LGBT lawyers sue American pastor for "crimes agaist humanity" in Uganda

[Sojourner55]

Attempts are being made by an LGBT advocacy group to have Pastor Scott Lively tried before the international court--supposedly for his being complicit in recent anti-homosexual legislation in Uganda. That legislation was passed by Ugandan officials, yet it's the American who is being targeted, which makes little sense. It's sad that there are no groups willing to prosecute the real crimes against humanity going on in Uganda: the wanton, hate-crime murders of Christians and others, who have no advocates--by Muslim extremists who seem to operate with impunity.

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/m...0#.T5todPUyKOI

[Warrior4God]

It's interesting that the group in Uganda suing the American pastor is named Sexual Minorities Uganda and is called "SMUG" for short. The name pretty much sums up the attitude of the organization.

[Sojourner55]

It's interesting that the group in Uganda suing the American pastor is named Sexual Minorities Uganda and is called "SMUG" for short. The name pretty much sums up the attitude of the organization.

Yeah, the same thing occurred to me. Rather fitting, huh?

[jongoodman]

Funny. Next thing you know, pastor will be listed here. How are they planning to prove influence of a Christian missionary in a Muslim country?

[Luke34]

It's interesting that the group in Uganda suing the American pastor is named Sexual Minorities Uganda and is called "SMUG" for short. The name pretty much sums up the attitude of the organization.

I know, they're so smug about not wanting to be persecuted under a horribly oppressive law by their own government! What's their deal, right?

[Vhayes]

Funny. Next thing you know, pastor will be listed here. How are they planning to prove influence of a Christian missionary in a Muslim country?

From wiki:

Uganda is a predominantly Christian country with a significant (about 12%) Muslim minority. The Northern and West Nile regions are dominated by Roman Catholics and Iganga District in the east of the country has the highest percentage of Muslims.

Link here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Uganda

[Vhayes]

Again, from wiki:

Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill (often called the "Kill the Gays bill" in the media)^[1][2][3] is a legislative proposal that would broaden the criminalisation of same-sex relations by dividing homosexual behavior into two categories: "aggravated homosexuality", in which an offender would receive the death penalty, or "the offense of homosexuality" in which an offender would receive life imprisonment. "Aggravated homosexuality" is defined to include homosexual acts committed by a person who is HIV-positive, is a parent or authority figure, or who administers intoxicating substances, homosexual acts committed on minors or people with disabilities, and repeat offenders. "The offense of homosexuality" is defined to include same-sex sexual acts, involvement in a same-sex marriage, or an attempt to commit aggravated homosexuality. It further includes provisions for Ugandans who engage in same-sex relations outside of Uganda, asserting that they may be extradited for punishment back to Uganda, and includes penalties for individuals, companies, media organisations, ornon-governmental organisations that know of gay people or support LGBT rights.

Link here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_...sexuality_Bill

Another piece of information:

Scott Douglas Lively is an American author, attorney and activist, noted for his opposition to LGBT rights and his involvement in the ex-gay movement. Lively is the president of Abiding Truth Ministries, a conservative Christian organization located in Temecula, California.^[1] Lively has called for the criminalization of "the public advocacy of homosexuality" as far back as 2007.^[2][3] He is also directly linked to pending anti-gay legislation in Uganda, which would, if passed, make homosexual conduct punishable by a lengthy prison sentence or death.^[4]

Link here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_L...vism_in_Uganda

[keck553]

I know, they're so smug about not wanting to be persecuted under a horribly oppressive law by their own government! What's their deal, right?

Jesus only blesses those who are persecuted for righteousness sake. Nothing else qualifies.

[Warrior4God]

I know, they're so smug about not wanting to be persecuted under a horribly oppressive law by their own government! What's their deal, right?

No, actually I get them not wanting to be killed, thrown in jail, or constantly harassed for being gay. It's the whole thing about them wanting to sue an American pastor in court for his views on homosexuality as sin in order to shut him up and using the absurd argument that he somehow possessed enough power and pristige to be able to have influenced their government to pass such severely punitive laws against homosexuality that makes them so "smug."

[Sojourner55]

The frivolous nature of the lawsuit is the point of the OP:

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) says pastor and attorney Scott Lively committed "persecution," a "crime against humanity" as defined in the Rome Statutes of the International Criminal Court.

CCR filed the case in the U.S. on behalf of a Ugandan advocacy group called Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) and are using the Alien Tort Claims Act, an old and very controversial U.S. statute that allows foreigners to sue in U.S. court for violations of international law committed outside the U.S.

SMUG charges that Lively "worked extensively with key anti-gay political and religious leaders in Uganda with the overall purpose and objective of depriving LGBTI persons of their fundamental rights" by defeating anti-discrimination legislation on sexual orientation and gender identity, and introducing a bill heightening penalties against homosexuality.

CCR spokesman Pamela Spees told the New York Times, "This is not just based on his speech. It's based on his conduct." The lawsuit claims that Lively "traveled to Uganda twice," "spoke at a 'Seminar on Exposing the Homosexual Agenda,'" "held an all-day pastors' conference allowing only invited media or guests," "addressed students at Nkumbe University on the 'Dangers of the Culture of Porn,'" "led a service at the Ugandan Christian University," "met with the Kampala City Council" and other activities the group considers objectionable and legally actionable.

So, let's see...we have an American pastor who preaches that homosexuality is a sin, according to the Scriptures. He is expressing that opinion in a predominately Christian country, where most agree with that view. He voices his opinion to government officials--not as an authority figure but as a foreign visitor. And he spoke to University students in this predominantly Christian country about the dangers of the culture of pornography. That all sounds reasonable to me. What is not reasonable however, is the contention by the CCR that Pastor Lively is culpable for stringent new legislation proposed by the Ugandan government--which did not even pass. As he himself states:

Lively called the accusations against him “absurd.” “Implying that my speech and writings about homosexuality overpowered the intelligence and independence of the entire government and population of Uganda, bending them to my supposedly nefarious will is a breathtakingly insulting and racist premise.”

Lively was in fact, opposed to the death penalty provision included in the proposed legislation, and said he sees rehabilitation as the answer, rather than punishment.

Anyone who really considers Lively's actions as tantamount to crimes against humanity is seriously out of touch with reality. Even the CCR must recognize the absurd nature of the lawsuit. The organization has a history of engaging in such litigation on a whim--seeking publicity and social activism as much as the possibility of actually winning a case in court:

CCR describes itself as “committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.” CRR was co-founded by William Kunstler, a self-described “radical lawyer” famous for representing sometimes violent political and social activists. The law firm uses the courts to advance the activists’ work. Its strategy is “Success without victory,” that is, choosing cases not to win but to generate media or bolster the activists.

But what of the actual complainants in the case? Here is a summary, according to a SMUG representative:

SMUG claims their members have suffered "severe deprivations" of "freedom of expression, association, assembly and the press; . . . to be free from attacks upon one's honor and reputation," and fears harassment, arbitrary arrest and physical harm, including death.

Attacks upon their honor and reputation? Oh, the horror! And they "fear" the possibility of harassment, arbitrary arrest and physical harm, including death. Despite all the talk of false imprisonment and persecution, there seems to be a lack of actual instances of violence against against homosexuals, as implied. They were not actually suffering harm or death, but feared they might. I'm sorry, but neither Lively's actions nor these worries amount to crimes against humanity, or "horrible persecution" as someone here suggested.

But you know what does? The senseless violence and murder of Christians in Uganda by Muslims in the last few years. Here are a few examples that made it to the news:

http://www.newvision.co.ug/news/3150...id-attack.html

http://www.persecution.org/2012/01/2...im-extremists/

http://www.persecution.org/2011/08/1...am-for-christ/

http://www.persecution.org/2010/07/1...ndan-bombings/

Depriving anyone of justice or human rights is never a good thing. Nor is the mistreatment of any minority group. But it's sad that so many people are not as emotional and outspoken over the increasing bloody persecution against Christians around the world as they are over Gay Rights.

[Vhayes]

The frivolous nature of the lawsuit is the point of the OP:

If YOUR life depended on the outcome would you consider it frivilous?

So, let's see...we have an American pastor who preaches that homosexuality is a sin, according to the Scriptures. He is expressing that opinion in a predominately Christian country, where most agree with that view. He voices his opinion to government officials--not as an authority figure but as a foreign visitor. And he spoke to University students in this predominantly Christian country about the dangers of the culture of pornography. That all sounds reasonable to me. What is not reasonable however, is the contention by the CCR that Pastor Lively is culpable for stringent new legislation proposed by the Ugandan government--which did not even pass. As he himself states:

Lively called the accusations against him “absurd.” “Implying that my speech and writings about homosexuality overpowered the intelligence and independence of the entire government and population of Uganda, bending them to my supposedly nefarious will is a breathtakingly insulting and racist premise.”

Lively was in fact, opposed to the death penalty provision included in the proposed legislation, and said he sees rehabilitation as the answer, rather than punishment.

Anyone who really considers Lively's actions as tantamount to crimes against humanity is seriously out of touch with reality. Even the CCR must recognize the absurd nature of the lawsuit. The organization has a history of engaging in such litigation on a whim--seeking publicity and social activism as much as the possibility of actually winning a case in court:

CCR describes itself as “committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.” CRR was co-founded by William Kunstler, a self-described “radical lawyer” famous for representing sometimes violent political and social activists. The law firm uses the courts to advance the activists’ work. Its strategy is “Success without victory,” that is, choosing cases not to win but to generate media or bolster the activists.

But what of the actual complainants in the case? Here is a summary, according to a SMUG representative:

SMUG claims their members have suffered "severe deprivations" of "freedom of expression, association, assembly and the press; . . . to be free from attacks upon one's honor and reputation," and fears harassment, arbitrary arrest and physical harm, including death.

Attacks upon their honor and reputation? Oh, the horror! And they "fear" the possibility of harassment, arbitrary arrest and physical harm, including death. Despite all the talk of false imprisonment and persecution, there seems to be a lack of actual instances of violence against against homosexuals, as implied. They were not actually suffering harm or death, but feared they might. I'm sorry, but neither Lively's actions nor these worries amount to crimes against humanity, or "horrible persecution" as someone here suggested.

But you know what does? The senseless violence and murder of Christians in Uganda by Muslims in the last few years. Here are a few examples that made it to the news:

http://www.newvision.co.ug/news/3150...id-attack.html

http://www.persecution.org/2012/01/2...im-extremists/

http://www.persecution.org/2011/08/1...am-for-christ/

http://www.persecution.org/2010/07/1...ndan-bombings/

Depriving anyone of justice or human rights is never a good thing. Nor is the mistreatment of any minority group. But it's sad that so many people are not as emotional and outspoken over the increasing bloody persecution against Christians around the world as they are over Gay Rights.

NON-Christians don't DEFEND because of biased things like the original post. Preach hate = reap hate. Preach Jesus = reap brothers and sisters.

[amazzin]

Nice to see you Vhayes. Give TomH a huge holy kiss for me

**returns into hiding**

[Vhayes]

Gotta love the smilie faces...

[Sojourner55]

If YOUR life depended on the outcome would you consider it frivilous?

You lost me there. How would the outcome of the lawsuit in question possibly be extrapolated into matters of life and death? If the lawsuit was filed against those who legislated the law, you might have a point. But it wasn't--so you don't.

Whether the CCR were to win the suit or not, has absolutely nothing to do with the legislation proposed by the Ugandan government. Moreover, the lawsuit itself would have no merit before any rational judge in any court of law. Hence, the term "frivolous."

Note also that the death penalty provision in the proposed legislation specifically targeted AIDS-infected sex offenders who prey upon children and the disabled. Considering the fact that such an offender is condemning the defenseless victim to a death sentence, the death penalty seems rather appropriate to me. (Incidentally, in case you missed it, the legislation did not even pass).

If you lived in the midst of the enormous AIDS epidemic in Africa, you might better understand the need for stronger deterrents against the rampant rape problem in most of the countries there. And if you knew some of the victims, you might even feel a little less sympathy for the predators who help spread the epidemic.

NON-Christians don't DEFEND because of biased things like the original post. Preach hate = reap hate. Preach Jesus = reap brothers and sisters.

Preach Jesus= repentance from sexual immorality, which includes homosexuality. Repentance from homosexuality= less AIDS + no hell. I know that, to you and others, calling homosexuality a sin is the same as hating homosexuals. But for me and many others, that is not the case.

[Vhayes]

You lost me there. How would the outcome of the lawsuit in question possibly be extrapolated into matters of life and death? If the lawsuit was filed against those who legislated the law, you might have a point. But it wasn't--so you don't.

The legislation was greatly influenced by the Americans visit. So I do.

Whether the CCR were to win the suit or not, has absolutely nothing to do with the legislation proposed by the Ugandan government. Moreover, the lawsuit itself would have no merit before any rational judge in any court of law. Hence, the term "frivolous."

Note also that the death penalty provision in the proposed legislation specifically targeted AIDS-infected sex offenders who prey upon children and the disabled. Considering the fact that such an offender is condemning the defenseless victim to a death sentence, the death penalty seems rather appropriate to me. (Incidentally, in case you missed it, the legislation did not even pass).

If you lived in the midst of the enormous AIDS epidemic in Africa, you might better understand the need for stronger deterrents against the rampant rape problem in most of the countries there. And if you knew some of the victims, you might even feel a little less sympathy for the predators who help spread the epidemic.

Do you personally know some of the victims?

Outlawing homosexuality will never "fix" the AIDS epidemic. Education would help.

Preach Jesus= repentance from sexual immorality, which includes homosexuality. Repentance from homosexuality= less AIDS + no hell. I know that, to you and others, calling homosexuality a sin is the same as hating homosexuals. But for me and many others, that is not the case.

Wow - you twisted that one around a bit. Let me tell you what I was actually saying although I thought I was pretty clear the first time.

If you preach Jesus, you win brothers and sisters in the Lord. They will (hopefully) grow and learn what the Lord would have them do with their lives - which would include recognizing their sin as sin - no matter WHAT the sin was.

If you go out and preach homosexuals must be punished, it should come as no shock to you that people want nothing at all to do you you OR the Jesus you preach.

I hope that was a bit more clear.