The Slippery Slope of Moral Legislation…

Following the Senate’s passage of the so-called anti-gay bill last Tuesday, we decided we would examine the issues thrown up by homosexuality and its criminalisation. We encountered understandable difficulty in getting anyone who is gay, at least in Nigeria, to speak on record. More, many ordinary people we reached out to wanted no part of it. Their reactions varied from advising that we leave well alone, to curt answers to admissions of being homophobic.

For me, it just underlines the fact that the whole topic is still shrouded in taboo and a no-go area in our society, even though there is evidence that it is a growing phenomenon. Many people base their reaction on emotion disguised as religion and not much else.

My concern therefore was whether the passage of the bill by the Senate was done dispassionately. Whether it was free from the hysteria and emotions beclouding the issues? As I watched news footage of the public hearing, featuring a young lesbian doctor, I saw looks of incredulity, disgust, disdain and even some scornful laugher on the faces of the Senators, public and even security agents.

On a scale on 1-10 where do same sex marriages and relationships stand compared to say, a grown man, like a Senator say, marrying a 15 year old Egyptian child in violation of the spirit at least, if not letter of the Child Rights Act? Where were those looks of disgust then?

Only recently the internet waves were ruled by scintillating lesbian video clips of a member of the House of Reps. Having failed to extract the desired amount for which she was allegedly being blackmailed, they posted the purported video on the internet.
I wondered where the public show of disgust was then.

Perhaps they were being saved for the periodic episodes of monumental corruption erupting in the various arms of government, including the Legislative arm?

The hypocrisy of government, lawmakers, and indeed, Nigerians was on full display.

A trip to Köln, in what was then West Germany, in 1985 remains indelible in my mind. It was the first time I was seeing an obviously gay couple, and in a very public display of intimacy and affection. I watched them stroll past, right there in the city centre, they had eyes only for each other. You could have knocked me down with a feather! It was only something I’d only ever read about, I’m not even sure that they had scenes depicting homosexuality on TV or in movies back then. For me though, and in my young mind, instructively, the greater shock was the apparent indifference of the people themselves. Nobody (except shocked me) stared - actually, more accurately, I gaped. Everybody went about their business normally.

I thought Germany was a pretty liberal and accepting country. Since then of course, homosexuals in Europe and several Western nations have gained such grounds in terms of gay rights that make what I saw way back then pale into insignificance.

The point here is that no wonder then that Europe is the choice destination of ‘flight’ - or more accurately, asylum - for those who claim (rightly or falsely) they are being persecuted for their sexual orientation. Already a few Nigerians have been granted asylum - as two of the interviews in our cover story show.  The numbers I believe are still in trickles.

Europe will, it figures, remain the choice destination for the newly created class of persecuted sexual minorities whom the Senate have unwittingly crowned with a cause célèbre. The Nigerian Senate has inadvertently perhaps, thrown open the floodgates for asylum seekers, real and fake alike, to make a dash for Europe. We may have created more problems for ourselves than we set out to solve. Another wave of brain drain, in an era when we are trying to encourage Diaspora professionals to return home. An uncomfortable, even illegal, environment for those who want to return. A rash of would-be immigrants masquerading as homosexual minorities exploiting loopholes in the law to obtain Migrant visas and residency in Europe, the United States and Canada by hook or by crook. In fact, a whole new industry is certain to spring up, centred around ‘helping’ those ‘persecuted’ by the Nigerian State to escape. It is not unlikely that in this situation we could once again be making complete nuisances of ourselves at various Embassies and points of entry around the world, with all that that entails.

I have seen two versions of the bill, I was unable to verify as at press time which version was passed by the Senate, suffice to say that both contained pretty draconian sanctions and cast a wide net over potential offenders. The Senators even upped the recommended prison terms in their effort to drive home the point, never mind that said point and what it sought to achieve was debatable.

If the bill becomes law for instance I stand to be jailed for even writing our cover or being Editor of this particular edition as S. 7(2) states that publicity, procession and public show of same sex amorous relationship through the electronic or print media physically, directly, indirectly‘ or otherwise are prohibited in Nigeria.

If the bill becomes law merely cohabiting with a platonic friend of the same sex could land you in jail for the next 14 years of your life if someone decided to frame you or set you up. And we all know that the investigative abilities of our dear Nigeria Police is well, not quite all that.

The bill, if it becomes law, could be an unwitting endorsement by the state of hate crimes against the newly created underclass of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender. 

Was the issue of homosexuality critically examined enough by the law makers? Is there some truth to the claim by some that they were born that way? In which case there’s nothing they can do about it? Or if there is something that could be done, by whom? Assuming of course, they want ‘something done’ about it. Is there some truth to the assertion by others that homosexuality is just another decadent lifestyle choice which they choose to make? Where do you draw the line between understanding, showing compassion for something that’s not of your making and glamorising an alternative lifestyle? Could some of those LGBTs be products of their environment which may have included sexual molestation and abuse as children? Were researchers and other relevant professionals called in to testify or to give guidance during the public hearing? Or was it simply a public lynching masquerading as a public hearing? Did the Senators ask all those questions and more?

Were the lawmakers properly advised about our Constitution and the fundamental rights they confer on all citizens to dignity, personal liberty, private life, freedom of association, freedom from discrimination, et cetera? Did they critically weigh this against government’s constitutional obligation to make the security and welfare of the people and making laws for their peace, order and good government priority? Between ensuring that citizens’ fundamental rights are not restricted or trampled upon and ensuring that the social fabric of society does not unravel and public sensibilities offended thereby actually threatening public peace and order, where do we draw the line?

Was it examined critically enough in light of cultures where these practices actually exist, for good or ill, in Nigeria?
All those I thought, were issues that should have occupied our Senators’ minds just a little bit more.

As we were, if the (now still born) Indecent Dressing Bill had been passed into law, we are heading down a slippery slope, the end of which no one can tell.

The only part I wholeheartedly support and agree with was Senate President, David Mark calling the bluff of British Prime Minister, David Cameron and do-gooder Western attitudes. I agree Cameron should take a hike, he and his gratuitous aid. Britain lost its way long ago on the altar of political correctness.

As I conclude, let me express my personal view on homosexuality, as well as the anti-Same Sex Marriage Bill which also has the consequence of criminalising homosexuality.

I believe homosexuality is against the natural order of things - notwithstanding the fact that current research suggests that the phenomenon does exist in the plant and animal kingdoms. If it were not so then same sex unions should NATURALLY be able to produce children for the procreation of mankind. As it is they can’t. 100% of the time they can’t.

As a Christian I believe homosexuality is unscriptural (but then, so are many other things). I believe however that is between you and your God.

Should same sex marriages be encouraged? No

Should they be outlawed? Have tried this option: why not simply NOT recognise them? Why not amend the Marriage Act to specifically define what a marriage is and which ones will be recognised by our laws – i.e. that a marriage should be between a (biological) man and woman? Instead of outlawing same sex marriage positively the same result can be achieved negatively. By simply failing to recognise other marriages. No public lynchings, no mass hysteria.

As for those harsh sentences which also rope in many others, I believe they not only serve no useful purpose, they make no sense. The jail terms will make them ‘straight’? I don’t get it.

There are many grey areas in homosexuality and some have always presented a challenge for me, even before last week’s passage of the controversial bill. The adoption of children for instance. Is it better to let a child desperately in need of a caring and loving home stay in a, say state run orphanage or a series of foster care homes than allow a caring, loving, well established, stable and able homosexual person or persons to adopt him or her? I have no clear answer to that. I have watched documentaries on such children adopted abroad by gay couples or gay singles and I have to say that given the option of having the child get lost or forgotten as just another statistic in the system, the adoption seemed to be the better choice, the lesser of two ‘evils’. Perhaps, just like adoption by heterosexual persons each case should be examined on its merits?

As a lawyer I’m swayed by arguments that many aspects of the bill are unconstitutional. Those arguments are as valid as they are strong. As a member of the society I am however concerned by the possibility of the unravelling of the moral fibre of the society of which I am part should, for instance, same sex public display of amorous relationships be allowed. Our Constitution affirms the right of every citizen to dignity and freedom from discrimination on grounds of gender sex, freedom of association, et cetera. But that same Constitution also mandates government to legislate for the peace, order and good governance of Nigeria. Would there be peace and public order in a society such as ours should same sex relationships be openly expressed? I believe what consenting adults do behind closed doors should not be the business of the state or even of society. A viewpoint, I know, that annoys LGBTs who find it patronising and condescending.

Should they flaunt their sexual orientation in our faces? No. But then again those are my personal views, which of course I am entitled to hold.

If a loved one, relation, colleague or friend turns out to be homosexual would I feel any the less about him or her? No. I will come to terms with it. And I would make an effort to understand it a little bit more. Yes, there may be pain, disappointment, surprise, or plain disapproval but what does one do? What should one do? Lynch him or her? Cut them off? Why?

One last word. I hope the Senate will display the same assiduousness and industry regarding other pending bills some of which have been languishing in their chamber for years, the PIB for instance. At least seven critical Justice Sector Reform bills need to be fast tracked by the National Assembly.

Our entire edition this week is devoted to airing some of the issues arising from the Bill to Prohibit Marriage Between Persons of Same Gender, Solemnisation of Same and for Other Matters Related Therein…

 The Wig & Skirt By Funke Aboyade, Email:olufunke.aboyade@thisdaylive.com