View Full Version : BBC Slammed For Debating Whether Uganda Should Execute Gays
letmein
17-12-2009, 01:36 AM
LONDON " The British Broadcasting Corp. suffered criticism from lawmakers Wednesday for inviting debate on whether homosexuals should face execution in Uganda.
The broadcaster launched an on-line debate over a proposed Ugandan law that would punish some homosexual acts by life imprisonment or death. Legislation being considered in the African country would impose the death penalty on some gay Ugandans, and their family and friends could face up to seven years in jail if they fail to report their homosexuality to authorities.
BBC's "Africa Have Your Say" Web site asked for people's views on whether Uganda has gone too far and whether there should be any laws against gays.
The page's title was originally "Should homosexuals face execution?" but was later changed to "Should Uganda debate gay execution?" Several British politicians said the taxpayer-funded broadcaster should not treat the execution of gays as a legitimate topic for discussion.
"We should be looking at what is going on in Uganda with abhorrence," said lawmaker Eric Joyce of the ruling Labour Party. "We should be condemning it, and the BBC should be condemning it. ... Instead it seems to have thought it appropriate to come up with something that suggests it's a subject for discussion."
Lynne Featherstone, a lawmaker from the opposition Liberal Democrats, said she has written to BBC executives seeking an apology and an end to the Web discussion.
"Suggesting that the state-sponsored murder of gay people is OK as a legitimate topic for debate is deeply offensive," she said.
The forum attracted more than 600 comments and triggered a lively Twitter discussion.
The BBC's World Service Africa program editor, David Stead, defended the debate. In a blog posted on the BBC Web site, he said editors had "thought long and hard about using this question" and sought to reflect the diverse views about homosexuality in Africa.
"We agree that it is a stark and challenging question, but think that it accurately focuses on and illustrates the real issue at stake," he said.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/16/bbc-slammed-for-debating-_n_394894.html
InOne
17-12-2009, 01:39 AM
Well don't debate it, put a stop to it, is it any wonder Uganda is a 3rd world country?
Mrluvaluva
17-12-2009, 01:58 AM
It seems ridiculous in this day and age. It should not be an option full stop. Sometimes I think the world is going backwards instead of forwards.
arista
17-12-2009, 07:16 AM
It seems ridiculous in this day and age. It should not be an option full stop. Sometimes I think the world is going backwards instead of forwards.
Yes the BBC
has gone stupid on this.
Crimson Dynamo
17-12-2009, 09:34 AM
lol at Uganda full stop
Sticks
17-12-2009, 10:45 AM
What right have we to criticise the judicial affairs of another sovereign state
None that I can think of
This is a debate purely for the citizens of Uganda and nobody else.
Crimson Dynamo
17-12-2009, 10:59 AM
What right have we to criticise the judicial affairs of another sovereign state
None that I can think of
This is a debate purely for the citizens of Uganda and nobody else.
who needs a "right"?
:conf:
Niamh.
17-12-2009, 11:00 AM
What right have we to criticise the judicial affairs of another sovereign state
None that I can think of
This is a debate purely for the citizens of Uganda and nobody else.
I have to strongly disagree with that sticks, people are people and this is a human rights issue that other countries should step and stop as they are murdering people.
What right have we to criticise the judicial affairs of another sovereign state
None that I can think of
This is a debate purely for the citizens of Uganda and nobody else.
Oh right ,so there should have been no sanctions imposed against South Africa .Apartheid was our business and we should have been allowed to carry on ??
I love these folks with bible in hand and blindfold tied securely to eyes :rolleyes:
Niamh.
17-12-2009, 11:50 AM
Oh right ,so there should have been no sanctions imposed against South Africa .Apartheid was our business and we should have been allowed to carry on ??
I love these folks with bible in hand and blindfold tied securely to eyes :rolleyes:
Absolutely, these are innocent people being murdered so it should be the worlds business to put a stop to it!!
Absolutely, these are innocent people being murdered so it should be the worlds business to put a stop to it!!
Unfortunetly ,I don't believe it will be stopped .it will carry on and we will all probably forget about it very soon,sadly.It's not likely to make news here in Europe for awhile again.Shame.!!!
Niamh.
17-12-2009, 12:36 PM
Unfortunetly ,I don't believe it will be stopped .it will carry on and we will all probably forget about it very soon,sadly.It's not likely to make news here in Europe for awhile again.Shame.!!!
Yes it is a shame, we're all too wrapped up in our lives to think about other peoples hardships
Dr.Gonzo
17-12-2009, 12:41 PM
Have the gays done anything wrong or are we just going to kill them for bumming?
Niamh.
17-12-2009, 12:43 PM
Have the gays done anything wrong or are we just going to kill them for bumming?
Being Gay is what they have done Gonzo!
Dr.Gonzo
17-12-2009, 12:44 PM
Being Gay is what they have done Gonzo!
Wow, seems kinda harsh. O well, at least they had fun.
Crimson Dynamo
17-12-2009, 01:28 PM
Wow, seems kinda harsh. O well, at least they had fun.
can they not just take away their mobiles or disconnect their internet for a year?
Dr.Gonzo
17-12-2009, 01:34 PM
can they not just take away their mobiles or disconnect their internet for a year?
I don't think that would stop them putting their penises in each other though. Better plans must be designed before the gayness spreads!
On a serious note... this is completely nutty, although it is everyone's right to debate what they wish to debate - it is through debate and discussion that we learn.
WOMBAI
17-12-2009, 01:48 PM
What right have we to criticise the judicial affairs of another sovereign state
None that I can think of
This is a debate purely for the citizens of Uganda and nobody else.
What sort of arguement is that! So if the rest of the world are aware that mass murder is going on by a government in some country - they are supposed to ignore it - under the guise that it is none of their business. Human rights are everyone's business - that is just a cop-out - just an excuse for turning a blind eye when it suits you!
Crimson Dynamo
17-12-2009, 01:49 PM
What sort of arguement is that! So if the rest of the world are aware that mass murder is going on by a government in some country - they are supposed to ignore it - under the guise that it is none of their business. Human rights are everyone's business - that is just a cop-out - just an excuse for turning a blind eye when it suits you!
witness nazi Germany for example
Mrluvaluva
17-12-2009, 03:15 PM
What right have we to criticise the judicial affairs of another sovereign state
None that I can think of
This is a debate purely for the citizens of Uganda and nobody else.
I have to totally disagree with that. We should not just stand by and let them get on with it. Why, maybe they could go further and persecute people for the colour of their skin or possibly their religious persuasion? Would you find this acceptable in the UK if such a law was passed? Would you not expect others to intervene to stop such abhorrent victimisation? Many people have strived to educate people on such matters and have lost their freedom, or lives along the way fighting such injustices. In your eyes should we stop and just let governments do as they please? That seems pretty backward to me.
atieah2009
17-12-2009, 03:16 PM
I have to totally disagree with that. We should not just stand by and let them get on with it. Why, maybe they could go further and persecute people for the colour of their skin or possibly their religious persuasion? Would you find this acceptable in the UK if such a law was passed? Would you not expect others to intervene to stop such abhorrent victimisation? Many people have strived to educate people on such matters and have lost their freedom, or lives along the way fighting such injustices. In your eyes should we stop and just let governments do as they please? That seems pretty backward to me.
They should not have the right to execute Homosexuals, but i don't see a way in which the UK or EU can stop this.
Dr.Gonzo
17-12-2009, 03:22 PM
I have to totally disagree with that. We should not just stand by and let them get on with it. Why, maybe they could go further and persecute people for the colour of their skin or possibly their religious persuasion? Would you find this acceptable in the UK if such a law was passed? Would you not expect others to intervene to stop such abhorrent victimisation? Many people have strived to educate people on such matters and have lost their freedom, or lives along the way fighting such injustices. In your eyes should we stop and just let governments do as they please? That seems pretty backward to me.
What do you suggest we do? Send our troops to yet another hole of a country and tell another bunch of animals how to bury their ****? It hasn't worked out well in the past. We should keep our noses out and let them deal with things how they want. Troops went to Vietnam; troops went to Afghanistan... and it never ends well. We are a small but great nation, and we should be happy with that. Let others do as they will. Judge not, lest ye be judged.
Mrluvaluva
17-12-2009, 03:41 PM
What do you suggest we do? Send our troops to yet another hole of a country and tell another bunch of animals how to bury their ****? It hasn't worked out well in the past. We should keep our noses out and let them deal with things how they want. Troops went to Vietnam; troops went to Afghanistan... and it never ends well. We are a small but great nation, and we should be happy with that. Let others do as they will. Judge not, lest ye be judged.
Wars are fought and there are casualties along the way, but they are fought to combat injustices, and for the better of the people in most cases. If the world sat by and let things happen I would not like to comprehend where we might be today with such an attitude.
Dr.Gonzo
17-12-2009, 03:45 PM
Wars are fought and there are casualties along the way, but they are fought to combat injustices, and for the better of the people in most cases. If the world sat by and let things happen I would not like to comprehend where we might be today with such an attitude.
There are injustices in every country... we just don't have the troops to combat everything we as a nation do not agree with.
atieah2009
17-12-2009, 03:45 PM
Wars are fought and there are casualties along the way, but they are fought to combat injustices, and for the better of the people in most cases. If the world sat by and let things happen I would not like to comprehend where we might be today with such an attitude.
Bang on. The wars helped kids not to get raped and abused by the Paedo talibans and the treatment of woman there was ridiculous as in Iraq Saddam tortured civilians the way they would be treated 1000 years ago. Send troops in
show them how the big boys do it.
Dr.Gonzo
17-12-2009, 03:49 PM
Yeh, then send troops home in rubber sacks. Show them how the undertakers do it.
atieah2009
17-12-2009, 03:52 PM
They are being paid to do a job and they should be more then proud to do it.
Dr.Gonzo
17-12-2009, 03:58 PM
They are being paid to do a job and they should be more then proud to do it.
You ask any corpse how easy it is to be proud. We should concentrate more on the **** that happens on our own soil before casting an eye elsewhere.
Mrluvaluva
17-12-2009, 04:03 PM
Yeh, then send troops home in rubber sacks. Show them how the undertakers do it.
As I previously said, there are always casualties but it is a price that unfortunately has to be paid. I think that in this case there should be some involvement on a humanitarian basis. I doubt we would have the freedom we have today if people had not lost their lives for the better of their, and their future, generation.
WOMBAI
17-12-2009, 04:13 PM
What do you suggest we do? Send our troops to yet another hole of a country and tell another bunch of animals how to bury their ****? It hasn't worked out well in the past. We should keep our noses out and let them deal with things how they want. Troops went to Vietnam; troops went to Afghanistan... and it never ends well. We are a small but great nation, and we should be happy with that. Let others do as they will. Judge not, lest ye be judged.
This is a really difficult one - because although I do believe it is everyone's business - at the same time I agree with what you say and don't want our troops sent there as well! It is always easy for people who have no emotional involvement to shout 'send the troops in' - but those troops are someone's loved ones - and it just isn't good enough to say 'there are casualties along the way' - just as long as it isn't them or their loved ones hey!
Maybe other things such as very extreme international sanctions - restricting imports and exports into the country and such like - make life very difficult for those in the government. It would be a slower process - of course, but I don't see why people from other nations should die in order for people from that country to be allowed openness about their sexuality.
atieah2009
17-12-2009, 04:15 PM
As I previously said, there are always casualties but it is a price that unfortunately has to be paid. I think that in this case there should be some involvement on a humanitarian basis. I doubt we would have the freedom we have today if people had not lost their lives for the better of their, and their future, generation.
Excellent, Lives have to be sacrificed. Fathers,Husbands and boys become warriors. What's wrong in our soil? a bit of graffiti on the road? War is unfortunate but a price that has to be paid, we live under a one world government.
WOMBAI
17-12-2009, 04:17 PM
As I previously said, there are always casualties but it is a price that unfortunately has to be paid. I think that in this case there should be some involvement on a humanitarian basis. I doubt we would have the freedom we have today if people had not lost their lives for the better of their, and their future, generation.
You pay it then - don't just expect someone else to do it!
atieah2009
17-12-2009, 04:18 PM
You pay it then - don't just expect someone else to do it!
My Uncle paid a price, and i would be more then happy to myself.
Mrluvaluva
17-12-2009, 04:22 PM
it just isn't good enough to say 'there are casualties along the way' - just as long as it isn't them or their loved ones hey!
Quite presumptious of you.
WOMBAI
17-12-2009, 04:25 PM
My Uncle paid a price, and i would be more then happy to myself.
I am sorry about your uncle - he was obviously a brave man. You are free to join up and fight if you want to - but no-one has the right to sit by and say that others should do so! Nine times out of ten - they have no idea what they are talking about!
Mrluvaluva
17-12-2009, 04:30 PM
You pay it then - don't just expect someone else to do it!
I would if the need arose. I don't expect anything from anyone. I am grateful we have people who are willing to and not just ignore such matters.
_Seth
17-12-2009, 04:36 PM
This is absolutely abysmal. Anyone who agrees with this is an utter disgrace. This move can never be justified.
Sticks
17-12-2009, 04:47 PM
We do quite a bit of trade with certain regimes, some might not approve of, but this trade provides jobs in this country. If we go criticising other governments and "dipping our nibs where there is no ink" all we do is lose jobs here in Britain. The practices you may not like will continue anyway and all you have succeeded is putting people out of work here.
There is a fundamental rule, that we do not interfere in the internal affairs of another sovereign state, period.
Niamh.
17-12-2009, 05:03 PM
We do quite a bit of trade with certain regimes, some might not approve of, but this trade provides jobs in this country. If we go criticising other governments and "dipping our nibs where there is no ink" all we do is lose jobs here in Britain. The practices you may not like will continue anyway and all you have succeeded is putting people out of work here.
There is a fundamental rule, that we do not interfere in the internal affairs of another sovereign state, period.
So turning a blind eye to the murdering of innocent people is ok then if it saves jobs?
Tom4784
17-12-2009, 05:21 PM
Too right the BBC are getting flack. I agree with the statements that Uganda's murdering it's citizens. I find it tragic that nothing is being done to stop it.
WOMBAI
17-12-2009, 05:27 PM
Too right the BBC are getting flack. I agree with the statements that Uganda's murdering it's citizens. I find it tragic that nothing is being done to stop it.
And what do you suggest? Send in the troops - exchange the lives of our men for theirs! Where is the sense in that?
Sticks
17-12-2009, 05:34 PM
So turning a blind eye to the murdering of innocent people is ok then if it saves jobs?
You are not going to stop them what ever you do, so what is the point?
In tough times like now, we do not want to cause the loss of more jobs here, do we?
InOne
17-12-2009, 05:38 PM
I do agree we should look at the state of our own country before we go sending any more troops out. Why do we always have to sort it out?
Mrluvaluva
17-12-2009, 05:40 PM
You are not going to stop them what ever you do, so what is the point?
Ahh. Imagine if this was said of Hitler.
WOMBAI
17-12-2009, 05:40 PM
Politics - our polititians have their own agendas. Bugger all to do with human rights!
InOne
17-12-2009, 05:42 PM
Ahh. Imagine if this was said of Hitler.
Godwins law.
Mrluvaluva
17-12-2009, 05:48 PM
Godwins law.
Sorry. I forgot it was unmentionable.
InOne
17-12-2009, 05:50 PM
Sorry. I forgot it was unmentionable.
Do you agree it applies to this debate?
Mrluvaluva
17-12-2009, 05:56 PM
Do you agree it applies to this debate?
I think this debate has progressed onto amuch wider subject and I do not see the need for people to be shouting Godwins law! as soon as something is mentioned. It applies in the context it was meant to.
Tom4784
17-12-2009, 05:58 PM
And what do you suggest? Send in the troops - exchange the lives of our men for theirs! Where is the sense in that?
Did I say anything about war? I'm talking about the cancellation of treaties and contracts, It's possible to pressurize them into changing things if we take away any help we provide to the country. If all the major countries threaten to withdraw their treaties and such then it would definately make Uganda reconsider it's stance.
Sticks
17-12-2009, 06:01 PM
But someone will always trade with whoever you have an issue with
All you are doing is cutting off your nose to spite your face
WOMBAI
17-12-2009, 06:04 PM
Did I say anything about war? I'm talking about the cancellation of treaties and contracts, It's possible to pressurize them into changing things if we take away any help we provide to the country. If all the major countries threaten to withdraw their treaties and such then it would definately make Uganda reconsider it's stance.
Agreed!
Tom4784
17-12-2009, 06:05 PM
But someone will always trade with whoever you have an issue with
All you are doing is cutting off your nose to spite your face
We can get Uganda's export produce from other countries though, If the richest countries threatened Uganda with withdrawing contracts and relief they'd have to consider throwing out the law.
Niamh.
17-12-2009, 11:00 PM
Did I say anything about war? I'm talking about the cancellation of treaties and contracts, It's possible to pressurize them into changing things if we take away any help we provide to the country. If all the major countries threaten to withdraw their treaties and such then it would definately make Uganda reconsider it's stance.
Yeah, good points Dezzy
You are not going to stop them what ever you do, so what is the point?
In tough times like now, we do not want to cause the loss of more jobs here, do we?
In fairness Sticks what is it you truly believe here ???
In you first post you say we don't have the right to criticise the judicial affairs of another sovereign state and that is a matter purely for those citizens and nobody else...Although i think that is BS ,if that is you opinion then fair enough .but now it seems you are saying we shouldn't criticise as it could affect the economy ??
I do agree that this is most likely not going to stop,but that does not mean we should put our hands over our eyes and not discuss it.
We can get Uganda's export produce from other countries though, If the richest countries threatened Uganda with withdrawing contracts and relief they'd have to consider throwing out the law.
Agree 100%.
I come from a country that had sanctions imposed against them and yeh the sentiment that it will only make us stronger is spun out on a daily basis , however it does affect these countries economy and can force countries to reconsider their policies.
BB_Eye
19-12-2009, 05:27 PM
Sanctions and boycotting are not the answer (look where it landed Iraq and Zimbabwe), but it's not much to ask that the BBC don't invite this sort of debate under any circumstances. How did they allow this to happen?
BB_Eye
19-12-2009, 05:48 PM
Agree 100%.
I come from a country that had sanctions imposed against them and yeh the sentiment that it will only make us stronger is spun out on a daily basis , however it does affect these countries economy and can force countries to reconsider their policies.
I rarely agree with Sticks, but he is right in saying it's too much like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Trading with brutal regimes is an everyday thing now. The wealthy Saudis have the beheading of adulterers and homosexuals in their law, but we are not going to stop buying oil from them any time soon and the less said about Libya the better. Then you have countries such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sudan which are awash with government paramilitaries and rebels casually murdering civilians. There is little point singling out Uganda (disgusting as this new witchhunt is) when there are so many other failed states out there with dictators that treat their citizens like their little playthings, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. This is simply a case of corrupt politicians use scapegoats to get its disenchanted electorate behind them. But these are third world countries and their inhabitants are doomed without foreign investment.
However, I think it's only fair to mention that these things might not happen so easily if human rights organizations were more outspoken about gay rights. Have a look at the website for Amnesty International, see how little attention is given to gay rights and tell me it isn't still a taboo subject for many people. Obviously, this isn't helped by the way the Bush Administration has curried favour with the religious right and set gay rights back ten years or the snide, patronising contempt that tabloids such as the Daily Mail show for the gay community. With all of this in mind -and I know a lot of people won't want to hear this- it's pretty clear that homophobia is still socially acceptable, even in our "enlightened" society and most of you are guilty of it.
WOMBAI
19-12-2009, 06:00 PM
I rarely agree with Sticks, but he is right in saying it's too much like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Trading with brutal regimes is an everyday thing now. The wealthy Saudis have the beheading of adulterers and homosexuals in their law, but we are not going to stop buying oil from them any time soon and the less said about Libya the better. Then you have countries such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sudan which are awash with government paramilitaries and rebels casually murdering civilians. There is little point singling out Uganda (disgusting as this new witchhunt is) when there are so many other failed states out there with dictators that treat their citizens like their little playthings, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. This is simply a case of corrupt politicians use scapegoats to get its disenchanted electorate behind them. But these are third world countries and their inhabitants are doomed without foreign investment.
However, I think it's only fair to mention that these things might not happen so easily if human rights organizations were more outspoken about gay rights. Have a look at the website for Amnesty International, see how little attention is given to gay rights and tell me it isn't still a taboo subject for many people. Obviously, this isn't helped by the way the Bush Administration has curried favour with the religious right and set gay rights back ten years or the snide, patronising contempt that tabloids such as the Daily Mail show for the gay community. With all of this in mind -and I know a lot of people won't want to hear this- it's pretty clear that homophobia is still socially acceptable, even in our "enlightened" society and most of you are guilty of it.
You make some good points - but sanctions have to be the lesser of two evils - if some action is to be taken - then it should be sanctions rather than our own troops risking their lives!
Captain.Remy
19-12-2009, 06:08 PM
Yeah kill all of them fags LMAO
Kidding of course.
BB_Eye
19-12-2009, 06:15 PM
You make some good points - but sanctions has to be the lesser of two evils - if some action is to be taken - then it should be sanctions rather than our own troops risking their lives!
I'm not really in favour of either myself. The best thing our country can do is criticise human rights abuses abroad while upholding them at home (to think it all sounds so easy), something our government has failed to do with its draconian anti-terror laws and collaboration with the US on the detention of terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay without trial and its disastrous pre-emptive war in Iraq under false pretences. All of this is analogous to our policy on nuclear weapons. The government and the MoD are happy to break international law on the proliferation of nuclear weapons, but still feel the need to preach to nations such as North Korea and Iran on their nuclear programme. And somehow the rest of the world is meant to believe that these two peaceful (however despotic) countries pose more of a threat than warmongers such as Israel to whom, the US has been supplying nuclear weapons for many years. It's no wonder that any advice we offer to failed states automatically translates into "do as I say, not as I do".
Shaun
19-12-2009, 06:16 PM
Thank God I was born in this country :\
WOMBAI
19-12-2009, 06:33 PM
I'm not really in favour of either myself. The best thing our country can do is criticise human rights abuses abroad while upholding them at home (to think it all sounds so easy), something our government has failed to do with its draconian anti-terror laws and collaboration with the US on the detention of terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay without trial and its disastrous pre-emptive war in Iraq under false pretences. All of this is analogous to our policy on nuclear weapons. The government and the MoD are happy to break international law on the proliferation of nuclear weapons, but still feel the need to preach to nations such as North Korea and Iran on their nuclear programme. And somehow the rest of the world is meant to believe that these two peaceful (however despotic) countries pose more of a threat than warmongers such as Israel to whom, the US has been supplying nuclear weapons for many years. It's no wonder that any advice we offer to failed states automatically translates into "do as I say, not as I do".
Again, some good points! Personally I feel that countries like Iran do pose a bigger threat than Israel - because, in my opinion, the culture of the country is more inclined to the creation of religious zealots - and I personally would feel extremely concerned if they had nucleur weapons.
But I do agree that western polititians are incredible hypocrites who most definitely do not 'practice what they preach' and are very much of a 'do as I say, not as I do' mentality!
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.