Africa: Virginty and Power lost.

With no doubt, everyone desires personal freedom. To be free is to not be bound by external powers that restrict desired action, of course if the actions are admitted by the law. To be free is to be let to make decisions by oneself, unbounded by oppressors, without any objection whatsoever from a body other than ourselves. To be free is to not be discriminated against and to be accepted as part of an existing society, having the rights to be move as one wants, to speak as one wants, and to participate in what one wants. All these and many more make up the freedom that we have so strongly fought for from our oppressors, that we keep fighting for from our present oppressors, and that we may shed bled just to keep.

The continent of Africa is not just a gigantic landmass, but it is a ground where a bloody, bruised, and battered history still resides. It was in between those beautiful sunrises, golden clouds, majestic oxen, and beasts of elephants, that Africa, with all her beauty, lost her priceless virginity. A colonial hell fell upon her, and stripped of all her clothing from head to toe, her precious body exposed: more brilliant cuts than any diamond ever seen, more lustrous than any gold, more pleasing to the eye than a goddess – she lay bare, her captors held her hands tight, her legs wide and since then she can’t handle her own battles.

Many African countries receive aid and other endorsements from major economies such as the United States and the United Kingdom. In times of internal wars, Africa seeks help from these countries and gets it, and this has led to an end to many wars, and leading to the effective application of constitution-based responses to subjects that these wars were about. The outcome as expected was a peace(or an unmentioned unrest?). This sort of peace in Africa however doesn’t stay very long, and some unrest almost certainly occurs, but these foreign powers are always present and willing to assist. Our kids can grow in a land that cannot be destroyed by their fathers’ battles with their countrymen and their neighbours, and this has created a sense of security and a feeling of safety in the continent.

As much good that sounds like, are we really creating an Africa for our children? The question here is so much as to ask: are we losing grip and stronghold on the one piece of land that we own? Can we say we own it any more?

It has been mentioned by many skeptics that a country(or continent) must limit how much it seeks help from foreign powers and deal with its own children and their own problems. Clearly the feeling here is that we have given ourselves the image of the weak and incapable to deal with our own problems; that we have constantly painted ourselves as the gigantic landmass that can’t do anything for herself. We have been sold as slaves already, we have been colonised already, we have been segregated against already, we have been defeated by guns already, shall we again be fathered and fed by the same nations who had already labelled us as the weak?

The has been a lot that Africa couldn’t do and still looks unable to do for herself and the constant lagging behind of the continent in development, and organisation, have labelled each and every pair of feet as an unproductive and unable – an invalid woman. Further involvement of foreign powers in our own issues have further fuelled this view among fellow Africans and internationals, and this is constantly bringing us down. We have come to understand that even though we are not told we are not better, we are not better than an American co-worker. Even though we are not told that we can’t develop any further than we have so far, the whole continent seems to be a unified body in that thought. There are of course a few cells disobeying orders and trying to go in another direction as the body’s but as in any similar system, an immune system will kill them or convince them to change their mind(differentiation, in cell biology).

Reflecting again on the main questions, can we still say we have control of our own continent? Shall we ever be a proud continent knowing our capabilities and respected but not pitied? Are we able to deal with our own problems? Can we ever be able to deal with our own problems as a continent? Or are we going to remain the earth’s victim of child rape?

Must we restrict international involvement and deal with our own issues as a grown and mature man of a continent, strong and large as we are?


Human Rights and Homosexuality – Have we gone too far to turn back?

Our general existence in the current century is nothing more than a blessing to all who breathe and eat off mother earth, or simply, those covered by the world-wide umbrella so named “human rights”. Seen as a fundamental part of our being, human rights were created over a long stretch of time, in the plight to create “better environments that were more moral, happy and equal. Of course the world is a much better place than it probably would have been without such a component in effect: we are free to express our viewpoints, free to move pointlessly and repeatedly between states, or take a vacation to the lands once owned by different races, communicate with and interact with all races in both social and sexual ways, or in the language of the expensive diamond ring.

In this paradise we have so created for ourselves, we cannot completely consider implausible that we thought the human race was a stable population, with quite constant behavior, and the same needs, when we created and actively assumed right to apply the human rights we have created to the whole world. However, changes keep happening, and they need an adjustment to accommodate them. One such change is the existence of a homosexual society: gay and lesbian, as now named.

The gay and lesbian population is nothing but a population of the same human species that we are, and according to how we defined human rights, these people are also supposed to have these rights. They want to be accepted, loved, not segregated against, treated fairly and to be subject to a fair justice. This is what we promised everyone and we definitely have no right to deny them their rights for that way we break the whole core that has made such a human civilization as we possess now, that we have long tried to attain. Nelson Mandela, Rosa Parks, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther…the list goes on, shed blood and sweat for this freedom we possess, and owe to our entire population.

The question that should be somewhere in the back of our minds is: Was the acceptance of different sexual orientations one of the intentions when we established this morality backbone – our bill of rights?

Numerous times indeed, the above-mentioned activists constantly referred to sexual equality in public speeches and campaigns. It may be probable that they also intended to address the way we should treat homosexuals. But did they really? All along the fight for personal freedom there was no recorded law that accepted other sexual orientations apart from the mainstream heterosexuals, nor did they even need a law for that, for it was too obvious. Homosexuality, then, was seen as a problem brought about by a wrong upbringing – a condition that if given careful attention, could be easily resolved. Why were there no such laws governing homosexual equality? It is not implausible to think that not much attention was paid on it, therefore allowing for a possible limit to activists’ views on equality.

Then back to the initial question, was the acceptance of “gay and lesbian” as equal beings worthy of all human rights intended? Human rights have brought many benefits, a calm and peace of mind, to the world that we live in today, such that we find it hard to imagine their absence. Have we just gone too far with them and made them universal such that when we see a flaw, we have very little or no power to not grant rights to other people? Are we afraid that once we go against the supporting beam of our very co-existence, we will have no reason to believe that any of our past equalities we have fought for, were not worth fighting for? Race and religious equality for example.

But then again, looking at past experiences, most of the equalities we fought for have brought better tolerance and respect within our population, across different races, religions, cultures, sexes, and languages. What reasons do we have not to expect the same from a unified population of different sexual orientations? The acceptance of “gay and lesbian” might bring such a peace never seen before in our homelands: those who are ashamed of their orientation will feel more accepted in their own countries, and lovers that feel oppressed will act in freedom, feeling accepted and loved in the only planet which they may exist in, at the moment. After all, what kind of population will we be if we are are a population filled with divisions?