Jason Kuznicki has an interesting post, phrased as an open letter, about the Ugandan anti-gay legislation I've written about several times. He points out that the text of the Ugandan bill clearly reflects American political rhetoric and he quotes the text to show that:
The object of this Bill is to establish a comprehensive consolidated legislation to protect the traditional family by prohibiting (i) any form of sexual relations between persons of the same sex; and (ii) the promotion or recognition of such sexual relations in public institutions and other places through or with the support of any Government entity in Uganda or any non governmental organization inside or outside the country.This Bill aims at strengthening the nation's capacity to deal with emerging internal and external threats to the traditional heterosexual family.
This legislation further recognizes the fact that same [sex] attraction is not an innate and immutable characteristic.
The Bill further aims at providing a comprehensive and enhanced legislation to protect the cherished culture of the people of Uganda. legal, religious, and traditional family values of the people of Uganda against the attempts of sexual rights activists seeking to impose their values of sexual promiscuity on the people of Uganda.
There is also need to protect the children and youths of Uganda who are made vulnerable to sexual abuse and deviation as a result of cultural changes, uncensored information technologies, parentless child developmental settings and increasing attempts by homosexuals to raise children in homosexual relationships through adoption, foster care, or otherwise.
Jason reacts to this and points out both its barbarism and the absurdity of cultural relativist arguments:
Now, I'm told that even bothering to care about this stuff makes me a neo-colonialist, and that I should probably just back off. I shouldn't impose western, decadent, cosmopolitan values (values like "not killing people who put their penises in non-state-approved places") on an indigenous, authentic, untainted people. Can the subaltern speak, already? And can the oppressors just shut up for once? It's about time for the oppressed to strike out on their own -- and oppress someone else.That, after all, is what it takes to really grow up as a nation. Or so you've been told, Uganda.
I, however, am writing to you today because this very law looks neo-colonialist to me. It looks like a stale rehash of what we've argued about the United States for most of my life, albeit I see that you play for rather higher stakes over there. As Michelle Goldberg put it in The American -- gasp -- Prospect, "The ludicrous idea that gays and lesbians are imposing their values on Uganda -- or that gay adoption is even on the table in that country -- demonstrates the way American rhetoric pervades that country's anti-gay politics." Sadly, you seem to get this stuff... from us.
Uganda: We've been having this same debate -- full of this same solicitous, hyperventilating care for the traditional family -- for years. We heard it from Anita Bryant back when Idi Amin was still in power. Over here we worry that Scandinavia is imposing its values on Iowa. But in any event, the people who are telling you the loudest to be your own nation, not to accept colonial values, not to ape the West -- these very people are aping the worst aspects of the West.
Heads and nails.

Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 

Comments
The Ugandan anti-gay legislation merely reflects The Family values.
Hence the Capitol Hill rhetoric.
Posted by: Gingerbaker | December 10, 2009 10:32 AM
Greg Laden has two videos of Rachael Maddow explaining the American links to the Ugandan law. PZ has some older Maddow videos on the same topic.
Posted by: llewelly | December 10, 2009 12:39 PM
llewelly @ 2 - PZ has Part 2/2 posted as well; however both videos are well worth the watch.
This is the exact type of journalism I advocate for and why I also hoped that NBC would have replaced Tim Russert on the Meet the Press with Ms. Maddow, knowing that wouldn't happen given how new she was to TV at the time and her being a noted partisan rather than from straight news like David Gregory. I still favored her since I find her talent and analytic skills equal to our Ed Brayton, which is far above the standard we almost always experience in main-stream newspaper editorial pages and the TV news channels (Fareed Zakaria's GPS (Global Public Square) on CNN being one notable exception).
Her only flaw so far (I have a little bit left to watch in Part 2) was failing to note that Paul Cameron's claims were falsified; those being the claims mentioned in Part 1 claiming gays commit a far more disproportionate amount of sexual crimes against others. She merely noted his being booted-out of relevant professional and licensing groups.
Ms. Maddow's report also amplifies Mr. Kuznicki's point about where Uganda is getting its ideas and justifications to persecute gay people.
Posted by: Michael Heath | December 10, 2009 1:23 PM
Notice how that once-tireless cyber-defender of gay-agenda "critics" everywhere, mroberts, has been conspicuously absent recently? When you're so blatantly deranged and bloodthirsty that even mroberts is shamed into hiding, you know you're WAY outside the bounds of sensible adult discourse.
Posted by: Raging Bee | December 10, 2009 3:40 PM
Raging Bee @ 4:
I think global warming has so fucked how the moon influences our atmosphere that mroberts is confused about when to show up for his regularly scheduled smack-down.
Posted by: Michael Heath | December 10, 2009 3:48 PM
Bee,
You are goading mroberts to force an opinion from him? I support that effort as he has been on the wrong side (from me) of many arguments here, I'd like to see if we could agree even once about something.
Posted by: MikeMa | December 10, 2009 3:53 PM
I'm not trying to goad him; I'm just pointing out how thoroughly demented the Christian Reich's homophobia has become. As for his opinion on this issue, I think his silence strongly implies he's just as aware as we are that it's wrong, and would rather hide from it than admit to how wrong it is.
Posted by: Raging Bee | December 10, 2009 4:59 PM