Homosexuality and the wretched legality

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