When Pope Benedict XVI was reported to have endorsed the use of condoms to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS, Kenyan media, as usual, concentrated on the more salacious bits of the announcement, especially as the Holy Father's reported remarks were an example directed at male prostitutes. None chose to look at the fundamental shift in Roman Catholic doctrine that had been initiated by the Pope, especially when one considers his position on sexual relations within marriage, which he stated are an expression of love between couples. For centuries, Roman Catholic doctrine held that sex was for procreation alone and that it a sin of the flesh where sex is for other purposes.
The Holy Father, unwittingly, opened up debate on the matter of legislating moral issues. In the context of the latest assault on homosexuality in Kenya, the Pope offers us a unique opportunity to debate whether the personal moral failings of man can be legislated away, especially when they are not of intrinsic harm to society or individuals. Evangelical Christians tend to interpret the Bible in literal terms, especially when it means the continued and continuing growth of their flocks. As a result, their positions on homosexuality, as on many moral failings, are dogmatic and hard-line. For instance, they would probably call on a law to punish the seduction of married women. A simple thought exercise should suffice.
The Ten Commandments were handed down to Moses by the Almighty Himself on Mount Sinai. Among the commandments are some that would be very difficult to investigate or enforce. How do you know that a person has not coveted his neighbour's house, or his wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, or his ox, or his ass? And even if you did, how would you enforce a law criminalising such covetousness? The Bible is the Word of God, to many Christians, and to non-Christians, it also seen as a guide to how a man could live his life in a moral and spiritual way. To be good, is to follow the Word of God; to be bad is to sin and endanger your soul for all eternity. It will be the same with the writings in the other Holy Books of the Jews and the Muslims. After all, Abraham is the father of all these faiths.
During the Referendum campaign, many Kenyans of Faith, and many who chose not to disclose their faiths, were persuaded that the Constitution was a bad one because it seemed to permit homosexual marriages. Despite the assurances of the Committee of Experts, they refused to accept that even despite the lack of a definite ban on such unions, that they were not permitted; they wanted an explicit sentence stating that homosexual marriages are prohibited. They did not get their wish, and many are still living with the sense of betrayal that the refusal engendered. It was the same with abortion, and many still harbour wishes that the Constitution should be amended to explicitly ban these two issues. What they refuse to accept is that the Constitution of Kenya was not drafted to satisfy the moral and spiritual needs of Kenyans of Faith, but it was meant to provide the basis for the governance of all Kenyans, secular and non-secular alike. It is a sad fact that Kenya, while it may be home to millions of Christians, is not the spiritual home of Christians or Muslims alone, but is home to many faiths and to many people who do not profess any specific faith and that all their needs must also be considered in the interpretation of the Constitution.
It is a good thing that the process of amending the Bill of Rights is tedious and expensive. This is as a result of the abuse of office by the previous regimes that gave us a bastardised version of the Independence Constitution, one where Kenyans could be held in detention without trial and one where Kenyans could be deported to parts unknown to undergo procedures unknown at the hands of non-citizens, all in the name of 'The war on Terror'. The Prime Minister was wrong to indicate that the state would indulge in abuses against the Constitution simply to satisfy the blood-lust of a vocal minority of Kenyans opposed to homosexuality in all its forms. While it is true many Kenyans find the practice abhorrent, just like the Almighty does, it is not true that many are unduly bothered by what goes on between two consenting adults in the privacy of their homes. Kenyans must open and participate in the debate regarding the powers they would like to see the state exercise in the name of morality for in that debate, if we all agree that the state has a place in our private lives, then it will be with our permission that we allow the state to enter our bedrooms. For if we must allow the state to investigate and punish acts of homosexuality, then we must also allow the state to investigate and punish acts of sodomy or fellatio. After all, they are carnal acts against the order of nature too and are frowned upon by the Good Lord Himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment