Hazel Blears‘ expenses ’scandal’ has been splattered on the front pages of many tabloids and under a great many pairs of page three boobs for a greater many months now, weakening her position as a re-electable candidate in the traditionally Labour safe Salford and Eccles parliamentary seat. Boundary changes in the constituency have opened up opportunities for alternative candidates to have a serious electoral run towards backbencnhdom, paving the way for a fresh, young, Tory candidate. The New Conservative party machine, in a welcome move, has put forward Matthew Sephton, an openly gay candidate, and head of LGBTory, the Conservative party’s answer to the now popular party political Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender groups.
This is great news for those in Salford who want someone new, peppy and fresh, but as is always the case when opportunity knocks, we let in a little dirt as we tread on the carpet. Cue the lugubrious Richard Carvath, a self styled ‘pro-heterosexual‘ and prospective independent MP for Salford and Eccles.
Now I’m not exactly sure what a ‘pro-heterosexual’ is, granted that there’s a distinct lack of historical hetero struggle, and granted that heterosexuality forms the bulk of sexual make-up on the British Isles, I’m not exactly sure what the ‘pro‘ in ‘pro heterosexual‘ actually stands for. It’s quite obvious that Mr Carvath, in claiming to be ‘pro-heterosexual,’ is in fact, by insinuation, claiming that he is ‘anti-homosexual.’ But Richard struggles to leave things at rude and corrosive euphemism, as displayed by his attack on Matthew Sephton, the newly selected Tory candidate, on his personal blog, sighting in the title, dated December 7th, “Tories Select Homosexual Pervert for Salford and Eccles.” He writes,

Richard Carvath

“The Conservative Party has just selected homosexual Matthew Sephton as their candidate for Salford and Eccles.
As a rival [and pro-heterosexual!] candidate I welcome Matthew to the contest for Salford and Eccles.
Matthew’s own blog is heavy with pro homosexual pervert content: see here, here and here. I very much doubt that the vast majority of the Salford and Eccles electorate will want to be represented by a prominent homosexual activist – and one who neither lives nor works in the constituency.”

The article in question was reported to the police (presumably as hate related,) to which Mr Varvath received this letter from PC2401 Jacky Thompson,

“We have received a complaint today regarding concerns over the content of your blog article dated Monday 7th December 2009.
A reader of your article has made a complaint that the content is offensive and feels strongly enough to report this matter to the police. He wishes for you to be advised over the potential alarm and distress caused by your article. Whilst not taking this at face value and understanding the meaning of language and how it can be misinterpreted, it could be argued that the context of the comments made could be construed to be borderline criminal.
At this stage I feel it would be advisable for you to remove this from your blog thereby preventing misinterpretation.
Your assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated. …
Regards
PC2401 Jacky Thompson.”

Richard replied,

“Dear PC Thompson,
Thank you for your email.
There is nothing criminal about my blog article and so I have no intention of removing it for the foreseeable future.
Homosexuality is a perversion: that is both moral truth and medical fact. Therefore it is quite reasonable for me to refer to a person in whom the perversion of homosexuality is manifest as a homosexual pervert. Let me make it clear that I do not use the term ‘homosexual pervert’ as a pejorative term – derogation is not my motive in using the term; I use the term simply to convey the true nature of what homosexuality is because I believe that the truth matters.
I’m aware that you are employed by an organisation [GMP] which is politically in favour of homosexual perversion. I’m aware that GMP celebrates its association with the militant perverts’ organisation Stonewall. I’m aware of the secular humanist socio-political orthodoxy of ‘equality’ and ‘diversity’ which GMP panders to.
My advice to you is to stop being a social engineer trying to suppress free speech and get on with genuine police work.
It is not a crime to criticise homosexuality and nor is it a crime to refer to a public gay political activist as a homosexual pervert.
Even if it were a crime I’m a British evangelical Christian so nothing and nobody is going to tell me what I can and can’t say in my own country. As a Christian I speak and act out of love – not hate – so my motive for referring to homosexuality as a perversion is love.
My advice to you is to get on with dealing with real crime like robbery, rape and murder and stop trying to suppress free speech.
Never has there been clearer proof of the vital importance of the Waddington free speech safeguard!
I am a parliamentary candidate and I will not tolerate being harassed by a politicised, pro-homosexual Police force.
Yours sincerely,
Mr. Richard Carvath PPC.”

Richard is no stranger to controversial views however. When asked in an interview with Salford Online about sex education, he commented that to be taught sex education in schools is akin to “grooming” and “sexualising” children. He went on to say,

“Sex education is a bit of a big misnomer, the idea that anybody needs to know, or be taught about the mechanics of it, or be taught about condoms or anything is riddiculous. Anybody who has had sex, which is probably most people, uhm, know full well, that you do not need lessons in it to know exactly what happens, and what goes where and all the rest of it, so it’s a bit of a nonsense anyway.”

These are not the only unfounded and dangerous views Richard Carvath has voiced publicly, in the same interview with Tom Rodgers, (which you can view in its entirety here, here and here) he goes on to say that homosexuality should be illegal and that social normative society is the only answer to British culture,

Tom Rodgers: “You’re standing as an Independent, where do you think your support base is going to come from?”

Richard Carvath: “I think my appeal is very broad, for the simple reason that people get a fair grasp of what I’m really all about. My politics are the politics of social justice, politics largely of common sense, traditional British moral standards, British culture and social norms way of life, so I think the appeal is very broad.”

Tom Rogers: “You’ve categorised yourself as mainstream, but there are some controvercial policies there, in terms of perhaps, homosexuality?”

Richard Carvath: “In terms of my position on homosexuality, you know, I think it’s a bad thing, it’s a bad lifestyle choice, I think there’s masses of social evidence that shows the negative consequences of folowing that lifestyle..”

Tom Rogers: [Interrupts] “I’ll stop you there. There’s masses of social evidence?”

Richard Carvath: “Well I’m obviously not briefed with, you know, a load of notes to bring with me on this, but uhm, if you look at the, uhm, any number of people, sociologists, psychologists people, doctors, people who are working in health professions, all of these people who compile statistics and evidence, and you can see from this that the homosexual lifestyle is charactorised by, uhm, desiece, degredation, loneliness, emotional problems, debt, uhm, premature [inaudible]. I mean, in terms of the health problems for example, I mean, you know, we’ve all heard of HIV and AIDS, and that is particularly a homosexual problem, uhm, but also many other things, such as, [inaudible] infections, uhm, systemic infections, uhm, there’s an awful lot I could say but it’s probably, you know, not the most pleasent thing for all of Salford Online. It goes without saying that the nature of, certainly the male homosexual act, causes allot of, uhm, physical trauma as well, which causes permenant lasting damage, which I’m not going to go into detail about.”

Tom Rogers: “These are obviously personal views of yours, do you think these actually have a place in political life?”

Richard Carvath: “Yes I do, very much so. It used to be the case in this country that homosexuality was illegal, and that was the case up until 1967, uhm, I would advocate basically returning to that position, uhm, I don’t think it does homosexuals any favours or society as a whole to encourage or condone what is essentially a destructive lifestyle.”

Tom Rogers: “So you would have them, do what?”

Richard Carvath: “I would like to go to a situation where homosexuality is illegal in principle and in the law, in practice, what that would mean would, it would mean that, uhm, you’d have a situation where homosexuality, homosexual behaviour, would uhm, would be illegal in public. So if there was obvious homosexual behaviour, you know, like cottaging, things in public toilets or Hamstead Heath, whatever, that would clearly be seen to be illegal, and also the promotion or manifestation I think in cultural terms of society. So homosexuals, if they still wish to, are still going to in private, uhm, what they want to do, but I think it’s about getting it out of public life, because I think it’s perhaps in homosexual’s best interests. Nobody is born gay, and there’s no evidence to support that claim, uhm, homosexuality is not genetic, or biological, or hormonal in origin, uhm, I mean the roots of it are complex, I mean, usually the child [inaudible], uhm, it’s surprising how many male homosexuals; the father is absent, and this goes back to why, you know, we need to go back to a society where, uhm, where mothers and fathers are there in the home. It’s mothers and fathers together, who bring up children who socialise into their natural gender role.”

Carvath claiming to run on a ticket of “social justice” is frankly as insulting as his pseudo science is laughable, and it seems his political opponents think as much of him. Writing for the Lesbian and Gay Foundation, Matt retorted, “As an unknown POTENTIAL candidate, Mr Carvath is an irrelevance in this election campaign.”

Gay rights advocate and writer for the Guardian and PinkNews, Adrian Tippetts, commented: “Name me one peer reviewed study that backs up this incoherent babble. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Another ridiculous claim: that being gay is caused by a troubled childhood and a distant father. This is extremist religious propaganda, long since debunked and certainly not supported by any scientific study, in any peer reviewed journal. It is totally rejected by every professinal body in the Western World. He doesn’t know what he is talking about and he isn’t remotely qualified to talk. When interviewed, he cannot even string a sentence together. I don’t believe that, even if he were to see the scientific evidence that supports the evolutionary explanations for homosexuality, he would have the intelligence to understand it.”

Richard’s ‘manifesto‘ (and I use the term lightly) is little more than a deranged attack on everything and anything that he personally has distaste for. He is like a rabid dog, frothing at the mouth, making up pseudo statistics as he goes, in a desperate bid to support his fatuous policy ideas. In the following page, entitled “Opposing Perversion, Depravity and Vice,” Richard whacks off to the prospect of returning to the types of homophobic prejudice (that he would clearly like to partake in) of the 1950s.

Of course these assertions crumble when held to the sunlight, as Liberal Conspiracy’s Unity demonstrates with comic clarity, scientific, and historical evidencing.
The real percentage figure of homosexuals is thought to be at least 5% of the global population, though some estimate a much higher 10%, whilst the British public, when polling data was returned from the Pew Research Centre in 2007, are 71% in agreement that homosexuality is a way of life that society should accept (not that we, as homosexuals, require acceptance in order to exist.)
And this is where things really did get muddled. At what point did a normative thinking heterosexual wake up and have it occur to him all of a sudden, whilst munching on his cornflakes and reading the morning’s Daily Fail, that it is his right, as a heterosexual, to prescribe the rights and restrictions of any other individual? What sort of cocktail of ignorance, arrogance and blind audacity does it take to assume the position of a celestial dictator on earth?
Richard Carvath thinks that he has the moral authority to tell us, as Nadine Dorries has before him, and as the Ugandan Government seeks to do so after him, what we, us, they, can do with their, our, your personal liberty. Mr Carvath must have some serious personal and internal conflict bubbling up and close to the surface of his skin to feel the need to vent so horrifically and disgracefully in this manner. Richard must have a huge egocentric personality to believe, even for a moment, that he has within an inch of a right to tell me what I can and cannot be, who I can and cannot love. Dick must have a real homosexuality, inferiority, insecurity complex to have to resort to making up ‘facts’ and ’statistics’ to support his false arguments and plastic fantastic moral standards.
What drive and determination it must take to keep plodding along in that manner, blinkers and all, choosing to ignore the empirical evidence that continues to slap him, again and again, hard and fast in his bloated, patchy, red face. To practice and preach such vile hatred towards your fellow brothers and sisters, to condemn them to a life of persecution and misery that they have been afforded not to have to endure by decent and well wishing parliamentarians, activists and the silent majority before them.

Perhaps Richard, if you’re reading this, you’d be better focussed on your industrial cleaning business to make a change in the streets of Salford and Eccles. Bring on the ballots!

For you, Ricky! <3

I wrote a couple of weeks ago (read it if you haven’t) about the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill, morbidly nicknamed the ‘Kill the Gays Bill,’ which outlined, in no uncertain terms, the fate awaiting those who are unlucky enough to be born both Ugandan, and gay. Amongst the cruel ‘legal’ consequences that are proposed, are death for the ‘crime’ of “aggravated homosexuality,” and three years imprisonment for those who know of a gay person’s whereabouts but (in an Orwellian move) fail to report it to the authorities within 24 hours.

The bill, despite receiving frankly pathetic, suspicious, and shameful coverage from all but the Guardian in British media, caused a stir in the international community, which resulted in condemnation, calls for protection of the half a million strong Ugandan gay population, and, in a surprising move, the Swedish government to threaten to pull financial aid from the nation.
The calls have not gone unheard either, reporting yesterday, Bloomberg’s Fred Ojambo wrote,

“Uganda will drop the death penalty and life imprisonment for gays in a refined version of an anti- gay bill expected to be ready for presentation to Parliament in two weeks, James Nsaba Buturo, the minister of ethics and integrity, said.
The draft bill, which is under consideration by a parliamentary committee, will drop the two punishments to attract the support of religious leaders who are opposed to these penalties, Buturo said today in a phone interview from the capital, Kampala.
Ugandan lawmaker David Bahati presented a private member’s bill on Oct. 14 which sought the death penalty and life imprisonment for gay people in the country. The Ugandan government supports the bill because homosexuality and lesbianism are “repugnant to the Ugandan culture,” Buturo said. Still, it favors a more refined set of punishments, he said.
In addition to formulating punishments for the gay people, the bill will also promote counseling to help “attract errant people to acceptable sexual orientation,” said Buturo.”

Buturo said that the new draft of the now, presumably, ‘Cure the Gays Bill,’ will find itself before parliament within two weeks, which has led to many critics of the legislation to fear it’s full inception early on.

James Nsaba Buturo

Despite the removal of the death penalty, the bill is still a lethal blow to the gay community of Uganda, allowing life imprisonment, extradition from another country on suspicion of homosexual behaviour, and, owing to the dreadful way in which the bill has been constructed, the potential for manipulative abuse in the form of heterosexual affection, eg: two straight men hugging.
If that doesn’t make your skin crawl, consider the political corruption that could (and very likely will) surround the private show trials that are explicit in the bill’s text, and the media blackout that will be enforced when cherry picked political opponents find themselves sat in a court of Ugandan law on suspicion of love for the same sex.

The language used by the Ugandan minister of ethics and integrity is very telling also, favouring a “more refined” set of punishments, “counselling” and (according to Pink News) “gay cure therapies.”
It is not so much what Buturo is saying, as much as it is what he is not saying. There are no plans explicitly laid out for the fate of innocent gay people in the nation, only a shady and ominous suggestion towards pseudo science therapy and a life inside a two by two cell. The mere suggestion that the Ugandan authorities will attempt to cure homosexuality not only has zero foundation in scientific study, but has not been so openly and unashamedly acknowledged since the days of Action T4 in Nazi Germany. The potential for torturous, guinea pig like experiments is a very stark reality that we must all sober up to, and should, in many ways, be more concerned about than we were before.

This legislation is paving the way for politically and religiously motivated hatred, sham trials, press blackouts, prejudiced and homophobic, delusion fuelled, sick, torturous experiments, and damage to generations of gay people to come.

It would be very easy for us, at this point, to jump aboard the ‘Shouldn’t, Wouldn’t, Couldn’t‘ band wagon of Western democracy at this point, and look, with a sly glance, in shame, at the Ugandan parliament whilst whacking off to our own superior liberalism, but as per usual, the mix is a little more toxic than first impressions might suggest.

The bill is an American conservative evangelical sponsored piece of legislation. In a press release reported on publiceye, Tarso Luís Ramos, Political Research Associates (PRA) executive director, writes as part of an investigation into the ‘Influence of U.S. Religious Conservatives in Promoting Homophobia in Africa’,

“Just as the United States and other northern societies routinely dump our outlawed or expired chemicals, pharmaceuticals, machinery, and cultural detritus on African and other Third World countries, we now export a political discourse and public policies our own society has discarded as outdated and dangerous. Africa’s antigay campaigns are to a substantial degree made in the U.S.A.”

It also emphasises, “The investigation’s release could not be timelier, as the Ugandan parliament considers the Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009. Language in that bill echoes the false and malicious charges made in Uganda by U.S antigay activist and Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively that western gays are conspiring to take over Uganda and even the world.”

Rev. Kapya Kaoma, PRA Project Director, writes, “The U.S. Right – once isolated in Africa for supporting pro-apartheid, White supremacist regimes – has successfully reinvented itself as the mainstream of U.S. evangelicalism. Through their extensive communications networks in Africa, social welfare projects, Bible schools, and educational materials, U.S. religious conservatives warn of the dangers of homosexuals and present themselves as the true representatives of U.S. evangelicalism, so helping to marginalize Africans’ relationships with mainline Protestant churches.”

“We need to stand up against the U.S. Christian Right peddling homophobia in Africa,” said Kaoma, who in recent weeks challenged U.S. evangelist Rick Warren to denounce the bill and distance himself from its supporters. “I heard church people in Uganda say they would go door to door to root out LGBT people and now our brothers and sisters are being further targeted by proposed legislation criminalizing them and threatening them with death. The scapegoating must stop.”

This isn’t the first time that Scott Lively, president of Abiding Truth Ministries, a conservative Christian organization in California, has found himself up to his neck in allegations of such hatred. The author of ‘The Pink Swastika,’ his book, based on supposed links between homosexuals and the Nazi Party, which were dismissed by historians as a total fabrication, has been so consumed with blind hatred for homosexuality, that the man, a the former state director for California’s branch of the American Family Association went ahead with Don Schmierer and Caleb Lee Brundidge, two other far right nutbags, to create Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill.

Scott’s world view, one in which he sees a threatening global gay rights agenda as an evil and infectious disease that is spreading fast around the globe, is a dangerous delusion that has led him, and many others in his home nation, and elsewhere, to prescribe the harshest, most cruel and torturous part of the human condition on our brothers and sisters, in the name of Godly righteousness.
The potential for this evil has been realised time and time again, we have borne witness to the greatest evils of mankind, and this new proposal, with or without the death penalty, is nothing short of religiously prescribed genocide.

If New York’s lady liberty stands for anything at all in this cruel and modern world, it is surely against the madness and slavery peddled by evangelical nutcases, who are hell-bent on the eradication of an entire community, whose only crime is love. Should her copper and steel lips stay sealed, her glassy eyes stare blindly out into the ocean, we will know that this day was the day that Liberty stood in silence on our shores, as well as on theirs.

Uganda, despite significant improvement since the mid-1980s, has an appalling record on human rights. Conflicts in the northern parts of the African state have continued to highlight abuses by the Ugandan Army and the Lord’s Resistance Army, a sectarian  guerilla group engaged in an armed rebellion against the Ugandan government, who have over time, kidnapped thousands of children as young as eight years old, who have been forced to serve and kill, or face the life of a ‘night commuter.’ This culminated in what one United Nations official described as, “appalling brutality,” and the the UN’s humanitarian chief, John Holmes, who met with victims of the attacks by the Lord’s Resistance Army, to speak out.

“Villages around there have been attacked by the LRA – a large number of deaths. We think there have been up to 900 deaths in the whole area, but around that area there have been 350 deaths – unimaginable brutality, a population, which is traumatized and terrorized by what’s happened to them, so to them, for that population the consequences have been catastrophic. The object of the operation we understand and share, of course, which is to put an end to the terror of the LRA. The problem is for this population at the moment, the consequences have been very dramatic.”

Mr Homles went on to describe an attack by the Lords Resistance, “In one case the church was surrounded, when people were engaged in the service, everybody in the church was massacred. In other cases, whole villages seem to have been effectively – small villages – wiped off the map, their populations killed, some very brutal cases of murder, children found by the bodies of their parents; one little girl whom I saw – they seem to have tried to pull her head off effectively, and left her paralyzed – a girl of three. And so these are appalling stories, and that’s why the population is so utterly traumatized – a very peaceful agricultural population – nothing to do with the LRA whatsoever, not their quarrel, not their issue – but they’ve been terrorized in this way by the LRA whose record is well known, but I think even they have exceeded themselves by it.”

Lords Resistance Army

The number of ‘internally displaced’ people is at 1.4 million, torture is widespread amongst security organizations, and the arrests and beating of opposition Members of Parliament, has created international criticism, which led to a decision by the British government to withhold part of the aid to Uganda in 2005.

To add to this list of humanitarian atrocities is the newly proposed ‘Anti-Homosexuality’ Bill, which would sentence “aggravated homosexuals” to death, and in an Orwellian move; punish all those who don’t tell the authorities of the known existence of a homosexual within 24 hours, to three years imprisonment. But the 1984 comparisons don’t stop there, after defining the “crime of homosexuality,” (which is sexual contact between two people of the same sex, oral, anal, with toys, or otherwise) the bill goes on to include the “touching of another person with the intention of committing homosexuality,” – a thought crime.

The guise under which this bill finds itself before us, is, predictably enough, “the protection of the family,” though what exactly the authorities are proposing to “protect” the family from is unclear, especially when you considerer the sectarian violence that has penetrated large parts of the nation. The bill aims to “strengthen the nation’s capacity to deal with emerging internal and external threats to the traditional heterosexual family,” again, it is unclear as to what the terms, “internal and external” actually mean, but if the prophetic Ugandan President is nothing else, he is paranoid, as we can see here as he accuses “European gays” of “recruiting” Ugandan citizens, when speaking at the Young Achievers Awards ceremony on Saturday,

The Ugandan President

“I hear European homosexuals are recruiting in Africa.
We used to have very few homosexuals traditionally.
They were not persecuted but were not encouraged either because it was clear that is not how God arranged things to be. You should discourage your colleagues [who are gay] because God was not foolish to do the way he arranged.
Mr and Mrs, but now you have to say Mr and Mr?
What is that now?”

One of the worrying aspects of the proposed legislation is the ‘confidentiality’ clause, which reads:

(1) At any stage of the Investigation or trial of an offence under this Act, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judicial officers and medical practitioners, as well as parties to the case, shall recognize the right to privacy of the victim.
(2) For the purpose of subsection (I), in cases involving children and other cases where the court considers it appropriate. proceedings of the court shall be conducted in camera, outside the presence of the media.
(3) Any editor or publisher, reporter or columnist in case of printed materials. announcer or producer in case of television and radio, producer or director of a film to case of the movie industry. or any person utilizing trimedia facilities or information technology who publishes or causes the publicity of the names and personal circumstances or any other information tending to establish the victim’s identity without authority of court commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding two hundred and fifty currency points.

These conditions create a potential environment in which the “offence” of homosexuality could easily be manufactured, and what little retarded form of justice that is left in the Ugandan courts could be perverted in such a way as to sentence many “innocent” people to jail time or death. I doubt the potential for this abuse is something that has been overlooked by the architects of the bill.

Gay Ugandan is left to die

Any Ugandan seeking refuge in another nation doesn’t have much hope either, as the ‘Extra Territorial Jurisdiction’ and ‘Extradition’ clauses permit the Ugandan Courts to sentence you to death for having homosexual sex outside of their own borders, and to extradite you in order that you might see trial on home turf. Whether this could easily be enforced if a Ugandan citizen sought refuge in a place like Britain is doubtful, but it a stark example of Uganda’s global and religious ambition to wipe homosexuality off the face of the earth.

The Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, today raised the issues of this bill with the President of Uganda at the Commonwealth Heads of Government conference in Trinidad, a short time after Canadian and American officials expressed concern. A Downing Street spokesperson said, “The Foreign Office will be following the passage of the bill closely and we will continue to do everything we can privately and publically to prevent its passage . . . it has been raised in the strongest terms at the highest possible level today.”

How much might “the strongest possible terms” carry is yet to be seen, but many critics of the Ugandan bill have called for the nation to be thrown out of the Commonwealth altogether, and in yesterday’s Guardian, Stephen Lewis, a former UN envoy on Aids in Africa, described the proposed legislation as having “the taste of fascism.” In a speech in Trinidad, reported in the Globe and Mail, he said: “The credibility of the Commonwealth is hanging by a spider’s thread. The putative legislation declares war on homosexuality. What is put at risk here – beyond the threat of the death penalty for HIV-positive homosexuals – is the entire apparatus of Aids treatment, prevention and care.”

Perhaps the powers that be might be best advised to concern their efforts with the protection of life, to legislate against bullet holes, not whether two men or women can share their love. Call me an optimist, but I don’t think a homosexual, however “aggravated,” poses an equal threat to a militant with a sub-machine gun. Either way, yet again, as a global community, we face the march of forces that seek our destruction, and it would be our undoing to allow this change to go unnoticed.

New York protest calling for action from Obama.

London Protests calling for public action and Commonwealth sanctions.

Read the Anti-Homosexuality Bill in full here.

Guardian: Activists denounce denounce Uganda’s Homosexuality Bill.
Anglican Church of Canada: Respect the dignity of every human beings.
The Globe and Mail: Uganda’s anti-gay bill causes Commonwealth uproar
Pink News: Gordon Brown raises anti-gay laws with Ugandan president
Human Rights Watch: Anti-Homosexuality’ Bill Threatens Liberties and Human Rights Defenders