Keith,

If you wish people to be clear about what your political position is, then you should make it clear with each post, and if people get the wrong end of the stick you should explain what your actual opinion is.

You may feel that it is up to others to understand things the way that you meant them, but sometimes that is simply unrealistic and you have to allow for a margin of error and misinterpretation on all sides. That is the subtlety of good communication (something which I could do well to develop in my own posts).

In the Ugandan death penalty thread, your posts do appear is if they were posted to add credence to Ake's or GfS's position, not least because Ake repeatedly indicated that he saw you as being on his side.

This was something that you never distanced yourself from, just as you made no attempt to refute his numerous unfounded assertions about homosexuals.

It could easily be inferred that the reason you do not take Ake to task when he describes Gays as having a natural propensity for child abuse, and when he says that Gays should effectively be imprisoned, (amongst other things)is that you agree with him.

It could easily be inferred that you are more concerned with refuting those who are outraged by his position than you are with setting the record straight wholly neutrally as you claim you are.


Civil rights is a fundamental principle of our society, and when people argue to limit them, they condemn us to a return to the jungle.

We live in a world that depends on ideas to continue functioning.

Political debate is the arena in which ideas are examined and developed.

Money for example is nothing more than an idea. It only exists because we all agree it does.

The law, parliament, the courts, queueing for the bus, ... all these things are nothing more than ideas ... yet their agreed existence has allowed human beings to survive in a way unprecedented by any other species.

Of course Ideas can also result in the creation of solid tangible things too, like cars and computers, but I am more concerned with the imaginary mechanisms that mean we don't have to live in caves and hunt big game with spears, or have a life expectancy of about 30 years.

So if you wish to engage in political discussion, why not share your ideas, and why not give your reaction to the ideas that are around you.

So in short,

1, what do you think

2, what problems do you find with the assertions made by GfS and Ake?


If you aren't prepared to answer these questions, then it may be realistic to expect people reading your posts to view you as being an apologist for homophobic and racist politics.