to provide evidence about the populations attitude towards LGBT rights:
Although the Constitutional and legal system in South Africa theoretically ensure equality, social acceptance is generally lacking, especially outside of urban areas in the eastern half of the country. A 2008 survey found that 84% of South Africans said homosexual sexual behavior is always wrong, compared to 8% who said that it is not wrong at all. In a 2013 survey, 61% said society should not accept homosexuality.
"Homosexuality is a taboo to us," he says. "I'll go back to African traditions, there's no word for that in our language."
I ask what would happen if one of his daughters told him she was a lesbian.
"I might kill her myself. That thing is unnatural, it's awkward, so I cannot accept something that is awkward in my house.
"If someone said choose between keeping this child or killing it, I would kill it."
That is a very strong contrast to the strong laws in favor for LGBT rights. Hence my question:
Why had the south African government implemented those rights, which are the exact opposition to the majority of the south African population? Don't get me wrong, I love LGBT rights, but i don't understand this in terms of democracy: If the population is against LGBT rights, but the government implements exactly that, democracy has failed.
Therefore, it makes no sense at all to implement that for the government (e.g. to have an appearance of a modern state), because they won't be elected again.