U.S. Evangelicals to blame for Ugandan murder?
That’s the claim by some pro-gay groups in Uganda. The New York Times reported last week about David Kato, a gay activist that was murdered during an attempted robbery in Uganda. The New York Times chose not to mention that the murder was a part of robbery until late in the article.
Prior to explaining the real reason for Kato’s death, they reported on gay activists blaming American Evangelicals for the murder. Kato, like many pro-gay activists in Uganda and other African nations proposing strict laws criminalizing homosexuality, have faced death threats as a result of their political and cultural activism. Some of the proposed laws even permit executing homosexuals.
READ MORE at the Manhattan Declaration blog...
Comments:
LQ - not that I'm bothered by it, but I'm not *that* liberal.. I'm only marginally more inclined to vote (D) than (R).. But I must seem liberal on a website like this one. ;-)
If Person A incites Person B, Person B is still guilty, but A shares some of that guilt.
Hmm. You can say "Christianity does not advocate death for homosexuals", and that's usually true today for countries in America or Europe. But Africa is different, and there are Christians in some places there who prefer Old Testament-style laws. If a Christian from the US goes over to Africa, knowing the viewpoints of fundamentalist Christians there, and speaks about the corrupting influence of homosexuality on culture, and the medical dangers that homosexuality brings, and how homosexuality is a distortion of God's plan, does he share some of the blame when his words are used as further justification for mistreating homosexuals?
Also you might recall that stoning requires more cooperation then a shooting. Furthermore, muslims don't seem to go out of their way to disown such actions, and secularists don't seem to encourage them to do so. Admittedly expecting an honor society to apologize is like expecting them to encourage boys to cry. But sometimes they seem rather less reluctant to do random acts of violence then they might be.
I do not have as much animosity toward Islam as some; but I don't have illusions about their being particularly peaceful either.
As far as that goes, there are a number of things in much of Western society that I find far more distasteful then in Islam.
This is an answer that is not an answer and I doubt it will satisfy you. A lot of answers don't
My point was that the Gray Lady wanted to hold Christianity accountable for the murder of homosexuals, while giving Islam a free pass. Christianity does not advocate death for homosexuals, while Islam does.
Jason's point, as I gather it, is that even if Christians incited the murder, that it should be shown that Person A incited Person B, and that Person B is not thereby innocent.
Yes, Mr. Taylor, I understand that multiculturalism is inclusive except where it chooses to not be. And I understand that European invaders of the African continent are seen as repugnant by the cultural elite, while Arabic invaders of the same continent are seen as acceptable. I also know that it's "murder" if it can be blamed on Evangelical Christians, but it's "a regrettable effect of a cycle of poverty and violence that needs our help" if it can be blamed on Islam, animism, communism, despotism,...
I also know that the NYT article connecting *Islam* to violence against homosexuals will take a while to get properly edited for publication. Years, maybe.
Have you got that already?
It's very interesting that the NYT article nowhere mentions Islam, in which homosexuality is punishable by stoning, and which is the majority religion (and thereby the governing ideology) in many African countries.