Pastors fast over "evil" – Martin Ssempa opts for grandstanding

If you needed evidence that Martin Ssempa’s gay crusade has flopped badly, thanks mainly to having met his match in Robert Kayanja, here it is in the New Vision.

Money quote:

“It is time to confront these problems now, for us to live peacefully in society.” The campaign will focus on 10 key evils. They include sexual perversion, bloodshed, idolatry, apostasy, corruption, tribalism and disease. Others are political problems, poverty, and bloodshed.

Ha, Ha, Ha.

If Martin Ssempa fasts on just one of his chosen “evils,” corruption, he would be dead in a week … well he is a small, pint-sized man with plenty of spunk so he might last 10 days. But the corruption in Uganda would not be dented even a chip. But let us not beat the poor guy up too much. At least he is now paying lip service to a set of problems whose “evil” to society is all too apparent. If only he could focus on corruption first for his fast. Then the gays would just have to count down the 10 days after which they would live in peace.

Fast away, Pastor Martin, fast away.

Related Reading:
1. Anti-gay trio declares war on homosexuals

/

Are you a top or a bottom? 10

Yes, it is an all too common question, one that can make the questioner seem sadistic and which sends shivers of embarrassment down the spine of the one asked.

Are you a top or bottom?

And the reason why this is a dreadful question to ask or answer is simple. Men, be they straight or gay, carry a certain machismo (call it ego) that they don’t want publicly punctured by being shown up to be lesser men than they want to be seen as. That is why short, little men buy big cars and talk about them as though the size of their cars makes up for their lack of stature. It is exactly the same reason why men who marry women who are bigger than they are tend to be the most abusive. A small man will beat up his bigger woman just to prove to himself that even though he is smaller, he is more powerful. Small(er) men usually feel that they have more to prove and it is no accident, therefore, that the most successful, richest and most prominent men outside of the bedroom are men 5ft7″ or shorter. Taller men take their looks for granted, and usually assume that their size will speak for itself so they have less need to shove, push and muscle their way into being respected.

But this is about sexual tops and bottoms. For a man to admit that they like to bottom takes a certain amount of confidence that only a tiny minority of men have. This is true even for straight men who like to be ‘woman-handled.’ Many men like to be tied up and thrown around like rag dolls by their women but are usually too timid to say it and so they will act out these fantasies with dominatrix prostitutes while they keep sex with their wives orthodox. When you put it in a gay perspective, it becomes even more fraught to admit (even to oneself) that one enjoys being buggered at all. It is bad enough having to admit to homo-sodomy, but also to admit to being the one sodomized? That is a bridge too far for most men since it denotes an admission of loss of power and control; it is an admission of weakness that few men will ever voice.

Yet, it need not be. The problem with the public’s perception about gay lives is that everything gay men (but not gay women) do is reduced to a sexual act. Take away the sex and what remains is not very interesting to observers. But the moment you learn that Jonathan is dating Henry, the first question that usually comes to mind is “Who is the top?” even though you might not actually articulate it. Since there is nothing we can do about how the human mind works, this column will not attempt to dissuade anyone from thinking about gay men in terms of tops and bottoms. It is impossible to change that mindset.

What can be changed is the misconception that being gay is just about having sex, or that it is merely about homo-sodomy. Odd as it might seem, gay men (and women) are capable of having very deep feelings for each other that transcend sexual activity. They are capable of acts of kindness, thoughtfulness, and deep care that have nothing to do with taking any clothes off. When we speak about same gender loving, we are usually talking about companionship, sharing experiences, enjoying the company of a fellow man with whom you are bonded by a commitment and, yes, deep love. It doesn’t matter that you might not even have any kind of sex with that man – indeed the test should be the strength of feeling(s) when you are not having sex with the man or woman you love. Once any bystanders understand that gay men and women are capable of loving like that, our relationships become a little less pigeon-holed into the top/bottom/homo-sodomy caricatures.

Obviously, the sexual dynamics are important and it is not realistic not to consider who is the stronger personality in a gay relationship. The reason why that is important is that, like in straight relationships where there has to be a focal point of strength in order to give the relationship direction, gay relationships, too, need a source of strength. The strength might come from physical size or prowess, financial clout, practicality, intellectual superiority or social versatility. Unless there is a demarcation of roles according to the strengths of the partners involved, any relationship, and especially any gay relationship, is doomed. But those attributes usually have nothing to do with who does what sexually behind closed doors.

But when it comes to who is buggering who, the truth is that there are very few gay men who will forever have no inclination to being buggered if they find someone they are truly, madly in love with. And the reason is that once you are in love, sex is sharing and so whatever you do with your partner ceases to be about a power struggle or a dominance test. The question of being a bottom ceases to be an indication of weakness because the love you have for each other transcends all that. Equally, men who absolutely will not accept being buggered, perhaps because of a previous experience that was traumatic, will find themselves succumbing to advances of someone they are in love with.

So, when a man says that he is absolutely and utterly a top, chances are that he has not found a loving relationship with anyone and all he has is sex for kicks. And men who plead to being explicitly bottom are likely closing their minds to the possibility of sharing more than a sex act with their partners. Generally, once love takes the place of raw sex, who is taking it in the behind (if at all) ceases to matter and those who dwell on top and bottom roles are thus missing the beauty of same gender loving, and are instead going for the raw, lust-filled and frantic sex that one can have with anyone once the sex johns hit one.

If there is nothing more than animal instinct involved, who is top or bottom matters infinitely. It is in such raw situations that even the pain and horror of being buggered is amplified. For, if it is all about sex, unless both of those involved are in the same place mentally, chances are that one of the players is likely to be more ready than the other and if, as is usually the case, it is the one who is topping who is more ready, there will be limited consideration for the one who is being torn into, making for a very uncomfortable experience to say the least. But where two people become one mentally, the issue of pain becomes immaterial and you can see that the physical body language of both partners is in sync. That is when whoever is top or bottom becomes secondary to the sexual union, and both the giver and receiver actually enjoy the physicality of the moment. You don’t have to be a total top or bottom to achieve that kind of heavenly transportation but it certainly helps if, should you choose to, your mind is transported to that area in order to enjoy what should be the ultimate icing on the cake of same gender loving.

Nature or Nurture? Does it matter? 6

I, too, saw the BBC headline about gay penguins that GayUganda has highlighted on his blog but let it wash over me like water off a duck’s back.

The reason for that is that after years and years of debating whether homosexuals are are born or bred, I finally resigned myself to the realization that it doesn’t matter either way. Whether we are born with gay genes or things happen in our childhood to make us gay, we are not to blame for what we become.

Take the case of a young boy who is traumatized by a hostile home environment where the father is a drunk, verbally abusive to the mother and the children and is a total dead-beat. Children may not only cower away from such a father, they might actually develop a psychological fear of their father that drives them to see their mother as the be-all-end-all of their existence. Now, would you blame such a boy for his traumatic upbringing? And if he turned out to be gay as a result of a psychological rejection of everything that his father stood for, would you blame him for that? More pertinently, would you argue that he is not entitled to be happy as a gay man if that is what he clearly states a preference for?

And if we are born gay, obviously we have no control over our genes so what is the discussion about then? Is anyone suggesting mass lobotomies or brain transplants to make those born gay straight? If there is nothing we can do about people born black, white or Mandalay, why should we think there is something we can do to change anyone born gay? And if we could change a homosexual to a heterosexual, might we be able to use the same techniques to change a heterosexual to homosexuality? Do you see how fatuous the whole discussion is?

Dismissive as it might sound, the nurture/nature debate is pointless unless one argues that we are responsible for our genes or upbringing.

As for whether homosexuality is natural or not, again one needn’t step off this planet to see how pointless this discussion is. There are all sorts of “unnatural” human phenomena that decent human beings accept and embrace: childlessness, physical physical handicaps, racial differences. All these phenomena fall into the same category as homosexuality in the sense that they are God-given. No one chooses to be barren or sterile and certainly no one makes a choice to be physically handicapped.

Interestingly, even what we call normal has nothing to do with us as human beings. Our looks are God-given. So is our height, color of skin and personality. God is as responsible for Martin Ssempa’s entire pint-size frame as he is for Robert Kayanja’s comparably imposing height.

So, since we are not responsible for our genes or upbringing, why does it matter whether we are born or bred gay? Shouldn’t the discussion be best focused on integrating gays in mainstream society and showing them the kind of compassion and understanding Jesus preached?

Just a thought.

Is homosexuality a mental problem? 3

There are times when one can be driven to drink because of frustration. That is exactly how I feel after reading Dr. Fred Kigozi’s article in Uganda’s Weekly Observer Magazine where he suggests, among other things, that homosexuality is a mental problem.

I came in from the gym ready to have a glass of water, jump into the shower and go to bed. Then I read Dr. Kigozi’s article and, immediately, pulled out the Sobieski Vodka and poured myself a stiff shot … and then another.

Where on earth do people like Dr. Kigozi get off? Which gay people have they actually interacted with in order for them to come up with the kind of palpable nonsense he dredges up?

Money quote from Dr. Kigozi:

Homosexuality in general, refers to a person having sexual feelings and thoughts towards another of the same sex. Such a condition which was rare in most African societies, and not to be openly discussed, is becoming a common phenomenon day by day.

Not to be discussed openly, yes and the reason for that is simple. Africans have never been known to be open about matters of sex and sexuality. But rare among African societies?!!! On what does Dr. Kigozi base this claims? Oh please!

Two years ago, in late 2007, we wrote a book; Homosexuality – Perspectives from Uganda (ISBN 978-9970-001-90-3). It was hardly ground-breaking but it was remarkable for its coverage of the subject from all spectrums of the homosexual community in Uganda, with Ugandan lesbians and gay men contributing articles. Widely researched, and laced with personal anecdotes as well as authoritative research, the book tackled the premise that homosexuality was/is rare among African societies head on and debunked it completely.

Please understand this if you undestand nothing else. The notion that homosexuality was/is rare in African society is as nonsensical as the pretense that there was no native complicity in the slave trade. There is widespread, unchallenged, evidence that shows manifestly that homosexuality was actually tolerated in African societies until the advent of the white man with his gun and Bible.

Consider the following extract from Microsoft’s Encarta (Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2003. © 1993-2002 Microsoft Corporation):

…The oldest evidence of same-sex relations is found in southern Africa, where 2,000-year-old rock paintings depict men having sexual relations with men. There are at least 70 documented words in various African languages for men or women who engage in homosexual relations. …In precolonial and early-20th-century East Africa, there are several different instances in which male priests in traditional religions are known to have dressed as women, and sometimes to have married other men. Among the Meru and Kikuyu of Kenya, the local term for these priests was mugawe. Among the Hutu and Tutsi peoples of Burundi and Rwanda, the terms were ikihindu and ikimaze. Religious roles for cross-dressing men were also found in the kingdom of Bunyoro in Uganda. The kingdoms of 18th- and 19th-century East Africa were also a site of institutionalized same-sex relations. The Bunyoro kingdom included homosexual priests. Among the Maale people of Ethiopia, men who cross-dressed, performed women’s work, and had sex with other men were known as ashtime. Reports indicate that the ashtime were protected by the king. In Buganda, young men served in the royal court and provided sexual pleasure for male visitors and elites. In 1886 King Mwanga ordered all of the pages in his court killed because they had converted to Christianity and subsequently refused to have sex with him and other men. These young men became known as the Namugongo martyrs, and a church was dedicated to them and consecrated by Pope Paul VI in 1969. Same-sex relations also occurred during initiation rituals for boys and girls in East Africa. Maasai boys in Kenya and Tanzania could cross-dress during their initiation. This was also the case with Nandi boys in Kenya. Kaguru girls in Tanzania were reported to engage in same-sex relations during their initiation rituals. Contemporary East African cultures also include homosexual practices. Among some Amhara people of Ethiopia, there are two distinct categories: wándar-wárád, which translates literally as “male-female,” and wándawánde, which translates as “mannish woman.” The Teso peoples of Uganda are also reported to have a category for men who dress as women. Among Swahili peoples in Kenya and Tanzania, weddings are a time of raucous sexual joking and demonstrations. Women, in particular, show girls how to provide pleasure during sexual relations. The Swahili also have a term, Wasagaji, for women who have sex with other women. A Wasagaji is typically a married or divorced woman who has an intimate emotional and erotic relationship with another woman. In precolonial and early-20th-century East Africa, marriage between women has been noted among 14 different ethnic groups, including the Dinka, Kikuyu, Kipsigi, Kisii, Kuria, Luo, Nandi, and Nuer. These types of marriages are most commonly described as an economic arrangement. Wealthy women exchanged goods for a “wife,” her work for the household, and any children she might bear, regardless of the impregnator’s identity …

More pertinently, there is documented evidence that European anthropologists came to Africa more than 100 years ago with a pre-determined agenda to establish that homosexuality didn’t exist on the dark continent. Worse, there is documented evidence that shows that they found out otherwise and then deliberately misrepresented what they had witnessed.

Murray and Roscoe[1] persuasively illustrate that various Western anthropologists discovered the truth with their own eyes and ears. According to Murray and Roscoe (Boy Wives and Female Husbands), one anthropologist, Brian MacDermot[2] had this to say about the Nuer:

.
” … [an informant] began to tell a story [that] contradicted “all I had thought and learnt so far about Nuer homosexual relations: … Doereding now told me about a crazy man he had once known who lived near Nasir in the Sudan and who frequently dressed as a woman. … the man had actually become a woman … the prophet of Deng had agreed to his change of status … therefore he could dress in women’s clothes and behave as a woman … and was allowed to marry a husband.”

The evidence is simply overwhelming especially when one learns that many anthropologists embarked on their research with pre-conceived prejudices against homosexuality, intent on finding evidence that it did not exist. Sometimes, they even lied about having seen it, only to concede grudgingly what they had witnessed after persistent questioning. Alan Merriam[3] denied the presence of homosexuality among the Bala only to contradict himself in a later report when he admitted that “kitesha, a gender defined social role, is a homosexual.” Evans-Pritchard denied having witnessed any homosexual activity in his publication of 1932[4] too, only to admit, reluctantly, in later articles[5] that he had witnessed acceptance and tolerance of homosexuality among the fierce Azande of Northern Congo:

Another commander, Ganga, told Evans-Pritchard that “there were some men who although they had female wives, still married boys. When a war broke out, they took their boys with them, although they were left in camp, as befitted their
wifely status, not their future as warriors.”

In the 1930s, Geoffrey Gorer[6] complained that among Dahomean royalty: “Sexual perversion and neurotic curiosity were developed to an almost European extent.”

It is quite evident that many of these anthropologists, armed with Biblical morality, were anxious not to find any evidence that told them that homosexuality was universal and couldn’t thus be the moral ‘pestilence they had been taught it was.

The message to be drawn from all this is fairly simple:

DR. KIGOZI: please do your homework before sounding off on subjects that affect and could destroy lives. Just because you are a doctor doesn’t give you the right to sound off on subjects that are clearly beyond your expertise. A little humility (admitting, for instance, that you don’t have all the answers) might not come amiss!

Cited References:

[1] Murray and Roscoe (1998) Boy Wives and Female Husbands: St. Martin’s Press
[2] Brian MacDermot (1972) The Cult of the Sacred Spear: The Tale of the Nuer Tribe in Ethiopia: Hale.
[3] Alan P. Merriam (1971) “Aspects of sexual behavior among the Bala (Basangye). “In Human Sexual Behavior, ed, D. Marshall and R. Suggs, Pgs 71-102. New York: Basic Books
[4] Edward Evans-Pritchard (1932) “Heredity and gestation as the Zande see them.” Sociologus 7:400-13
[5] Edward Evans-Pritchard(1971) and (1973) “Some notes on Zande sex habits. “American Anthropologist 75:171-75
[6] Geoffrey Gorer; Africa Dances [1935] 1963: Pg 141

Gay Lifestyle Versus Being Gay; what is the difference? 9

There is a popular misconception among many discussants where a homosexual lifestyle and being homosexual are concerned. In her response to me, Ms. Gwen Richardson summarizes the misunderstanding perfectly in her comments:

I must also add that this whole idea that someone who has engaged in homosexual behavior, has since ceased this and if, subsequently, they have any desires along these lines means they are lying or living a double life is based on a false premise. The false premise is that anyone who decides to make a lifestyle change, of any sort, can never have an urge in that direction in the future. Otherwise, the person is living a double life.

Ms. Richardson mixes apples and oranges. Engaging in homosexual conduct is one thing; being homosexual is quite another. Anyone can have sex with those of their own sex but that doesn’t mean they are homosexual. Richardson highlighted cases in schools and prisons where that sort of thing happens, and of course she is absolutely right. We also know that many boys looking for money will have homosexual sex without necessarily being gay. This is quite common, for instance, along the coastal areas of Kenya where tourists will pay boys for sex. These kinds of boys can drop their homosexual activity or lifestyle at the snap of a finger or if the motivation for money wanes or is removed.

A man or woman who leaves what everyone assumes is a happy home and makes elaborate effort to bond and sleep with a fellow man or woman is not cheating for kicks. He/she is looking for a type of love that he is not getting with a person of the opposite gender. One such man, as we all know, is the former pastor, Ted, Haggard. He preached that homosexuality was wrong, stood on the pulpit and inveighed against it while he was willingly having regular sexual relations with a man. That means that Pastor Haggard had homosexual feelings that he couldn’t do anything about because they were part of him. Homosexuality was thus not a lifestyle to him, it was his very being.

Now, you can argue that Ted Haggard’s heterosexuality was a lifestyle choice since we know he was living a lie. He was and still is gay despite his best attempts to convince everyone else otherwise. There can be no other reasonable explanation why a man who had so much to lose, and whose faith constantly ate at him, would choose that which he knew would destroy him unless that is what he has always been. In fact, he admitted that he had always had the feelings and, even after his world collapsed around him, that he was still struggling with his homosexual feelings. That is not a man who can turn his real sexuality on and off like a tap.

The point Richardson and many others miss is that while being gay might be a lifestyle for some, for instance the money boys on the beaches of Mombasa and Lamu, it is an integral part of life for millions all over the world. Homosexuality is obviously not just a lifestyle for people like Ted Haggard and Don McLurkin who have admitted to having the gay feelings even if not acting on them. It is also not a lifestyle for those who have never had any sexual or emotionally unitive feelings for those of the opposite sex, and who have no wish to change. It is not a lifestyle choice for those who pine for same gender love even when they are virgins or when they are not having any kind of sex at all.

I am firmly in the ‘gay being’ category. Being gay is essentially who I am and I don’t want it any other way. So, to talk of my gay lifestyle is to separate me from who I am, and to reduce my being to a sex act. It is to suggest that who I am and my sexuality are two different entities – yet they are not. I cannot (and do not want to) turn to women and enjoy both a sexually and emotionally unitive union with them because I cannot identify sexually, spiritually, emotionally with women. For me, therefore, talking about my gay lifestyle is similar to talking about my African lifestyle when it is impossible for me to be anything other than African. All I have is my life, my existence, my well-being, my very essence for living – and that is as a gay man. I will presume to argue that that is exactly the same case with Ted Haggard and Don McLurkin who opt to stifle their feelings and opt for a straight lifestyle. It is also the same for many of my friends who have given up the ghost and accepted who they are and, instead, chosen happiness over expedience. Our being gay is not a lifestyle; it is our life!

I think it is not relevant when, where or how an intrinsically gay man or woman started having the feelings if you are considering the business of a happy existence. That is a subject that psychologists can bother themselves with but gays, wherever they are, who don’t want to have it any other way must be allowed to live their lives just like a black woman who is struggling to make a success of her life in America. I have no interest in establishing how or why I am gay because it is pointless for me to do so when I cannot wake up in the arms of the man I love. I gain nothing from it and would rather use my time in the pursuit of happiness as a gay man. I would imagine that Ms. Richardson also has no interest in pursuing why or how she is a black woman in America except for historical edification.

But even if someone could read God’s mind and establish why he created such diversity in the world, it would be pointless for me to try and be anything else because I am happy being what I am. Those who are unhappy with their sexuality (Ted Haggard, Don McLurkin etc.) can seek cures and salvation from wherever it is promised. If they get it, fine. But their quest for something different should not be the benchmark for judging my life as a contented gay man.

To this end, Antony Menchetti’s loose interpretation of Genesis 1:27 comes to mind:

If God loves and accepts us as we are, why do we have to be straight to be more blessed?

If Gwen Richardson or anyone else ever answers that question to my satisfaction [read, if they decipher God's mind], perhaps I, too, will consider converting to a straight “lifestyle.”

Pastor Kayanja Seen By Some as a Christ-like Figure!! 9

Once you hold your nose and block out the stench emanating from its pages, Uganda’s Red Pepper can make for interesting reading: The alleged affidavit by one of Pastor Kayanja’s homo-sodomy accusers makes for some curious revelations about the minds of those who attend these humongous cult-like churches:

Money Quote:

That late in the night, I was awakened from deep sleep to discover pastor Kayanja caressing me like he would a woman, which compelled me to quit bed in great discomfort, leaving him with Kenneth in there. However, when out of bed and alone, I wondered whether I hadn’t missed an opportunity to be greatly blessed and anointed by a ‘great man of’ God.

I am not sure whether to laugh or cry at this remark. The complainant seems to be suggesting that he withdrew from Kayanja’s advances “in discomfort” but then retrospectively regretted not allowing Kayanja to have his way with him because of the blessings he would have received.

Did/does Kayanja really have such control over people’s minds? Do/did some people really see these pastors as Christ-like figures? What on earth possesses people to lose themselves when they attend these larger-than-life megalomaniacal churches? Is this naivete, foolishness, ignorance, overawe, madness, or ‘all the above?’

I had to pinch myself when I read this, though I don’t see why it should come as a terribly big surprise when one thinks about it. The young boys see the pastors as demi-gods and acquiesce for the most part. It is usually after the fact they get the guilty feelings about what they have done, and then they rush to Martin Ssempa who is desperate to make a name for himself, as well as money from his American right wing religious fundamentalist bankrollers. Ugandans still see priests and pastors as ‘holy’ and obviously that is a situation that can lead many into activities whose implications they might not exactly understand.

That is why focus needs to be placed on how old these boys were when the alleged acts took place. If they were above 18, there is no case to answer. If they were underage, then the crime is pedophilia. But in situations of he said/she said, who is going to prove that the alleged homo-sodomy actually took place? Or should we just take the word of Martin Ssempa and these young men who are clearly impressionable and could very well be enamored with Ssempa’s own aura of charisma?

The situation seems too murky for any prosecutable case to be brought. But, when all is said and done, AfroGay is rather thankful about all these headlines. No publicity is negative publicity, and if the masses hear enough about this subject, some of the stigma surrounding homosexuality will be blunted. Yes, the word ‘gay’ could come to be used by detractors to discredit and ruin (and we know that it is indeed being used that way) but the silence surrounding our lives (not lifestyles as Gwen Richardson put it) was deafening. Even if the coverage of the subject is puerile at best, in a country where the level of ignorance is where it is at in Uganda, it must be better to be talked about badly than not to be talked about at all.

WHO’S WHO IN THE BLACK LGBT COMMUNITY 1

BET.com has done us proud with a who’s who in the black lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender world of the arts, public service and sports achievement. It is humbling and gratifying to see these openly gay black lumiaries that have blazed such trails. An Ethiopian brother makes the list. Check it out for yourself and you will see that how homosexuals indeed defy stereotypes.

So, someone please tell Martin Ssempa, Stephen Langa, Luke Orombi, Nsaba-Buturo, Mary Karooro-Okurut, Pope Benedict XVI, Wait Training, Ex Gays, Abiding Truth Ministries and their followers this simple fact: you will have to live with homosexuals in your midst whether you like it or not because you are already living with them. They entertain you on the silver screen and in sports arenas, they cure you when you are ill, they sing the songs you love to dance to, they teach your children how to read and write, they pray for you when you need spiritual uplifting and … yes … they make ensure that life is not bedlam by their contribution to public service. Please get over yourselves and get used to it.

Selected faces from the BET website:

Ken Reeves

Reeves is the first openly gay African-American man to have served as mayor of any city in the United States. The Harvard College and University of Michigan Law School graduate was mayor of Cambridge, Mass.

John Amaechi

John Amaechi became the first NBA player to come out of the closet. Amaechi came out after he left the league.

Anthony Woods

The West Point graduate led two combat units in Iraq and received a Master’s degree in Public Policy from Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government before being discharged for coming out as gay. He is running in a special election in California’s 10th Congressional District where he grew up. If elected, he would become the first Black openly gay representative in Congress.

Wanda Sykes

Sykes used her anger and disappointment in California’s Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage there, as an opportunity to come out. “I am proud to be gay!” Wanda declared at a gay rally in Las Vegas last year. She also announced to the world that she’s married to a woman. This year, she became the first African American and the first “out” lesbian to get the role as featured entertainer for the 2009 White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

Ron Oden

Oden is an openly gay politician. In November 2003, he was elected the mayor of Palm Springs, Calif., after serving eight years on its city council. He is the father of two daughters and the grandfather of two girls and one boy.

Sabrina Sojourner

Sojourner is the first open lesbian to be elected to the United States Congress. Having been elected by a whopping 83 percent of the vote, Sabrina represented the District of Columbia in the U.S. House of Representatives, where in her non-voting position she lobbied not only for Statehood for the District of Columbia, but impacted other legislators on a whole spectrum of issues. She served from 1997-1999.

Sheryl Swoopes

Sheryl Denise Swoopes was the first player to be signed in the WNBA when it was created. She has won three Olympic gold medals and is a three-time WNBA most valuable player. Frequently referred to as the “female Michael Jordan,” Swoopes is famous for her offensive and defensive skills. In 2005, she averaged 18.6 points, 4.3 assists, 2.65 steals, and she shot 85 percent from the free-throw line while averaging 37.1 minutes playing time per game.

Patrik-Ian Polk

Patrik-Ian Polk is the creator, producer and lead writer of the acclaimed Logo TV series “Noah’s Arc,” which is often described as “Sex and the City” with gay characters. “Noah’s Arc” is about four Black gay men living in Los Angeles. He is also the director behind the groundbreaking Black gay feature film “Punks.”

Kecia Cunningham

Cunningham is serving her fourth term on the Decatur, Ga., City Council. The African-American lesbian first won in 1999 and has since run unopposed.

E. Lynn Harris

Harris is an openly gay author, most known for his depictions of African-American men on the down low or in the closet. Harris was initially unable to land a book deal with a reputable publishing house for his first work, “Invisible Life,” so he self-published it through a vanity publisher and sold copies from his car trunk. Since then, five of his novels have achieved New York Times bestseller status.

Lawrence Webb

Webb is the first openly gay African American elected in the state of Virginia. Lawrence was elected to the Falls Church City Council in 2008 after his first run for political office.

Keith Boykin

Keith Boykin is the editor of TheDailyVoice.com. He is a New York Times best-selling author of three books, and a frequent political commentator on CNN.

Doug Spearman

Spearman’s career as an actor includes work on such TV shows as “Star Trek Voyager,” “The Drew Carey Show,” “The Hughleys,” “Charmed,”and “Girlfriends.” Spearman recently co-starred on the LOGO hit show Noah’s Arc, in which he played Chance Counter, an out black gay college professor.

Dagmawi Woubshet

Dagmawi Woubshet is an assistant professor of English at Cornell University, where he teaches courses on African-American and comparative African Diaspora literature and culture. He recieved his PhD from Harvard University in 2007 and his BA in 1998 from Duke University. His scholarly interests include: crritical race and sexuality studies, contemporary Black visual culture, translation, and vernacular Ethiopian poetics.

Gordon Chambers

Chambers is a soul music veteran, but is principally known as a songwriter. Over the past dozen years the Jamaican-born Chambers has penned tunes for a virtual Who’s Who of modern urban adult contemporary singers, including Whitney Houston, Heather Headley, Carl Thomas, Stephanie Mills, Gladys Knight, Gerald LeVert and Phyllis Hyman. He also earned a songwriting Grammy Award in 1995 for Anita Baker’s “I Apologize.”

California Courts Make the Right Decision on Proposition 8

I agree with Andrew Sullivan that the High Court in California made the right ruling in upholding the California voters’ rejection of gay marriage.

While I think that gay marriage is a worthy aspiration for those who want it, I also think that it is dangerous for courts of law to strike down voters’ voices with a stroke of a pen. A full debate was held on the pros and cons in California and the opponents of gay marriage won. Since the High Court didn’t nullify the marriages already in place when gay marriage was outlawed, the principle was conceded that (in)justice cannot be applied retroactively, and in so doing affirmed the legitimacy of the thousands of gay marriages that had happened before the voters’ rejection at the ballot. Had the decision been arrived at in secret caucuses and foisted on the people of California, that would be a different matter.

Now, there is nothing for it but for California to judge whether or not the gay marriages already in existence actually pose the kind of threats the detractors have portended. And, as is going to happen, the apocalyptic warnings don’t come to pass, California will be able to return to the subject with indisputable evidence that gay marriage is of no threat to anyone’s way of life and gay marriage will pass.

Another gratifying element about the gay marriage debate in America is that it is now being thrashed out at the State level, rather than in the Oval Office as George W. Bush used to do. This is a matter for the states to resolve and not the Federal Government or the president. That is also why Obama’s silence on this ruling is a breath of fresh air. Pontificating activists of whatever persuasion must go to the states and argue their case. And once the voters make their voices heard, effort must be turned towards persuading doubters or proponents to changing their minds. Presidents have no business in this matter and Obama is absolutely right to stay out of it.

Uganda Refuses to Bow to United Nations Pressure to Accept Homosexuality?

There is a person who calls herself Regina Lule who keeps on mailing anti-gay articles to me. Given my recently found activist streak, I never try to let anything she sends go unchallenged. At one point I asked her if she was a mother, and whether she would like her own child treated the way she wants other people’s gay children treated. I suspect I touched a raw nerve for she never responded to that one.

Her latest on was/is from the Catholic Exchange, celebrating the Minister of Ethics’, Nsaba Buturo’s, claims to have rejected some ambiguous call that is supposed to have been made by the United Nations, apparently exhorting Uganda to accept homosexuality.

People like Regina Lule are whistling in the wind because:

1. Of course, homosexuality is NOT illegal in Uganda; it is homosexual activities that are. Legal mind after legal mind has conceded this. Even the police have conceded that they cannot arrest anyone simply because they pronounce themselves to be homosexual. That is why self-confessed homosexuals like Kasha, Victor Mukasa and Georgina (before and after he/she admitted his homosexuality) continue to walk free.

2. Homo-sexual acts are conducted privately by either homosexual or heterosexual couples which makes it totally impossible to prove unless one of those involved files a complaint. And because consensual homo-sodomy can be practiced by gay or straight people in private, criminalizing homo-sodomy is as effective as criminalizing sex before marriage.

3. Homosexuals have never been prevented from engaging in mutually consensual sexual acts of their choice despite laws and crusading Bible punchers. There is no practical way of doing that, short of breaking down bedroom doors and/or hiding in closets in order to witness homo-sodomy being performed.

4. The courts of law of Uganda ruled in December 2008 that homosexual men and women are entitled to have their human rights protected in the same way as everyone else. The ruling has neither been challenged nor rescinded.

What United Nations directive is the Catholic Exchange talking about then? Who drafted it and when was it handed down to the government of Uganda?

Regina Lule flatters herself if she thinks that there is anything she or any other activist can do to stop same gender loving. If there was, it would have been done already. In reality, men are loving fellow men and women are loving each other despite all these gargling sounds coming out Nsaba Buturo’s face.

We are not fighting battles to allow us to love one another because we are already doing that. We are fighting battles to ensure that we are not persecuted, or lynched because we love whomsoever we love. It is mind-boggling that seemingly educated people like Regina Lule, the Catholic Exchange and Nsaba Buturo don’t get it.

Whoever said that common sense is not common? As Abba so famously put it, “well, whoever it was, I am a fan.”

Gwen Richardson: True Intentions of Gay Activists Now Revealed 6

It is always gratifying to see someone who has finally found his/her voice, even if after sacrifices made by others, be a vocal proponent of human rights. What sets the cowards apart from those that stand up to be counted is the ability to set aside our own comfort and potential loss of station and/or property to fight for something we believe in. In this struggle, no other black figure can sure assail the struggle that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. fought for and died fighting in 1968 so that men and women like Gwen Richardson can have a voice.

It is thus with a bit of consternation that you read Ms. Richardson [not that it is directly relevant to this subject, but Ms. Richardson lists herself as a business expert and operates a website http://www.cushcity.com/ that seems inaccessible] wax lyrical about how the struggle for gay rights is different from the struggle black America fought to give her the voice she now has free reign to exercise.

Take this quotation from her article in the Black News that tries to justify why the struggle for gay rights is dissimilar to the one her compatriots fought in order for her to be judged on the strength of her character rather than the color of her skin:

Homosexuals have suffered no intergenerational discrimination, have never been denied the right to vote or own property, and can disguise their sexual preference for a lifetime, if necessary. Comparing the history of gays to that of African Americans is like comparing the Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre to the Holocaust.

No intergenerational discrimination? Never denied the right to own property? Can disguise their sexual preference for a lifetime? Is Ms. Richardson really telling us that Martin Luther King Jr. would have accepted any of the above premises for his children? Oh, don’t worry that you cannot leave your property to whoever you choose – at least if you hide your sexuality you can live in peace (even if not happiness). Never mind that you will likely lose your job if it is discovered that you are gay. Just hide it and hope that it is not discovered. Oh, why worry about your right to love whoever wants to love you if you can vote for people who condemn you on account of a perception (for it can only ever be a perception unless you have sex in public) about your sex life? After all, casting a ballot for people who don’t believe in your right to exist is better than not being able to cast any ballot at all. Would Ms. RIchardson raise her daughter with such values? Unfortunately, she doesn’t look at things in such a personal way. Perhaps she should.

In case you didn’t know it, the The Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre Richardson refers to is the name given to the death of seven people as part of a Prohibition Era conflict between two powerful criminal gangs in Chicago, Illinois, in the summer of 1929. Ms. Richardson thus reduces the struggle for gay rights is to an anecdotal criminal incident by a gang of hoodlums caught in a struggle for their criminal turf. It would give too much credence to Mr. Richardson to respond to that kind of remark. The rest of Ms. Richardson’s pronouncements are as preposterous.

Consider her trawling in people like Donnie McLurkin, Anne Heche and Roy Simmons. Roy Simmons was one of the first pro-football players to admit that he was gay. Donnie McLurkin admitted his gay past, then he said he was “delivered” of the wishes to act on his gay feelings but that he still had the gay feelings. “I’m a diabetic now and I don’t eat sugar, but it doesn’t mean that I don’t want sugar.” he was quoted as saying. Anne Heche dated Ellen DeGeneres and parted with her when she thought her career would suffer for it. As far as we know, Ellen hasn’t done badly at all since, thank you very much, whereas Heche’s acting career went into the toilet and stayed there since that sad episode.

What all three people have in common is that they say they were abused as children and have suggested that it is why they may have become gay. But how many men and women do we know about who were abused and didn’t become gay? Besides, if it is abuse that caused the homosexuality, who exactly is Richardson blaming; the victim or the abuser? And whether it is the former or latter, what prevents the abused from seeking the same rights Richardson now takes for granted simply because she is a straight, black woman – all three attributes that she did absolutely nothing to earn, attributes that God bestowed on her?

It is when she talks about Anne Heche giving birth to a baby as indication that she has gotten over her gay feelings that you realize that Richardson has spent too much time reading cliches and gossip. We all know that getting married and having children says nothing about one’s sexuality, and it is a mark of Richardson’s ignorance about this subject that she is even mentioning this in 2009. The late Natasha Richardson’s father, was gay. Yet he married and gave birth to her. OJ Simpson’s father, Jimmie Simpson was gay. The actor, Rock Hudson, was once married even though the marriage begat no children. One of the most successful musical moguls in America, Ron Simmons, was married to Kimora Lee and they had two children. Simmons is gay. It makes you wonder what research Richardson has done.

Richardson can of course say what she wants. For people like her, though, who have reached the pinnacle and then actively seek to kick away the ladder they used to get up there, the words of Coretta Scott King [quoting the words of her late husband, Martin Luther King, Jr.] come to mind:

“I don’t believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others”… “I have worked too long and hard against segregated public accommodations to end up segregating my moral concern.”

Ms. Richardson, madam: the struggle for your freedom as a woman and black one at that was fought and won by men and women who understood that human rights are universal and not just for women or black people alone. You might do well to return to your history and read about what those who fought for your freedom felt about your selective discrimination based on cliche, innuendo, hearsay and third party claims.