BBC slammed over gay execution debate
For once I think the BBC have a point. If something's happening out there in the real world, you should be free to discuss it from all angles. It's a bit amusing when the BBC get censored though -- seeing they do so much censoring themselves.
"British politicians today condemned the BBC for hosting an online debate asking: "Should homosexuals face execution?" The debate on the government-owned broadcaster's Have Your Say Web site has now closed, and the title was changed to "Should Uganda debate gay execution?" after it provoked uproar online. It was in response to a proposed bill in Uganda that could lead to the death penalty for gay people.
On his blog Labour Member of Parliament Eric Joyce said: "What's happened here, I think, is that the BBC has attempted to tap into the Ugandan zeitgeist, if you will, and reflect the sort of discussions going on in Kampala." He said: "Is the BBC really there to provide credibility to a vile discussion around a profoundly hideous and savage piece of legislation?"
The BBC, in its Editor's Blog, defended its decision to host the debate. "The editors of the BBC Africa Have Your Say program thought long and hard about using this question which prompted a lot of internal debate," the post said. "We agree that it is a stark and challenging question, but think that it accurately focuses on and illustrates the real issue at stake."
Source
7 comments:
Yes. All are "catch phrases" meant to get yet more money from the guilt-ridden, weak-minded liberals of the West, money that is never used to help the people of Africa, and more importantly, the wild animals of Africa.
As for this debate itself, everyone should know by now that gays do not like subjects discussed unless "they" control the discussion and subject matter.
Anon,
I think the point was that executing people because they are homosexual is what is being debated.
The bill has nothing to do with AIDS, it punishes people for having the wrong sexual orientation. It's no different than the Spanish Inquisition.
I guess Uganda didn't learn from the Idi Amin regime they had.
Then again, some countries do know how to stop a problem before it gets out of control and starts demanding special rights, privileges, laws, and protections, above and beyond those enjoyed by the rest of the population. And besides, what Uganda does is Uganda's business. If gays are bothered by this, let them go there and protest.
And Robert, to many peoples around the world, homosexuality is a crime. To them, it is a crime against God and nature, as stated by most religions.
Some Americans (especially the govt) have the mistaken beleif that they can go around the world telling others how they should live, as if America is a perfect example. It is not! The best way to get others to live the so-called "perfect life" is by first making sure your own country is perfect. Only then do you have the right to expect it from others.
This kinda lost its way.
The issue was about the BBC getting excoriated for what some people say was an 'offensive' topic description.
The underlying facts are simple and not in contention - Uganda is examining legislation aimed at introducing the death penalty as a sentencing option for some essentially homosexual-based activities.
The topic was "Should homosexuals face execution?". The simple answer for the vast majority of people is 'no'. What is so hard or offensive about that? The complaints seem to stem from the very act of asking the question - as though some questions are so horrible they can't even be asked. This is the death knell for free speech in the UK - where one is forbidden from even asking the question to begin debate. Haven't they heard, there are no stupid questions?
Bobby you said "But sex between consenting adults should remain legal in a free society."
Religion should remain legal in a free society but see how atheist Chinese communists treat them DAILY.
Yeah Howard, based on most of your comments, I guess you're hoping that stupidity will remain legal in a free society.
Post a Comment