THE Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams is said to bre very concerned at the news that a proposed Anti-Homosexuality Bill is once again under consideration by the Ugandan Parliament, and might possibly pass into law tomorrow.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams
According to this report, Williams this week reiterated his views – first expressed in 2009 after he was subjected to considerable pressure to condemn the Bill  – saying:
Overall, the proposed legislation is of shocking severity and I can’t see how it could be supported by any Anglican who is committed to what the Communion has said in recent decades. Apart from invoking the death penalty, it makes pastoral care impossible – it seeks to turn pastors into informers.
Commenting on behalf of the UK gay Humanist charity, the Pink Triangle Trust, its secretary George Broadhead dismissed Williams’ statement, saying:
What appalling hypocrisy! Why is Rowan Williams ignoring, or refusing to condemn, the damaging role in this played by a branch of his own Anglican Church – the Church of Uganda – whose website makes it clear [PDF] that it is supportive of the Bill?
The PTT pointed out here that the Anti-Homosexuality Bill was first introduced as a private member’s bill by MP David Bahati in October 2009.
Bahati is an evangelical Christian and a member of the Fellowship Foundation, also known as the Family, a US-based Christian and political organisation which arranges the annual prestigious National Prayer Breakfast in Washington.
The Anti-Homosexuality Bill was ostensibly “shelved” by Uganda’s president Yoweri Museveni following an international outcry. However, it seems that public hearings on the Bill have recently taken place in the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee and the remaining stages of the legislative process could be completed soon.
If enacted, the bill would greatly broaden the criminalisation of homosexuality by introducing the death penalty for people who have previous convictions, are HIV-positive, or engage in same-sex acts with people under 18 years of age. The bill also includes provisions for Ugandans who engage in same-sex sexual relations outside of Uganda, asserting that they may be extradited for punishment back to Uganda, and includes penalties for individuals, companies, media organisations, or non-governmental organisations that support LGBT rights.
Broadhead said:
We are shocked that after such a long time this heinous piece of legislation may still become law. Much of the homophobic bigotry which is rife in Uganda and other African countries emanates from religious sources, including US evangelical Christians. It certainly emanates from the Anglican Church of Uganda.
The Church states on its website:
The Church of Uganda appreciates the spirit of the Bill’s objective of protecting the family, especially in light of a growing propaganda to influence younger people to accept homosexuality as a legitimate way of expressing human sexuality. We particularly appreciate the objectives of the Bill which seek to: provide for marriage in Uganda as contracted only between a man and woman; prohibit and penalize homosexual behaviour and related practices in Uganda as they constitute a threat to the traditional family; prohibit ratification of any international treaties, conventions, protocols, agreements and declarations which are contrary or inconsistent with the provisions of the Act; prohibit the licensing of organizations which promote homosexuality.
Broadhead added:
Unfortunately the vast majority of the population [of Uganda] are Christian and clearly greatly influenced by these malign bible-based policies.
Update: More than 1.5-million people have signed an online petition against this outrageous Bill. Please add your name. And we have just heard from Bill Murray, who regularly sends us links from Australia, that the Australian PM Kevin Rudd has added his voice to the global condemnation of the proposed legislation.
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
May 12th, 2011 at 8:55 am
“….the proposed legislation is of shocking severity….”
So it’s OK to legislate against teh gheys so long as it’s not too harsh?
“….I can’t see how it could be supported by any Anglican who is committed to what the Communion has said….”
So the Archbishop Orombi is not part of the Anglican community? You are throwing him out?
“….it makes pastoral care impossible – it seeks to turn pastors into informers….”
So now it’s all about you?
May 12th, 2011 at 9:27 am
You can’t beat a bit of good ol’ christian hypocrisy. It really is in a class of its own.
Anyway methinks the Ugandan government have lost the pink vote.
May 12th, 2011 at 9:29 am
FWIW here is the petition opposing this outrage
http://www.avaaz.org/en/uganda.....etition_2/
Yet again, ‘religion poisons everything’.
May 12th, 2011 at 9:36 am
Ugandans who engage in same-sex sexual relations outside of Uganda, asserting that they may be extradited for punishment back to Uganda,
Bloody hell the world has gone mad.
May 12th, 2011 at 10:16 am
The poor Archbishop of Canterbury has been put in an impossible position. As confirmed by Right Reverend Michael Nazir last week, the Anglican Church is growing in Africa. Either human rights on the one hand, or upsetting the Uganda Anglican Community on the other. Either acting honorably or dishonorably. Someone has to pay for the Archbishop’s pension! and biting the hand that feeds you – I can understand the Archbishop’s predicament.
May 12th, 2011 at 10:43 am
Praising with faint damns springs to mind after reading RW’s comments
May 12th, 2011 at 11:20 am
Hypocrisy indeed. For a religion that claims to be all about love, the xtian church has certainly shown over the millennia that it knows how to engender and legitimise pure hatred with the best of them.
May 12th, 2011 at 11:22 am
I’d have thought John Sentamu was the Archbishop who should be getting the main criticism. The man was born in Uganda, and as far as I can tell left in 1974 after being a victim of Idi Amin, so should be well aware what others go through there now. He’s been asked numerous times to comment, but still says nothing though wasting his time on other empty media stunts passed off as ‘religious commenent on social issues.’
At least Williams has been making some attempt to drag his flock back to decency, while at the same time fighting a rearguard action from Nazir-Ali, who was the other contender for the Arch of Cant’s job and now seems to have decided that if he can’t be head of the church as it is he’ll break it up, side with fundie nutters and head the breakaway church. Again, given the guy’s background as another refugee of religious/political oppression, you’d think Nazir-Ali, if genuinely religious and interested in social issues, would speak up instead of using it as yet another issue on which, by silently colluding with some pretty evil scum, he might as well be sentencing people to death himself.
May 12th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
We will see more of this.
As mainstream religions decline in the West, they will seek to prop up their legitimacy with the help of the developing world, which will mean adhering more to their values and less to western ones.
May 12th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
Stop all aid to Uganda NOW.
May 12th, 2011 at 1:26 pm
For a long time it has been clear that Rowan Williams lacks moral courage and you have to wonder about his principles. He fence sits, he keeps his mouth shut to accommodate the sexual and financial activities of the Windsor clan, he shuffles to avoid confronting the African and USA bigots, he says little or nothing about the nefarious child abuse activities of the Roman Catholics.
What he does find time for is particpating as a key figure in the fancy dress nuptials of the Windsors. Which leads me to wonder whether his boss, the Head of the C. of E., Mrs E. Windsor shouldn’t be speaking up. She once said in one of her Christmas Day bore-ins to her subjects that religion was the answer to the problems of the world. What kind of religion? This kind? If she says nothing she damns herself.
What is tragic is that while Rowan Williams continues to equivocate, condemning as little as possible, looking for the weasel words, good and brave men and women, with more courage than himself suffer and die.
This is a shameful performance of the Archbishop and he stains himself and his church.
May 12th, 2011 at 1:44 pm
@ Stuart H
Indeed. And Sentamu has form.
As leader of the Damilola Taylor inquiry, he suppressed mention of a possible homophobic motivation in the killing:
http://www.petertatchell.net/l.....milola.htm
And he also refused to sign the Cambridge Accord:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Accord
May 12th, 2011 at 3:20 pm
Did I read that right? The death penalty for having HIV?
May 12th, 2011 at 5:56 pm
Like Ivan above, I find Rowan Williams’ comments to be somewhat telling. He seems to have a problem with the legislation ‘overall’, which suggests that it is in part acceptable to him. I get the impression that he basically thinks killing homosexuals or life imprisonment is a bit harsh but supports the idea that governments should be able to legislate against the existence of these people in some manner. It’s something I see often in Christianity; it seems those who are judgemental comfort to think they can officially declare someone is bad for doing something, without really having the stomach to follow through. Surveys suggest that many Christians opposed to abortion, for example, want to make it illegal but do not want women and doctors charged with murder and jailed for life or executed.
Despite significant pressure from various people across the planet, I doubt this legislation will fail without pressure from people with genuine power. The Australian Prime Minister has condemned it already, but I have yet to hear from anyone else. Perhaps I have simply missed it, but I would have thought there would be voices from the US, UK and UN (and maybe even U2) taking Uganda’s government to task for even thinking about this.
The horrible cynic inside of me (the one that’s usually right) is saying that a major reason the significant world powers are reluctant to condemn this and threaten sanctions is the meme creeping through politics that maintains religion upon a pedestal that insulates it from criticism or interference, even when it will blatantly and happily kill people.
May 12th, 2011 at 6:37 pm
It would appear that having a large following in Africa and an insignificant following at home means that the Anglican Church is like a tail wagging a dog. It is presumably the case that African bishops actually wield quite a bit of power over the ABofC because he can’t afford to have them split away and leave him with a membership that is counted in thousands rather than millions. I find it disturbing that we have these 26 bishops sitting in the House of Lords who are under the influence of people who have such primitive ideas.
May 12th, 2011 at 6:55 pm
You can contact Williams, or at least his staff, to protest his lacklustre response to this, at contact@lambethpalace.org.uk
At the very least, I should expect the Anglican Communion to take steps against a branch of their church which is going against the publicly stated policies of that organisation. Whether closing all communication by expulsion of the Ugandan church is a good idea or not, (or even feasible, given Stonyground’s tail/dog analogy) I’m not sure, but that’s what I proposed in my mail to him/them.
May 12th, 2011 at 7:23 pm
You have to give Rowan a bit of credit, he managed to say a whole paragraph without actually saying anything, that’s quite an achievement!
Joking aside, I actually get really annoyed by the likes of Williams. He is obviously an intelligent man who, if he had but an ounce of integrity, could do a lot of good in this world. His voice still carrys a lot of weight in the UK but, like all the heads of the world’s religions, he is happy to sit behind a wall of platitudes rather than anything of substance.
May 12th, 2011 at 8:59 pm
@ JMW
“The horrible cynic inside of me (the one that’s usually right) is saying that a major reason the significant world powers are reluctant to condemn this and threaten sanctions is the meme creeping through politics that maintains religion upon a pedestal that insulates it from criticism or interference, even when it will blatantly and happily kill people.”
Absolutely spot on! Our politicians are cowards. They haven’t got the balls or, more importantly, the morals to call it what it really is – ie evil. And that’s because they believe that religiots can, sadly, make a difference when it comes to poll time. Better to keep quiet and let bad people do their thang than actually speak up and run the risk of getting the wrong side of people who can whip up an easily offended god flash mob at the drop of a hat.
Shame on them for their pusillanimity.
May 13th, 2011 at 12:23 am
It’s not Williams we should be having a go at, it should be the press for not tearing this twat apart.
May 13th, 2011 at 12:55 am
This appeared around midnight, UK time.
AngieRS
The only Brit paper that comes up on a Google news search for ‘Uganda homosexuality’ is the Guarinad. Mind you, I can see the Daily Heil and its ilk’s headlines now, as they imagine a ‘horde’ of brown homosexuals looking for political asylum. Oh yes, they’ll be loud enough about it then.
May 13th, 2011 at 1:28 am
Weird, was having an issue with the comments there. Seems back now.
May 13th, 2011 at 1:30 am
You mean Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd:)
May 13th, 2011 at 1:34 am
@AgentCormac – Well said.
@Angie – Agreed. This sort of thing seems to fall into a realm that makes the media, and politicians as I mentioned earlier, incredibly uncomfortable. They cannot bring themselves to condemn it because to do so would mean they were seen to condemn people’s Deeply Held Beliefs ™ and that would cause a lot of upset. Of course, a person with any vertebrae would wonder why people held these murderous beliefs so deeply in the first place, and take them to task for it.