|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: On Not Repeating Hitler's Mistakes
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
So President Museveni of Uganda released some comments on why he decided to sign his country's "Jail the Gays" bill. (Formerly the "Kill the Gays" bill, showing the Ugandan government is willing to compromise!) Here they are in their entirety.
quote:
President Museveni’s Remarks on decision to sign anti-homosexual bill at the closing ceremony of the 10-day retreat of the NRM Parliamentary Caucus, 16th February 2014
1. In that bill, I had no problem with punishing people who promote homosexuality.
2. I had no problem with punishing people who become homosexual for mercenary reasons what one would call homosexual prostitution. The man is not a homosexual, but he engages in homosexuality for money.
3. I had no problem with punishing exhibitionism of homosexuality.
The reason I had not signed the bill is to scientifically answer the question; are there people genetically born homosexual? For me, I had thought that since there were people born albino there could be people born homosexual.
But since the medical authorities, the department of genetics of the Medical School from Makerere, say there is no proof yet that people are homosexual by genetics, I told those scientists to put it in writing and they are going to do so. Then I will sign the bill.
Am taking all these precautions because am historically answerable for whatever I do as a leader. There were mistakes made in the 1930s by Hitler because he wanted to make Germany strong. Some of these issues are very crucial and should be handled objectively not emotionally.
I had not concentrated my mind on homosexuality all these years. I thought electricity, roads, were more urgent things. Moreover, I had never seen a homosexual.
When you insisted we sat down and discussed it and we have found a solution systematically.
I know we are going to have a big battle with outsiders, but I will be able to say I asked scientists and this is what they said. That homosexuals are normal people behaving abnormally.
Maybe it's just me, but if I was making policy for a national government and thought to myself "Yeah, this is a little Hitler-y, but I can be careful that it doesn't get too Hitler-y, plus I'm sure that all my successors will be just as careful as me", that would be a clear indication that whatever it was is probably a bad idea. One of the best ways to not be "historically answerable" for enacting one of the more infamous policies of the Third Reich (you know, the "putting people in camps" policy, not the "building autobahns" policy) is to NOT ENACT ONE OF THE MOST INFAMOUS POLICIES OF THE THIRD REICH!!!
I would probably also avoid the use of the English word "solution" when discussing this policy, since it's a common translation of Endlösung.
On a related note, this seems to prove that there is such a thing as self-Godwinning.
[ 08. March 2014, 16:56: Message edited by: Crœsos ]
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
People don't have the same sensitivity to Hitler and Nazis that Europe, North America, and Israel have in much of the developing world. The law is evil and the President of Uganda should know better than to talk this way. That said, in some countries like India, Hitler is seen as inspirational for restoring national pride and doing away with the corrupting influences of those immoral liberals trying to import their perversion. If only, they would probably say, his nationalist renewal could be separated from his "mistakes." This is why education on the Holocaust (and other staggeringly evil things done under Nazism, Stalinism, Maoism, etc.) is so important.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
D'you think someone should point out to Museveni the treatment blacks received in the third reich?
Enforced sterilisation was the norm.
And it was not uncommon for black POWs to be summarily executed: the 'lucky' ones often found themselves in concentration camps.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
People don't have the same sensitivity to Hitler and Nazis that Europe, North America, and Israel have in much of the developing world.
That may be the case, but it was Museveni's chosen comparison, most likely made in an effort to explain why this policy isn't pernicious to folks in Europe and North America. Given the similarities that would be obvious to anyone with an even passing familiarity with Hitler and his policies, pitching this new law in those terms just sounds like a suspiciously specific denial.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I have always been curious about the segregation in the USA and the permits required for our Indians to leave reservations, residential schools and related policies, in the light of pre-war Nazi policies against racial and cultural groups. They were merely more vigourous than here. A matter of degree and perhaps rewritten history.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
One doesn't have to go that far back in history to uncover the Fascist/Nazi sympathies of many in Canada and the US.
The time of the residential schools was also the time of things like eugenics the Alberta Eugenics Board or the famous "None is too many" comment by the immigration official who turns the St. Louis away from Canada (after it was not accepted by the US and Cuba as well)
Anti-"them" feelings ran high during the Depression, admittedly, and carried over into WW2, but the disposability of Jews, the outright hatred of blacks and the fear of the mentally-disabled were all features of North American culture during the time of Hitler.
That is why the new Canadian Constitution specifically included the total-equality clauses that are so disliked by certain kinds of hater. P. E. Trudeau had lived in that time and learned from it, as did most of the people who survived WW2.
We seem to be forgetting some what we learned three generations later.
[ 09. March 2014, 11:12: Message edited by: Horseman Bree ]
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
aunt jane
Shipmate
# 10139
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
D'you think someone should point out to Museveni the treatment blacks received in the third reich?
Enforced sterilisation was the norm.
And it was not uncommon for black POWs to be summarily executed: the 'lucky' ones often found themselves in concentration camps.
Why do you not contact Museveni yourself to voice your concerns? Why leave "someone" to do it?
Posts: 97 | From: South East of England | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
I seem to recall that one of Museveni's predecessors wanted to erect a statue of the Fuhrer in the capital and was only deterred when the Soviets explained gently, in words of one syllable, that this would be an Epic Fail on the PR front. It didn't help that at the time General Amin was doing a general re-run of Krystalnacht with the Ugandan Asians cast in the role of German Jews. Luckily Ted Heath was made of sterner stuff than Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain. What the devil are they going to do when they run out of minorities to stigmatise? And lets hope that Mrs Greening takes this into consideration when we decide what countries she sends our money to.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Starlight
Shipmate
# 12651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally written by President Museveni of Uganda:
The reason I had not signed the bill is to scientifically answer the question; are there people genetically born homosexual? For me, I had thought that since there were people born albino there could be people born homosexual.
But since the medical authorities, the department of genetics of the Medical School from Makerere, say there is no proof yet that people are homosexual by genetics, I told those scientists to put it in writing and they are going to do so. Then I will sign the bill.
I will be able to say I asked scientists and this is what they said. That homosexuals are normal people behaving abnormally.
I've seen quite a few people make this mistaken assumption that homosexuality must be either genetic or a choice.
It is relatively easy to establish scientifically that it isn't a choice - you can simply survey people and ask people to what degree they felt there was an element of conscious choice. The answer is that people of all sexualities typically report having little or no choice over which gender they felt an attraction toward. The American Psychological Association in their submission to the US Supreme Court, 2013, testified that scientific research shows: "Most gay men and lesbians do not experience their sexual orientation as resulting from a voluntary choice."
Answering scientifically the question of what does actually cause homosexuality is much more complicated. The current leading theory is that the primary cause is the effect of various hormones on the development of the brain of the foetus in its mother's womb. Exposure (or lack of it) to various hormones in the womb, causes the foetus' brain to develop in certain ways leading to the person being born with attractions to a particular sex (or both sexes). Genetic factors may also play a complex role, and these have certainly not been ruled out either. From the Royal College of Psychiatrist's (2007?) submission to the CoE: "It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by genetic factors and/or the early uterine environment. Sexual orientation is therefore not a choice..."
The state of our current scientific knowledge about the causes of homosexuality is thus almost identical to the state of our current knowledge about the causes of left-handedness. Left-handedness has been repeatedly demonstrated to not be caused by any one particular gene. If it is genetic, it is apparently a consequence of at least 40 genes working together. It is known that exposure of a fetus to certain chemicals in the womb can cause left-handedness.
Overall, left-handedness thus looks very similar to homosexuality in terms of our scientific knowledge of their cause - both appear to be caused by the way the foetus' brain develops in the womb which is apparently substantially affected by various hormones and chemicals that the foetus is or isn't exposed to in the womb, which may or may not be affected by complex genetic factors present in the mother's DNA and/or the foetus'. Everyone (even the Ugandan President I presume) seems happy to take it for granted that left-handed people are born that way and that it is not a conscious choice on their part to make the 'wrong' decision to be left-handed. Yet no scientists have ever found "the gene" that causes left-handedness. Left-handedness appears to be neither genetic nor a choice, and homosexuality likewise.
Thus when the Ugandan President asks "are there people genetically born homosexual?" the answer is that according to the best of our scientific knowledge, yes, people are born homosexual, but no, it's not necessarily genetic.
(Sorry if everyone here was already well aware of that. I would normally say that it goes without saying that "it's genetic or a choice" is wrong, but I have seen so many Christians in the West express the same sentiment that I have abandoned the idea of thinking that "it goes without saying that it's obviously wrong" and have taken to explaining why it's wrong whenever I see it expressed...)
Posts: 745 | From: NZ | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
Using handedness as a comparison is interesting, since there have been times when the sinistral were viewed with as much anathema in society as the homosexual, and with the same attitude that it is a choice. Even to the extent of invoking demonic influence, and irreparable harm to the society that allowed sinistrality free rein. (In the case of handedness, there may be an element of choice, if research I saw once is correct in suggesting that what happens with lefties is that they are not born righthanded, and are better able to use either hand than a true dextral is, so the analogy falls down there.) On the other hand, the way that being sinistral is now not an issue in most societies (apart from requiring teachers to make sure that lefties sit on the left of the desk, so that writing arms do not interfere with each other) could imply some hope for the future of attitudes to homosexuality.
[ 21. March 2014, 18:18: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
