Africa | David Cameron | Hillary Clinton | The Family | Uganda

BigGayDeal.com

Ugandan President: Don't Tie Our Aid Money To LGBT Rights

President-Museveni4In Uganda, where legislators have spent much of the last two years wondering whether to execute gay people, President Yoweri Museveni is worried about money.

At a speech on Friday, President Museveni sent a message to the Western, pro-gay nations who've historically given Uganda monetary aid, warning them that any economic sanctions against Uganda would backfire on their beloved LGBTs. "Before anyone gives me a lecture on homosexual rights," he said, according to News24, "first talk about railways ... Homosexuals also need electricity. Homosexuals also need roads. Homosexuals also need railways." These remarks were greeted with applause.

It appears Museveni is speaking out in response to recent high profile utterances from Hillary Clinton and British PM David Cameron both of whom asserted that "LGBT rights are human rights," and pledged to work to ensure the legal protection of LGBTs around the world. It's worth noting that Museveni quietly supported proposed legislation in 2009 that would guarantee the death penalty for "serial" sodomites, and has deep ties to The Fellowship -- the United States organization of Protestant fundamentalists who attempt to export Christian morality to developing nations.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. YOU ALL MISSUNDERSTOOD HIM! He meant: We need roads and railways to mass transport them to the concentration camps. And electricity to execute them by electrocution. That’s the only concern about homosexual’s “needs”.

    Posted by: Lexxvs | Dec 17, 2011 11:26:55 PM


  2. The proper response: Don't make us subsidize your bigotry.

    Posted by: Azgaard | Dec 18, 2011 1:13:50 AM


  3. if they want to kill the gays they can do it on their own dime.

    Posted by: fanboi | Dec 18, 2011 1:19:24 AM


  4. You mean you're so poor, you can't even sustain yourselves? Then you'll be done away with, and truthfully, it would be for the better. We're not going to fund your ability to violate human rights, and the sooner people like you are taught your lesson, the better.

    Posted by: Matt | Dec 18, 2011 2:23:41 AM


  5. If he has any sense, he's just saying this to appease his homophobic populuation. But then he'll quietly take the money and cut the persecution.

    Third world beggars can't be choosers.

    Posted by: Keithy | Dec 18, 2011 5:12:39 AM


  6. The US doesn't dole out foreign aid from the goodness of its heart. All aid has economic, political, and social goals. A lot of US aid is still tied to US contractors. Meaning that we give a poor country, say, $100 million, but it has to be spent on US providers of goods even though those goods could sourced locally for much less.

    And if we don't give them money, then China, Russia, or some other country will, with fewer conditions but more influence.

    Aid is a very tricky game.

    Posted by: Anon | Dec 18, 2011 11:09:15 AM


  7. let Russia and China give it, we have to stand up for something. Personally I think we should be cutting aid down until we're on our feet better

    Posted by: George M | Dec 18, 2011 11:40:26 AM


  8. Stop being an ignorant bigot a$$hole. How's that for the trade-off for $$$?

    Posted by: mmike1969 | Dec 18, 2011 3:14:57 PM


  9. In (mexican) spanish we have so many sayings for that kind of people, too bad they are lost in translation; the one I like the most: "limosnero y con garrote", is something like "begging and getting picky about it"...

    Posted by: Carlos | Dec 18, 2011 6:57:47 PM


  10. Dear President Museveni,

    Homosexuals in Uganda need to be free from fear that you and your government will kill them solely because of who they are and who they love. Take the "Kill The Gays" bill off the table, permanently, and then we will reconsider your country's application to the civilized world.

    Signed,

    The Rest Of The LGBT Community

    Posted by: Nathan james | Dec 18, 2011 8:49:37 PM


  11. Relative to the size of its economy, the US gives less foreign aid than any other wealthy country. It comes out to pennies per citizen. Still, it provides considerable traction, and ceding that to China or Russia would further diminish US influence around the world.

    I'm not saying that we should give money to corrupt or evil governments. But humanitarian aid (food, immunizations, textbooks, etc.) is a moral imperative. I don't object to cutting back on direct budget support. But a country's people shouldn't suffer simply because they have leaders---often not elected, but who simply take power or limit voting to the elite---who couldn't care less about them and only want to line their pockets while pursuing immoral policies. Not to mention, humanitarian aid generates goodwill toward the US...something in short supply in quite a few places.

    Posted by: Paul R | Dec 19, 2011 12:31:00 AM


  12. I'd be for Aid Paul if it went all to medicine, books and such and never went through government hands. Done totally with organization. But they won't do that, the US or them. I think it needs to go, but let's be real they will get it one way or another

    Posted by: George M | Dec 19, 2011 9:55:46 AM


  13. Interesting how aprox 95% of ALL the Above Comments are stipulated in some format of 'hate speach'. Funny how that is and how hypocritical that seems to me!

    Secondarily, I would like to point out the fact that no one made comments with any true facts or substaniated information.
    1. If you would actually review the Supreme Courts Comments in 2003 why they supposively felt the Supreme Court Ruling in the 80's maintaining a 'sexual preference' of same-sex to be illegal in our Country, you would seee bias conflicting information.
    2. One main item was the fact that it was not like the 'same sex' sexual preference was not asking the Federal Government 'NOT' to recognize anything formally or official in regards to any format of Union!
    ---Excuse me then why is it a sexual preference group in USA is pressing the Federal Government to recognize a Union officially between two non-heterosexual sexual preference people?
    ---This is not allowed based upon the ruling of the latest Supreme Court Decision as of 2003! READ IT VERY carefully!!
    *I am simply stating FACTS.
    3. That ruling also stated they were not speaking of any other format of sexual preference except that of two conseting adults and not some type of illegal formation or expression of sexual preference.
    ---The statistics now state up to 40% --- yes almost 40% of ALL CHILD MOLESTATIONS are from homosexual sexual preference persons which they state represents ONLY 2% of the population of the USA!!
    ---How can you be alright with a sexual preference that is PROVEN to now FACTUALLY be responsible for almost 40% of the ENTIRE POPULATIONS CHILD MOLESTATIONS??
    **NOW THAT is HATE CRIMES!!

    You can kick, scream, yell, get mad, be stupid, say nothing intelligent, provide no factual evidence of any kind....but it DOES NOT MATTER....a 'sexual preference' DOES NOT =[equal]= Race or Ethicinity!!
    **AGAIN --- 'sexual preference is NOT Race--- or Ethecinity
    **DO your homework, study, review World Definitions an research Ancestorial Documents all you want an the more you do the more this becomes FACT!

    SO...KEEP your 'sexual preference' IN THE BEDROOM an AWAY FROM the -helpless- innocent - loving - none understanding - impressionable - Children of America and EVERYONE ELSE IN PUBLIC!! --It is NOT our business what you do behind close doors.

    Study to be approved, be approved to have understanding, have understanding to gain wisdom and with wisdom use it wisely!

    Posted by: TruthSeeker | Aug 6, 2012 3:12:54 AM


  14. « 1 2

Post a comment







Trending


« «There Ought To Be A Law Against Fornication, Infidelity« «