|
Post by merlin on Jun 19, 2011 18:14:19 GMT 3
Merlin, First, into the progressive vs conservative argument. You say that conservatives are "afraid" of the negative impact of change while the progressives seek 'better'. I am a social conservative, to say that I am afraid of change is way off the mark. I am just being realistic, that's all. We have been treated to liberal 'advancements' on family life. Stuff like kiboko doesn't work (using highly flawed examples). With all those advancements, are the families in the west any less dysfunctional than they were 50 years ago? I can go into further examples but let me leave it at one example, this is a thread on a completely different topic. When we consider the issue of homosexuality, is there anything beneficial that will make me promote it? Absolutely none! It is an affront to the traditional family for obvious reasons. The most compelling reason is one that is health related. It is a well known fact that homosexuals have vastly greater chances of contracting several diseases. Want proof? You can do the appropriate search on the CDC website, they've been doing research on the same for years. In the Kenyan context, KEMRI, CDC, etc did studies that corroborate the claim. If the gay population is well under 5% of the national population yet they contribute 15.26% of the new AIDS infections, there is a problem, a big problem. If we take the fact that they engage in sexual intercourse with married people, then the risk applies to the general population as well. Considering that a section of liberals (of the social variety) are in favour of discouraging unhealthy eating habits to avoid certain illnesses, why don't they take a dose of their own medicine and discourage homosexuality with all the health risks it carries? Luoldeng, Your comment; First, into the progressive vs conservative argument. You say that conservatives are "afraid" of the negative impact of change while the progressives seek 'better'. I am a social conservative, to say that I am afraid of change is way off the mark. I am just being realistic, that's all. We have been treated to liberal 'advancements' on family life. Stuff like kiboko doesn't work (using highly flawed examples). With all those advancements, are the families in the west any less dysfunctional than they were 50 years ago? I can go into further examples but let me leave it at one example, this is a thread on a completely different topic. First of all; my observation about the nature of progressive or conservative inclined people is general and not meant as a comment personal applicable to you. The intention of the comment is to emphasise that the journey of progression should be travelled together inclusive the progressive and the conservative and open discussions can help to keep both together as factual insight reduces wild expectation and anxiety for negative effects. Being realistic could mean being aware how reality will react in response to our actions. However we never know for sure till afterwards when we have acted. All progression is on expectations for the future it is risk taking and daring. However a better world is the reward for our endeavour. When we consider the issue of homosexuality, is there anything beneficial that will make me promote it? Absolutely none! It is an affront to the traditional family for obvious reasons. I have to disagree with you. Citizens are persecuted, discriminated and suffer. They have to live in denial and cannot show their love and compassion for the people they love. It probably does not directly benefit you and I though it benefits society if they are offered the same right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law, full and equal enjoyment of all rights and fundamental freedoms as you and I enjoy. No one expect any promotional activity, though discrimination is neither expected. The reasons for being an affront for traditional family living is not so obvious and need to be phrased as traditional family living is an concept which could mean different things for different people. However why should the concept of traditional family living be the only form of living for a successful and enjoyable society? The most compelling reason is one that is health related. It is a well known fact that homosexuals have vastly greater chances of contracting several diseases. Want proof? You can do the appropriate search on the CDC website, they've been doing research on the same for years. I agree with you, Homosexuality has negative aspects and of greater health risk as heterosexual habits, but so is taking a matatu of greater health risk than flying with Kenya Airways. Is drinking and smoking a greater health risk than eating Ugali and Sukuma, is sex a greater health risk than abstention. There are awareness campaigns such as the John Michuki laws, health warnings on sigaret packages, though no-one get stoned or lose his job for smoking in designated areas or taking a matatu. In the Kenyan context, KEMRI, CDC, etc did studies that corroborate the claim. If the gay population is well under 5% of the national population yet they contribute 15.26% of the new AIDS infections, there is a problem, a big problem. If we take the fact that they engage in sexual intercourse with married people, then the risk applies to the general population as well. I perceive AIDS as a general disease even when all homosexuals are stripped from their rights and extradited from Kenya will AIDS still be here. So this is no answer for the problem of AIDS either the source of the disease. Considering that a section of liberals (of the social variety) are in favour of discouraging unhealthy eating habits to avoid certain illnesses, why don't they take a dose of their own medicine and discourage homosexuality with all the health risks it carries? I can’t follow your logic. You do not forbid eating by encouraging healthy eating habits and likewise do not forbid sex by encouraging safe sex habits. Let’s try to go beyond conceptual definitions and define why society will be at risk because of homosexual relations?
|
|
|
Post by Luol Deng on Jun 20, 2011 22:59:40 GMT 3
merlin,
The point of 'showing love and compassion to the people they love' is neither here nor there. If homosexuality is acceptable, I don't see the reason why anyone should be barred from marrying their own siblings, or marrying more than one wife. But when you go to those liberal countries, bigamy/polygamy is illegal and so is incest, whether the parties are consenting or not. Some of these things that are banned in the West like polygamy are acceptable in the traditional African context. They are also acceptable in religions like Mormonism & Islam. Most importantly, since the pro gay-rights activists always go to the animal kingdom to try & show incidences of homosexuality, polygamy is a phenomenon that can be observed in the animal kingdom. But if you are found to be a polygamist, you are treated like a criminal. There is no reference to the no-discrimination BS in such cases. All I can say is that they find polygamy to be unacceptable in their context and so, it is illegal. With the same token, homosexuality goes against the norms of our society, it is contrary to what is acceptable and the homosexuals have to live by that.
Your example of Kenya Airways vs the Matatu was unfortunate. I made reference to sources that are not only unbiased but pro-gay in some instances, then you raise the issue of transportation. The dynamics in the transportation industry are completely different to those regarding human sexuality. I may decide to pick holes into your analogy but that will move us away from the clear facts. You raised the issue of smokers. It is because the smokers are a threat that they have been forced into designated areas, in some countries in the West the restrictions are even tougher. Smoking puts one at a high risk of cancer, not only the active smoker but also the passive smokers who inhale the second hand smoke, so, they have restrictions put on them because their behaviour is a threat. On homosexuals in the Kenyan context, they are also a threat not only to themselves but to the society. The gay rights groups put the percentage of gays in the US at 2-3% yet they account for more than 50% of the new cases of AIDS. In Kenya if we put the figure at 2% which is way higher than the British 0.7-1.3%, then it means that the gays are more than 7 times more susceptible to the HIV virus. It doesn't stop there, they are at a higher risk of contracting all the known sexually transmitted diseases. What makes the matters worse is that they frequently have sexual intercourse with partners who are married which means that it is no longer a problem within the gay community. The causes of the elevated risk of disease are known and supported by solid science, nothing wishy washy. When it comes to smoking, there are frequent lectures on stopping smoking, homosexual acts should be treated the same way.
This is similar to smoking. The end of smoking will not bring an end to lung cancer. The end of eating greasy foods will not bring an end to heart problems & the like. In both of these cases the authorities have not slackened their efforts just because the risk will not be nil at the end of their efforts.
Let me clarify things here. Liberals come in all flavours, I don't oppose all they do, I am actually in support of many of their positions. One of the branches of liberals advocates for healthy eating, etc. When Michelle Obama proposed the use of federal funds to aid in healthy nutrition programs, some liberals were over the moon while conservatives were of the opinion that the government has no business telling them what to eat. A favourite map of the liberals is one that shows that the rabidly conservative deep south has a far larger share of the obese in comparison to more liberal areas. It is accepted wisdom that if your meal consists primarily of junk food then you are digging an early grave for yourself and this is backed by solid science. So, measures have been taken to curb the problem and take more wholesome dishes, etc. Other measures such as reducing the size of a serving have been enforced.
With the case on homosexuality, like the case with nutrition, the solid science is there to prove that engaging in homosexual behaviour is risky. But unlike nutrition, there is no policy measure that has been put in place to curb homosexual behaviour, double standards? If after all these years there hasn't been much in the way of scientific breakthroughs to reduce the risks posed by such behaviour what does it say?
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 21, 2011 22:05:18 GMT 3
merlin, The point of 'showing love and compassion to the people they love' is neither here nor there. If homosexuality is acceptable, I don't see the reason why anyone should be barred from marrying their own siblings, or marrying more than one wife. But when you go to those liberal countries, bigamy/polygamy is illegal and so is incest, whether the parties are consenting or not. Some of these things that are banned in the West like polygamy are acceptable in the traditional African context. They are also acceptable in religions like Mormonism & Islam. Most importantly, since the pro gay-rights activists always go to the animal kingdom to try & show incidences of homosexuality, polygamy is a phenomenon that can be observed in the animal kingdom. But if you are found to be a polygamist, you are treated like a criminal. There is no reference to the no-discrimination BS in such cases. All I can say is that they find polygamy to be unacceptable in their context and so, it is illegal. With the same token, homosexuality goes against the norms of our society, it is contrary to what is acceptable and the homosexuals have to live by that. Your example of Kenya Airways vs the Matatu was unfortunate. I made reference to sources that are not only unbiased but pro-gay in some instances, then you raise the issue of transportation. The dynamics in the transportation industry are completely different to those regarding human sexuality. I may decide to pick holes into your analogy but that will move us away from the clear facts. You raised the issue of smokers. It is because the smokers are a threat that they have been forced into designated areas, in some countries in the West the restrictions are even tougher. Smoking puts one at a high risk of cancer, not only the active smoker but also the passive smokers who inhale the second hand smoke, so, they have restrictions put on them because their behaviour is a threat. On homosexuals in the Kenyan context, they are also a threat not only to themselves but to the society. The gay rights groups put the percentage of gays in the US at 2-3% yet they account for more than 50% of the new cases of AIDS. In Kenya if we put the figure at 2% which is way higher than the British 0.7-1.3%, then it means that the gays are more than 7 times more susceptible to the HIV virus. It doesn't stop there, they are at a higher risk of contracting all the known sexually transmitted diseases. What makes the matters worse is that they frequently have sexual intercourse with partners who are married which means that it is no longer a problem within the gay community. The causes of the elevated risk of disease are known and supported by solid science, nothing wishy washy. When it comes to smoking, there are frequent lectures on stopping smoking, homosexual acts should be treated the same way. This is similar to smoking. The end of smoking will not bring an end to lung cancer. The end of eating greasy foods will not bring an end to heart problems & the like. In both of these cases the authorities have not slackened their efforts just because the risk will not be nil at the end of their efforts. Let me clarify things here. Liberals come in all flavours, I don't oppose all they do, I am actually in support of many of their positions. One of the branches of liberals advocates for healthy eating, etc. When Michelle Obama proposed the use of federal funds to aid in healthy nutrition programs, some liberals were over the moon while conservatives were of the opinion that the government has no business telling them what to eat. A favourite map of the liberals is one that shows that the rabidly conservative deep south has a far larger share of the obese in comparison to more liberal areas. It is accepted wisdom that if your meal consists primarily of junk food then you are digging an early grave for yourself and this is backed by solid science. So, measures have been taken to curb the problem and take more wholesome dishes, etc. Other measures such as reducing the size of a serving have been enforced. With the case on homosexuality, like the case with nutrition, the solid science is there to prove that engaging in homosexual behaviour is risky. But unlike nutrition, there is no policy measure that has been put in place to curb homosexual behaviour, double standards? If after all these years there hasn't been much in the way of scientific breakthroughs to reduce the risks posed by such behaviour what does it say? Luoldeng,I perceive our discussion is getting fuzzy. We delve into examples and the discussion tends to evolve in making the examples the objective of the discussion. It is my own doing this is happening as I presume that examples are self explanatory however I should state the objectives when using examples. Can we move back to the principal question: ‘is homosexuality harmful for society?’. My stand is that the unsafe homosexual sex act brings risks of attracting a sexual transmittable disease such as HIV. However this in principle does not differ from the risk a person takes who involves in an unsafe heterosexual sex act. No-one get fined or imprisoned for being involved in a heterosexual sex act so why imprison or apply the death penalty for someone involved in a homosexual sex act? The higher infection rate is not an argument to define homosexuality explicitly as harmful for society contrary to heterosexuality.I conclude there is no factual argument to discriminate homosexuality however I like to elaborate on the risk responsibility issue though this has no relevance to the homosexuality discussion. The sex act has personal risks and responsibility a person takes or leaves. There are many of these personal responsibility risks in life. And I like to mention the following examples of personal responsibility risks; Using safety belts or motor helmets when participating in motorised traffic. Eating unhealthy food Smoking, Drinking Alcohol, These behaviours are a danger for the person itself although they can also harm others. Laws will be invoked in cases where it can harm others without given the other a change to protect itself. One of these examples is to drive without safety belts. In case of an accident you could be unable to limit the impact of the accident and harm others if you do not wear safety belts. This is why using safety belts have become an item in the traffic laws. Eating unhealthy food is a health risk for the person itself. You will not find a law about restricting the sale of unhealthy food although it harms the person itself. However stimulation programs are attempting to change these habits for own wellbeing. These programs are not compulsory. Smoking is a health risk for the smoker therefore smoking or selling tobacco is not forbidden however others can be harmed by inhaling the smoke which a smoker produces (passive smoking). Therefore local laws are introduced to have smoking free areas. However health warnings on packets of cigarettes are introduced as a stimulation programs attempting to change smoking habits for own wellbeing. Drinking alcohol is a health risk for the person itself. There are no laws which forbid drinking alcohol. However an intoxicated person can do harm to others and will meet laws to limit this harm. The principal of law is to provide protection to citizens from harmful behaviour of an individual or group of individuals. The law does not go beyond this principal to protect a citizen from it selves because this will interfere with the other principle of law in offering citizens maximum freedom. Other issues,Marrying own siblings, or marrying more than one wife are issues on its own and could be discussed however they have little to do with the discussion on homosexuality. There are more issues such as birth control, abortions, euthanasia, etc. Issues worthwhile to discuss though let us first try to move the discussion about homosexuality closer to a consensual conclusion. It probably paves a way to discuss the other issues in a fruitful way.
|
|
|
Post by Luol Deng on Jun 21, 2011 22:46:47 GMT 3
The 'unsafe' homosexual acts is a bit of a misnomer. Homosexual acts are inherently unsafe, and despite the advances in medicine there is no substantial reduction in the occurrence of various diseases. Right now the data from the CDC in the states indicates that more than 50% percent of the new cases of HIV are among the gay community. The only explanation to that figure is that the gay community is generally careless (not true) or that their practices are inherently riskier (correct, with plenty of research to prove). So, whichever option you pick, there is none that is flattering.
What you call personal responsibility in many cases has government backing, there are also pressure groups that bring the fast food joints for instance to account and they can't do as they please under the guise of the consumer making a rational decision. So, the examples I gave were not an end in themselves, but they were meant to shed more light on personal responsibility vis a vis government action/inaction. So, even though the wellbeing programs are voluntary, there is a modicum of follow up on those problems. Is there any action voluntary or otherwise that highlights the dangers of homosexual practices? None that I know of. Doing so will only make one be called a hater, a homphobe, etc
The examples that I was giving (incest, polygamy) have nothing to do with homosexuality. That is agreed, the essence of using those example is just to show that the laws are a product of the culture in the West as ours are a product of the local culture.
So, in conclusion I can say that there is no compelling argument that has been advanced that makes homosexuality acceptable. I have been using the term homosexuality rather than homosexuals because as I said before I believe that they are also human beings like me, but their acts are unacceptable. I didn't know that Elton John was gay when I started listening to his music, ditto George Michael, but did I stop listening to their music when they outed themselves? Absolutely not. I have an interest in classical music and one of the greats, Tchaikovsky was gay, did I stop listening to his music? No, but do I approve of their acts? Absolutely not.
Accepting homosexuality will mean that I am giving validity to the lifestyle. As long as there is proof beyond any reasonable doubt that it is involuntary, and it is safe then I have no qualms. But so far evidence to the contrary continues mounting.
PS. I think this is my final post on this topic, it is not my goal to change anyone's beliefs but to debate on this topic. Otherwise my position still stands. I have to take a break from this thread and head back into lurkdom....
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Jun 22, 2011 3:27:20 GMT 3
The 'unsafe' homosexual acts is a bit of a misnomer. Homosexual acts are inherently unsafe, and despite the advances in medicine there is no substantial reduction in the occurrence of various diseases. Right now the data from the CDC in the states indicates that more than 50% percent of the new cases of HIV are among the gay community. The only explanation to that figure is that the gay community is generally careless (not true) or that their practices are inherently riskier (correct, with plenty of research to prove). So, whichever option you pick, there is none that is flattering ... Heterosexual people also engage in anal sex; not all homosexual people do.
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 22, 2011 10:12:02 GMT 3
So, in conclusion I can say that there is no compelling argument that has been advanced that makes homosexuality acceptable. Accepting homosexuality will mean that I am giving validity to the lifestyle. As long as there is proof beyond any reasonable doubt that it is involuntary, and it is safe then I have no qualms. But so far evidence to the contrary continues mounting. PS. I think this is my final post on this topic, it is not my goal to change anyone's beliefs but to debate on this topic. Otherwise my position still stands. I have to take a break from this thread and head back into lurkdom.... Luoldeng,I respect your decision to step back from this discussion and head back to lurkdom... I have to thank you for the many contributions you made which have helped me to clarify my understanding of the controversy regarding homosexuality. It also has challenged me to look into the concept of society. I am indebted to you. I still feel that we have not reached the kernel of our differences in valuating homosexuality and could have peeled a few more generalities from it. However we did go a considerable way.
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 22, 2011 18:19:07 GMT 3
...Which is followed on the same link by the more disturbing expose on Hillary Clinton's hidden agenda for Africa. Why is Hillary pushing gay rights upon Africa? Written by admin on July 12, 2010 – 6:33 am Obama, had declared June the Lesbian-Gay- Bisexual-Transgender Pride Month, they would simply not believe it. Nor would they believe that in his proclamation for Fathers’ Day, he’d said that nurturing families comes in many forms, including being raised by two “fathers” — even if neither of them is the true father. To top it all, Hillary Clinton recently told “LGBT members of the State Department family” that gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay and that her first concern for Africa is how LGBT persons are treated on the continent. “Our regional bureaus are working closely with our embassies on this issue. The Bureau of African Affairs has taken the lead by asking every embassy in Africa to report on the conditions of local LGBT communities. And I’m asking every regional bureau to make this issue a priority. ” This was greeted with thunderous applause in Foggy Bottom. But I wonder if she would dare to make this announcement in Nairobi. Indeed, it is fortunate that the US does not have an embassy in Mogadishu, because if the word got round that THIS was the African priority for the present US administration, there would be a repetition of Black Hawk Down. And not only in Somalia. Of course, most Africans are completely unaware of Ms Clinton’s agenda. They sense no danger to their way of life from Uncle Sam’s quirky obsessions. But they should. Issues like these are achieved covertly, patiently and using the legal systems. And before the electorate knows what’s happened, these new “rights” have been enshrined in a Bill of Rights. US Vice-President Joe Biden’s recent trip to Nairobi seemed part of an effort to impose Uncle Sam’s values on Kenyans. It was a typical operation: arrogant and extreme security measures, chaotic traffic jams, and the token visit to a Kibera slum. He went, at huge expense to the US taxpayer, to boost the proposed Kenyan Constitution, and promise that “once it’s approved” his boss will make his first official visit to Kenya. The proposed Constitution leaves the way clear to sign the right to abortion – and later on, gay and lesbian rights — into the new document without passing through Parliament. From an African point of view this seems to be one of the top priorities of the Obama/Biden/Clinton triumvirate. Kenya, often perceived by outsiders as the most “Western” African country after South Africa, is being used as a guinea pig. The perception is mistaken. Only some sectors of youth in the capital, Nairobi, are Westernised, by Afro-Americana, especially rap, rock and reggae, which fill in a cultural gap and are a sign of protest against the older generation. Even the cosmopolitan coastal resort of Mombasa staged a strong public protest when two “gays” tried to “marry” recently in a suburb, Mtwapa, known for its strange characters and commercial sex tourism. But the pattern seems clear: first apply pressure to Kenya, then move on to other East African countries. Uganda has already had its knuckles rapped by Clinton over its Anti-Homosexuality Bill. If the truth about all this were to get out, the embers of anti-Americanism, which have been smouldering since the invasion of Iraq, might burst into flame. Africans are ambivalent about the US. “Let us in to share your wealth, expertise, high standards and your experiment with democracy,” Africans say. “Your hand-outs are welcome too, provided they reach the people they’re intended for, and provided that there are no strings attached. But leave us to run our own affairs, and do not interfere with our culture, our values and traditions. We may not have got our act together politically and economically, but we know what is acceptable behaviour and what is not. So leave us alone!” LGBT rights, a priority in Kenya? When we’re starved for food, education, basic health care, shelter, food, work opportunities and humane working conditions, and accountability? Pull the other one! Martyn Drakard writes from Kampala, in Uganda. Source: www.mercatornet.com/ articles/view/ why_is_hillary_pushing_gay_rights_upon_africa/ B6kMartyn Drakard writes from Kampala, in Uganda Is Martyn Drakard your spokesman? If not, then do not read any further. There is a world out there which can be frightening though not be ignored. However you can play ignorance, locking your door and windows, declaring your culture, values and traditions as being the answer to challenges as best for yourself and your family. However after a while your kids will look through slits in your door and start wondering why out there kids get educated, look healthy and have a trusty look at their future while around your table they are starved for food, education, basic health care, shelter, food, work opportunities and humane working conditions, and accountability. Your kids will ask questions, insubordinate your authority which you obtained from your praised culture. They will become aware your authority is not derived from knowledge how to effectively deal with the world outside your door though from you knowing what acceptable behaviour is and what not - and your physical strength to beat them up and punish them. Don’t be disillusioned, after more than 40 years your time of authority has come to an end. The door will be opened not by your neighbours who you told to leave you alone though by your own kids. You see the world is not static and changes continuously though your praised culture, values and traditions are static and may become outdated. Sustainable change will come from within. The scary thing you are frightened of is in yourself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2011 1:07:18 GMT 3
merlin, I really appreciate you. Thank you
and I was listening to these two tunes so I'm sharing:)
|
|
|
Post by politicalmaniac on Jun 25, 2011 6:20:02 GMT 3
I am extremely happy NY State legalized gay marriage. As NY goes so does the world?
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jun 26, 2011 13:46:13 GMT 3
Merlin I had recused myself from taking part in this thread, even before Luoldeng's departure because I noted that no response would satisfy your stance on gay rights if it was anything short of the kind PM celebrates above. I'm more of a don't ask, don't tell, do what you want behind closed doors (UK style). Hell, if it works for an aspiring president, all power to him, but that's as live & let live as I'm willing to go on this issue. Clearly, our views will not converge, so there's little need to keep flogging a dead horse.
As Winston Churchill said, “If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 26, 2011 23:29:36 GMT 3
Merlin I had recused myself from taking part in this thread, even before Luoldeng's departure because I noted that no response would satisfy your stance on gay rights if it was anything short of the kind PM celebrates above. I'm more of a don't ask, don't tell, do what you want behind closed doors (UK style). Hell, if it works for an aspiring president, all power to him, but that's as live & let live as I'm willing to go on this issue. Clearly, our views will not converge, so there's little need to keep flogging a dead horse. As Winston Churchill said, “If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.” B6k,Message in a Bottle,Thank you for your message. At last a contribution from inside your self. I respect your opinion. I see JUKWAA as a discussion board where contributors are in search of reality (what really is happening?). It is the interaction; validating each other arguments that leads us to discover reality. Not everyone is able to enter into discussion though there is not always a need to offer arguments to substantiate opinions. Following discussions of others can be an enriching experience. As for Winston Churchill’s expression; at twenty we discover a world with many opportunities which inspires our brain, we also discover many injustices which challenges our heart. However at twenty it is usual to prioritise personal development, finding own identity, a job, building a career and family. It is at forty when we start wondering if this is all what count. It is the time when liberals awake and take part in building a better society. This is a general trend; some people are liberals from day one, others never awake, keep building their career, keep accumulating wealth and become little family kings. Their heart shrunk to feel any challenges which leave them no other option as to search for what they already have. What makes them conservative is their fear to lose any of it.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jun 27, 2011 0:58:15 GMT 3
Merlin, to me Churchill simply meant as a youth one can enjoy the luxury of having idealistic views on life. As one gets older with more responsibility they appreciate better how the world & society as a whole operates. A more conservative outlook on things then takes over.
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 27, 2011 23:08:05 GMT 3
Luxery?
B6k,
I take it that Churchill’s statement is also your opinion. I never met Churchill so I do not know what he meant. However ideals are not a luxury though a way to give meaning to living. Ideals do not die with more responsibility and gaining insight how the world & society as a whole operates. Ideals die when we become afraid to lose anything that provides a perception of security in live.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jun 28, 2011 2:36:57 GMT 3
If we can only understand the thoughts of those we have met, then we can never learn lessons from the ancient teachers such as Buddha, Jesus, or Mohamed.
Clearly this whack-a-mole debate with you has no end. All the best in your goal of pushing the envelope for the rainbow agenda.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 28, 2011 2:52:01 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 28, 2011 10:29:01 GMT 3
If we can only understand the thoughts of those we have met, then we can never learn lessons from the ancient teachers such as Buddha, Jesus, or Mohamed. Clearly this whack-a-mole debate with you has no end. All the best in your goal of pushing the envelope for the rainbow agenda. b6k,Whack-a-moleYour comment: Clearly this whack-a-mole debate with you has no end.I agree with you, some debates never take off as it needs more than throwing a one-liner quoted from others on this board. You could compare this with popping-up moles which I try to whack. Fruitful discussions can only develop when they are fertilised by others meaning; interacting with others who commit their thoughts, knowledge, skills, experience, doubts and opinion for the common objective to discover reality. Ok, for once a borrowed one-liner form John Lennon, "Life is what happens while you're making other plans." -- John LennonIf we only learn lessons from the ancient teachers such as Buddha, Jesus, or Mohamed we will bound ourselves to the spiritual world which is fiction. Life happens in reality and in the now, it consists of nothing else as interaction with the world around us. Source: onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-of/whack-a-mole
|
|
|
Post by politicalmaniac on Jul 5, 2011 21:56:47 GMT 3
I had a great weekend. I took a trip to the big apple and the Rt Hon Prime Minister names sakes were with me in their inaugural voyage 30,000 ft above sea level.
I attended a wedding. Between two men. A great friend of mine who is a top notch HIV investigator in Baltimore. He has been a financial anchor in my attempts to fund HIV affected widows and orphans groups in mainly in Western and parts of Nyanza. Infact all the boys and girls who have come through my abode for college have done so with some financial aid from him.
The only person I could have interacted with who was probably gay was a class mate while in Pwani, who was quite feminine and had a gynecoid figure and loved to caress his boys. He had to endure a lot of teasing and in some cases outright physical violence. It freaked me out to say the least.
I have 'evolved' as Pres Obama would put it.
I am now a very strong supporter of LGBT RIGHTS including the right to marry. They are just human beings like all the str8 folks, including me (and hopefully you).
As far as I am concerned ignorance and irrational hate borne out by the lack of having known a LGBT close friend or relative, is the biggest obstacle to arrogating LGBT folks their full rights.
If your prejudice is insurmountable, at least adopt a 'do not condemn or condone' approach. leave these children of "god" alone, please. As MLK said 'the 'content of character' is what we should all abide by. (and Panuarers - MKM are glaring deficient in that aspect, I am sorry to say)
Having seen some of my close friends ostracized as 'kehee' I should have 'evolved' earlier. That term 'kehee' is as repugnant as any.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jul 6, 2011 0:38:01 GMT 3
If we can only understand the thoughts of those we have met, then we can never learn lessons from the ancient teachers such as Buddha, Jesus, or Mohamed. Clearly this whack-a-mole debate with you has no end. All the best in your goal of pushing the envelope for the rainbow agenda. b6k,Whack-a-moleYour comment: Clearly this whack-a-mole debate with you has no end.I agree with you, some debates never take off as it needs more than throwing a one-liner quoted from others on this board. You could compare this with popping-up moles which I try to whack. Fruitful discussions can only develop when they are fertilised by others meaning; interacting with others who commit their thoughts, knowledge, skills, experience, doubts and opinion for the common objective to discover reality. Ok, for once a borrowed one-liner form John Lennon, "Life is what happens while you're making other plans." -- John LennonIf we only learn lessons from the ancient teachers such as Buddha, Jesus, or Mohamed we will bound ourselves to the spiritual world which is fiction. Life happens in reality and in the now, it consists of nothing else as interaction with the world around us. Source: onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-of/whack-a-mole Merlin, how very true: "Fruitful discussions can only develop when they are fertilised by others meaning; interacting with others who commit their thoughts, knowledge, skills, experience, doubts and opinion for the common objective to discover reality. " FERTILISED (fertilized). That is the key. Opposites attract. Yin-Yang, etc. In order to have offspring, there must be an egg & a seed. Anything less is pointless onanism. Life requires a pair of opposites to propagate, which in its own non ending cycle of life, is the very meaning of life. A union where the cycle cannot even sustain itself (unless it preys on the fruits of others) is opportunistic, & in a sense predatory in nature. It makes as much sense as,a man, pissing into a strong wind. It can be done, but it is guaranteed to be messy & quite pointless. Let us not adopt western (& sadly these folks are the trail blaizers in alternative lifestyles) modes of life for the sake of being chique.
|
|
|
Post by akinyi2005 on Oct 8, 2011 17:37:48 GMT 3
Couldn't find a more appropriate thread for this rather sad story.
Five year old defiled and killed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2012 6:28:48 GMT 3
Girls expelled for alleged lesbianismGirls accused of lesbianism to be counselled
Updated 10 hr(s) 32 min(s) ago Related Stories
By LINAH BENYAWA
Girls at a school in Kilifi County who had been sent home over allegations of lesbianism will undergo counselling.
The Moi Kadzonzo Girls Secondary School principal Dorris Kavuku Wednesday said some them had confessed verbally and in writing that they had been involved in the practice.
"These things happen but our aim is to correct the girls so that we can improve the school’s performance. They have admitted engaging in lesbianism and we are planning to have a counselling session session for them after classes," she added.
Ms Kavuku said some of the girls are back in school.
"Majority of the affected girls are back in school except a few whose parents failed to co-operate and stormed out of the school in anger," said Kavuku.
Parents and religious leaders Wednesday flocked the school following the report. Bishop Anthony Charo of Mariakani Pastors Fellowship expressed shock, saying a lasting solution must be found.
"Whatever happens we have a responsibility to the entire community that’s why we are here," said Charo. www.standardmedia.co.ke/news/InsidePage.php?id=2000051724&cid=159&story=Girls%20accused%20of%20lesbianism%20to%20be%20counselled
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2012 6:41:55 GMT 3
Rights group slam revived Uganda anti-gay bill
By AFP Posted Wednesday, February 8 2012 at 19:07 Gay rights activists on Wednesday condemned the reintroduction before Uganda's parliament of a bill that calls for the death penalty for certain homosexual acts and sparked an international outcry.
David Bahati, the MP behind the bill, formally reintroduced the legislation Tuesday after lawmakers voted last year to automatically pass it over to the new session after failing to debate it.
Frank Mugisha, the director of Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), voiced disappointment over the revival of the bill.
"We thought it would come back, but with all the condemnation from local and international human rights groups we had hoped that Bahati would reconsider it, or that parliament would move to strike it down immediately," Mugisha told AFP.
"It is just bringing everything bad up again, but we remain committed to fighting it and challenging it in all ways possible," he added.
Originally tabled in 2009, the bill calls for "serial offender(s)" to face the death penalty, and proposes jail sentences for family members and landlords who fail to report homosexuals to the authorities.
Lawmakers applauded Bahati as the bill -- which US President Barack Obama has described as "odious" -- was introduced, clapping their hands, thumping the seats in parliament and chanting "our bill."
Parliament spokeswoman Helen Kawesa said the bill was reintroduced in its original form, with the death penalty clause still included. "It is the same as before," Kawesa told AFP.
The speaker urged parliament to deal with the bill quickly, but Kawesa could not say when it would be debated as it had to first be discussed by a committee.
"It now has to go to the legal committee... as the parliament is new, so the committee is new and needs to consider it," Kawesa said.
Homosexuality is already illegal in Uganda, but the proposed bill has previously attracted heavy criticism for the draconian penalties it proposed.
It would introduce the death sentence for anyone caught engaging in homosexual acts for the second time, as well as for gay sex where one partner is a minor or has HIV.
It also proposes to criminalise public discussion of homosexuality -- including by rights groups -- with a sentence of up to seven years in prison.
At an African Union summit last month, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, in an unusually outspoken declaration, told African leaders to respect gay rights, a controversial matter in many African states.
Michelle Kagari, Deputy Africa Programme Director at Amnesty International, urged parliament to "reject this bill in its entirety" as it "must not legislate hate."
"If passed, it would represent a grave assault on the human rights of all Ugandans, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity," Kagari said in a statement late Tuesday.
The bill now must pass the legal affairs committee for public hearings and discussion before debate in parliament can proceed, a process expected potentially to take at least several months.
While it went through this process in the last parliamentary session, the bill must be reconsidered as it is a new parliament with new members of the legal committee.
"A lynch mob is being whipped up by extremist MPs and evangelical leaders determined to brutally punish and execute people simply for who they choose to love," said Ricken Patel of Avaaz, an online global activist group.
"Global condemnation stopped this vile law twice before, now we need a tidal wave of outrage to kill it for good."
Ugandan gay rights activists have braved hostility as they fight popular criticism. Last year leading gay rights activist David Kato was found bludgeoned to death at his home outside Kampala.
In November, a Ugandan court sentenced Enoch Nsubuga, 22, to 30 years in jail after he admitted beating Kato to death with a hammer. Nsubuga had claimed he was reacting to unwanted sexual advances. www.nation.co.ke/News/africa/Rights+group+slam+revived+Uganda+anti+gay+bill/-/1066/1322944/-/pwxx3j/-/index.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2012 6:46:40 GMT 3
Government resurrects Anti-homosexuality Bill
By Mercy Nalugo
Posted Wednesday, February 8 2012 at 00:00 The controversial Anti-homosexuality Bill, 2009, is among the 10 Bills that were re-tabled in Parliament yesterday.
The mover of the private members Bill, also Ndorwa West legislator, Mr David Bahati, re-tabled the Bill for its first reading.
“Our Bill, our kids,” the legislators shouted in unison as others gave Bahati a standing ovation.
The Speaker, Ms Rebecca Kadaga, who presided over yesterday afternoon’s session, was quick to announce that the Bill must be expeditiously scrutinised and brought back to the House.
Resurrection “The Bill will be committed to the relevant committee for expeditious scrutiny and back to the House,’’ Ms Kadaga said.
The Bill is among the 22 pending Bills that expired with the Eighth Parliament. Proposed in 2009, the Bill outlaws homosexuality and introduces stringent penalties for those convicted.
Court says sodomy case still awaits probe file Clerics told not to wed homosexual couples Anti-gay Bill doesn’t make sense, Mbeki says If passed into law, gay adults who have sex with those of the same gender under 18, will be hanged.
Gay sex is illegal in Uganda and MPs supported their colleague to have it banned. However, human rights activists and the international community protested the Bill saying it was infringing on the rights and freedom of gays.
The donors also threatened to cut their aid to Uganda if such a Bill was passed into law.
President Museveni had in 2010 indicated that the government would bow down to international pressure as the matter had become a foreign policy and needed further consultation before Parliament can pronounce itself on it.
Just last year, Mr Frank Mugisha, a Ugandan gay activist, was presented a Robert F Kennedy Human Rights Award in Washington, the first time the award was bestowed on an advocate for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights.
When a gay rights activist David Kato was killed, the West branded Uganda a ‘gay killing nation’.
mnalugo@ug.nationmedia.comwww.monitor.co.ug/News/National/-/688334/1322392/-/b0u6uhz/-/index.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2012 22:14:41 GMT 3
Gays flee as irate residents storm Likoni seminar By DANIEL NYASSY dnyassy@ke.nationmedia.com Posted Thursday, February 23 2012 at 21:19
A mob on Thursday stormed the venue of a meeting of homosexuals, scattering the delegates.
About 30 participants scampered from the Likoni CDF Youth Empowerment and Library Centre through the back when about 100 youth led by religious leaders and village elders forced their into the venue.
Five Coast gay leaders, however, were not so lucky as the youths blocked the escape route and seized them.
They were held captive in the building for three hours as residents bayed for their blood.
The five were saved by Likoni police boss Abagarro Guyo and district officer Moses Ouma who ordered the seminar closed.
The five were bundled into a private car and whisked away under tight security.
“Everybody is ordered to vacate these premises. The seminar is terminated immediately and the place closed,” said Mr Guyo.
Sheikh Amir Zani of the Muzadhalfa mosque described the seminar as illegal, ungodly and unacceptable. He threatened to mobilise the community to cane the gays if they organised such a meeting again. “The government should stop this or we will act as a community,” Sheikh Zani declared.
Mombasa Network for Human Rights organising secretary Ali Kigarimbwe accused the organisers of denigrating the youth centre.
Sauti ya Likoni lobby group chairman Hamisi Hassan Ng’anzi said residents were shocked that such a seminar could be held in their midst.
“Many workshops of this kind have been held, purportedly to impact safe sex skills to the youth but they are actually business ventures.
“Why is drug abuse on the rise? These workshops don’t have any meaning,” he said.
A village elder, Mr Daniel Baridi, said all seminars at the centre should be vetted and approved by community leaders.
“We established this centre to help our youth but it is being abused. We will not allow such activities,” he said.
But the Ministry of Youth and Sports district officer, Mr David Ogal, defended the organisers of the seminar and accused residents of misunderstanding their aims.
“Here we are dealing with very vital education to vulnerable groups, including drug users, commercial sex workers, gays and others.
“We are offering peer and HIV/Aids education to the youth because they are at the highest risk of infection,” he told the press.
Mr Ogal said the ministry’s job was to help impart life skills to the youth and vulnerable groups whose HIV infection is twice that of other groups.
“I am a youth officer and charged with this responsibility. The gay community, like other groups, approached us and requested to be educated on safe sex.
“They have a right to safe sex. By doing this, we are not promoting homosexuality but imparting knowledge.
“There is a lot of social discrimination and stigma about the issue and we as a society must fight it,” he said.
The seminar participants were aged between 20 and 30, said the officer, adding that his ministry would make youth funds available to all groups as they had a right.
The seminar was organised and sponsored by the Kenya NGO Consortium and Constitutional Aids Control Council, which Mr Ogal said paid them a daily allowance of Sh1,000 “for lunch and transport” for each participant. www.nation.co.ke/News/regional/Gays+flee+as+irate+residents+storm+Likoni+seminar+/-/1070/1333872/-/j0bf1k/-/index.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2012 23:40:30 GMT 3
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2012 21:27:27 GMT 3
Mombasa aspiring governor Suleiman Shahbal is on the spot over his remarks that appear to support gay rights. In an interview on NTV last week, Shahbal said he believes all Kenyans have equal rights whether gay or not gay. "I have lived in Mombasa and never seen any gay people being violated who live in the society with us. Your sexual orientation is a personal issue. We live in a society where we recognise the rights of people in spite of their sexual orientation,” he said. The anti-gay activists have obtained a CD recording of Shahbal's remark which they intend to use during his campaigns.www.the-star.co.ke/national/corridors-of-power/74420-corridors-of-power
|
|