THE FUSS ABOUT 'GAYISM' -MY THOUGHTS

Recently, I transcended into that mind space called 'nothingness' and  my journey into my mind space on the vehicle of 'transcendental thinking' brought me to the matter of 'Gayism'. Gayism is a term that I coined recently. So as far as this write up goes, it could mean 'Gay', 'Gay Marriage' or 'Gay Relations' depending on the context in which it is put in this write up.  I am a advocate that every human being has inalienable rights.  Rights are innate just by the very fact that we exist but can human rights be said to be totally absolute?

 The term 'Gay' as I understand it means 'lively', 'happy' or 'same sex relations' and it was popularly used to describe one's state of being but today 'Gay' is used to mostly describe people involved in same sex relations . While writing on this matter, I  find my self at a crossroads of whether to approach the issue from an academic point of view or a more casual approach and finally decided to do it with a mixture of both approaches. My intention is to bring this topic to you with the utmost care as it a matter that should be handled delicately. I am not here to give you facts and figures but just to share my thoughts. I did not delve into any religious or moral argument that 'gayism' is not normal or right because we need to see it from another angle for better understanding. Don't get me wrong, I am a child of God and I believe in what the bible says. The bible condemns the practice of 'gayism'. We can find evidence of this in Romans 1:24-28, Deuteronomy 23:17, Leviticus 20:13 and Leviticus 18:22-25. It's just that people easily jump to the religious and moral angle(depending of if your view on morality aligns with what the bible is preaching). I am just trying to take the bull by the horn from another perspective.

There have been many reactions on the marriage bill was recently legalized in the United States of America(USA). In summary, some percentage of people are totally against the move by the United States government, some are in support of the move and while the others are indifferent. Many countries, a large percentage of them being African countries are totally against the move by the United States Supreme Court legalizing gay marriage in the US. Despite President Obama's efforts to encourage some African countries to make the move legalize 'Gayism' in their constitution (typical of a world power to assume that everybody should take its course be it right or wrong just because they have chosen to do so), a large portion of Africans against it because it is not part of our cultural heritage.

As Africans, we consider it a taboo for two people of the same sex to engage in sexual acts not to talk of marriage between both sexes. The very act itself in most African communities is punishable by banishment, death or even exile. This behavior is not acceptable by most African societies but we still cannot deny the fact that even in the olden days there were same sex relations. It was just not popular as it is today.

In monasteries, temples, convents, seminaries, same sex boarding schools, etc, 'gayism'  is a very common practice. Looking far back in history the great founder of stoicism Zeno of Citium (an ancient Greek philosopher) and Alexander the great (Mecedonian king) have been known for their great love for teenage boys and young men. 'Gayism' have a long standing history in man's existence but not part of man's original make up.

In light of the above premise, I am left with the conclusion that the very act of 'gayism' is not intrinsic in man as many people have argued but an act brought about by curiosity in  nature of man into things that are part of his make up as a social animal. The evolution of the psychological and social development of man, his awareness of his abilities and the thirst to push past known boundaries has led to man's willingness to explore his sexual abilities past what is known as the norm. For example, two little boys who start touching themselves in their private part would be curious to know the extent at which they can take the sensations they are feeling within themselves to.The question is, 'are some boundaries worth crossing?'   Has man reached the peak of his civilization so much that defying the natural order of things is the only option to spice up his existence?

Our social existence is based on the premise of our inalienable rights as human beings and the freedom to express ourselves. But can we say that human rights in themselves are absolute. This brings to mind a famous quote by a french philosopher, J.J Rousseau, 'man is born free but everywhere he finds himself in chains'. The adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights(UDHR, 1948) by the United Nations General Assembly in my opinion is an evidence that Human rights in themselves are not absolute. There is always a limitation to every concept. For instance, a murderer who has been condemned to death by the State. The question is what right does the state have to take a life even though the murderer took the a life himself. Does it justify the death penalty meted out by the state as punishment? An abolitionist argument would be that he has a right to life and thus the state has no right to take his life. If we were to follow up this argument, the murderer has a right to life despite the fact that he cut short the life of another but the state decided to sentence him to death(limitation of his right to life) because of its obligation to ensure order in the society.


To further buttress this point,  If we look back into Hobbsean and Locke theory of how the society or government that we have today was garnered, we would see that the decision of man to surrender his right to 'the supreme' or 'the government' is further proof to us that rights in themselves are not absolute. Man recognized the fact that absolute freedom would mean that society his existence would be in chaos thus his surrender to a government and the formation of an advanced society. The laws which govern society were derived from the law of nature. 

In Nature, there is order. There is a natural order of things that have been set  that is why, two male lions mating will not mate, two female flies can not mate and reproduce etc. There are two dominant species in nature i .e male and female. This alone negates the relationship between people of same sex, who are married and have a desire to groom a child of their own. If 'gayism' was a natural inclination in man, mans physical make up should have been so constituted that he would be able to reproduce whether he mates with a member of the opposite sex or not.  In gays, there is always, the male and the female, the husband or the wife (even though they would be married as wife and wife or husband and husband) in the relationship. This further negates 'gayism as act because, there is still that mental reminder that one person must assume the role of the opposite sex. If gayism was a natural act, nature would have manifested it in its elements and it would have been part of the natural laws. Hence, there would be no controversy surrounding 'gayism'.

In summary, the point is - that rights are not absolute. If they were there would not be a government and that the laws which govern the state is based on the law of nature. In nature, there is order and thus it follows that since the laws which govern the state were formulated based on the orderly law of nature, 'gayism' is a contradiction to nature itself and thus to claim that 'gayism' should be legalized world wide (by its advocates) is an argument that is null and void.

The way forward. 

We must treat the matter of 'gayism' as a bug whose antidote we should be looking for. The matter of 'gayism'  is more of a psychological issue more than a human rights issue. I still maintain that the right of every human being should upheld but to say that 'gayism' has a  right in any constitution holds no substance because we would be defying the laws of nature that govern our very existence.

We must especially be perceptive to the younger generation whom we are grooming because our legacy and actions are what they have to build a future on. If a child begins to develop negative or abnormal tendencies from childhood, as parents we try to nip the matter in the bud! This is how we can combat this virus called 'gayism'.

In Nigeria , the government should support and empower NGOs, religious organisation and even hospitals to render free counselling services to individuals who are confused about their sexuality. Individuals also need to be educated that just because someone prefers same sex relations does not make the person less human. They shouldn't be treated any less rather people should embrace them with love and point out the way to redemption.


'The future of tomorrow's generation is being molded presently. Stand up for what is right to ensure a better tomorrow'  E.W