Opinion
Blessing Same-Sex Couples: When ‘The Guardian’ Failed To Uphold Conscience Nurtured By Truth
Published
12 months agoon
By Leo Igwe
My attention has been drawn to the editorial of The Guardian newspaper of January 08, 2024. This piece, “Pope Francis’ approval of same-sex blessing” spelled out the position of this media house on the issue. The editors of The Guardian are entitled to their opinion and position, and so, are the readers and members of the public. Let me say upfront that I am a big fan of The Guardian newspaper, and occasionally contribute opinions. And I remain a fan. The Guardian is a renowned and reputable media outfit, known for its quality and excellent journalism. But I am rejoining this editorial because I found the piece appalling, shoddy, and distasteful. I felt disappointed after reading it. The language was vile and lacked decorum.
In the first paragraph, the editorial states that the pope’s approval of blessing for same-sex couples has caused controversy and disdain among Christians. Yes, that is true. But the question is: Which category of Christians? It says that the papal authorization has polarized “Christians who live in strict accordance with scriptural doctrines” and those who embraced “man-made modifications, and pander to the whims of a few seeking to justify their lust”. What came to my mind when I read this part was this: how many Christians in Nigerian live in strict accordance with the Bible? Are scriptural doctrines not man-made? Haven’t scriptural doctrines been modified over the years? Don’t these editors know that the scripture was written based on the knowledge, norms, and mores of its time? In the past centuries, scriptural doctrines and teachings of the church have been revised and updated in the light of new knowledge about human nature, including human life and sexuality. The editors played down the pope’s attempt to accommodate both opponents and proponents of a blessing for same-sex couples.
They accused him of confusing people and yielding to “the impulse of conforming to an aberrant New World Order, which is at variance with the instructions of the Holy Bible as enunciated in Romans 12:2”. My question is this: What makes the editors of The Guardian, think that they are more knowledgeable than the pope in church and Christian matters? Why do they assume they understand what is agreeable with the ‘good, pleasing and perfect will of God’, whatever that means, more than the leader of the catholic church? The editors are professional journalists and experts in the media business. And the pope and other Vatican officials are theologians and experts in the Christian God business. Why do The Guardian editors think they know and can teach the Pope his job?
Simply put, why do they want to be more catholic, more Christian, than the Pope? What makes them think that they know and unequivocally understand what constitutes “family conduct that is good, acceptable, and represents the perfect will of God for humanity”? From the tune and language of the editorials, it is evident that biblical literalists populate the board hence, the editors think that the pope must follow the Bible. Look, the Bible is filled with contradictions. Its teachings should be critically examined. The scripture does not espouse a consistent, inerrant moral code. If the editors think that the pope must follow the Bible, why are they not following the biblical injunctions that support witch killing, child sacrifice, slavery, and subordination of women?
The editors welcomed the ‘voiced opposition’ from concerned catholic stakeholders, including the bishops from Nigeria. They went further to outline why they opposed the blessing of same-sex couples. I found their reasons horrible and objectionable. First, they said that same-sex marriage offended the Bible, which they regarded as the standard for the practice of Christianity. The editors said the blessing of same-sex couples made a mockery of the Christian faith. A mockery? Hence they used the editorial to call for the preservation of “humanity against absurdities”, excessive indulgence touted as human rights. The editorial described same-sex marriage as an absurdity that undermines the institution of marriage, and family values. Same-sex couples, they said, are ‘reprobates’ who are ‘on the perilous route of sin”. The editors reminded the pope that his approval of same-sex marriage was antithetical to God’s purpose for marriage, which for them was procreation. They stated that same-sex marriage was a societal evil and an aberration that detracted from the culture of the people and the values of the society.
The entire piece drips with unwarranted hatred and hostility towards homosexuals. It is, all in all, a homophobic piece. Look, the Guardian prides itself as a media agency guided by “conscience nurtured by truth”. But I am sorry to say that this editorial acutely lacked both in conscience and in truth. It was a vicious and insensitive piece. The editorial hurts and sucks. It was unconscionably hostile towards people that The Guardian should protect and defend, that is, gay catholics. I wonder what the editors at The Guardian newspaper have against sexual relationships among consenting adults. How is that harmful to them? What is the business of the editors in the bedroom of adults? Why do they sanction discrimination against people based on whom they love?
The editorial is a breach of trust. Editorials are statements that should inform and guide, not misinform or mislead. Editorials should not incite hatred or sanctify violence and discrimination against minorities, sexual minorities. Editorials encapsulate the character, intellect, and integrity of a media house. They should not be carelessly, recklessly, and irresponsibly written because it is a record for posterity.
Homosexuality is a critical topic that has been debated over the years in different parts of the globe. It may interest the editorial board to know that in 1935, homosexuality was classified as a pathological sexuality. But in 1973, the American Psychological Society declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1990, the World Health Organisation declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder. Are the editors of the Guardian not aware of these shifts and changes? Are the editors not aware that those who introduced Christianity and the Bible have shifted their position? Are they not aware that those whose legislation against homosexuality most African countries adopted after independence have repealed these laws and legalized same-sex marriage?
Unfortunately, the editors failed to factor these positive and progressive developments into their position and propositions. They threw caution to the wind and penned a hate-filled piece. This editorial will forever dwell in infamy because it is out of step with humanity and civilized values. The Bible, which the editors alluded to in their piece, says, ‘my people perish for lack of knowledge’, Hosea 4:6. Why have the editors rejected latest and existing knowledge about homosexuality and same sex relationships? Like the pope, The Guardian editorial board should have written about blessing same-sex marriage looking forward, not backward, exercising wisdom and thoughtfulness, not spreading lies, hate, prejudice and ignorance.
Dr Igwe is a board member of Humanists International, UK.
You may like
By Leo Igwe
The Advocacy for Alleged Witches (AfAW) is concerned over the reported arrest of two men accused of being ‘witchdoctors’ in Zambia. The arrest underscores the potency of witchcraft fears and the connection between occult anxieties and the country’s politics. These individuals were accused of trying to bewitch the Zambian president, Hakainde Hichilema. The police claimed that they had charms. They planned to use the charms to harm the president. The report says the two persons have been charged under Zambia’s Witchcraft Act. The Act criminalizes “possession of charms”, “professing knowledge of witchcraft”, and “cruelty to wild animals”. The police found the two with assorted charms, including a live chameleon.
This development is utterly embarrassing and shows that the Zambian government is slowly losing its focus and bearing.The country has many socio-economic challenges. Suspicion of bewitchment or possession of charms should be the least of its worries at this time. There should be no place for witchcraft and possession of charms in modern politics because there is no evidence for these beliefs and practices. Zambian authorities should not weaponize the Witchcraft Act or use it to justify this incident. Zambian law does not recognize witchcraft. Zambia’s Witchcraft Act criminalizes naming or imputing witchcraft. It prohibits accusing or threatening to accuse any person of being a witch or a wizard. In this case, it is the police who are breaking the law.
Otherwise, how did they know the two individuals were ‘witchdoctors’? Did these persons identify as witch doctors? If not, the police are liable because they named and imputed witchcraft and have to prove that these individuals have witch-doctoring powers. The police claimed to have charged these individuals for possessing “assorted charms”, including a chameleon. Really?
The police in Zambia have questions to answer: What are charms? How did they know that what was in their possession were charms, not pets? Is a chameleon a form of charm? What makes possession of a chameleon possession of a charm? When and how does a chameleon become a charm? The police need to answer these questions and more before one takes them seriously.
Again, did the individuals describe what was in possession as ‘charms’? If they did, does confessing or designating something as a charm make it a charm? And if they did not, the police are liable because they need to prove how those possessions translated into charms.
In addition, the police claimed that the duo wanted to bewitch the president. What does that mean? How did they know? Are the police not contravening a provision under the Witchcraft Act by professing knowledge of witchcraft? Can one harm another person using a chameleon? They claimed that the two persons wanted to use the charms in their possession, including the chameleon to harm the president. How did they know that? What is the evidence for that?
The Advocacy for Alleged Witches calls for an end to this state-sponsored witch hunt. There is no evidence of harm through witchcraft or charms. The Zambian government should desist from witchcraft- related infractions and violations including arbitrary arrest, and detention of innocent citizens. These allegations are baseless and absurd. The arrest was politically motivated. This development demonstrates that Zambian authorities are out of sync with their duty and obligation to uphold the rule of law and protect accused persons.
Zambian authorities need to act in compliance with the 2021 UN resolution, which urged states to take measures to combat abuses linked to witchcraft beliefs and ritual attacks. End witchcraft allegations in Zambia. End witch hunts in Africa now!
Dr Igwe directs the Advocacy for Alleged Witches.
By Tony Afejuku
The other burning issue, apart from Farotimi and Babalola’s, which I wish to take a look at – and which I am taking a look at now – relates to what is happening in our capital territory. What is this burning issue – which our human rightists and civil society organisations and personages are surprisingly and un-satisfactorily not inclined to focus attention on and examine as they should? I may be wrong, but it surely seems to me that this issue, this burning issue, which is of more importance than Farotimi and Babalola’s – which has been given undue adulation – is deliberately being neglected and depreciated by proclaimers and heroes and heroines of human rights, justice, equity and equality of rights in your country my country our country. Why, why, why and why, why, why? Anyone who has any iota of patriotic sensibility, feeling and judgment well watered and buttressed by a very great influence upon his or her critical judgment will keep on asking the question I am asking.
Mr. Nyesom Wike, as almost everybody who can read and write a little knows, is the current minister of your, my and our Federal Capital Territory. His post or office is akin to that of a governor of a state. As the immediate past governor of Rivers State who was drafted, after his two terms there expired, to continue in the FCT as its new minister-governor or governor-minister under the auspices of a party he is not a true member of, Mr. Wike cannot but be seen as a lucky man. He is in every possible and impossible way. Minister-Governor Wike is a lucky man and a very fortunate one indeed. No former governor of Rivers State (or of any Nigerian state), as far as I know, has achieved what the famed political rouser of rabbles has achieved in one short gubernatorial life-time, and at a relatively young and fertile age. His dual achievement with and in two different political parties at this delicate point of Nigerian politics indicates to our politicians and us all that there is always time for a reminder that there are ready-made high rewards for arch-angels of betrayals. And Mr. Wike may go down in Rivers and Nigerian history as both an arch-angel and an emperor of betrayal of us all if we attempt to indicate what I have defined here as his dual achievement.
We can roughly divide, briefly, Wike’s political development into two periods. During the first, excluding his lower political positions before he became the governor of Rivers State, he quickly adapted his style to that of an emperor who became a rabble-rouser of rabble-rousers whose gubernatorial efficiency moved from stiffness to stiffness. He did not at any time feel that he needed suppleness to govern Rivers State. “Let the heavens fall if they must fall!” We are not there yet in this attempted analysis of the stiff-hearted and stiff-minded one. True? But he is already demonstrating this characteristic in Abuja. False? Judge and give the answer yourself.
Even after he left Rivers State a short while ago as governor, he is still trying to control happenings there to the political discomfiture of his hand-picked successor, his erstwhile “boy” and “son” – with whom he has fallen out. As the minister-governor or governor-minister of the FCT, Wike is occupied with the other taste of the emperor-juggernaut formulator – doing the work of two key political masters in one room and desk of political jugglery. Since his appearance in the FCT, minister-governor or governor-minister Wike has allegedly attempted to recover or transform for Abuja what is not traditionally or socially Abuja’s, for example, the city’s social idiom and landscape and terrain as well as its environs. In doing this he sometimes over-steps his bounds and mark of human/inhuman decency/indecency and psychological understanding of human nature, if you follow well what I am saying; he has so far become at best not really better than a typical pedestrian Nigerian lawyer and officer of political power: in his explorations so far in the Federal Capital Territory we have come to the realization, as T. S. Eliot would say, that “it is so often true that only by going too far can we find out how far we can go.” But one has to be a very negatively obstinate and self-serving emperor and a thorough-bred arch-angel of betrayal of the people and masses to justify such perilous and perfidious expeditions and adventures.
Last week, I saw on Arise Television “The Morning Show” Chief Rita Lori-Ogbebor, the dutiful widow of the late Nigerian supreme patriot and soldier, Colonel Ogbebor (of Benin stock) battling, so to say, to wrest the legacy of her late husband from the tight grip of the adventurous FCT minister-governor who has registered his name and signature in the hearts and consciousness of the people as the depriver of their possessions. The three anchors of “The Morning Show” were in their respective ways splendid in their structures of remarks and questions to Chief (Mrs.) Rita Lori-Ogbebor whom I have had occasions in times past to call patriotically Rita A-K 47 on account of her natural right to fire her beautiful tongue at any person, usually an enemy, of just actions. When she made the case she made to protect the estate of Paulosa Nigeria Limited, her late husband’s aforesaid legacy in the FCT, she was in her natural territory, habitat and element where even at age eighty-four, she never ever loses her stability – although she unusually restrained herself in the Arise Television appearance. Dr. Reuben Abati, Rufai Oseni, and Ayo Mairo-Ese clearly explored seriously but delightfully the mind of the mother-hen of Warri – my other coinage and appellation I gave her in my poetry. Her “The Morning Show” appearance enabled me to see the poignant cry de profundis of the FCT inhabitants whose property and residences in different guises have been demolished. She did not say anything that was out of joint. She spoke and came out as a mother, protector and symbol of the people who have suffered – and are suffering – from the state of affliction and anguish Wike’s demolitions have placed – and are placing – the people.
Ojy Okpe in her delicious and delectable “What is Trending” slot on the same show, showed without exaggeration but with further elaboration what people in and outside Abuja/FCT think of the mighty Wike’s demolitions, a burning issue that the Senate has asked “Let Heaven Fall” minister-governor Wike to halt as the committee the Senate set up on the issue starts its work. Of course, we cannot but assume that Chief Rita Lori-Ogbebor, Mrs. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan as well as Mrs. Ireti Kingigbe, the senator representing the FCT in the Senate and other patriotic senators diligently did what they did on the floor of the Senate when the burning issue was tabled for debate with the gracious understanding and authorization of the Senate President.
I need to state further that the “The Morning Show” anchors did well and extremely so by giving the minister-governor the opportunity to air his anti-Paulosa story. His senior special assistant on public communication and social media, Mr. Olalere Olayinka, stood in for him. After he gave the reasons for the clamp-down, his responses to the questions the anchors put to him followed the usual pattern of denials by artificial men in power – denials that they always use to intimidate and betray the people. In fact, Mr. Olayinka’s ploy to ride easily over our dear Rufai Oseni, a wholesome representative of the deprived, that the chap (or is it guy?) and his boss always employ their colloquial speeches and remarks to dishonor, failed. Yes, the ploy failed woefully. In stanza after stanza of the exchanges between Mr. Olayinka and the Arise anchors, he deteriorated – and his deterioration was hall-marked when he unwittingly revealed that the Paulosa land had been acquired by his minister-governor’s close cohort, an act that was nothing short of gross abuse of power and authority.
Because the Senate is already using its authority, power and privilege to resolve the burning issue, hopefully, in a way that the late Colonel Ogbebor’s legacy and family will not be subjected to any kind of degradation, I will utter no more words for now. I trust, however, that the liberties the Senate is taking – or has taken – are for the sake of order to favour the down-trodden.
As for the minister-governor, the PDP emperor at large, here is an immortal quote from Marcus Aurelius, the magnificent and authentic Roman Emperor and philosopher (A.D. 121-180): “If it is not right, do not do it; if it is not true, do not say it.” You lose nothing by giving us a slice of your humanity by your right acts and correct words. Everything changes and passes. Be humane as a human being.
Afejuku can be reached via 08055213059.
By Leo Igwe
Recently, I facilitated a critical thinking workshop at the Bay Wreath Schools in Lagos. The theme was critical thinking and teacher development. As the theme stated, the workshop was on teaching, about teaching, and for teachers. It highlighted the pedagogical value of critical and reflective inquiry. The workshop exposed teachers to critical mental habits and skills. It emphasized how critical thinking would enhance expertise in the learning and delivery of subjects in classrooms.
I used the opportunity to discuss questionstorm as a method of teaching and learning. Questionstorm is a way that I operationalized critical thinking for primary and elementary schools. Questionstorm is the ability to interrogate all objects and materials. It is a habit of questioning ideas and experiences in all areas of human endeavor. Simply put, questionstorm is a question-driven inquiry. Children are naturally curious. They thirst for knowledge and understanding. Unfortunately, the school system kills children’s curiosity and dampens their interrogative appetite. The school system places much emphasis on rote learning and memorization. It makes the generation of answers not questions or problems the test of knowledge, and the determinant of intelligence. Teaching is largely a drudgery, a monotonous exercise, and a process of depositing knowledge on passive recipients, the students. Teaching entails dumping information on learners whose duty is to cram and reproduce during tests or examinations.
This teaching praxis has been criticized and blamed for the poor performance of students post-school (college and university) and their inability to think independently, creatively, and innovatively. Other teaching methods have tried to address these gaps and limitations. There have been suggestions to make teaching and instruction more active, and more student/learner/child-centered. One such method is the Montessori method. The Montessori method discourages grades and tests as ways of measuring achievement or determining intelligence and excellence. It emphasizes hands-on learning and the development of real-world skills. While the Montessori method stresses the practical approach to learning it says very little about the authoritarian teacher-to-student approach that is the mainstay of teaching and learning in classrooms. Teaching follows a pattern that leaves students and learners in the margins and unable to question and contribute to the learning process. Teachers present what is to be learned such as a text, and then generate questions that students respond or address to demonstrate knowledge of what has been taught. The student’s or learner’s main job is to answer questions, to look for or find answers or solutions. The teacher’s work is to get students to look for, and provide answers, and reproduce what they have been taught or told. But students are answer-depots. Students are not memory banks or reserves. They are active minds and thinking agents.
With questionstorm as a teaching method, the mode of instruction would change. Teaching becomes a cooperative endeavor that actively involves teachers and students. What is taught in the classroom is a collaborative note, not the teacher’s note, not a handout to students. Teachers present or generate texts or objects for learning, in response to intense questioning of the object or material by students, teachers provide information as required for that subject, topic, level, and time frame. No two instances of teaching – of the same topic or subject- are or should be the same because the input of students and teachers is not predetermined.
This is because of an overlooked principle in teaching and learning, that I call the “uncertainty principle”.
The uncertainty principle underlies questionstorm because knowledge is not fixed. Learning is a fluid process. All that is to be learned is uncertain, it is unknown and never determined. No teacher can say beforehand what is to be taught or learned because no one knows exactly the questions and answers or replies that would arise when a topic is presented or taught in a particular class. A topic or learning material elicits unique responses and exchanges that both teachers and students cannot exactly know or predict a priori, before the fact.
Teaching is a shared task and responsibility. Class notes are fluid materials. They are not texts cast on educational stones and delivered by teachers to students to copy, cut, and paste as is often the case. Class notes are not written or produced by teachers for students but by teachers with students. Teachers’ notes are incomplete and insufficient. They account only for a part, not a whole of the learning process and material. Students’ input completes and complements the teaching material and learning process. Thus every class note is unique because it is a product of a specific collaborative endeavor, a product of particular teaching and learning agents and circumstances that cannot be repeated or replicated.
Thus, as a teaching method, questionstorm is set to facilitate teacher development and improve the quality of instruction in schools. Questionstorm will help realize a paradigm shift in education and learning. I hope educators, teachers, and school managers will embrace this method of teaching and learning.
Dr Igwe directs the Critical Thinking Social Empowerment Foundation.
Inline image
NEW TIMES CULTURE
Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia
Black Saturday As 10 Confirmed Dead, Others Injured In Abuja Church Stampede
Tinubu Congratulates Civil Service Commission Chair Olaopa As He Turns 65
Top Stories
-
Latest News5 days ago
BREAKING: Govt Renames University Of Abuja
-
Opinion2 days ago
Burning Issues: (FCT Minister And Paulosa) (2)
-
Latest News3 hours ago
Black Saturday As 10 Confirmed Dead, Others Injured In Abuja Church Stampede
-
Latest News4 days ago
Why We Set Up Kojola Dry Port – Abiodun
-
Metro2 days ago
AfAW Decries Court Acquittal Of Suspected Murderer Of Alleged Witch In Enugu