Kapena Nkayi Maseke
How long will Namibia continue to be a copycat of Western customs? Does abandoning our indigenous habits in favour of Western ones make us more international?
Namibia is a sovereign state; therefore, we maintain and address our own internal problems without outside meddling or blind adoption by those who wish God had formed them otherwise. We will not be compelled to subscribe, nor should our children be obligated to learn a cultural practice that is not our own, or to teach them that the anus is a sexual organ when we know it is not.
Even if Namibia is a part of global society, we nevertheless need to recognise that we are Africans with unique cultures and customs of our own. It is indeed unfortunate that our leaders still heedlessly pursue what is not theirs, and reject what is. We have the right to reject what does not speak for us; our difficulties should be dealt with in our own African ways, as the original species of humanity on planet Earth (as Yoweri Museveni would say), rather than in Western methods. That is why, for instance, private schools in Namibia are required to teach our native languages; this ensures that we do not lose touch with our culture and language, which is our pride and identity.
Now, when you introduce same-sex marriage, what part of our cultural practices and/or societal issues are you attempting to address, and how? Men sodomising themselves may alleviate some of Western society’s ills, but it does not necessarily fix our societal concerns. African problems will be addressed by African remedies, so the court should cease imposing on people without people’s consent.
In the genesis of creation, after God had done everything, he realised that one was missing, and that was a human being. To control his creation on earth, he created one that resembled him: Adam. Adam was lonely; he then made him asleep, and from Adam’s rib, he created Eve. It was Eve (a woman) who accompanied Adam, not another man. Later on, God said, go on earth and reproduce. God knew that there was a man and a woman, and this defines the physiological and anatomical biology of a man and a woman.
Now, when democracy is defined as “the government of the people, by the people, and for the people” by Abraham Lincoln, it literally means the majority, in this case, the 99% of Christians living in Namibia that do not see the anus as a sex organ, not the 1% that lives under denial, not the few minorities that want to argue with God over his creation, not the 1% in Sodom and Gomorrah. Therefore, for the court to legalise same-sex marriage for us, the 99% Christians, is totally uncalled for, and an indication that our court belongs to the 1% minority that is ensuring that their agenda is normalised, accepted by the people at all costs, and thus using our courts.
It is a well-known fact that the people (as a majority) control their own collective destiny in a democratic society. Using the presidential election electoral system as an example, I will define democracy from many angles. We can understandably accept the definition of democracy as majority rule when we consider that in any electoral process, a candidate who receives 51% of the total national vote while excluding the remaining 49% of the vote (that 51%) is legitimated as the winner (leader) by the electorate. The idea that the majority is generally given preference over the minority is the basis for this concept. One may now wonder to what extent our government’s judicial branch is controlled by the tiny minority groups that adhere to Western culture and customs, to the point that a court ruling in a Christian nation with 99% of its citizens being Christians is overturned.
Why not legalise polygamy if you have time and energy, since almost in every Namibian village, we find people practising polygamy? The majority of our people are products of polygamy, raised in polygamous families,
and succeeded under this polygamous leadership. It is now known that polygamy is not legalised because it is not a Western agenda, as you are taught that anything African is evil and undemocratic. What a shame for our courts!
The people’s interests should be maintained by the court without causing harm to anyone, particularly the majority, as that defines democracy. This includes making sure that the people’s way of life, culture and traditions are preserved, and that future generations can learn about and appreciate our culture.
People are now left wondering: What statistical foundation did the court use to determine that Namibians are genuinely interested in same-sex marriage? I should end this by paraphrasing the honourable Jerry Ekandjo: Anyone who believes that the anus is a sexual organ is a candidate for psychiatric evaluation. Something to think about, I guess.
*is a professional nurse and teacher. The views expressed are entirely his and not meant to offend individuals, including those in Sodom and Gomorrah.