This week, a video made by World Net Daily contributor Jason Mitchell resurfaced in which he expresses support for Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 – which, among other punitive clauses, calls for repeat “offenders” to be given the death penalty – and claims the proposed law is inspired by scripture.
I’d not seen this video the first time around (December of last year) but, a hat tip to the folks at Good As You for spotlighting it so it can be seen in all its hate-mongering glory. In the video, Mitchell, who goes by the name of ‘Molotov,’ avows that this legislation is something that the America’s Founding Fathers would have supported, and that Uganda have got it right with their Anti-Homosexuality Bill.
Not only is he cherry picking his biblical references (Leviticus and tattoos anyone?), his inference that it’s okay to kill the gays because of the tyranny of King Mwanga II (because there’s never been a heterosexual tyrant, right?) is sloppy both morally and historically. There’s also a comparison to bestiality in there too, which really speaks for itself as lazy pontificating. I would also personally interject that, as someone who has several religious family members, I find his interpretation that good Christians would support Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill to be abhorrent. It is a shame that those who shout the loudest about their religious views are often the least qualified to speak about them.
Now on to his claims over the Anti-Homosexuality Bill itself:
Mitchell tries to distance the bill from accusations that it is an attempt to wipe out Uganda’s gay and lesbian citizens, saying that Uganda just wants them to stop practicing homosexuality.
Wrong. If that were true, the bill would focus on the sex act alone. It does not. The bill deems “conspiracy to engage in homosexuality” to be an offense (Part II, Section 8). Also, there’s “attempted homosexuality” (Part II, Section 4, 1 and 2) and “intention” of homosexuality thrown in there for good measure (Part II, Section 2, 1C).
The concept of “intent” is so ill defined in this legislation that the stipulation could potentially be used on the basis of a simple accusation – this is already happening in Uganda, where charges of homosexuality are regularly utilized as political tools and media fodder, but the proposed law will only expedite the process of criminalization, pushing the boundary yet further still into dangerous, and potentially lethal realms.
Ol’ Molotov Mitch then says, “If gay Ugandans don’t like the law, they can leave.” Wrong. Here, yet again, Mitchell betrays his own ignorance. The bill calls for the extradition of all accused gay and lesbian citizens, calling them back to Uganda to face charges of homosexuality (Part II, Section 17). The proposed law would also penalize family and friends of the accused if there is any hint that they knew about the individual’s homosexuality and did not inform the authorities (Part II, Section 14, “Failure to Disclose the Offense”), a penalty which would have them fined or possibly imprisoned (depending on which section they are charged under).
In short, this audiovisual screed is offensive to nearly all of the senses (the Dr. King reference is particularly appalling). “For the Record” it would have helped if Mitchell had, in fact, read the bill properly before he commented on it. Perhaps then, he, and World Net Daily, would have been better informed to discuss this egregious legislation, but, it seems, Mitchell is more interested in attacking the so called liberal media for opposing this legislation, than actually caring about facts.
The Anti-Homosexuality Bill will be debated on the floor of the Ugandan parliament in the next few weeks.
To read the full text of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009, please click here.
Already signed the petition? Thank you! Please consider forwarding it to your friends to spread the word. To find out more on Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill, links to our continued coverage of this story are provided below:
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.