News

Top Cleric Wants Gays, Porn Laws Revisited

fr_sylvester_968250108

click search http://copiproperties.com/wp-content/themes/genesis/lib/structure/layout.php geneva; font-size: small; line-height: 200%;”>Both laws, http://charlieacourt.com/wp-admin/includes/class-wp-list-table-compat.php while necessary for streamlining the country’s moral fibre, http://chaosoffroad.com/wp-admin/includes/continents-cities.php Fr Arinaitwe said, they contained certain sections that are luridly uncalled for.


The provision for instance in the Anti-Homosexuality Law which penalises touching somebody as an intent to commit homosexuality Arinaitwe said was ridiculous, noting that such would be impossible to prove.


The Cleric was on Tuesday speaking to hundreds of Makerere University students at a public dialogue on these controversially enacted laws.


“As a church, we have a duty to warn people against conduct that is contrary to the word of God, which includes homosexuality,” he said.


“However, we also have a duty to preach the gospel of showing love, mercy and compassion to everyone, including those whose ways are considered questionable.”


The Anti-Homosexuality Law, he further noted, had gone overboard to provide for extradition of Ugandan offenders living abroad to be tried at home.


This he said would put the country on a collision course with other countries where homosexuality is not a crime, a risk that is unnecessary.

The law which was signed by the President in February has since soured Uganda’s ties with a number of western pro-gay countries, with some moving to withdraw aid they had been channelling to the country.


The Anti-Pornography Law on the other hand, Fr Arinaitwe said, also contained a number of clauses that needed to be revisited.


“During consultations on the Bill, as UJCC presented our views to the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs committee. While in acknowledgement of the law, I personally criticise certain provisions of the law, such as the idea of inserting gadgets on private premises and institutions, for monitoring offenses related to pornography,” he said.


“This I think constitutes unwarranted interference with the right of privacy of a person as enshrined in Article 27 of the National Constitution.”

Comments

Header advertisement
To Top