considered illegal:

    – The offense of “christian evangelism”
    – Attempt to commit “christian evangelism”
    – Aggravated “christian evangelism”
    – Protection, assistance and payment of
    compensation to
    victims of “christian evangelism”
    – Aiding and abetting “christian evangelism”
    – Conspiracy to engage in “christian evangelism”
    – Procuring “christian evangelism” by threats, etc
    – Detention with intent to commit “christian evangelism”
    – Promotion of “christian evangelism”
    – Failure to disclose the offense of “christian evangelism”

    OOPS! Sorry, I leaned on my keyboard wrong. Just swap the words “Christian Evangelism” for “Homosexuality”… that’s who the murderers are chasing… my bad :D

  2. Tim

    February 9, 2010 at 9:28 pm

    Well that’s nice. I’m glad a bunch of them stood up and complined about the insane government of Uganda’s plan to have its gay & lesbian citizens hunted down, jailed and or murdered, but how about putting some teeth behind those words and threatening to cut off Uganda’s foreign aid money. Then they can shine the light of truth on the conservative religious-right members of Congress (The Family members) here who put these idiots up to all this in the first place.

  3. Dan Massey

    February 10, 2010 at 12:31 am

    Overheard in Dallas:

    The Family is an anti-christian cult that exists to foster evil and exploitative commercialism world wide. Its long term sponsorship of the National Prayer Breakfast is a disgusting act of unbridled hypocrisy that deserves nothing but worldwide condemnation.

    In the case of Africa, the Family’s focus is the opening of the continent to a new wave of commercial exploitation by Family associates. To accomplish this, they have first seeded the poorest, most poorly educated, and most dependent communities with their fanatical antichristian doctrines, pretending to be liberators as they fasten the chains of a new, spiritual colonialism on Africa, from which slavery they hope the continent will never escape.

    The Family’s approach to this goal is to cause men selected from their local antichristian cult to rise to prominence as national leaders, primarily by demagoguery of the uneducated and unsocialized community to win elections on divisive and irrelevant issues while they allow their commercial associates to plunder the nation’s resources.

    Apparently, Rick Warren and Karl Rove hatched the idea to use near pan-African homophobia as the entering wedge issue to launch their men to power. Warren then undertook his personal antichristian adventure of spreading the word to Family agents embedded in the governments of the African states. One of these agents was David Bahati, in Uganda.

    Apparently, Bahati bought Warren’s idea hook, line, and sinker, as they say. Not a believer himself, it appears Bahati was a mere opportunist who thought this too good an opportunity to pass up. A homosexual himself, with deep feelings of self-hatred, Bahati easily mustered the drive to outdo even Warren’s repulsive vision. Since Bahati wished himself dead, but lacked the courage to act on his denial of the truth, he projected his self-hatred onto the gay community and launched his promising political career on the sly and lying promises of Rick Warren and his own self-loathing.

    Now, of course, Bahati finds himself one of, if not the most despised person on earth. He has brought shame and disgrace on Uganda, its people and government, creating a wave of disgust and horror that touches an entire continent. He has bet everything on what he thought was a fixed game, only to learn that Rick Warren was simply manipulating his trust for a purpose as false and antichristian as Bahati’s own. An uncomfortable bind as rampant hypocrisy comes back to bite its creator.

    Now that it’s clear that Warren and Rove’s plan has backfired by calling attention to The Family’s interest in the development of pan-African homophobia, so that control has been taken over by people of direct political power—Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) and Representative John Bozeman (R-AR). Apparently, these new bosses outlined a revised plan for homophobic exploitation at a very secret meeting at the Hilton the day before the NPB. Perhaps the most recent news from Uganda reflects this new tack.

    Increasingly, Ugandan officials are adopting a defiant stance, claiming national sovereignty. This is, of course, absurd on the face of it. The rights at issue are inalienable human rights, granted by God, and no nation, no church, no school, no parent, no society, no corporation, and no person has the slightest scintilla of permission to deny these rights to any human being.

  4. Robert McJunkin

    February 11, 2010 at 7:51 pm

    What can the men and women in our Congress do to actually make a difference in what happens in Uganda? I wish that instead of debating something they can do nothing about, they would use the same energy to act on something they CAN do something about — namely, ending discrimination against gays in this country. What a bunch of hypocrites!

  5. Peter the Saint

    February 12, 2010 at 11:49 am

    I sure as hell hope that the Obama Administration is planning to EXPEL ALL UGANDA AMBASSADORS IMMEDIATELY if this bill passes in any way, shape or form. Kick them the hell out! And shut down their Embassy. Or it will become an international outlet for murderers to collect data on gay people whom they wish to catch, “disappear” and hang. Obama: are you gonna let murderers troll our streets of DC?? Our nation? They’ve been very upfront about their plans. And people in DC: Are YOU ready to help protest their embassy if needed? I hope so. Because the fight isn’t about marriage anymore…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

National

Louisiana lawmakers fail to overturn Edwards veto of Trans sports bill

Edwards further said that the bill was “mean” because it targets “the most emotionally fragile children in the state of Louisiana.”

Published

on

Louisiana Democratic Governor John Bel Edwards (Photo Credit: Official state portrait)

BATON ROUGE – Louisiana lawmakers failed to override Gov. John Bel Edwards’ (D) veto last month of a bill that would have barred trans girls and women from participating on athletic teams or in sporting events designated for girls or women at elementary, secondary and postsecondary schools.

The measure, Senate Bill 156 authored by Sen. Beth Mizell titled the ‘the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act,’ in the Governor’s eyes, “was a solution in search of a problem that simply does not exist in Louisiana,” Edwards said in his veto statement;

“As I have said repeatedly when asked about this bill, discrimination is not a Louisiana value, and this bill was a solution in search of a problem that simply does not exist in Louisiana. Even the author of the bill acknowledged throughout the legislative session that there wasn’t a single case where this was an issue. 

The Republican majority state House chamber failed to override the Governor’s veto after voting 68-30 to override it, according to the state legislature’s website.

The vote narrowly missed the 70-vote threshold needed in the lower chamber to override the veto.

Two-thirds of both the House and Senate must vote to override a governor’s veto, according to the local Baton Rouge newspaper The Advocate.

The Governor reacted to the news that his veto withstood Republican efforts to overturn it in a press conference Wednesday.

Edwards noted that in his view he had “rejected a play” that had no place in Louisiana. 

“I would rather the headlines going out from today be that Louisiana did what was right and best. We rejected a play out of a national playbook that just had no place in Louisiana. That bill wasn’t crafted for our state, I mean go read it and look at the arguments that were made. None of that applies here,” Edwards said.

He further said that the bill was “mean” because it targets “the most emotionally fragile children in the state of Louisiana.” 

“We have to be better than that,” Edwards said. “We have to be better than that.” 

 

Continue Reading

National

Federal court blocks West Virginia Law banning Trans youth sports

“It hurt that the State of West Virginia would try to block me from pursuing my dreams. I just want to play.”

Published

on

Becky Pepper-Jackson (Photo credit: ACLU/Raymond Thompson)


CHARLESTON, W.Va. — A judge of the United States District Court, Southern District of West Virginia ruled Wednesday that 11-year-old Becky Pepper-Jackson must be allowed to try out for the girls’ cross-country and track teams at her school, blocking West Virginia from enforcing a law that bans transgender girls and women from participating in school sports. 

The ruling came in the lawsuit challenging the ban filed by Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley LLP.

“I am excited to know that I will be able to try out for the girls’ cross-country team and follow in the running shoes of my family,” said Becky Pepper-Jackson, the plaintiff in the lawsuit. “It hurt that the State of West Virginia would try to block me from pursuing my dreams. I just want to play.”

West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice signed H.B. 3293 into law at the end of April. It was one of hundreds of anti-LGBTQ bills pushed in state legislatures across the country in 2021. During legislative debate, it was not endorsed by any mainstream sporting or health organizations. A similar law in Idaho was blocked by a federal court in 2020, and a federal court in Connecticut recently dismissed a challenge to policies that allow all girls, including girls who are transgender, to participate on girls’ sports teams. Legal challenges are underway against similar laws passed in other states.

The Supreme Court recently refused to disturb Gavin Grimm’s victory at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, where he prevailed in challenging his school’s anti-transgender discrimination against him. This decision — which is binding precedent in West Virginia federal court — said that federal law protects transgender students from discrimination in schools.

“This is great news for Becky, and while our work is not done yet, today’s ruling jibes with similar rulings in other courts across the country,” said Avatara Smith-Carrington, Tyron Garner Memorial Law Fellow, Lambda Legal. “It is our hope that courts recognize and address discrimination when they see it, and nowhere is it more visible than in these stark attacks against trans youth.”

“Becky — like all students — should have the opportunity to try out for a sports team and play with her peers,” said Josh Block, senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBTQ & HIV Project. “We hope this also sends a message to other states to stop demonizing trans kids to score political points and to let these kids live their lives in peace.” 

“We’ve said all along this cruel legislation would not survive a legal challenge, and we’re encouraged by the court’s decision today,” said ACLU-WV Legal Director Loree Stark. “We hope trans kids throughout West Virginia who felt attacked and wronged by the passage of this legislation are feeling empowered by today’s news.”

“We are extremely gratified — for Becky, and for all trans youth — at the court’s recognition that the law and the facts clearly support treating people who are transgender fairly and equally. Discrimination has no place in schools or anywhere else,” said Kathleen Hartnett of Cooley LLP.

Continue Reading

National

Conservative groups attack proposed Alabama capital city’s LGBTQ law

Allege law requires Christians to violate their religious beliefs

Published

on

Alabama State Capitol, HIV, gay news, Washington Blade
Alabama State Capitol (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

MONTGOMERY – The Alabama capital’s City Council is being urged to reject a proposed ordinance that would make sexual orientation and gender identity protected classes under the law.  Matthew Clark, the Executive Director of the conservative Alabama Center for Law and Liberty sent a letter on behalf of his group and six allied organizations asking the Council to abandon a vote implementing the ordnance.

According to the letter, the groups allege that the law would require Christians to violate their religious beliefs or face fines under certain circumstances. Prominent among the other signatures is Mathew D. Staver, Chairman of Liberty Counsel which the Southern Poverty Law Center lists as an extremist anti-LGBTQ hate group.

The SPLC, which has its headquarters in Montgomery, writes; “The Liberty Counsel has also been active in the battle against same-sex marriage and hate crimes legislation, which it claimed in a 2007 news release to be “’thought crimes’ laws that violate the right to freedom of speech and of conscience” and will “have a chilling effect on people who have moral or religious objections to homosexual behavior.” In that same release, the Liberty Counsel falsely claimed that the brutal murder of Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyo., had nothing to do with homosexuality, but instead was “a bungled robbery.”

In the letter Clark noted; ““As we read the ordinance, churches could be fined if they refuse to allow transgender people to use the bathroom of their choice, and they might be fined if they refused to let same-sex couples use their facilities for weddings,” Clark said. “They could also be fined if they declined to hire non-ministerial personnel, such as facility managers or secretaries, whose sexual orientation or gender identity contradicts the tenants of the church’s faith.”

“Christian schools, small business owners, and homeowners are also in the crosshairs. Schools could face liability if they decline to let transgender students use the locker rooms of their choice,” Clark said. “Small business owners like Jack Phillips [referring to Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission] could face liability. And homeowners who list their homes on Airbnb could be fined if they declined to let a same-sex couple engage in sexual activities in their home that violate the tenants of their faith.”

Clark then warned the City Council that if it passes the ordinance, litigation could result and the City would likely lose.

The Montgomery Advertiser reported last month that City Mayor Steven Reed said a council vote in favor of the LGTBQ nondiscrimination ordinance that’s now being drafted in Montgomery would send a message. 

“There are signals that communities can send, and this is an important signal not only to those residents that live here right now but people all over the country that have maybe one idea of Alabama and Montgomery, and we want to show them that there’s a different reality here,” he said. 

Reed and his team have been working with the Human Rights Campaign and other advocacy groups to draft an ordinance that would expand protections for LGBTQ residents in the state’s capital city. The proposed measure, which would specifically target discrimination in government, employment and housing based on sexual orientation or gender identity the Advertiser reported.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Follow Us @washblade

Sign Up for Blade eBlasts

Popular