Saturday, January 25, 2014

The Nigerian Gay Rights Palaver.

A few days ago, the Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan, who obviously has no clues about solving the myriad of problems confronting the nation and in desperate need for some distractions, decided to ban same-sex marriage. And “lucky” for him, the gimmick worked.

As if on cue, some western governments including that of the United States reacted as if struck by thunderbolts. Just the way Jonathan must have expected. The Canadian government actually cancelled a scheduled state visit by President Jonathan.

For God’s sake, Nigeria, as a sovereign nation reserves the rights to promulgate any law it deems fit. The question however is whether the promulgation of the said law was necessary in the first place…except to serve as an irritating distraction.

In spite of the silly and embarrassing manner that our young folks back home are copying everything that emanates from America (including the good, the bad and the ugly) there are still some no-go areas. And this is in view of our fundamentally conservative cultures and religions. With the reality on ground, can any Nigerian man ever have the temerity to inform his parents, siblings and relations that he wants to marry a fellow man? And, seriously, can a wedding between two women take place in a Nigerian church, mosque or a wedding registry (the American equivalent of JP’s office)?

Unlike it’s Nigerian counterpart, the Kenyan government was rather smart in regard to the gay rights issue. The east African nation says it has nothing against gay rights but it stipulates a stiff sentence on anyone caught indulging in sodomy. No one, not even President Obama can fault that! It’s like saying everyone has a right to sing but no one must open mouth.   

On a personal note though, I really don’t care what some individuals do in the privacy of their homes. Neither do I care a hoot what anyone does with his or her body.

As the saying goes in America…it’s a free country!

Just last year in Memphis or somewhere down south, a man was arrested for having sex with a horse inside a neighbor’s barn. The owner had installed a secret camera when the whinny of the horse was becoming too frequent every night.

But would anyone (least of all, the arresting police officers) have known about this dastardly act if it was committed in the privacy of the suspect’s home and the “victimized” horse belonged to him?

In this same “God’s own country” some women (especially in those cute, quiet suburbs) are said to be indulging in some strange “leisure hours” with their dogs. But since whatever happens in privacy stays in privacy, who cares?

The other day, in New York, a man was seen doing something “fishy” with a goat that was supposed to be his pet. Now, the man got into trouble only because he made public something that should have been a “private affair”.

This therefore, is precisely my point here. The homosexuals (in the western world or among their copy-cats in Africa) are their own enemies. Why must they always demand for public validation or approval for something that is as private as their own idea of sexual intercourse? Why do they even have to inform the rest of us folks about their sexual preferences or styles…why must we care? 



No comments: