|
Post by mank on May 28, 2011 17:08:08 GMT 3
Well you will definitely find something quite as wacky as pink nail polish in Africa. The best Beauticians in Kenya are men. And somewhere make up and nail polish. Well, they say it belongs to marketing.
Those boys either had to do all duties, together with the women at home and actually got to liking it. Well, is that wacky? A child I a child and should be allowed to explore it’s world Kasuku, This is really not about gender roles, or personal exploration. If the 2 lunatics were using only their personal space to express whatever the sickness in their heads, it would not be any use to even comment. My comments in this case are an expression of my outrage at thinking about the poor child brought to this world only to be put in a box by these people. Gender roles do not develop in a vacuum. They develop with individuality and recognition of one's gender. Now here is a child born to captivity, its path to self discovery and expression deformed. As B6K posits I believe the child will with time "hear" the hormones inside calling it to express itself. Imagine though, the barrier the child will have in front of itself at that time - the child denied a chance to tell the world whether it was born a girl or boy will now be "hearing" voices in itself saying "go now to the same world you are a deception to, and tell it the truth of who you are ... and ask it to give you your fair share". I believe abducted children who have to be dressed in all forms of disguise when traveling somewhere make more sense of the world around them than the poor kid in this story can. B6K mentioned "when this kid plays pee pee with its peers". I think this rather a generous view of what world these parents are giving the child. The kid has no peers! Is there any other house in its neighbourhood where parents are keen on raising a child without gender identity? If the parents are so keen on not revealing the gender of the child even to friends, are they letting it do anything that would spill the beans? Simply the child cannot play pee pee with any child. ... and I imagine other children would call it ET. .. after the famous child fantasy movie. Now I see Merlin is saying exactly what I have been saying all along. This happens at the same time I think the thread has now evolved to beyond homosexuality (where it was shackled inspite of its general title) ... into child abuse disguised as sexual expression.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on May 28, 2011 17:51:02 GMT 3
KK, you also just derailed your African sexualities thread by posting the link. An example of some African couple would've been more appropriate. I doubt you'll find anything quite as whacky in Africa though. Well you will definitely find something quite as wacky as pink nail polish in Africa. The best Beauticians in Kenya are men. And somewhere make up and nail polish. Well, they say it belongs to marketing. Those boys either had to do all duties, together with the women at home and actually got to liking it. Well, is that wacky? A child I a child and should be allowed to explore it’s world Kasuku, there's nothing new under the sun. In Niger & Nigeria there is a tribe called the Wadoobe. They hold a ceremonial dance where the men put on colourful makeup & perform for unattached women. The women decide who they want to marry. That said, they are still typically African in other respects. The men practice polygamy & should a wife leave her husband for another freaky dancer, she has to leave the kids behind. saharanvibe.blogspot.com/2007/02/wodaabe-beauty-ceremony.html
|
|
|
Post by merlin on May 28, 2011 18:12:31 GMT 3
Mank,
I do not think this child abuse will work. The poor kid has some experimenting parents but also two brothers Jazz, 5, and Kio, 2. No change to influence the gender aspect. Nurture is an important aspect to bring out the best in children, to inspire and challenge the natural talents of the kid though it seems impossible to change the basic nature of the child.
The opposite is to suppress talents of the child – in name of nurture. Suppression can happened with brute force when you read the beastly stories in the newspaper how parents treat their children, which often lead to trauma. The suppression of talents can also mean suppression of homosexual urges.
I perceive the experimenting parents are craving for a girl and unluckily brought only boys into this world. They now like to change this with nurturing the baby into a girl to satisfy their own preferences.
For everything we do there is an urge, sometimes conscious and sometimes hidden.
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 28, 2011 21:31:36 GMT 3
Merlin,
The observations I have made in my life and those of my peers is that the scars of child abuse never disappear. Abused children who prosper socially and economically can put those scars yards behind the experiences they have acquired on their path to prosperity. Yet even they have moments when they go back to the agony of "why did it happen to me?" Those who do not prosper never get anything else to occupy their minds, but the agony of their child abuse. Its the majority of this category of people that are often said to be "cursed". They are lucky if they only grow to be reserved individuals whose presence among others is always like no presence at all.
The siblings of this kid could actually add to the abuse rather than reduce it as you argue they can. Siblings do bully one another, and you can imagine the hell they can create if they take on making fun of the "genderless child", the Extra-Terestrial.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2011 7:52:52 GMT 3
KK,I started to participate in this thread on the wrong footing. I perceived it was about a broad spectrum of African Sexuality though now understanding you like a discussion about Homosexuality. So why didn’t you said so? You surely must have your reasons not to be open and straightforward about it though must realise by now the discussion is not really going anywhere. We discussed homosexuality in another thread “Esther Adhiambo on Homophobia” jukwaa.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=5450&page=1#ixzz1NCaMwVJx which shows a discussion pattern where the subject is openly addressed and the participants moving from a prejudice stand towards realising the essence of the social problem. Also the aversive positions are slowly shrinking. I found this a very worthwhile discussion a gem on the JUKWAA board. It is impossible to discuss a subject if the instigator is not open about it – or very clear for him/her self. If you like discussions about homosexuality then open a thread that clearly indicates this. It could be of help if you define for yourself what you try to achieve and analyse afterwards how close you achieved your goal. I don’t think you can convert anyone to homosexuality though probably create a better acceptance for homosexuality as part of society. I also perceive that JUKWAA is not the best place for finding homosexual contacts and friendship. Your discussion is ambivalent - Homosexuality or Sexuality. It probably is part of your life feeling different gender urges which is not unusual and we all go through these phases in due time. I think at the end we just make a choice to be male or female however some of us limp with one leg in the male and the other in the female gender. Some later in life make a choice the change from gender – even after raising children.Society – other people – don’t like ambivalence and get annoyed (feel cheated). Though don’t worry about this, just discuss what you like especially in the anonymity of JUKWAA. Regarding raising children and nurture gender position. I perceive it is easier for the child to relate to one or the other gender type otherwise the situation could occur where you find yourself in. I have only (4) girls and no experience in raising boys. I found there is a bit of both gender types in my girls though the female gender dominates. However I buy them all sort of toys from dolls to cars. It is their choice and does little to direct gender issues however it is society - the school - who demands a choice of gender. MerlinYou are taking the stance that Mank has been taking here for a while now. As I explained clearly to him in my responses "African Sexualities" doesn't denote heterosexual african sexualities but rather the full scope of human sexual expression which as you know includes LGBTI sexual expressions. So, I am very clear about what I'm doing. As I said to Mank feel free to talk about hetrosexuality all you want on this thread but don't oblige others to do so. Nobody can "covert" anyone to homosexuality as nobody can "convert" anyone into heterosexuality. Sexual orientation is hard wired. The problem is that too many hetro folks think that their sexual expression is the only legitimate one. That really is the problem! That is why so many people who are LGBTI have to stay in the closet. I was already fully cognizant of the resistance I'd meet by raising the issues of diverse sexualities. That is life. We have as much choice as Black people have had in resisting racial oppression, or women in resisting sexist oppression. We have to face it and deal with it straight up. Even as I agree that JUKWAA is not the place to make contacts with LGBTI people; homophobia doesn't allow us to know that for sure. So many closeted people and I don't blame them. 'Your discussion is ambivalent - Homosexuality or Sexuality. It probably is part of your life feeling different gender urges which is not unusual and we all go through these phases in due time. I think at the end we just make a choice to be male or female however some of us limp with one leg in the male and the other in the female gender.' Merlin, here you lose me. Homosexuality is one form of human sexual expression as I've already said above. You do know that there is a difference between sexual orientation and gender identity. You seem to be collapsing the two here. Though I agree with you that women and men carry both the female and male principles, there are people who can not "limp with one leg in the male and the other in the female gender". There are people who are trans-gender and that is all there is to it. This is another area of the human condition that we are going to have to understand as we become a more civilized humanity. "It is their choice and does little to direct gender issues however it is society - the school - who demands a choice of gender."You are right. If one is a forward looking parent and wants to parent outside of boxes which are usually hetronormartive, sexist, racist (for white parents) classist; to parent oppositionally, against the grain, this is frowned upon by mainstream society. Why must society, the schools demand choice in gender. Gender too is hard wired and by the time the kids are 3yrs or there about they articulate what gender they are. Even without knowing the terror that awaits them should they deviate from the "norm". more later.
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 30, 2011 11:17:48 GMT 3
KK,
How are your sister mine?
Merlin is saying what Man K has been saying for a while ... Surprise surprise! Yes, Merlin, where the HELL have you been so long?
KK, women need men ... no less than men need women. We are a community. Look for the positive in men, and it is there in plenty (or are your willing to come to I and I land and I will give you an orientation? Even Ciokalaine (to us what Wangu wa Makeri was to our brethren yonder) needed men ... and even while they were her benches she knew (and bent to) their strengths. That's our history ... the Njiru (which I am sure your are, and so am I), the Njeru and the Ntune! Now we have multiples, but those, sister, are the original clans of the Amiiru. Dig deep and you will find, what women had to do so we can be what we are. Exalted be they, the sources of our nourishment when it was needed most.
Gender roles are specialization ... same thing as Adam Smith spoke of. You cannot deny a child its identity so to empower it. Shame to I for I hail from a society that does these abominable things.... so you who exert them then has to take my punches. They are coming bountiful sister!
Man K
|
|
|
Post by Luol Deng on May 30, 2011 15:55:09 GMT 3
I have kept away from this thread because as has been said before, I feel that KK is being insincere. There was another thread on sexuality & bigotry that was discussed before, I gave my views there and will not repeat the same again. First things first, the article that acts as a basis for this entire discussion doesn't give much in the way of facts on "African Sexualities". I have been all across the continent and would be curious to read what the authors had to say on this topic. The initial apporach by these types was to picture the opponents of the Homosexual lifestyle as religious zealots. The second way has been the re-writing of history that traditional African societies tolerated homosexuality but the missionaries brought homophobia with them. The third approach has been to say that culture is not static and therefore we must accept changes in society.
It is clear that none of the three approaches has gained much traction in Africa. The preamble to the book in question doesn't reveal much but I presume they are taking the second option to try and prove that homosexuality was acceptable in traditional African societies. There are several books that take that option but the research work is often flaky at best.
There was this rather weird claim made by KK:
There is no way I am going to let the "sexual orientation is hard wired" claim go unchallenged. First of all, this very claim was made almost 20 years back, it was debunked less than a year later and there is no further study that has been able to come any closer to the "homosexuality gene" myth. Even with the improved technology in gene sequencing, the gay gene is yet to be identified and that is not because of the lack of trying. Secondly, even if there is such a gene, there are further challenges ahead. Genes are passed on through procreation, homosexuals have traditionally not reproduced (that may not be the case now with test tube babies, etc). So, if they don't reproduce, how the hell do they pass their genes? Unless there is another way of passing traits other than procreation.....
So, in brief, homosexuality is a lifestyle of choice. If you have compelling evidence that it is hardwired feel free to share.
|
|
|
Post by merlin on May 30, 2011 17:34:53 GMT 3
KK, and AllSexual orientation is hard wired?I am not so sure about this. Children and even adults go through phases where they experiment with both sides of sexuality. I perceive we possess male and female characteristics though like with colour of the eyes some genes become dominant which can be classified on the basis of median splits as 'Masculine' (high masculinity, low femininity), 'Feminine' (high femininity, low masculinity), 'Androgynous' (high masculinity and femininity), or 'Undifferentiated' (low masculinity and femininity). However I like to move away from the biological discussion of homosexuality which cannot be denied. I prefer to discuss the social aspect of homosexuality with the aim to create understanding and acceptance for their minority position. The problem is that too many hetero folks think that their sexual expression is the only legitimate one.This is always the challenge for minorities. Every individual of the majority get convinced by the surroundings his/her way is the right one - and all others are wrong. They will deny you equal treatment access to resources and pressure you to become like them. However if you persist in pointing out your position with the aim of obtaining recognition and equal treatment eventually you will succeed. This is what this discussion is about, recognition, acceptance and equality. It is therefore of no use to discuss the biological aspects of homosexuality which is an attempt to convert you to the majority. To make your quest for equality successful you clearly have to define your position. This is why it is not so useful to talk about AFRICAN SEXUALITIES & GENDER IDENTITIES. This confuses people – as shown in this thread - and your objectives get lost. Why not define it as “Homosexuality in African social environment” Again Homosexuality is a social issue like race was/is a social issue in America.
|
|
|
Post by Luol Deng on Jun 1, 2011 2:59:24 GMT 3
Merlin, The reason why I was raising the biological points was to clearly define the basis of the ensuing discussion. When agitating for rights, we have to understand the basis of those demands. If homosexuality were an involuntary condition, nothing short of full equality would suffice. I would be in absolute agreement. What we have though is a lifestyle that is a CHOICE. Despite what the gay rights activists may want to say concerning it not being a choice, there is no scientific evidence to back up this claim. There is a reason why this fallacy has been oft repeated in the media, but that is a discussion for another day. If the gay community on the other hand acknowledges the fact that it is their preferred lifestyle of choice, and that their rights should be respected, it would be a different issue altogether. We are not in denial that such behaviour will persist and that it is very difficult to legislate on personal morality. On Monday this week there was this article on the standard: www.standardmedia.co.ke/mag/InsidePage.php?id=2000036087&cid=349&It went through details on how girls were engaged in lesbian relations just to be a step ahead of their parents. It stated that the parents would be suspicious if they go out with boys but would suspect nothing if they go out with the girls.........Well, if that is their choice, that is their problem. Although such behaviour is criminalised, it is extremely difficult to enforce & to prosecute. Because, coming to think of it, how will someone tell whether two people are gay unless they out themselves? Is it by living together? Due to the increase in rent, it is not unusual to find 2 men living together in the same house (I know several). That doesn't mean that they are gay. In the same way, it would be difficult to establish whether one engages in unnatural sex acts as stated in the Kenyan law unless you catch the person red handed or go on a witch hunt. So, even conservatives like me would admit that it is difficult for the 'long arm of the law' to be applied in some cases without infringing on someones basic rights. The situation however changes when a homosexual outs him/herself or is outed in one way or another. If there is reasonable evidence for prosecution then the law of the land has to be applied to the letter. So in brief, the homosexuals should stay in the closet where they are and we will not bother them.
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 1, 2011 23:05:10 GMT 3
Luoldeng,
If I understand you well, you make a difference in granting human rights and equality in relation with biological characteristics as this is compulsory and not on characteristics of choice.
I dispute this relation. People differ not only on biological characteristics though also on choice how to give meaning to their life. People differ in their choice of religion, choice to get married or stay single, choice of husband or wife, choice how many wives they will have, choice how many children they will have, choice of profession, choice of sexual abstention, and many other choices.
People have many choices though they have the freedom to do so without losing their human rights. So where does your opinion find its basis that people who choose to have a homosexual relation loses their human rights - or stay in the closet as you express it?
Morality
You perceive it will be very difficult to legislate on personal morality. I perceive this is the key issue. I like to shift the discussion from homosexuality to morality. However morality is an amorphous expression. It varies from person to person. Two forms of moral code systems can be distinguished;
Morality in Descriptive sense This refers to personal or cultural values. In Kenya there are many cultures and religions and even within these, morality varies from person to person. A person can think anything about the behaviour of others though cannot vindicate, fire him/her from employment, deny access to education, etc. on basis of his personal moral code. This will amount to discrimination.
Morality in Normative sense This refers directly to what is right and wrong, regardless of what specific individuals think. It could be defined as the conduct of the ideal "moral" person in a certain situation. This usage of the term is characterized by "definitive" statements such as "That act is immoral" rather than descriptive ones such as "Many believe that act is immoral." The morality in normative sense has found its way into the country’s constitution and penal codes. It is not left hanging in the air or left to personal moral values and neither to religious or other groups within society who have their defined moral values.
Here lays the essence of the conflict in our society. Religious groups like the Catholic Church have taken it up onto themselves to be the guardians of morality for the whole of society though this is not correct as Kenya is a secular society. The Catholic Church can only set moral values for the members of their church which only apply within the precinct of their church. They cannot dictate moral values and what is right or wrong for the rest of Kenya. They can dictate that homosexuals will not find employment within their church or Catholic institutions but that is the limit of their scope.
They can have an opinion about homosexuality though cannot incite their members to discriminate or victimise homosexuals outside the precinct of the church. The same is valid for anyone’s personal moral values. You can stop homosexuals from entering your house though you cannot discriminate or victimise homosexuals outside your house in the public area.
What is right or wrong in the public area is laid down in the constitution and the law of Kenya. It is not a personal right or wrong or a religious, sectarian one though a democratic agreement of all Kenyans. Homosexuals or anyone can make an appeal for human rights and equality based on the Kenyan laws. They do not have to stay in the closet as they have the same rights as you and me to forward their quest for recognition, acknowledgement and acceptance to be members of the Kenyan society.
Anyone who denies homosexuals this right is in breach with the laws of Kenyan.
|
|
|
Post by madgf on Jun 9, 2011 18:48:49 GMT 3
people who choose to have a homosexual relation loses their human rights - or stay in the closet as you express it? If we define people as legal entities and not as moral beings. Catholic Church have taken it up onto themselves to be the guardians of morality for the whole of society though this is not correct as Kenya is a secular society. The church + kadhi has provisions in the katiba concerning moral duty. Homosexuals or anyone can make an appeal for human rights and equality based on the Kenyan laws. In the universal charter set by the UN.. but not for sexual relation preferences. Kenyan laws regard it as sodomy (law).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2011 2:58:30 GMT 3
Semenya on track to cast off gender controversy
Posted Wednesday, June 8 2011 at 19:17 Oslo
Caster Semenya has bucked the controversy over her gender and has now targeted a successful Diamond League campaign in the run-up to the bid to defend her World 800m title in August.
The 20-year-old stormed to victory in the 2009 World Athletics Championships but was cast into limbo soon after because of allegations over her true gender.
The South African was revealed to be a hermaphrodite after the leaking of test results following her 800m win in Berlin.
The incident generated anger from the South African public and the IAAF in April introduced new eligibility rules for women athletes with excessive male hormones, a medical condition known as hyperandrogenism.
Semenya was cleared to compete as a woman in July 2010, nearly a year after she shot to prominence.
“It wasn’t easy to come back after the IAAF ban, but this was the goal,” Semenya admitted ahead of Thursday’s Bislett Games in Oslo, the fifth of the 14-leg IAAF Diamond League series.
Second fastest this year
The race on Thursday will be Semenya’s third of the season: she won an IAAF Challenge event in Dakar and then finished second at the Diamond League race in Eugene, Oregon, on Saturday.
“The first 150 metres were too slow, and I made some other minor mistakes,” she said of her Eugene outing, undertaken despite a 34-hour trip to the United States.
She however managed to dip under the 1:59 mark, which made her second fastest in the world this year.
And she seems to be slowly getting back on track to the amazing form she displayed in 2009 when she clocked a jaw-dropping personal best of 1:55.45 in winning the World gold.
“In Oslo, I want to remain below 1:58, maybe 1:57, but everything happens with an eye on the World Championships in South Korea.”
Semenya faces a tough outing at Bislett – including former World champion and Olympic silver medallist Janeth Jepkosgei of Kenya.
Admitting she will have to work on her endurance ahead of the Worlds and the Olympics, she acknowledged that defending the world title was on her radar.
(AFP)
www.nation.co.ke/sports/athletics/Semenya+on+track+to+cast+off+gender+controversy++/-/1100/1177410/-/bbc9frz/-/index.htmlThe correct terms are not hermaphrodite but inter-sexed/intersexual. Just as Blacks in US and Canada no longer accept the term "negro" same here. See below for links to more information. "One out of every two thousand children in America is born intersexual" That is the same statistic for Canada. "...intersexual show us that gender is infinitely more complex than shape of the genitals"Next time you hear a Kenyan family freaking out because their child was born with ambiguous gender tell them about those who have grown up, and lived to tell us what they would have wanted. Mainly, leave them alone until the children themselves declare their gender. No gender reassignment unless people ask for it themselves please. The statistics are staggering and so we can say that it is a disability or just part of human gender diversity. I go with the latter.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Jun 10, 2011 7:23:10 GMT 3
Kathure,
So should there be a separate league in every sport for the "inter-sexed or intersexual", or what do you think is fair?
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 10, 2011 8:18:21 GMT 3
people who choose to have a homosexual relation loses their human rights - or stay in the closet as you express it? If we define people as legal entities and not as moral beings. The church + kadhi has provisions in the katiba concerning moral duty. Homosexuals or anyone can make an appeal for human rights and equality based on the Kenyan laws. In the universal charter set by the UN.. but not for sexual relation preferences. Kenyan laws regard it as sodomy (law). Madgf,People are moral beings with every individual be free to live according to its personal morals. We discuss here how one individual imposes its personal moral values over another individual. I am afraid this cannot be done. You can have an opinion over another though you cannot demand the other to behave according to your personal morals. This does not mean that an individual can do what he likes. Society as a whole has moral values which are applicable to everyone within that society. These moral values have found their way into the law of the society. So people are both; moral beings and as member of society a legal entity. Trouble occurs when people overstep their legal obligations and impose their personal moral values over others – this is called discrimination. The same occurs when groups of people within the society impose their group moral values over others – mostly religious organisations. The church + kadhi has provisions in the katiba concerning moral duty.The constitution has recognised the Kadhis’ Courts though as a legal entity. Searching the constitution will not find any references to Islam, Church, Christian or Christianity. Religion is only mentioned in article 8, 24, and 27 State and religion 8. There shall be no State religion.
Limitation of rights and fundamental freedoms 24. (4) The provisions of this Chapter on equality shall be qualified to the extent strictly necessary for the application of Muslim law before the Kadhis’ courts, to persons who profess the Muslim religion, in matters relating to personal status, marriage, divorce and inheritance.
Equality and freedom from discrimination 27. (1) Every person is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law. (2) Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and fundamental freedoms. (3) Women and men have the right to equal treatment, including the right to equal opportunities in political, economic, cultural and social spheres. (4) The State shall not discriminate directly or indirectly against any person on any ground, including race, sex, pregnancy, marital status, health status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, dress, language or birth. (5) A person shall not discriminate directly or indirectly against another person on any of the grounds specified or contemplated in clause (4). Searching for the expression “Moral” results in articles 50, 66, 99, 159, 193 Fair hearing 50. (8) This Article does not prevent the exclusion of the press or other members of the public from any proceedings if the exclusion is necessary, in a free and democratic society, to protect witnesses or vulnerable persons, morality, public order or national security.
Regulation of land use and property 66. (1) The State may regulate the use of any land, or any interest in or right over any land, in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality, public health, or land use planning.
Qualifications and disqualifications for election as member of Parliament 99. (1) Unless disqualified under clause (2), a person is eligible for election as a member of Parliament if the person— (a) is registered as a voter; (b) satisfies any educational, moral and ethical requirements prescribed by this Constitution or by an Act of Parliament; and
Judicial authority 159. (3) Traditional dispute resolution mechanisms shall not be used in a way that— (b) is repugnant to justice and morality or results in outcomes that are repugnant to justice or morality; or (2) Each judge of a superior court shall be appointed from among persons who— (c) have a high moral character, integrity and impartiality.
Qualifications for election as member of county assembly 193. (2), a person is eligible for election as a member of a county assembly if the person— (b) satisfies any educational, moral and ethical requirements prescribed by this Constitution or an Act of Parliament; and I perceive the use of the expression moral or morality as confusing in a legal document especially the constitution. The expression does not define what is exactly meant and leaves this open to personal interpretation which weakens the law. (You saw how the discussion for the new CJ and DCJ became useless when church leaders started to complain about morals). If the church leaders take the appointment of the new CJ or DCJ to court then morality will be left to the personal moral values of the judge as there is no common agreed definition of moral values available. Nothing will be lost when the expression moral or morality is removed from the constitution, it only will strengthening the usefulness of the constitution. In the universal charter set by the UN.. but not for sexual relation preferences. Kenyan laws regard it as sodomy (law). I perceive you are right the Kenyan law regards a homosexual sexual act as sodomy though this does not legalise discrimination of people living in a homosexual relation in other spheres of society and seems to be in conflict with article 27 sub 4 of the constitution. I perceive the Kenyan law regards any sexual act in public as illegal.
|
|
|
Post by madgf on Jun 10, 2011 9:00:01 GMT 3
Jurisprudence is not law. Like you say, morality is subject to practice. The law can not define something personal in a liberal democratic society. By adding morality it provides leeway to avoid lawful, callous rulings. Churches are recognized as institutions and not religions. They get the same treatment as NGOs, charities, community etc. What makes them legit is their regard for moral duty as an institution, without it, they'd be considered a dangerous sect or scammers. The church as a moral institution can express their views on this matter, that's why the Vatican and Islamic theocracies are the global hegemonies on moral issues.. especially concerning sexuality.
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 10, 2011 22:13:00 GMT 3
Jurisprudence is not law. Like you say, morality is subject to practice. The law can not define something personal in a liberal democratic society. By adding morality it provides leeway to avoid lawful, callous rulings. Churches are recognized as institutions and not religions. They get the same treatment as NGOs, charities, community etc. What makes them legit is their regard for moral duty as an institution, without it, they'd be considered a dangerous sect or scammers. The church as a moral institution can express their views on this matter, that's why the Vatican and Islamic theocracies are the global hegemonies on moral issues.. especially concerning sexuality. madgf,Jurisprudence is not law. Like you say, morality is subject to practice. The law can not define something personal in a liberal democratic society.Law has little to do with something personal and here you should make the distinction between personal moral values, habits, and being a member of society dealing with others around you. Only then enters law the picture. You do not need morality in law. Law without morality will not lead to callous rulings. Law with morality will lead to discriminating rulings. By the way I did not mention morality is subject to practise. I made a distinction between Morality in Descriptive sense and Morality in Normative sense which is the essence of my arguments.Churches are recognized as institutions and not religions. They get the same treatment as NGOs, charities, community etcYou are correct I made no distinction between churches and religion as I find it difficult to imagine a church without their religion. The essence of churches is their gospel and ownership of truth. Churches are autocratic and like to impose their truth and moral values on the rest of society. NGOs, charities have goals and objectives. What makes them legit is their regard for moral duty as an institution, without it, they'd be considered a dangerous sect or scammers.I do not know who authorize and under which conditions they become legitimate. Although you offer an answer it does not convinces me sufficiently. Maybe you can reveal your source of information for legalising churches, NGOs, Charities and community? The church as a moral institution can express their views on this matter, that's why the Vatican and Islamic theocracies are the global hegemonies on moral issues.. especially concerning sexuality.I have to disagree with you. Hegemony means they are in control have the power and authority to impose their moral values on the world. It is only the Islamic theocracies in Islamic ruled countries that have hegemony. The Vatican has been in such a position in the far past though I do not know any country that is ruled by Christian laws. Their sphere of influence has reduced to Christian institutions and often there they have to comply with laws of the country. Kenya is not ruled by Christian laws though is a secular society. So everyone has the freedom to live by their own moral values though have to comply with the constitution and other laws of Kenya.
|
|
|
Post by nyarsiaya on Jun 10, 2011 22:52:12 GMT 3
Kathure with all due respect your arguments are not convincing. I have heard of this comparisons before (LGBQT Vs. Civil rights) and must say that I find them misplaced and disrespectful to the past of African Americans.
Semenya is a hermaphrodite, the right and scientific term of what her sexual orientation is. It is a biological phenomenon that was due to a failed differentiation (am certain you know this). A mutation if you may. Semenya in her condition (without human maneauver) is incapable of reproduction, for instance.
How can this, totally physiological happening be remotely compared to AAs and their rejection of "Black or Negro" terminology
At times I think we listen to too much noise and let the noise rule over substance. While I sympathise with LGBQT, I think that it clutches on some things that weaken it's fight.
|
|
|
Post by Luol Deng on Jun 11, 2011 0:04:57 GMT 3
merlin,
Seems like this thread is not going to die anytime soon.
You have stated the distinctions between morality in the descriptive sense & the normative sense. I'd rather put it as relative vs absolute morality. The relative sense is my own application of morals as I see it, the absolute sense is the application as prescribed. The Catholic church is definitely rooting for the latter even on matters of what I may term personal morals, the liberals are rooting for the former. On this issue I stand for the most part with the liberals simply because we cannot have a single religious entity prescribing to us what is right or wrong. We saw it last week in Malta where the Catholic church was supporting the status quo (Divorce remaining illegal).
There are other areas where there is no clear cut distinction of what the state can do or cannot do. Sexuality is one such area, no two countries ever treat the issue in the same way. There are those who choose to handle it extremely conservatively e.g. Uganda, Vatican, Saudi Arabia, etc. There are others who opt to handle it extremely liberally e.g The Netherlands, Scandinavian countries, etc. but even in the extremely liberal countries there is a modicum of control. Most of the countries in the world fall in between these extremes. Although enforcing such laws is difficult, they are there in the books nonetheless.
On the treatment of homosexuals, the constitution has a bill of rights. Everybody has rights under the constitution, and that includes criminals. Although the constitution doesn't explicitly ban homosexuality (the constitution is not meant to be prescriptive), the definition of a family was fashioned the way it is because Kenyans wanted nothing to do with gay rights. The laws of the republic also criminalise sodomy, unnatural sex acts etc. So, all will depend on how you treat the homosexuals.....You can treat them as equals since you are free to associate with whoever you choose. You may treat them as deviants as the constitution implicitly treats them. You can also treat them as criminals as the penal code treats them. So, the matter of denying homosexuals rights is relative to one's interpretation of the laws. This is the reason why I think the supreme court will be called in to interpret the issue of gay rights and one's ideological persuasion will be key. The liberals have made it clear that the constitution supports gay rights, social conservatives will have none of it.
You seem quite keen on establishing a link between religion (Christianity & Islam in this case) and anti-homosexuality and that we cannot legislate on personal morals. You are not quite correct on both counts. First, I have interacted with Hindus of a certain sect whose reaction to homosexuals was along the lines of the Ugandan example. A few years ago the Dalai Lama condemned homosexuality, the silence that proceeded was loud. Personally I first learnt of homosexuality via the society and not through religion. My religion's treatment of homosexuality came a lot later. I am struggling to find any indigenous community that condones the homosexual way of life, so, the issue here may be beyond religion. On the legislation on morals, we have a lot of legislation that covers personal morality. Otherwise how would one categorise legislation that bans bestiality, polygamy, incest, etc??
On your references to prayer in public schools in America, I think it wouldn't cause much consternation in Kenya. I for one did my early primary education at Aga Khan primary in Mombasa. At the time the school was partly public & partly private. It went totally private when the free primary education thing was introduced. The religious breakdown by then was roughly Muslim 50%, Christian 35% Hindu 15%. There was no prayer in school. In fact I became acquainted with 'School prayer' later on when we moved to Nairobi and the religious mix tilted to 95+% Christian & ~4% other. Even as a Christian, I don't think the prayers achieved much since all we did was to cram the prayers, etc. It is like the loyalty pledge that I crammed and still remember it to the last letter, but I never meant any of it when reciting it.
Finally, I have to say that I sympathise with the plight of gays as individuals. I remember listening to a program on the BBC's network Africa where a Kenyan lesbian narrated of how she was confronted by men, beaten up & had her clothes torn to pieces. I don't advocate for the homosexual lifestyle, but a human being is a human being, there is no need of treating them like trash. The gay community better remain in the closet, because if they rush things, the ultra conservatives may be forced to enact an amendment that will shackle them further.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Jun 11, 2011 0:24:10 GMT 3
Kathure with all due respect your arguments are not convincing. I have heard of this comparisons before (LGBQT Vs. Civil rights) and must say that I find them misplaced and disrespectful to the past of African Americans.
Semenya is a hermaphrodite, the right and scientific term of what her sexual orientation is. It is a biological phenomenon that was due to a failed differentiation (am certain you know this). A mutation if you may. Semenya in her condition (without human maneauver) is incapable of reproduction, for instance.
How can this, totally physiological happening be remotely compared to AAs and their rejection of "Black or Negro" terminology
At times I think we listen to too much noise and let the noise rule over substance. While I sympathise with LGBQT, I think that it clutches on some things that weaken it's fight. I thought of saying precisely this earlier but decided that Kathure is intentionally mingling the concepts. I am glad you took the time to state it.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Jun 11, 2011 2:00:12 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 12, 2011 16:57:04 GMT 3
merlin, Seems like this thread is not going to die anytime soon. luoldeng, Your comment; You have stated the distinctions between morality in the descriptive sense & the normative sense. I'd rather put it as relative vs absolute morality. The relative sense is my own application of morals as I see it, the absolute sense is the application as prescribed. The Catholic church is definitely rooting for the latter even on matters of what I may term personal morals, the liberals are rooting for the former. On this issue I stand for the most part with the liberals simply because we cannot have a single religious entity prescribing to us what is right or wrong. We saw it last week in Malta where the Catholic church was supporting the status quo (Divorce remaining illegal). I accept your terminology of relative versus absolute morality though I used the commonly accepted terms (see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality) I like your distinction between liberals and conservative. I relate progressiveness with liberal and inertia with conservative although in general terms. The church is conservative which is understandable as any activity to thrust humanity forward means diminishing influence of the church. Although individual priests stood for progression of Kenya, the church as an institution has never supported this hence their NO position on the Referendum for the new constitution and their objections against the nomination of Dr Willy Mutunga and Nancy Barasa for CJ resp. DCJ. and again in Malta as you mentioned. (Read also “The declining soft power of the Church in Kenya” by Mukhisa Kituyi Sunday nation 12/06/2011 www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/The+declining+soft+power+of+the+Church+in+Kenya+/-/440808/1178358/-/leh9ej/-/index.html ) The church seems to be the last wagon of the progression train and is in danger to lose connection. There are other areas where there is no clear cut distinction of what the state can do or cannot do. Sexuality is one such area, no two countries ever treat the issue in the same way. There are those who choose to handle it extremely conservatively e.g. Uganda, Vatican, Saudi Arabia, etc. There are others who opt to handle it extremely liberally e.g The Netherlands, Scandinavian countries, etc. but even in the extremely liberal countries there is a modicum of control. Most of the countries in the world fall in between these extremes. Although enforcing such laws is difficult, they are there in the books nonetheless. I agree with you though the discussion is not about the position of Kenya on the progressivity list. In my perspective we discussing ways and means to create a better Kenya and my definition of better is a Kenya with less poverty and less suffering. Also the progressive countries have laws covering sexuality however these laws are not based on morality though on the basis of protecting their citizen from suffering; exploitation and forced sexual relations. The laws on sexuality in Uganda and to a lesser extend in Kenya are based on morals and discriminate citizens who are no threat to others or society. On the treatment of homosexuals, the constitution has a bill of rights. Everybody has rights under the constitution, and that includes criminals. Although the constitution doesn't explicitly ban homosexuality (the constitution is not meant to be prescriptive), the definition of a family was fashioned the way it is because Kenyans wanted nothing to do with gay rights. The laws of the republic also criminalise sodomy, unnatural sex acts etc. So, all will depend on how you treat the homosexuals.....You can treat them as equals since you are free to associate with whoever you choose. You may treat them as deviants as the constitution implicitly treats them. You can also treat them as criminals as the penal code treats them. So, the matter of denying homosexuals rights is relative to one's interpretation of the laws. This is the reason why I think the supreme court will be called in to interpret the issue of gay rights and one's ideological persuasion will be key. The liberals have made it clear that the constitution supports gay rights, social conservatives will have none of it. I understand fully that the current society is not ready to accept homosexuality though someone somewhere has to open-up the discussion with the aim to reduce suffering of individuals. It is not a specific plea for Homosexuality though for a better Kenya. Suppressing homosexuals is actually suppressing our own progress for a better Kenya Again, although the bill of rights is there to protect the citizens of Kenya several other laws are there to enforce and discriminate by the majority over minority groups in society. The slogan; in a democracy the minority have their say and the majority their way is not reflecting the intended meaning of democracy. The basis of democracy is to give freedom to everyone to do what they like as long as they do not limit the freedom of others. In this respect are all laws who limit the freedom of minorities based on the likes or dislikes of the majority (morals) undemocratic. You seem quite keen on establishing a link between religion (Christianity & Islam in this case) and anti-homosexuality and that we cannot legislate on personal morals. You are not quite correct on both counts. First, I have interacted with Hindus of a certain sect whose reaction to homosexuals was along the lines of the Ugandan example. A few years ago the Dalai Lama condemned homosexuality, the silence that proceeded was loud. Personally I first learnt of homosexuality via the society and not through religion. My religion's treatment of homosexuality came a lot later. I am struggling to find any indigenous community that condones the homosexual way of life, so, the issue here may be beyond religion. On the legislation on morals, we have a lot of legislation that covers personal morality. Otherwise how would one categorise legislation that bans bestiality, polygamy, incest, etc?? I like to create awareness about conservatism and suffering. Scientifically man made great strides to reduce suffering in Kenya and the world. We gained knowledge how to produce ample food, increased knowledge how to live in peace with each other, medical knowledge to reduce suffering from illnesses. Knowledge is there how to prevention illness, control birth by choice, however conservative forces holds us back to make use of this knowledge to its fullest. The main roadblock preventing reduction of suffering is religion from whichever church. On your references to prayer in public schools in America, I think it wouldn't cause much consternation in Kenya. I for one did my early primary education at Aga Khan primary in Mombasa. At the time the school was partly public & partly private. It went totally private when the free primary education thing was introduced. The religious breakdown by then was roughly Muslim 50%, Christian 35% Hindu 15%. There was no prayer in school. In fact I became acquainted with 'School prayer' later on when we moved to Nairobi and the religious mix tilted to 95+% Christian & ~4% other. Even as a Christian, I don't think the prayers achieved much since all we did was to cram the prayers, etc. It is like the loyalty pledge that I crammed and still remember it to the last letter, but I never meant any of it when reciting it. Slowly but persistently awareness of reality versus religion is dawning onto people. It is a slow process as religion is engraved into the minds of people at a very early age where it is incomprehensible to make a choice between how God created the earth versus evolution theory. Children can imagine the Adam and Eve story but how can the evolution theory be explained to five year old children? So at a later stage in life when reason develops people come to wonder about reality though with a loaded memory. The difficult part is not to reason and make new discoveries though to let go of previous indoctrinations to make room for new discoveries. Finally, I have to say that I sympathise with the plight of gays as individuals. I remember listening to a program on the BBC's network Africa where a Kenyan lesbian narrated of how she was confronted by men, beaten up & had her clothes torn to pieces. I don't advocate for the homosexual lifestyle, but a human being is a human being, there is no need of treating them like trash. The gay community better remain in the closet, because if they rush things, the ultra conservatives may be forced to enact an amendment that will shackle them further. I agree with you though my heart weeps for Kenya. Maybe there is a task for each of us who has freedom, wisdom and courage to do so. If we really want to build a better Kenya then we have to open closets, create awareness about suffering and discover ways to diminish this.
|
|
|
Post by Luol Deng on Jun 12, 2011 17:43:25 GMT 3
I don't have much time today but as I said earlier on, the science vs religion dichotomy is a false one. In fact, most of the early science pioneers (Newton & the like) were believers that were of the opinion that God created a harmonious universe with rules and therefore, it was up to them to discover the rules for a fuller understanding of the universe. There was opposition from sections of the clergy but Christianity had a role to play in the rennaisance, the scientific and industrial revolutions. As an ordinary Christian I have no problems from science that is observable & repeatable. The problem comes when science is used as a cloak for explaining phenomena that has never been observed and cannot be repeated. A lot can be said about evolution, but evolution is itself is a belief much like religion is and there is a threshold of faith needed to act as a basis of any sort. You don't need a Christian for such a sceptical assessment, commited evolutionists like Richard Dawkins & Isaac Asimov among others have said as much.
The theory of relativity, newtons laws of motion, etc are observable, there is not a single problem with that. But the theories of evolution are generally mutually contradictory and are in contradiction with the laws of science. So, unless the evolutionists believe that the 'laws of science' were suspended for much of their theory to take off, there is no plausible explanation.
By the way, I did evolution in Secondary school. Part of the course material included examples such as the peppered moths, embryonic recapitulation & fruit fly experiments that have been repudiated and taken from the mainstream evolutionary education for some time...
|
|
|
Post by madgf on Jun 12, 2011 19:15:38 GMT 3
Merlin, mine isn't an opinion or what I think. What I personally think is different. Morality is a complex notion, separate from ethics, so it isn't to be understood as a concept or an analysis. History associates morality with God embodied in His institutions/movement etc. This isn't from religion but from philosophy + academia. For example, Kant in role of reason, treatise on human nature - morality as an extension of God, morality as perception like the senses, felt, rather than judged. I get your normative/prescriptive thing but in the scheme of morality that's considered speculative science, not practice. Kant says a lot about moral law and duty which is like the dominant foundation of how society has entrenched morality in institutions + law.
|
|
|
Post by commes on Jun 12, 2011 22:33:05 GMT 3
Merlin, mine isn't an opinion or what I think. What I personally think is different. Morality is a complex notion, separate from ethics, so it isn't to be understood as a concept or an analysis. History associates morality with God embodied in His institutions/movement etc. This isn't from religion but from philosophy + academia. For example, Kant in role of reason, treatise on human nature - morality as an extension of God, morality as perception like the senses, felt, rather than judged. I get your normative/prescriptive thing but in the scheme of morality that's considered speculative science, not practice. Kant says a lot about moral law and duty which is like the dominant foundation of how society has entrenched morality in institutions + law. Madg (mad girlfriend) This month I feel intellectually bankrupt lazy. You got this right, just like u predicted the green and red. Did you ever get hold of Horth? This must be a sexuality thing ;D
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 12, 2011 23:07:32 GMT 3
I don't have much time today By the way, I did evolution in Secondary school. Part of the course material included examples such as the peppered moths, embryonic recapitulation & fruit fly experiments that have been repudiated and taken from the mainstream evolutionary education for some time... luoldeng,Your comment: I don't have much time today but as I said earlier on, the science vs religion dichotomy is a false one. In fact, most of the early science pioneers (Newton & the like) were believers that were of the opinion that God created a harmonious universe with rules and therefore, it was up to them to discover the rules for a fuller understanding of the universe. There was opposition from sections of the clergy but Christianity had a role to play in the rennaisance, the scientific and industrial revolutions. As an ordinary Christian I have no problems from science that is observable & repeatable. The problem comes when science is used as a cloak for explaining phenomena that has never been observed and cannot be repeated. A lot can be said about evolution, but evolution is itself is a belief much like religion is and there is a threshold of faith needed to act as a basis of any sort. You don't need a Christian for such a sceptical assessment, commited evolutionists like Richard Dawkins & Isaac Asimov among others have said as much.. I do not wish to enter into a philosophical discussion regarding science versus religion as this will be endless and of little practical use to explain the current situation in Kenya. There is science and there is religion and both have an influence in Kenya and the world. I like to consider this influence in relation to building a better Kenya and World. This influence materialise through individuals and institutions which is as far I like to go in identifying their source. The theory of relativity, newtons laws of motion, etc are observable, there is not a single problem with that. But the theories of evolution are generally mutually contradictory and are in contradiction with the laws of science. So, unless the evolutionists believe that the 'laws of science' were suspended for much of their theory to take off, there is no plausible explanation. I agree with you, science leaves us with many questions though I perceive there will be no end to the discovery process. So do not worry; the existence of a supernatural power and religion will exist till we discover an answer on the last unexplained phenomenon, which never will happen.
|
|