Uganda court to rule on legality of anti-gay law


From the AP:

A Ugandan court is expected to rule Friday on a petition by activists who say the East African country’s new anti-gay measure is invalid because it was passed during a parliamentary session that lacked quorum.

If the panel of judges on Uganda’s Constitutional Court agrees, the whole law could be jettisoned. If no, then the judges will continue to hear the activists’ argument that the law is unconstitutiona

If the law was not passed with the proper procedures, then so be it. I feel confident that the “Anti Homosexuality Bill of 2014” will be on the docket in Parliament (with a proper quorum) within minutes of such a decision being rendered.

I have gained a huge amount of respect for the Ugandans through this process. They have refused to bow to the cultural imperialists from the so-called “civilized world.”

The funny thing about this is that each and every one of the predictions of persecution and doom that were forecast by the pro-homosexual lobbyists did not come true. At least as of a couple of months ago, the only arrest for homosexual conduct (under this law) was when a couple in a hotel were so loud in their coupling that people in neighboring rooms complained about the disturbance.


Not to mention Homosexuality was already pretty much illegal before this law was passed. All the newer law did was make it stricter, and that can easily be done again.


An unfortunate human rights violation.

As Catholics we believe that homosexual acts are immoral but this has no bearing on the harmful nature of this law.


As a Catholic I am truly embarrassed that there are fellow Catholics that support this law.


Wow. So you are embarrassed by the Archbishop of Kampala, Cyprian Lwanga?

You realize that after they removed the death penalty, the Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican bishops of Uganda supported the measure.


Wow. You are not embarrassed to so freely associate with a group of law makers who wanted to kill people for homosexuality until outside pressure caused them to remove it?


And I have lost all respect for anyone that would support this heinous, discriminatory law. This law has been internationally condemned for wanting to Criminalize homosexuality, and rightly so.


All things considered, I do, in fact, stand solidly with the Bishops of Uganda.

(having said that, I will admit that a life sentence for deliberately infecting another with HIV or sodomizing a youth might be more severe than is needed, but that is something for prudential judgment. It might be that a 10-20 year sentence would be enough to deter)

And I firmly stand with the teachings of the Church on this issue.

Sorry that so many people in the so-called skilled world, who call themselves Catholic, seem to have a hard time with that.



Based on the diplomatic cables released by wikileaks; the Church is against criminalizing homosexuality. This law is opposed by Ugandan Archbishop Cyprian Lwanga as well as Cardinal Peter Turkson who is the president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.


If he supports this law, yes.


The law has been struck down


From the (Uganda) Monitor:
However, the ruling does not mean that the court nullified the content or substance of the law. The court nullified the law purely on procedural grounds because it was passed without a quorum as required by the rules.

The Bill can be easily returned to Parliament and passed again, this time with the required quorum of at least 125 out of the 365 MPs in the House.


I am thrilled to have the honor of writing with one who knows more about what is right for Ugandan society than its metropolitan archbishop.


He is not infallible just because he is a Bishop. He is as capable of been influenced by extremists as anyone else is, and I do believe he has been.

The Bishop may be for it, but Cardinal Peter Turkson who is the President of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace has come out against the bill saying that homosexuals are not criminals and they should not be sentenced for up to life in prison. Cardinal Antonelli Ennio, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family has also said it should not be criminalised. Likewise a newspaper run jointly by the Bishops of South Africa, Swaziland and Botswana has spoken against criminalising homosexuality. I can name more names if you like.

Not to mention the Cathechism. Homoseuxals “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.” Note, it doesn’t clarify that by saying, only if they behave as the Bishop of Uganda thinks they should. It applies to all homosexuals. Chaste and active.

So don’t make out that Church is supporting this law. Or that I am a bad Catholic because I won’t. I don’t consider it acceptable to mistreat active homosexuals solely because they do something I consider sinful. This law is a sign to the population that it is ok to mistreat homosexuals, and that is happening. They don’t deserve to be arrested, beaten, raped, or murdered. A law that encourages that is no less wrong just because a Bishop supports it.

What you don’t realise is it is extreme right wing views that have caused many people to support LGBT rights. You are so supportive of these sorts of laws because you fear homosexuality. I support same sex marriage, because I fear people like you. This time last year I was opposed to SSM and the people on this board, who hold your views, have change my mind.

  • The task of the civil law is to ensure the common good of people through the recognition of and the defence of fundamental rights and through the promotion of peace and of public morality. (CDF, 1988 --citing, VII, DH 7)

One would think the above is pretty much a common sense type of statement. I mention it, though, because of the libertine state of all of our societies these days.

Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder. (CDF, 1986)

You stated earlier that you believed that homosexuals should be treated with respect and *that applies to all homosexuals. Chaste and active. *

Believe it or not, I agree with you. I personally think all people need to be treated with respect. That comes from their status as human beings. Children, men, women, criminals, and so on. I will admit having a hard time treating politicians and lawyers with the respect they deserve as human beings, but I try.

Nevertheless, the quote above shows that homosexual actions are classified as an intrinsic moral evil. Not my words, the Holy See’s words.

In regards to the Church’s position specifically on the legalization of homosexual actions, JPII addressed the issue specifically during his Angelus message of 20 Feb 1994:

  1. Il pensiero va qui alla recente e ben nota risoluzione approvata dal Parlamento Europeo. In essa non si sono semplicemente prese le difese delle persone con tendenze omosessuali, rifiutando ingiuste discriminazioni nei loro confronti. Su questo anche la Chiesa è d’accordo, anzi lo approva, lo fa suo, giacché ogni persona umana è degna di rispetto. Ciò che non è moralmente ammissibile è l’approvazione giuridica della pratica omosessuale. Essere comprensivi verso chi pecca, verso chi non è in grado di liberarsi da questa tendenza, non equivale, infatti, a sminuire le esigenze della norma morale (cfr. Giovanni Paolo II, Veritatis Splendor, 95). Cristo ha perdonato la donna adultera salvandola dalla lapidazione (cfr. Gv 8, 1-11), ma le ha detto al tempo stesso: “Va’ e d’ora in poi non peccare più” (Gv 8, 11).


  1. Thinking here goes to the recent and well-known resolution adopted by the European Parliament . In it there were simply came to the defense of persons with homosexual tendencies, refusing unjust discrimination in their regard. On this the Church also agree, in fact approves it, it does its because every human person is worthy of respect. What is not morally permissible is the approval of the legal homosexual practice. Being sympathetic to those who sin, to those who are not able to free themselves from this trend, does not, in fact, diminish the demands of the moral law (cf. John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor , 95). Christ forgave the adulterous woman from stoning and saved her (cf. Jn 8: 1-11), but at the same time said, "Go 'and from now on sin no more" ( Jn 8: 11).

And as far as the moral liceity of “same sex marriage,” I would certainly hope I do not need to repeat Church teaching on that.

Again, refer to the above quote about the purpose of civil laws. “Public morality” comes to mind.

I find your comment,* What you don’t realise is it is extreme right wing views that have caused many people to support LGBT rights*, to be extremely ironic. In as much as I used to have an extremely libertine attitude toward homosexuals ("what you do is your business as long as you don’t ‘shove it down my throat’). Unfortunately, their militancy over the past 20 years has changed that.


Then there’s no problem - the bill doesn’t criminalize the orientation. What it does do is criminalize homosexual acts.

  • the bill doesn’t criminalize the orientation. What it does do is criminalize homosexual acts.

I think we need the same law here in America considering the history of Christianity and its dreadful rule over the world when Christians came into power.

Being a Catholic shouldn’t be illegal. However, all those displaying any signs of being a Catholic (praying, Churh going, baptism, mentioning God in one’s speech etc etc) should be imprisoned for life or better yet stoned to death.

PS Why I’m not surprised that there are “humans” who support this atrocity, this crime against humanity, this grave violation The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, this Nazi ideology?
The banality of Evil …


Second post on CAF and already affirms Godwins law.I think that is a record.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit