Uganda Hates on the Gays in Order to Make it Possible to Imprison Anybody Forever

Since 2009, some Ugandan leaders (with the backing of evangelical interests) have been pushing for a law to make homosexuality a capital offense. The bill now appears to be close to a vote, but the capital punishment part has been stripped out. It now provides for a host of jail terms, including possible life sentences (and lesser sentences for those who fail to report homosexuals in their midst).

Human rights groups and Western nations are, of course, all aghast. A parliamentary speaker said she wants the bill passed as a “Christmas gift” for anti-gay Ugandans.

Beyond the barbaric attitude toward homosexuality, the vague wording (pdf) of the law shows that it’s not just the gays who should be worried: It appears to be practically designed to be used against political (or even personal) enemies.

Box Turtle Bulletin, a blog that centers on analyzing anti-gay rhetoric, went clause by clause through the bill and notes the incredibly loose way the law defines homosexual activity. Those football players smacking each other’s butts on the field could be accused of being vile sodomites, apparently:

The new definitions provided in Clauses 1 and 2 greatly open the possibility for conviction to just about anyone who has simply bumped into or brushed up against an accuser who has an axe to grind. Look again at Clause 2, 1.c.: a person, under this clause, can be sent to a Ugandan prison for life for merely “touching” someone. And Clause 1 defines ”touching” to include “any part of the body” “with anything else” (a finger? a foot? a ten foot pole?) “through anything.” All of which means that someone can “commit homosexuality” even if they are fully clothed and there is no actual skin-to-skin contact. The sole proof required is that the “touching” took place with the perceived “intention” of committing the act of homosexuality. Sounds crazy, doesn’t it? But just to make sure we’re clear that the bill intends to cast an extraordinarily wider net, go back to the definition of ”sexual act” in Clause 1: an act that “does not necessarily culminate in intercourse.”

You can see where this is going, can’t you? With the bar for conviction thus lowered, anyone can be falsely accused of being gay — one can easily imagine rival politicians, business owners and pastors falling prey to such accusations – and it will become virtually impossible for them to prove their innocence.

In Uganda, the parliament and the executive branch are currently in conflict over who controls licensing to drill oil and dubious land trades. Uganda has also been accused by the United Nations of supporting the rebel troops in Congo who have taken over the city of Goma.

Ugandans (and foreigners inside Uganda) won’t have to be gay in order to worry about this law. They’ll just have to worry that they have something that somebody else wants or have done something to piss somebody off.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Almanian.||

    THIS ENTIRE COURT IS GAY!!!

  • Mike L Toris||

    What else can I say,
    Everyone is gay.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    A state with the tools necessary for the betterment of all mankind.

  • AnonoBot||

    Hey Tom Friedman, forget China - this is the country you should be rooting for!

  • the other other alan||

    In their defense - and I'm saying this as a fan - football is extraordinarily gay.

  • crazyfingers||

  • ||

    As long as they execute or throw in prison for life Episiarch and JW, I'm all in favor of it.

  • Loki||

    AND THEN THEY EAT THE POO-POO!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • wef||

    This post is racist. It just has to be.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • R C Dean||

    How does this law compare with, say, sharia, or laws on the books in nations governed according to sharia?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Ummm....lack of legally mandated head-neck separation?

  • Zombie Jimbo||

    Does that head-neck separation explain Manning's neck surgeries?

  • R C Dean||

    Sounds like this law was probably originally modelled on sharia, and then got softened up.

    Interesting that the "evangelical" support gets called out. What are the local muslims saying about it? Is it getting support/opposition from them?

  • Scott S.||

    No, actually, the leaders were advised by good ol' Christian evangelicals, some of whom are right here in the U.S. of A.

  • ||

    See the documentary "Missionaries Of Hate". The anti-gay hysteria is mostly driven by Christian Evangelical leaders such as Martin Ssempa (Uganda is about 85% Christian), though it has support from some Muslim leaders as well.

    I half seriously think the US Air Force should drop copies of Christopher Hitchens's God is not Great and Sam Harris's The End of Faith all over Uganda (and many other countries for that matter).

  • stan James||

    I fhtey pass the law a couple of good size bombs can do what we couldnt do re technology back in the mid to late 1930s

    Take out the Ugandan Reichstag.

  • ant1sthenes||

    Well, they apparently don't consider men kissing each other on the cheeks to be gay, so Sharia seems less expansive in its definition of homosexual behavior.

  • stan James||

    We can among other things, thank the pope for this madhouse. the catholic bishop of Uganda sided with the nut case hitlerites, including american xtian evangeliss on this law.

    not surprising since in 2009 the german pope UNexcommuncated Bishop Williamson, a holocaust denier.

    http://articles.cnn.com/2009-0.....s=PM:WORLD

    http://newwaysministryblog.wor.....ay-people/

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement