Connect with us

WARNING: US LGBT Organizations Falling Into Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Trap

Published

on

var addthis_config = {“data_track_addressbar”:true};

Like so many of us, I was dismayed last week after Uganda president Yoweri Museveni announced that despite international pressures and the risk of economic sanctions, he has decided to go ahead and sign the infamous Anti-Homosexuality Bill (formerly known as the “Kill the Gays Bill”). So naturally, I was pleased as I watched the announcement receive swift condemnation from President Barack Obama and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice. “As we have conveyed to President Museveni, enacting this legislation will complicate our valued relationship with Uganda,” said Obama. “It will be a step backward for all Ugandans and reflect poorly on Uganda’s commitment to protecting the human rights of its people.”

National LGBTQ organizations took it a step further over the last few days, and demanded the U.S. government recall our ambassadors from both Uganda and Nigeria. That gave me pause. Why would we want to withdraw our diplomatic connections to countries where human rights are being abused? Doesn’t that leave us without the on-the-ground ability to work on turning these laws back?

As it turns out, both our national LGBTQ rights organizations and President Obama are falling right into the trap set by anti-gay leaders in Africa.

Rev. Dr. Kapya Kaoma, Senior Religion and Sexuality Researcher at the social justice think tank Political Research Associates (where I also work), was the first U.S. researcher to reveal the links between U.S. conservatives and Uganda back in 2008. He’s written an excellent article explaining what is happening:

Last weekend, Uganda President Yoweri Museveni gave a speech “declar[ing] war on the ‘homosexual lobby,’” and called on all Ugandans to stand with him—he was expecting the Western world to react to his declaration. To Museveni and most Ugandans, the ‘homosexual lobby’ includes not only major LGBTQ rights organizations, but the United States and the European Union, which have for many years fought for the rights and dignity of LGBTQ persons on African soil. Western nations and organizations have not fought in the way social justice-minded people have hoped—they have not stopped the arrests, or the beatings—but there is no doubt that their presence and back-room meetings with African politicians has saved LGBTQ lives from systematic persecution, and in some cases, genocides.

It is these nations and organizations that have provided safe spaces for African LGBTQ persons—even in extraordinarily homophobic countries like Nigeria, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, and The Gambia—to share their plight and reorganize after their governments disband them. In Zambia and Uganda, these nations have gone beyond simple meetings with local LGBTQ activists, but are also monitoring and documenting human rights abuses, flooding court rooms when LGBTQ persons appear in court, and have provided safety when African nations declare war on gays. When LGBTQ Africans lives’ are in immediate danger, it is to the U.S. and European embassies they run for safety. These nations’ open protection of sexual minorities in Africa has resulted in charges of “promoting homosexuality in Africa” by both religious and political leaders.

Honestly, had it not been for the presence of the U.S. and European embassies, African gays would have been massacred years ago, without any fear of consequences. For LGBTQ organizations to now demand they pull out of Uganda perilously compromises the lives of LGBTQ persons—who will not have anyone to turn to for safety, and strip our ability to monitor persecution.

I understand that we are all desperate to stop the progression of the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill. But threatening to leave the country will only boost the political power and credibility of leaders like Museveni, David Bahati, and Martin Ssempa—opening the door for African nations to expand further anti-LGBTQ laws, possibly even including executions and mass slaughter.

In other words, if we were to withdraw our ambassadors and shutter our embassies in these homophobic countries, we’d be shutting off some of the only safe havens available to African LGBTQ people. And even worse, we lose the ability to see what’s happening and destroy our ability to intercede.

Look, no offense to our national LGBTQ organizations, they do some awesome work. But this can only be categorized as stupidity. U.S. and European diplomatic relationships in Uganda and Nigeria are one of the few reasons these Anti-Homosexuality bills no longer call for the slaughter of our brothers and sisters. If we turn our backs on them, what do we think is going to happen?

If we’re looking for real action to take, let’s follow Kaoma’s advice:

African homophobia is promoted and propelled by religion. In Uganda, Christian leaders (paid for and encouraged by American evangelicals) have been demanding the bill for years, and pushing their followers to vote for the lawmakers who support it. Politicians will always be politicians—they are always looking for votes. In his attempt to win the Evangelical votes in 2008, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama disagreed with same-sex marriage in a debate moderated by Pastor Rick Warren—one of very same U.S. evangelicals who worked with anti-gay pastors in Uganda. But to think that such dynamics only work in American politics is naïve at best, and dangerous, careless, and deadly at worst. Museveni needs votes to remain in power. So the answer to Uganda’s anti-gay bill lies in the primarily Christian electorate of Uganda. We should be demanding that Pope Francis speak directly to President Museveni and Speaker Rebecca Kadaga, and urge Ugandan Roman Catholics to proclaim his already-stated opposition to any law criminalizing LGBTQ persons. U.S. Anglican, and Evangelical/Pentecostal leaders should equally speak to their friends in Uganda about the dignity and fundamental human rights of sexual minorities. And the American people must demand an end to the constant flow of exportation of homophobia from U.S. evangelicals like Scott Lively, Lou Engle, and Rick Warren to Ugandan pastors and politicians.

Open letters, petitions, and press releases will only give Museveni and Uganda lawmakers another reason to sign and enforce the bill.

Image, top, by Chatham House via Flickr

Follow Eric Ethington on Twitter @EricEthington

Eric Ethington NCRMEric Ethington has been specializing in political messaging, communications strategy, and public relations for more than a decade. Originally hailing from Salt Lake City, he now works in Boston for a social justice think tank. Eric’s writing, advocacy work, and research have been featured on MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, CNBC, the New York Times, The Telegraph, and The Public Eye magazine. He’s worked as a radio host, pundit, blogger, activist and electoral campaign strategist. He also writes at NuanceStillMatters.com

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Trump Axes Catholic Charities Funding for Migrant Kids Amid Pope Feud: Report

Published

on

Amid President Donald Trump’s escalating feud with Pope Leo XIV, the Trump administration has canceled an $11 million contract with Catholic Charities in Miami, Florida, to shelter and care for migrant children who enter the U.S. unaccompanied, a relationship that dates back to the 1960s, the Miami Herald reports.

“The U.S. government has abruptly decided to end more than 60 years of relationship with Catholic Charities in the Archdiocese of Miami,” Archbishop Thomas Wenski wrote, according to the Miami Herald. “The Archdiocese of Miami’s services for unaccompanied minors have been recognized for their excellence and have served as a model for other agencies throughout the country.”

Catholic Charities was contracted to operate a full-service child welfare program in the Miami-Dade area.

“Our track record in serving this vulnerable population is unmatched. Yet, the Archdiocese of Miami’s Catholic Charities’ services for unaccompanied minors has been stripped of funding and will be forced to shut down within three months,” Archbishop Wenski noted.

The Trump administration is citing a reduction in unaccompanied minors crossing the border, which the archdiocese acknowledges. But that population still exists, and it is unknown how many children will be uprooted and relocated, or where they will go.

The Department of Health and Human Services described the daily population of unaccompanied migrant children in the agency’s care as “significantly lower,” than it had been under the Biden administration.

Health and Human Services’ press secretary Emily G. Hillard suggested that the Office of Refugee Resettlement’s closure of unused facilities “continues efforts to stop illegal entry and the smuggling and trafficking of unaccompanied alien children.”

But Wenski called it “baffling that the U.S. government would shut down a program that it would be hard-pressed to replicate at the level of competence” shown by the church.

Describing being moved as “incredibly psychologically harmful” to the children, Robert Latham, associate director of the University of Miami Law School’s Children and Youth Law Clinic, “said any relocation to a new foster home or shelter likely would be traumatic for children who already have suffered uncertainty and loss.”

“For little kids, moving repeatedly creates bonding issues and destroys the sense of both self and community. They don’t know who they are and where they will be” from day to day, he said.

READ MORE: ‘Could Be Two, Could Be Three’: Trump Signals Readiness for New Supreme Court Picks

Last week, President Donald Trump took issue with the Pope’s call for peace.

“God does not bless any conflict,” Pope Leo wrote on social media. “Anyone who is a disciple of Christ, the Prince of Peace, is never on the side of those who once wielded the sword and today drop bombs. Military action will not create space for freedom or times of #Peace, which comes only from the patient promotion of coexistence and dialogue among peoples.”

The Guardian called it a “rebuke” over the Iran war, and noted that while the Pope did not name names, his post criticized attempts to use religion to glorify the U.S. war in the Middle East.

Trump responded to the Pope’s remarks, saying that he had “nothing to apologize for,” and stated that the Pope was “wrong.”

The pope has continued his opposition to the Iran war.

On Tuesday, he wrote, “God’s heart is torn apart by wars, violence, injustice and lies. But our Father’s heart is not with the wicked, the arrogant, or the proud. God’s heart is with the little ones and the humble, and with them He builds up His Kingdom of love and peace day by day. Wherever there is love and service, God is there.”

Just days ago, Trump told reporters, “We don’t like a pope that’s gonna say that it’s okay to have a nuclear weapon. We don’t want a pope that says, crime is okay in our cities. I don’t like it. I’m not a big fan of Pope Leo. He’s a very liberal person, and he’s a man that doesn’t believe in stopping crime. He’s a man that doesn’t think that we should be toying with a country that wants a nuclear weapon so they can blow up the world.”

Trump also recently described the Pope as “Weak on Nuclear Weapons.”

READ MORE: ‘I Wasn’t That Involved’: Weakened Trump Tries to Rewrite History

 

Image via Reuters 

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Could Be Two, Could Be Three’: Trump Signals Readiness for New Supreme Court Picks

Published

on

President Donald Trump says he’s ready should any Supreme Court justice decide to retire.

Just one day after Senate Republican Majority Leader John Thune announced he is “prepared” should Justice Samuel Alito, 76, announce he is retiring — despite the jurist having made no public suggestion he plans to — President Trump announced on Wednesday he is also “prepared” to replace Alito, or others.

“It could be two, could be three, could be one. I don’t know — I’m prepared to do it,” Trump told Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo in an interview, according to The Hill.

The president, who placed three conservative justices on the Supreme Court during his first term, told Bartiromo that Justice Alito is “one of the great justices of all time.”

“Justice Alito is an unbelievable justice and a brilliant justice and he gets the country,” Trump continued. “He does what’s right for the country.”

Trump said he has a shortlist of nominees should any justice decide to retire, but he is unsure that would happen this year, The Hill noted.

READ MORE: ‘I Wasn’t That Involved’: Weakened Trump Tries to Rewrite History

But Trump also appeared to signal that perhaps retiring before the midterm elections might be wise.

Being on the nation’s highest court is “probably not easy to give up for people, you know, they reach a certain age,” he told Bartiromo. “Ginsburg could not do it.”

Liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who had been urged by the left to retire during President Barack Obama’s term, refused, and passed away while on the bench in 2020, handing Trump the right to nominate her replacement. He placed a conservative on the Court, further strengthening its conservative majority.

Justice Ginsburg, Trump told Bartiromo, “decided that she was going to live forever, and about two minutes after the election, she went out and I got to appoint somebody.”

“So, you know, you make the case that at a certain time you give it up… so that your ideology, your policies, your everything, would be of the kind that we like.”

U.S. News & World Report senior national political correspondent Olivier Knox commented on Trump’s remarks.

“I can’t decide if this is just organic chatter or if it’s a pressure campaign to get Alito to retire,” he wrote. “There’s been a LOT of this in the last couple of days. Thune, Grassley, etc.”

Indeed, the Washington Examiner’s David Sivak noted on Tuesday that Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley told him that “he’ll recommend to Trump that Mike Lee or Ted Cruz replace Samuel Alito, should he retire.”

“I hope he doesn’t retire,” Grassley said, “but if he does retire, I’m going to suggest that either Lee or Cruz be put on the Supreme Court.”

READ MORE: Voters in Military Towns Fear Trump Is ‘Bumbling’ US Into Another Iraq: Report

 

Continue Reading

News

‘I Wasn’t That Involved’: Weakened Trump Tries to Rewrite History

Published

on

Despite repeatedly endorsing Viktor Orbán, praising him as his “twin” in Europe, and dispatching Vice President JD Vance to Budapest to campaign for him, President Donald Trump now claims he had little to do with the far-right Christian nationalist prime minister’s reelection bid — which ended in a massive landslide defeat Sunday, ending 16 years of authoritarian rule.

“I wasn’t that involved in this one,” Trump said of Orbán’s failed reelection effort, telling ABC News’ Jonathan Karl that the Hungarian right-wing populist “was behind substantially,” while praising him as “a good man.”

Noting that Orbán is “a key figure in the global far-right movement and is also allied with Russian President Vladimir Putin,” The Daily Beast reports that Trump had been “insisting he wasn’t actively campaigning for him.”

Trump “had been posting on Truth Social before the election, urging people to vote for Orban, whom he has described as ‘a true friend,'” The Daily Beast reported. During his time in Hungary, Vice President Vance called the Hungarian leader a “wise and smart” man, while describing his authoritarian regime as a “model for the continent.”

READ MORE: Senate Republicans Are Prepared to Replace Alito — Before the Midterms: Report

But Trump’s support for the embattled Orbán has taken its toll. The Daily Beast describes him as “wounded” from his attempts to prop up the Hungarian illiberal nationalist ruler, and points to British think tank Chatham House, which suggested the White House’s “intervention” in Hungary “now looks more like a political own goal.”

Grégoire Roos, director of Chatham House’s Europe and Russia and Eurasia programs, noted that the Hungarian election “was monitored closely in the Oval Office,” and suggests there will be a cost.

“Several European far-right parties have already begun distancing themselves from Trump over his more erratic foreign-policy moves and this result may further accelerate a trend towards greater autonomy from MAGA. The question now is whether Washington adjusts its methods of influence in Europe or simply doubles down.”

For his part, Trump appears to have moved on.

ABC’s Karl reports that Trump told him he “likes” incoming Prime Minister Péter Magyar.

“I think the new man’s going to do a good job — he’s a good man,” Trump said. “I think he’s going to be good.”

READ MORE: Voters in Military Towns Fear Trump Is ‘Bumbling’ US Into Another Iraq: Report

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.