LGBT Rights in Africa

Last week, my University (SOAS, University of London) held a discussion about LGBT rights in Africa. Invited were SOAS lecturer Marica Moscati (preparing her PhD on same-sex marriage), a spokesperson for Amnesty International, John Bosco (a Ugandan refugee) and a Skye (Zimbabwean gay rights activist).

One against the stream
Moscati gave a quick picture of what gay rights in Africa looked like and showed a diverse picture from several nations punishing homosexuality with the death penalty or prison to one extreme opposite, South Africa. It prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation since 1996 and legalised same-sex marriages ten years after that . Seen in many western nations as one of the last legal steps to full equality, same-sex marriage was a very early change for better in South Africa. The equal marriage law “serves as a strong example for equality” and as an orientation point for South African society that largely still is as homophobic as it’s neighbours.

South Africa learnt from it’s divisive past and so did Rwanda that decided not to criminalise homosexuality in 2009. Rwanda experienced similar race relation problems as South Africa did. Today, 56.3% of parliamentarians are women, Zimbabwean gay rights activist Skye Chirape pointed out and argued it would have been a major factor for this decision as women are “more compassionate”. “If women were to seize their rightful share of governance, gays will be better off, too”.

Homosexuality – a Western import?
A member from the audience tried to contravene with an often heard statement: “Homosexuality is against African values” and the West would be pushing their ideas onto the continent. He was swiftly dismissed by the panellists: “What is African culture?” Moscati asked back and waited for a reply. “What is African culture?” she repeated after a few seconds of silence and then went on:

“Culture is not something fixed or written somewhere on a pillar. It’s something changeable. We can improve culture! We shouldn’t avoid reality just because it has mostly been done that way in the past.”

In fact, this accusation is quite ironic as it were the European colonialists who brought the anti-sodomy laws to the rest of the world in the first place. “There were lesbian relationships with legal implications in some ancient African tribal communities” said Moscati. Of course Africa also knew discrimination and resentments. Amplified homophobia yet is a Western import.

No coming out, no rights
As for nowadays, Skye mentioned that in Zimbabwe, the punishment for homosexuality is 10 years in prison “… if you’re lucky to come out alive”. She also emphasised that there are as many LGBTs in Africa as elsewhere, but “reports are oppressed by governments“ and almost all gays and lesbians are “too scared to come out”.
This, however, is crucial to be able to fight fully for rights. Some say, gays and lesbians should be careful and see how change comes along before risking their lives. Yet how can people be treated equally if Africa is unaware of their existence? How can they achieve justice if the handful of gay activists are branded as tainted by Western influence? It requires courage and may be daring, but otherwise the lives of gays in Africa will continue to be made miserable.

See my next post for Ugandan John Bosco’s story

To gay marriage opponents, it’s not about marriage

A bill is being considered again by Hawaiian legislators to  provide same-sex couples with a possibility to form civil unions.
A civil union, like the name suggests, are basically modelled after marriages yet aim to keep out religion, making it purely ‘civil’. That’s because marriage used to be a religious affair, like it’s still in Israel for example, where only religious bodies can marry people. And since religion is having a hard time accepting same-sex couples, many Christians feel they need to ‘preserve’ marriage for man and women. The civil unions concept was created as a compromise for equal treatment-seeking gay & lesbian couples to provide them with the now larger set of political rights.

 
It’s not about marriage
This very bill is being protested against by thousands of Christians now, holding up signs like “No Unions – No Marriage”, “1 Man + 1 Woman”. See the video here

In the past, conservatives protested when gays sought the access to marriage, claiming they would “redefine” and “attack” a tradition. Now, civil unions never existed before, but these people are still against it. This shows that gay marriage opponents do not simply care about how marriage is preserved for them only, but that they are bothered and disgusted by gay people living together at all.

Why secularism is important
The bill has been defeated several times before which was seen as a succeeding of strong protest previously. These protesters are a group of people that seek to impose their view onto others. If anti-gays form exclusive groups in the form of a church, that is legally indisputable. Secularism – separation of church and state – fails when a religious group succeeds in taking away government recognition of certain people outside their church and religiously formed ideas.
I am a Christian myself. I have strong beliefs, but I do not turn to the government to impose these beliefs onto others. If there was secularism in Islamic states, Christians wouldn’t have to complain about persecution and mistreatment in these countries. Yet the same happens there. The Muslim majority imposes their views via laws onto differently believing people.

Marriage Equality for the UK

Currently, eight countries and several jurisdictions in the world allow same-sex marriage. These are Belgium, Canada, The Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, a handful of US States and Mexico City.

As I wrote earlier, there is also a campaign to bring gay marriage finally to the UK, but mostly it’s focused in Scotland. www.equalmarriage.org.uk started a campaign in Scotland March 2009.

Currently ‘Civil Partnerships’ are said to provide all the rights of marriage but the name to gay and lesbian couples. However, the freedom to ‘marry’ in a church or another house of worship is also not granted as there is a ban in place on this, even if the religious institution wants to. The Quakers called to end this injustice in July last year. (See also: “Why Christians should support same-sex marriage”)

Secondly, it is the concept of a separate but (yet actually not fully) equal law. One set of laws for straight couples, one for gays & lesbians. Just like there used to be different set of laws for blacks and whites in South Africa or the US. Separate but equal is not equal and this is why we have to stand up for equal treatment now more than ever as the parliament discusses the Equality Bill.

For all UK residents, please write to your local MP about this injustice or copy & paste the following into an email from on findyourmp.parliament.uk :

Dear MP,

I note that Lord Alli has tabled an amendment to the Equality Bill on
allowing religious civil partnerships, and I write on this matter.

Although this would correct a major problem in the Civil Partnership
act, that it ignored religious same-sex couples, if this were to go
through, it still leaves a major problem with the system of
relationship registration in Britain.

There exists one relationship registration system for same-sex couples,
and another for opposite sex couples. These systems, though designed to
look alike, are different, and therefore I believe they are unequal and
discriminatory.

Using another word may seem like an easy answer to equality, but it
deprives same-sex couples of the terminology of love, refuses them the
fullest blessing from the state of their relationship and denies them
the respect from society and the community that marriage automatically
confers.

Even if my partner and I were to go abroad to a nation that did
recognise same-sex marriages and marry there, as soon as we got back to
Britain it is relegated to a civil partnership.

I would like to see an amendment tabled that allowed same-sex couples
to have a civil marriage, or a religious marriage if that particular
religion allowed it (such as Quakers, Liberal Jews, or the Metropolitan
Community Church). Equal rights, I believe, must mean that straight and
gay are treated the same, ruled over the same laws, and judged by the
same standard.

Civil Partnerships were of course a significant step forward, but
rather than making a separate system more like the thing it is trying
to emulate through this amendment, same-sex couples in Britain should
simply be allowed the same marriage rights as all other couples in
Britain.

Yours sincerely,

Your constituent.

Thanks to LGBTNetwork for this (http://www.lgbtnetwork.eu/?p=4009)

Austria: Same-sex partners “are not family”

The following case shows how much mistreatment, injustice and even disgust same-sex couples experience in many modern societies and are treated as second-class citizens.

Austria today approved a partnership law for gays and lesbians after weeks of debate. On the European map displaying countries’ recognition of same-sex partnerships, Austria long sticked out as a gray spot with almost no provision among it’s Western neighbours. Finally, the government decided to create a civil union law. However, it is one of the most half-heartedly I’ve ever seen:

While the bill lacks behind marriage in 37 points (edit: there are actually 73), it denies adoption, a common name and even the possibility of having a ceremony in the same localities where straight marriages are usually held. A whole different office will be responsible to hold ceremonies to make sure that ‘evil is separated from good’. Also, a gay non-biological parent is explicitly not allowed to take time off from work when the biological parent falls sick and can’t take care of a child temporarily.

Yet, conservative members of the opposition dismissed the new bill as “a dangerous step towards marriage” and criticised allowing ceremonies that are “de-facto marriage-like”.

The most outrageous and insulting part of this is that the oppositional People’s Party tried everything during the drafting of the bill to make sure same-sex couples are not seen as a “family”; In German language, a surname is mostly called Familienname (“family name”), and this term is used on any form and document where a identification is important. But as soon as an Austrian couple commits to a same-sex partnership, they are not to be regarded as a part of a family anymore and therefore, their surname will be called “Nachname” (literally “surname”). All this despite gay couples having to each keep their own surname. Now, all hotel e.g. will have to print new registration forms.

I know Austria is a pretty conservative country and I heard many stories of racism but its statutory homophobia is just as vile and disgusting,

With information from http://www.ggg.at/index.php?id=62&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=2653&cHash=1f64bb52c9 and http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2009/1118/1224259040662.html

Evangelicals slowly change perspective on homosexuality

About a week ago, the report of a Australian Pentecostal pastor giving a sermon asking for acceptance of LGBT people was a refreshing change from the usual hatred directed at us from a whole range of Christians from Catholics to Protestants.

In the US and Australia, those who condemn homosexuality are especially Evangelicals such as conservative Pentecostals who apply Bible teachings literally to many aspects of modern-day life and refuse to consolidate it with science or change of culture.

Pastor of Pentecostal Bayside Church in Melbourne, Rob Buckinham said in his Sunday sermon that in a survey, the most cited point of criticism from young Americans is that they view churches as being too judgemental, insensitive and hypocritical. He also brought up the following study:

“Today, the most common perception is that present-day Christianity is "anti-homosexual." Overall, 91% of young non-Christians and 80% of young churchgoers say this phrase describes Christianity. (…) they believe that Christians show excessive contempt and unloving attitudes towards gays and lesbians. One of the most frequent criticisms of young Christians was that they believe the church has made homosexuality a "bigger sin" than anything else.” (from: The Barna Group)

As I wrote in my previous post, this of course alienates young people from the church. As our increasingly enlightened society changes, sexist, racist and homophobic views are fading. However, deep-rooted ignorance backed by stubborn Christian belief however seems like an unshakable bastion that keeps society from progressing, when e.g. same-sex marriage laws get rejected.

Christians coming out

In Australia, Pentecostals are numbered at around 200.000 with many attendants in urban areas (see “Mega churches”). However, there a more and more gay Pentecostals coming out, such as 21-year old blogger Ben Gresham from the Hillsong Church in Sydney (I often go to their sister church in London), and even support groups are established such as Freedom 2 B[e] (freedom2b.org) for Pentecostal gays and lesbians striving to hold on to their faith despite rejection.

Now, even church leaders begin to open their eyes and challenge believes.

The Sin of Sodom

Pastor Buckingham took upon often cited bible verses that supposedly condemn homosexuality.

The story of Sodom & Gomorrah in Genesis 19 is one of them. God does not condemn Sodom for being a city full of homosexuals (that’d be a phenomenon even unseen till today). In fact, Lot, responding to the man outside his house, offered his two daughters to be gang-raped instead. If these men were all homosexuals, what use would it have to offer one’s daughters? Buckingham goes on to read Ezekiel 16:49 where the sin of Sodom is explained: Greediness. Or unwillingness to help the poor despite being loaded with riches. He rightfully drew a comparison to the modern Western world. Look at us, we know about starving in Africa. Looks like most of us are the real “sodomites”.

Christians and GLBTs

He went on to say Jesus also died for GLBT people and actually had most compassion for people from the edges of society. He specifically asked followers to invite their gay colleagues and friends to church, where they’d be welcome. He said “homosexuals are not the enemy of the church” and blamed Christian homophobia and derogatory remarks for keeping gays from church or even driving them into suicide during teen years.

Buckingham warned: ”Our job is to love and accept people, not judge or try to change them” (John 16:08).

At several points, he gave hope. As soon as people get to know gays, lesbians or transgender, compassion will fill your heart and you will learn to accept them.

The full sermon entitled “Real Christianity is accepting” is available as podcast here.

“Lord God I pray, forgive us and forgive the Christian church for giving this world the notion that You are anti-homosexual”.

Reading on:

• GayPentecostal.com
• Whosoever.org Online Magazin for GLBT Christians
• "Bible-Based and Pro-Gay” Beliefnet.com
• “Gay Pentecostals find a place to worship” St. Petersburg Times

American churches heat up civil rights war

Yesterday, voters in the US state of Maine were asked at the ballot whether they want to accept a gay marriage law enacted by legislation earlier this year. 53% percent of voters decided to reject it.

This is the second time that an already passed law to open marriage for gays and lesbians has been brought to a public vote: Exactly one year ago, Californians struck down gay marriage with the successful referendum called Proposition 8.

Majority vs. Minority

In Maine and California, campaigns were heavy on both sides of the issue, trying to win over voters (see my post about Prop 8 last year). However, gay marriage supporters only seem to question the legitimacy of a public vote on minority rights after the loss at the ballot. Why is the majority allowed to vote on a minority right in the first place? Today, I saw the same outcry on Twitter that I saw last year in November: “if you put it up to a vote of the people, we'd have slavery again".

So, is the pure egoism of humans that hinders equality? Do people only think about their own right and reject political measures that help strangers? I reckon a big part is being lead there…

Churches playing politics

Where did we see this last time? Ah yes, the medieval ages in Europe and forced conversions to Christianity under death threat are one example of an organised majority oppressing a minority. Or in South Africa were the Dutch Reformed Church declared their members “the chosen” race. All those are examples of a group of people organising themselves to oppress others, backed by pseudo-religious reasons. The same thing is happening in America today, where churches claim to have a monopoly over marriage and its definition.

Among others, the Mormon church was a heavy campaigner against gay marriage, although Mormons just make up 2% of the Californian population they were successful. In Maine, Catholic churches (especially Portland’s diocese) manipulate people into thinking that it’s OK to take away rights from same-sex couples (with campaigns that draw their money from the offertory)

American Christians have got to understand that forcing your own beliefs on others will only damage them. I myself am an active Christian, but I am ashamed of what so-called Christians are doing onto others. They take away basic rights, topple gay families even with children, they forget their every ethic and compassion out of pure egoism and ignorance.

Dividing society

Gay rights activist Cleve Jones rightly pointed out that this is a struggle for equality under the law for gay people. Blaming churches for forgetting how important equality is, Jones said:

This is a pluralistic society. We have one constitution, one Bill of Rights, and we have only one class of citizenship.

Churches fighting against this are juggling with the harmony of a diverse society. They are attacking other segments of society and draw anger at them. These churches are hurting the reputation of religion:
Various studies show that more and more young people turn their back to religion because of the churches’ hard-line politics (see Putnam/Campbell’s “American Grace”)

Coming Out Day is October 11/12

"Today is National Coming Out Day. This doesn't mean that today you have to come out to all of your friends and family. This doesn't mean that today, if you are already out that you should forget about the people who are still in. This doesn't mean that today is only important for the LGBT community. Today, is about being YOU! Today is about bringing awareness to the world why we are who

we are. "I'm gay!" - but not because I need or want attention. I'm gay - but it's not because I was abused in a past straight relationship. I'm gay - but not because I didn't have a father when I was growing up. Yes, I am a lesbian, but it's not because I couldn't get a man. I'm gay, but it's not because I have low self-esteem and think girls won't like me, or I want to get back at my parents. We are gay - but it's not because something dramatic happened to us in the past, and it's not because we're going through a phase.

The one and only reason that we are gay is because this is the way we were born! This is who we are. We don't choose to be gay. We choose to be happy with who we are.

Today, we are choosing to show this to the world. Today, even if it's just for today, be proud of who you love!"

National Coming Out Day is celebrated by communities in many countries including the US, Canada, Croatia, Germany, Austria and Switzerland on the 11th of October. The UK's Coming Out Day takes place on the 12th this month.

In difference to big metropolitan Pride marches, this day should be taken to put the focus onto your close surroundings, your community as it is about you. The Internet is taken by many that are already out to friends and family to spread awareness.

Quotes taken from YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llskoZYUTXA

P.S.: A little clip art (can be used as iPhone wallpaper) in Chinese since I'm in China at the moment

Campaigning for same-sex marriage in the UK, Ireland

Britons, including many gays, would like to think that almost everything that defines equality for same-sex couples and gays has been achieved in the United Kingdom. Civil Partnerships are legal since 2004 and in law, have little difference to traditonal marriage. But the concept in itself is discriminatory. Why have a seperate, but equal law for gay and lesbian partners? Isn't it like racial segregation that was common in many countries just decades ago? Seperate schooling or bus seats? It is. "When I grow up, I wanna... 'civil partner' a prince?"

While heterosexual couples can refer to each other as husband and wife, me and others would have to refer to our loved ones as "my partner". People might think we are in a business relationship. Yet more often, it simply leads to awkwardness or confusion, since many still don't know what civil partners are. Until they are not "married" persons, it will never feel just the same.

The biggest single inequality yet is, that civil partnerships can NOT be formed religiously, like marriages can. Even if religious institution want to, they are legally not allowed to bless same-sex couples wishing to... (well, at least) be 'civil partnered'. A Scottish bishop recently pointed out that he would be breaking the law, if a civil partnership ceremony would be celebrated in his church.

The following projects are currently underway to fight for marriage equality on the Isles:

• United Kingdom

A simple online petition recenlty launched is to be handed to the Prime Minister to call for marriage equality in the UK. A simple signature and email confirmation will do. You have to be a resident address in Britain (you don't have to be a British citizens!) http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Gay-Marriage/

Another private project can be viewed here: www.equalmarriagerights.org

• Scotland

Since March 2009 there is an internet campaign that was

launched with help of student groups try to lobby the Scottish Parliament to lift the ban on both, same-sex marriages and opposite-sex civil partnerships. If you live in Scottland, please support and share the campaign on www.equalmarriage.org.uk

• Republic of Ireland

Ireland's government is drafting a civil partnership law, simular to the one in the UK, but with lesser rights. An unexpected support from straight friends and family members is trying to persuade the government, that this is not enough! http://www.marriagequality.ie/

In polls, 81% of the public said different sexualities should be treated equaly.

California rejects minority's rights

A re-cap: Same-sex marriage in California has been a long back and forth game. Twice, in 2005 and 2007, the bill was approved by the legislation and then vetoed by the Governor Schwarzenegger.

In summer 2008, California became the second US-State to allow citizens to marry whatever gender they loved. In November, a voter referendum, called Proposition 8 (Prop 8), passed by a 2% margin, annuled the rights of gays and lesbians to marry yet again.

For weeks and months after the ruling, a weapon-less civil war broke out with protests not only in California but the whole of the US.

The second American civil war began with thousands of protesters demanding equal rights under the law as gay and lesbian couples. Nowhere else has the fight for marriage been fought with more media attention, YouTube videos, Facebook groups and TV appearances with people throwing arguments about civil liberties or religious doctrines at each other.

For months, the legal outcome was unclear until the Supreme Court of California announced it would make a decision weather the Proposition 8 was valid and thus same-sex marriages invalid or if it would protect the rights of a minority that a majority-vote couldn't turn over.

Since November 2008, two countries and three US-states introduced same-sex marriages: Sweden (36m inhabitants), Norway (4,8m), Iowa (3m), Maine (1,3m), Vermont (0,6m). None of those had, however, such a big cultural impact as the battle for marriage in the 37-million-strong California with countless of world-famous actors, TV stars and thousands of bloggers jumping into the debate with strong feelings on both sides.

The ruling today did not re-instate California's reputation for a state where everyone is supposedly equal. It was one of the first states to repeal a ban on interracial marriages in the 70s but decades after blacks got their civil rights, gays and lesbians remain second class citizens. If there would have been a popular vote about the civil rights in the 70s, there'd probably be still no black US president today.

The court needs to understand it has to protect equality for everyone. History thought us what happens if a majority denies the rights to a minority group: Women, Jews and Blacks are the ones that learnt already how important universal rights are. Unfortunately, many of the once discriminated discriminate others again.

Link: Calif. High Court Uphold Prop. 8

5th International Day against Homophobia & Transphobia

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.