Opinions

News

Sports

Business

Entertainment

GhanaWeb TV

Africa

Country

Homosexuality and the wretched legality

Mon, 3 Aug 2015 Source: Seshie, Stanley

BY: SESHIE, STANLEY

Marriage is a union from home to court, and not from court to home.

The act of confusion is infecting the world with its confusion. Africa

shall stand this confusion and see it as it is, confusion. The

homosexual activists are misrepresenting African cultural history, all

for their aim of pursuading us to embrace what, according to them, was

largely part and parcel of our culture long ago. Hence, their seeming

surprise that we are now rejecting the act. This article will look at

some of the misrepresentations, in addition to some specious arguments

of the proponents of legalization of this confusion and denied

disorder.

1. TRANSGENDER MISREPRESENTATIONS

Transgenders are people whose features and demeanors mostly

"contradicts" their conventional classification as male or female. It

is important to note that both the conventional classifications and

the seemingly "contradictory" demeanors and features have their roots

in their biology.For instance a woman having bears, muscular

structure, voices sounding like of males among other notable male

exclusive characteristics. Equally there are males with feminine

structure, voices sounding like that of a female among other

characteristics.

These group of people are found everywhere in the world from time

immemorial. They talk, walk and dress like the opposite sex. Up to

now, they are never called homosexuals in Ghana and Africa. Evidently,

they are not homosexuals. But today, homosexual activists are

deliberately citing these people in Africa cultures as signposts of

homosexual practices in our culture, with so-called archeological

studies and interpretations as proof. They are creating the impression

that standing against acceptance of homosexuality into mainstream

African culture is tantamount to opposing transgenders in society. A

dubious lie and shameless deliberate misrepresentations.

I am not sure anyone is calling anyone a homosexual simply because of

his or her demeanor.

Even the homosexual themselves do not want to be identified as so,

simply because of how they talk, walk, or dress. Rather and most

importantly homosexuals are people who want to be identified primarily

as having sexual intercourse with same-sex. Of course, the demeanor

and behavior may also contribute, if not misleadingly, but they are

never their identifiers just as they are not for heterosexuals.

So as Ghanaians hence Africans, we are not against the acceptance and

recognition man behaving talking, looking and dressing like a woman or

vice versa. We have been living with them in our mainstream culture

since time immemorial. We are not against transgenders at all. But we

are against, a Man wanting to play biological role of Woman or a Woman

a Man during sexual intercourse. And we wish to do that and will do

that via non-violent means.

2. IT IS HARMLESS TO SOCIETY

Another specious argument of homosexual activists is formulated as

question. What harm does two consenting adults having sex in their

closets cause to anyone or society, that they should not be allowed to

do it?

First no one says two adults should not do what they want to do in

their own closet. We are only saying they should not come out from

their closet and tell us to accept as normal what they did, hence

legalize it. They should not tell us to let them marry each other in

Ghanaian culture. Marriage in Ghanaian culture is a family union kept

by the man and woman marrying. The reason divorce equally separates

and brings animosity between the once united two families. Can you

imagine two Ghanaian families doing all that pre-marital underground

works before the day of final ceremony of handing over their wards to

each other?

That in all these checks they found out that they are investigating

the background of a male for their beloved son or a womam for their

beloved daughter, and would keep on doing so, as future "what"? The

investigating family would rather come back and investigate mental

orderliness of their ward. Something must fundamentally be amiss with

their son or daughter for sending them on such groundwork necessary

for marriage. Really, two Ghanaina families and relatives should come

and sit down that they are pronouncing two sons or daughters married?

Some things are simply impossible in some places. Let the homosexual

activists in Ghana invest their faith in time, that with time

Ghanaians will change their mind. They shall wait forever and ever.

Secondly, of course, it causes no direct harm to anyone, let alone

society. But the absence of direct harm cannot be a sound basis to

accept to legalize homosexuality. There are equally some behaviours

that no one would advocate for its legalization, simply because it

harms no one directly to anyone or society. Take suicide as an

example. It harms only the individual involved. Must we then say

because it harms no other person directly, it should be accepted,

recognized and legalized so that people can willingly and openly

engage in it? If you can say never to legalizing suicide, for no other

reason than it harms no other person directly, which is truly the

case, then the argument that homosexuality is harmless to anyone and

society hence should be accepted as normal should equally strike you

as wrong and specious. And that is what it is.

3. THE ANIMAL WORLD SIGNPOST!

They claim the animal kingdom is replete, if not dominated with

instances of homosexuality. And because evolutionary thinking, man is

but an animal, there is nothing essentially strange and wrong with man

doing what is part of its very kingdom. Well, this argument depends on

how you wish to see man as an animal.

Man is a higher animal. That Man is a higher is rooted in its rational

nature of a kind and degree missing in the entire animal kingdom. A

rationality that differentiates and elevates the human being from the

instinctual prison of the animal world. Most of the observable

behaviours of animals are mostly controlled by instincts. As an

example animals kill and have sex with and among themselves

indiscriminately. It is these very mostly instinctual behaviours that

the rational animal....Man, to rising above.

That effort to rise above these mostly instinctual behaviours is the

basis of morality. Morality elevates us above what permeates the

animal kingdom, that is why it is cherished by all even as we struggle

with it. This need to free ourselves from the instinctual prisons of

the kingdom animalia, coupled with our rationality for the continuous

refining of our actions forms the basis of legal framework. Do you

think the legal framework has no moral foundation?

For that, among other things, human beings set up courts to adjudge

disputes and differences which is absent in the animal world. Why? Is

killing not part of the animal kingdom? Remember our instincts calls

for confrontation, not compromises let alone to talk of forgiveness.

But we realized the need for compromises and forgiveness in some of

these cases, and the results are far more beneficial than the

instinctual confrontation would, that is if any at all. Thanks to

morality.

Also there are laws almost everywhere to penalize people who might

like to have sex indiscriminately, which is equally absent in the

animal world. Why? Is having indiscriminate sex as in incest and co,

not part of the animal kingdom? Yet, are there not laws to reprimand

and prevent people who want to drown themselves in such sexual

behaviours. In sum, the courts representing the amalgamation of the

moral and rational nature of human beings, among other things, demands

that Man must necessarily rise above the animality within him.

It is unfortunate that, today, the legal framework feels so autonomous

to not only forget its origin in morality but also throw it out in

dealing with matters that have everything to do with morality. At this

point is necessary to paraphrase the ancient Greek philosoher

Democritus, who realized the conflict betwen the mind and senses, as

nature deceives mankind through the senses almost everyday. And in

some cases it takes the mind to put the senses on the right path or

reveal the truth to the senses.

Note that it is in some cases, not all cases. For instance sunrise and

sunset as well as seeing a pool of water on tarred road on a sunny

day, are everyday common illusions that the senses feed us with, and

duely corrected by the mind. Simply because the mind corrects most of

the data coming from the senses, the mind now believes that it alone

matters. That arrogance of the mind is what the Greek philosopher

captured concisely in an imaginary conversation between the mind and

senses. In that conversation between the sense and the mind, the

senses blurt out at the mind, "wretched mind, you took all the

evidences from us, only to throw us down". This is when the mind no

longer sees the indispensable role of the senses.

Read it again. This is exactly what legality, in the form of human

right is doing to morality. Simply because legality, and particulary

human rights had been instrumental in almost every facet of our lives

and improved upon it as in fighting against repression, oppression and

suppresion among others in society, it is beginning to assume autonomy

forgetting its true origin. Legality took all the evidences and

meanings and urging on from morality to do something, and then

eventually throws it out, that it has no say in matters, as witnessed

in homosexual marital saga. Tsooooooo!!!

CONCLUSION

The claims of homosexual activists about transgenders in Africa

societies as signposts of entrenched homosexual practices in Ghanaian

and Africa culture is clear misrepresentation and are for mischievious

ends. The fact that no society will accept to legalize suicide for all

citizens to have the support of the State to willingly and openly

engage in it exposes the specious argument of homosexuality is

harmless to society, hence it should be accepted and legalized.

Finally, there is no denial of the fact that human beings are animals.

But, more importantly human beings are rational animals.

We are animals whose nature demands that we free ourselve from the

animalistic instincts. Morality certainly has its roots in our

distinct rational nature. We can never limit our rationality to the

tremendous scientific, technological and political achievements that

are obnubilating us today. In other words the legalization of

homosexuality is a relapse into the instinctual prison of our

animality. For this, let me paraphrase Democritus once again, having

morality rightfully scorn legality that "wretched legality, you took

all the evidences and meanings from me, only to throw me down" that I

have no say about marriage again. Marriage is from home to court, not

from court to home.

Email:seshiehanku@gmail.com

Whatsapp: 0508951323

Columnist: Seshie, Stanley