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

Agreed!

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.

Yeah, good points Dezzy

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.

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.

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?

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!

Yeah kill all of them fags LMAO

Kidding of course.

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".

Thank God I was born in this country :\

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!