Posted on 12/08/2011 12:33:51 PM PST by presidio9
On Jan. 26, a man broke into the home of David Kato and proceeded to bash him to death with a hammer. Kato was a gay activist in Uganda, where the parliament has for the past two years been debating a bill that would not only impose the death penalty for homosexuality, but punish anyone who merely knows the existence of homosexuals yet doesn’t report them to the police. While the law has not passed, the environment in Uganda is such that many people believe they can attack and even kill gay people with impunity.
Indeed, in the months leading up to Kato’s murder, an atmosphere of hysterical hatred — given sanction by the country’s elected leaders — consumed Uganda. Three months before Kato was killed, a Ugandan newspaper published pictures of 100 “Top Homos” next to the banner “HANG THEM.” The bludgeoned corpse of David Kato is but one of the many consequences of state-sanctioned homophobia.
Although she did not mention Kato on Tuesday, Secretary of State Clinton must have had him in mind this week when she addressed delegates to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. It was there that she delivered what historians will one day look back upon as a monumental speech, in which she declared that the continuing oppression of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people is “one of the remaining human rights challenges of our time.”
Sexual minorities, Clinton said, “are treated with contempt and violence by their fellow citizens while authorities empowered to protect them look the other way or, too often, even join in the abuse.” She addressed the pernicious argument — common in Uganda and many other places — that homosexuality is “a Western invention,” plainly calling it a “human reality.” And she issued a challenge to a world in which more than 70 countries criminalize homosexuality: “It should never be a crime to be gay.” On the same day as Clinton’s speech, President Obama issued a directive instructing federal agencies to “ensure that U.S. diplomacy and foreign assistance promote and protect the human rights of LGBT persons.”
One would think that this long-overdue expression of support for a baseline principle of human rights — that people should not be imprisoned, never mind killed, because of their sexual orientation — would garner support from the broad American political spectrum. Nowhere in her speech did Clinton endorse marriage rights for gay people, nor their ability to adopt children, both of which remain contentious issues in the U.S. She merely put the full moral force of American diplomacy on the right side of a basic idea: that when it comes to the conflict between governments that harass and murder gay people and the targets of such harassment, America will stand with the victims.
But this was too much for some of the Republican presidential contenders, most notably Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Condemning the abuse of gay people overseas, he said, constitutes “a war with people of faith in this country,” a “war on traditional American values,” he specified, that “must stop.” He added that, “Promoting special rights for gays in foreign countries is not in America’s interests and not worth a dime of taxpayers’ money.” Those who have followed the debate over homosexuality in America have become used to the rhetorical trick that identifies equal rights in marriage, military service and employment as “special rights.” Now, apparently, not being killed can be added to the list.
Obama “has again mistaken America’s tolerance for different lifestyles with an endorsement of those lifestyles,” Perry concluded. “I will not make that mistake.”
That last sentence is chilling. Does it mean that, if elected President, Perry would reverse the American government’s opposition to the murder of homosexuals overseas?
Perry was joined in his denunciation by former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who said that “the administration is promoting their particular agenda in this country, and now they feel it’s their obligation to promote those values not just in the military, not just in our society, but now around the world with taxpayer dollars.”
Unfortunately, the ostensible adults in the race,
Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, have as yet had nothing to say.
Of course, protecting the rights of gay people will rarely, if ever, be the sole consideration in American foreign policy. This conundrum is apparent in the U.S. government’s alleged
recent denial of asylum
to a Saudi diplomat who told American officials he is gay and would be persecuted were he to return to his country.
But it is never wrong to come out, so to speak, on the side of individual rights and dignity and against the forces of bigotry and fanaticism. How sad and pathetic that, at least for some, scoring cheap political points has warped their basic humanity.
***Kirchick is a fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a contributing editor to The New Republic.***
We should embrace mutliculturalism, and let Uganda deal with its problem as it sees fit.
Nobody’s stopping the Muslim purge of the Middle East.
It seems the media will go to a lot of trouble to make it look like the republicans are in the wrong about everything.
It says in the Bible that a man laying with another man as he would lie with a woman is an abomination, and although i can not imagine the liberal news media reading the Bible even if they can read, it is also against human nature.
Not that i would even think of killing them, nor would any other conservative, but i will not be made to think they are normal acts because they are sick.
By the way, why don,t you liberal news people do a little history reporting, for instance how the slaves were whipped if they displeased the plantation owners who were democrats and were also the founders of this sick disease called liberalism ?
At any rate, i would be interested in hearing the lies coming from a liberal about who it was that really set the slaves free, come on now, can,t we hear something from you other than Gay, Gay ,Gay? is that all that your minds can relate to?
“But this was too much for some of the Republican presidential contenders, most notably Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Condemning the abuse of gay people overseas, he said, constitutes “a war with people of faith in this country,” a “war on traditional American values,” he specified, that “must stop.” He added that, “Promoting special rights for gays in foreign countries is not in America’s interests and not worth a dime of taxpayers’ money.” Those who have followed the debate over homosexuality in America have become used to the rhetorical trick that identifies equal rights in marriage, military service and employment as “special rights.” Now, apparently, not being killed can be added to the list. “
And the problem is?
I don't think the New York Daily News will print a correction on this, but perhaps it's worth trying to get them to fix the record.
I agree. The selective outrage is maddening.
If the victim is not in the protected/favored class, they don’t matter.
The media trumpets this b.s., and the gullible buys into it.
This guy is a joke. He makes wild jumps in logic, puts up the most half arsed straw man I have ever seen and then knocks it down with wild swings of indignation and self righteousness. If this is what passes for intelligence nowadays then we are all in big trouble.
The real problem is that so many intellectual sloths and lefties will eat it up!
Mel
Leftwing insanity.
Not agreeing with a particular lifestyle and not wanting government to promote it does not mean you want them all dead.
lol.
Good Luck :)
Actually, if you read carefully there is nothing to correct. They never actually say that Kato was killed due to so called homophobia. They just imply it. Oldest journalistic trick in the book (except, perhaps, getting an “expert” to express the opinions that the journalist wants to express but can’t...because he’s impartial, don’t ya know?)
“But this was too much for some of the Republican presidential contenders, most notably Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Condemning the abuse of gay people overseas, he said, constitutes “a war with people of faith in this country,” a “war on traditional American values,” he specified, that “must stop.” He added that, “Promoting special rights for gays in foreign countries is not in America’s interests and not worth a dime of taxpayers’ money.” Those who have followed the debate over homosexuality in America have become used to the rhetorical trick that identifies equal rights in marriage, military service and employment as “special rights.” Now, apparently, not being killed can be added to the list. “
And the problem is?
I would think that nothing would be too far out for any one who would except gay marriage as any kind of life style.
I believe people have a right to live the way they want, but i do not blow smoke in some one else,s face and i don,t want some one blowing any thing in mine.
The headline is as lieing as the rest of the article. There are no Republicans, candidate or not that would advocate killing Gays.
If the Daily Snooze feels it has to stoke up the gays to vote for Obama they KNOW he is in trouble. This piece is good news.
“I believe it goes far beyond equal rights, if we are going to have equal rights,lets have them...”
The only way we will ever have equal rights in this country is by getting rid of all the equal rights laws. They are not meant to give equal rights. They are meant to take rights away from one class of people(mainly white, christian males) and give them to another class.
In trying to be fair, our congress implemented the most unfair law known to mankind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.