LGBTQI+++ Agenda

The Pursuit of Stability and Spiritual Aptness: A Conservative Christian Reflection on the LGBTQ+ Agenda

In an age where personal expression and individual rights dominate societal discourse, it is imperative to revisit the question of whether rights—however passionately advocated—are indeed absolute. As a conservative Christian, my perspective is grounded in a worldview that sees humanity as created in the image of God, with moral boundaries designed to preserve both spiritual well-being and societal stability. This lens leads me to question the direction and implications of the LGBTQ+ agenda, while affirming the inherent dignity of every person as a creation of God.

Rights Are Not Absolute

Human rights are foundational to justice and human dignity, but they are not unbounded. A right, when exercised without consideration for its impact on others or the broader community, can erode the very foundation it seeks to uphold. The notion that personal identity or sexual orientation should supersede societal norms raises profound questions about the balance between individual freedoms and collective responsibility.

The Western tradition of law—rooted in Judeo-Christian ethics—has long acknowledged the interplay of rights and responsibilities. Free speech, for instance, does not extend to inciting violence. Similarly, the right to pursue personal relationships must be weighed against the values and institutions that have historically sustained society, such as marriage, the family, and the community.

Morality and Stability in Society

Throughout history, societies that have regulated morality have tended to exhibit greater stability. Ancient Rome’s decline was, in part, precipitated by moral decay, as personal indulgence and societal fragmentation undermined its strength. By contrast, the Judeo-Christian ethic that shaped much of Western civilization introduced a framework of moral responsibility that upheld the sanctity of marriage, the family unit, and the inherent value of self-sacrifice for the greater good.

The LGBTQ+ agenda, while rooted in a desire for inclusion, often challenges these principles. Advocating for the redefinition of marriage, fluid notions of gender, and the normalization of lifestyles historically considered immoral raises questions about the long-term consequences for society. What becomes of a culture when the bedrock institutions of family and faith are dismantled in favour of subjective self-expression?

The Spiritual Dimension

The Christian worldview is not merely concerned with societal order but with eternal truths. Scripture teaches that God created humanity male and female, reflecting His image (Genesis 1:27). This binary complementarity is not a cultural construct but a divine design meant to reveal God’s nature and His intention for human relationships. Marriage, as defined by the union of a man(male) and a woman(female), is a sacred covenant reflecting Christ’s love for the Church (Ephesians 5:31-32).

To embrace an agenda that redefines these truths is to reject not only biblical authority but also the Creator’s design for human flourishing. While love and compassion compel Christians to treat LGBTQ+ individuals with respect and kindness, love also requires speaking the truth about sin and its consequences. Scripture warns that sin, including sexual immorality, separates humanity from God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). Ignoring this reality in the name of inclusion does a disservice to those we are called to love.

The Case for Regulated Morality

Regulated morality is not synonymous with oppression; rather, it is the acknowledgment that freedom must be exercised within boundaries that promote the common good. Just as traffic laws prevent chaos on the roads, moral laws provide the guardrails for a society’s spiritual and relational health.

Critics may argue that such regulation stifles individuality or imposes a particular religious view on a pluralistic society. Yet all societies, regardless of their religious leanings, regulate behaviour to some degree. The question is not whether morality will be legislated, but whose morality will prevail. If Christians retreat from advocating for a moral framework rooted in biblical truth, what will replace it?

A Call to Compassionate Truth

The challenge for conservative Christians is to articulate these convictions with both clarity and compassion. The LGBTQ+ agenda represents a significant shift in cultural values, but it is not immune to critique. As we navigate this discourse, let us remember that every person, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity, bears the image of God and is worthy of love and respect.

However, love does not necessitate affirmation of all behaviours or lifestyles. True love seeks the good of the other, even when it requires difficult conversations about sin, repentance, and the hope of redemption in Christ. Societies that have upheld moral order have thrived not because of rigid legalism, but because they recognized the enduring value of living in alignment with divine principles.

As Christians, we must stand firm in the conviction that God’s design is not only good but best—for individuals, families, and societies. Our task is to bear witness to this truth, not in hostility, but with the hope that hearts and minds might be transformed by the power of God’s love.

REVISE SEXUAL CONSENT AGE: A Call for Rationality and Justice in Kenya

The legal landscape surrounding sexual consent is a complex and often contentious terrain. In Kenya, the age of sexual consent is currently set at 18. While the intention behind this law is undoubtedly to protect minors from exploitation and harm, its practical application has led to a series of troubling inconsistencies and injustices, particularly concerning individuals aged 16 and 17. This article argues that a critical re-evaluation of the current age of consent is not only necessary but overdue, urging a shift towards a more nuanced and evidence-based approach that acknowledges the developmental realities of adolescents.

The current legal framework often results in the prosecution of consensual sexual encounters between individuals close in age, where one party is technically a minor. This has led to the distressing phenomenon of young men, and sometimes older men, facing severe legal consequences, including imprisonment, for engaging in relationships where mutual consent was clearly present. As a law enforcement officer, I have witnessed firsthand the agonizing consequences of these prosecutions. I have seen young, productive lives irrevocably damaged by convictions for “defilement,” even in cases where both parties were demonstrably willing participants. The image of a 25-year-old being jailed for a relationship he had at 22 with a 17-year-old is not just morally unsettling; it represents a profound failure of our justice system to distinguish between genuine exploitation and consensual adolescent relationships.

Psychological research offers compelling evidence that by the age of 16, most individuals have developed the cognitive capacity to understand the nature and consequences of sexual activity. They possess the ability to make informed decisions about their own bodies and relationships. Insisting that a 17-year-old is incapable of consenting to sex, while simultaneously acknowledging their capacity to engage in other adult activities like employment, creates a glaring contradiction. This inconsistency is further highlighted by the frequent cases of 17-year-olds working as domestic help. While parents may rightfully express outrage when their 17-year-old is involved in a sexual relationship with their employer, the fact that the same “child” is allowed to work and be paid raises serious questions about the coherence of our legal and societal understanding of adolescence. If a 17-year-old is deemed too immature to consent to sex, how can they be deemed mature enough to navigate the complexities of employment, often in vulnerable situations? This apparent paradox exposes a fundamental flaw in our current approach.

The Issue of child labour further complicates the narrative. We see instances where parents readily allow their 17-year-old children to work, often in demanding and potentially exploitative environments, yet vehemently oppose their involvement in consensual sexual relationships. This selective application of the “child” label reveals a societal discomfort with adolescent sexuality rather than a genuine concern for the well-being of young people. It is a societal hypocrisy to allow a 17-year-old to work long hours for meager pay, potentially facing exploitation in the workplace, yet deem them incapable of making informed decisions about their own bodies and relationships.

The consequences of maintaining the current legal framework are far-reaching. It not only leads to unjust convictions and the destruction of young lives but also undermines trust in the justice system. It creates a climate where genuine cases of sexual abuse may be overshadowed by the prosecution of consensual relationships, potentially diverting resources and attention from those who truly need protection. Furthermore, it discourages open communication about sexual health and relationships, leaving young people ill-equipped to navigate these crucial aspects of their lives.

It is crucial to emphasize that advocating for a revision of the age of consent is not about condoning child abuse or minimizing the importance of protecting minors. On the contrary, it is about creating a legal framework that is both just and effective in addressing the complex realities of adolescent development. A revised age of consent, perhaps set at 16 or 17 with appropriate safeguards and provisions for cases involving significant power imbalances or exploitation, would better reflect the cognitive and emotional maturity of young people.

Such a change would require a comprehensive public discourse, informed by scientific research and ethical considerations. It would necessitate robust educational programs on sexual health, consent, and healthy relationships. It would also demand stricter enforcement of laws against child labour and other forms of exploitation. A multi-faceted approach is essential to ensure the safety and well-being of young people while upholding the principles of justice and fairness.

The current situation Is untenable. We cannot continue to ignore the inconsistencies and injustices inherent in our current legal framework. It is time for a serious and open discussion about revising the age of sexual consent in Kenya, one that is grounded in evidence, reason, and a genuine commitment to protecting the rights and well-being of all young people. By acknowledging the developmental realities of adolescents and crafting laws that reflect those realities, we can create a more just and equitable society for all.

Fred Allan Nyankuru 

Masculinity Misunderstood: Why 'Toxic Masculinity' Is a Mirage

In recent years, "toxic masculinity" has become a catchphrase that many believe encapsulates problematic behaviours exhibited by men. Yet, this term is deeply flawed, and I argue that its usage has led to widespread misconceptions about masculinity itself. Far from being a dangerous or “toxic” force, authentic masculinity is a powerful, protective energy. When perceived through this lens, it becomes clear that masculinity isn’t toxic; rather, misunderstandings and rejections of masculine energy create a distorted view that, ironically, can be toxic itself.

Masculine Energy: Innately Protective, Not Aggressive

True masculinity is protective by nature. At its core, masculinity serves to shield, create safe spaces, and be a grounding force in the lives of others. Throughout history, men have been guardians of families and communities, often called upon to defend and support those they care for. This is not about aggression or dominance; it’s about responsibility, strength, and sacrifice.

But in today’s world, the protective and assertive qualities of masculinity can be misinterpreted as controlling or oppressive. These misinterpretations may arise from a lack of understanding of what true masculinity represents and seeks to achieve.

When masculine energy is misconstrued, we run the risk of perceiving its natural expression as inherently toxic. But it is vital to distinguish between the misuse of masculinity and authentic masculine energy. Misbehavior by men—be it cruelty, manipulation, or excessive dominance—is often just that: bad behavior. It's rooted in personal issues, insecurities, or a lack of manners rather than in masculinity itself.

Misinterpreting Masculinity: A Result of Insecurity?

One reason masculinity may be misinterpreted lies in insecurities surrounding the relationship between masculine and feminine energy. In instances where the feminine desire is not protection but independence, assertive or protective masculine behaviours may come across as threatening or controlling. This misalignment can breed a reactionary perception that masculinity itself is toxic when, in reality, the issue may stem from differences in personal desire and values, not the fundamental nature of masculinity.

It’s worth noting that some of the most celebrated qualities of masculinity—confidence, strength, and assertiveness—are qualities that can be misread if they are not understood or received correctly. This misinterpretation, ironically, has less to do with masculine energy itself than with an individual’s ability to receive it. It takes maturity, experience, and self-awareness to recognize and embrace masculinity in its purest form without feeling threatened by it.

The Concept of "Toxic Masculinity": Weaponizing Language

The language we use shapes our understanding of reality. Terms like "toxic masculinity" suggest that masculinity, by nature, is susceptible to becoming damaging or dangerous. This paints masculinity with a broad, negative brush, diminishing its inherent value. When we group genuine expressions of masculinity with harmful actions, we obscure the differences between male identity and male dysfunction.

Instead of labelling certain behaviours as “toxic masculinity,” it would be more constructive to call out harmful behaviours directly, regardless of gender. We should focus on issues like disrespect, manipulation, and violence as specific, individual problems that need addressing. Focusing on these behaviours rather than masculinity itself empowers us to recognize and cultivate healthy masculinity, unburdened by unfair accusations and generalizations.

When Feminine Energy Misinterprets Masculinity as Toxic

This discourse isn't simply about defending masculinity; it also requires a reflection on femininity and how it interprets masculinity. When feminine energy interprets protection, assertiveness, or strength as control or oppression, it distorts the essence of masculinity.

This misinterpretation can sometimes be a form of projection, where individuals see masculinity as problematic because of insecurities or past traumas. It can also be the result of a cultural shift that promotes independence to the extent that interdependence—masculine protection included—is seen as a threat. This misalignment can erode the relationship between masculine and feminine energies, causing each to perceive the other as adversarial rather than complementary.

Ironically, femininity that views masculinity as inherently toxic becomes a form of toxicity in itself. It creates a lens that is not only unfair but also destructive. When the feminine sees masculinity as a threat, it leads to an antagonistic relationship between genders, one that alienates men from women and prevents us from appreciating the beauty of gendered interactions and interdependence.

Masculinity and Femininity: Partners, Not Opponents

In truth, masculinity and femininity are complementary forces, each offering strengths that the other needs. Masculinity offers stability, security, and a grounding presence. Femininity, in turn, brings warmth, empathy, and creativity. When properly aligned, these forces are not oppositional but synergistic, creating a balance that fosters harmony, growth, and strength.

For this synergy to work, both masculine and feminine energies must be allowed to exist and express themselves authentically without fear of misunderstanding or backlash. Men should be able to embody strength without being accused of aggression; women should be able to embody warmth without feeling subservient. We must embrace both energies in their fullness, understanding that each has value and purpose.

A New Path Forward

Instead of promoting terms that create divisions, such as “toxic masculinity,” let us redefine our conversations. Let us move towards a framework that addresses individual actions and their consequences, without tying them to gendered qualities that only perpetuate stereotypes.

Recognizing masculinity as a positive force isn’t just about men—it’s about creating a world where both men and women can express their energies in ways that are empowering, not diminishing. It’s about valuing protection, assertiveness, and responsibility as strengths that contribute to a safer, stronger society.

In an ideal future, we would see masculinity and femininity not as forces in opposition, but as energies that, when properly understood and respected, bring out the best in each other. True masculinity, far from being toxic, is a gift to society and to women, as it supports, protects, and values those around it.

Conclusion

"Toxic masculinity" may be a concept with good intentions, meant to call out behaviour that harms others. But by attaching “toxicity” to masculinity itself, we risk confusing issues of behaviour with questions of identity. Masculinity in its purest form is not a threat; it is a force that, when understood and respected, creates safety, stability, and partnership.

If we genuinely seek equality and harmony between genders, it’s time to retire terms that divide us and to adopt an approach that respects and values masculinity and femininity alike. Only then can we create an environment in which both men and women can thrive as they were meant to—complementing, not opposing, each other.

 

PARENTING AND THE LAW

The Challenges Fathers Face in Child Custody and Support Laws

The legal landscape surrounding child custody, child support, and parental rights is a complex and often contentious one. While laws in many countries aim to protect the best interests of the child, they can sometimes create situations where fathers feel they are treated unfairly or inequitably. This discussion explores the challenges fathers face in child custody battles, their financial responsibilities, and their lack of influence over critical decisions, such as whether to bring a pregnancy to term. The goal is to provide a balanced examination of these issues, recognizing the importance of both parents in a child's life.

1.      The Custody Dilemma: Presumption of Primary Caregiving

One of the most common frustrations expressed by fathers is the perceived bias in custody cases. In many legal systems, there is a presumption—often unwritten but culturally ingrained—that mothers are the natural primary caregivers of children. This presumption can influence judicial decisions, resulting in mothers receiving custody in a majority of cases, particularly when children are young.

Fathers who wish to gain custody or even secure joint custody often find themselves facing a challenging uphill battle. This can involve lengthy court proceedings, significant legal expenses, and a need to prove their fitness as parents. In contrast, mothers are sometimes assumed to be the more appropriate custodial parent without the same level of scrutiny. While this trend is shifting in some jurisdictions, the traditional view still prevails in many areas, placing fathers at a disadvantage from the outset.

This disparity is problematic for several reasons. First, it can undermine the importance of a father’s role in a child’s upbringing. Numerous studies have shown that children benefit from having a strong relationship with both parents, regardless of the child’s gender. The bias towards mothers as primary caregivers may inadvertently diminish the father's role, ignoring the critical impact they can (and in fact do) have on their children's emotional, social, and intellectual development.

Second, it can create a legal environment where fathers must "fight" for what could be considered a basic right—to have a meaningful, ongoing relationship with their children. This fight can be emotionally draining and financially burdensome, further exacerbating feelings of frustration and disenfranchisement.

2.      Financial Obligations: Child Support and the Double Standard

Another contentious issue arises with child support obligations. In many jurisdictions, fathers are typically the ones required to pay child support, even when they do not have custody or only have limited visitation rights. The intent behind child support laws is commendable: to ensure that the child has the financial resources needed for a healthy upbringing. However, the application of these laws often leads to situations where fathers feel unfairly burdened.

A particular point of contention is when fathers are required to pay child support after having little to no say in the decision to bring a pregnancy to term. In many cases, the decision to give birth is made unilaterally by the mother, with the father having little influence over the outcome. Yet, once the child is born, the father is legally obligated to provide financial support, regardless of his initial wishes or involvement in the decision-making process.

This situation creates a sense of a double standard for many fathers. On one hand, they may feel excluded from one of the most significant decisions affecting their lives—the choice to become a parent. On the other hand, they are held financially responsible for the consequences of that decision. This can lead to feelings of unfairness and resentment, particularly when fathers perceive that they are being reduced to little more than a source of financial support rather than being recognized as equal partners in parenting.

3.      The Question of Reproductive Rights and Responsibilities

A related issue concerns reproductive rights and the question of whether both parents should have equal say in the decision to continue or terminate a pregnancy. Currently, in most jurisdictions, the decision to terminate a pregnancy rests solely with the mother. This makes sense from the perspective of bodily autonomy—no one should be compelled to continue a pregnancy against their will. However, this can also lead to fathers feeling they have no control over their potential future responsibilities.

When a mother chooses to continue a pregnancy, the father is legally obligated to provide child support, even if he had no desire or intention to become a parent at that time. Conversely, if the mother decides to terminate a pregnancy, the father has no legal recourse to prevent that decision, even if he deeply desires to have the child.

This lack of balance in decision-making authority has prompted some to call (rightly so) for more nuanced legal frameworks that better account for the rights and responsibilities of both parents. For instance, some propose that fathers who do not wish to assume parental responsibilities should be able to legally relinquish their parental rights before a child is born, thereby absolving them of future financial obligations. Others suggest that a more collaborative approach to reproductive decision-making could help both parents reach mutually agreeable solutions.

4.      Towards a More Equitable Legal Framework

While these challenges are real, it is crucial to acknowledge the complexity of the issue. Child custody and support laws are designed with the child's best interests in mind, and they play a vital role in ensuring that children are cared for and supported. The problem arises when these laws are applied in ways that do not adequately consider the rights and responsibilities of both parents.

There is growing recognition that legal reforms are needed to create a more balanced and fair system. Such reforms could include:

• Presumption of Shared Parenting: Shifting towards a legal presumption of shared parenting, where both parents are assumed to be equally capable of providing care unless evidence suggests otherwise. This would ensure that both parents have a fair chance at securing custody and maintaining a meaningful relationship with their child.
• Equal Decision-Making Rights: Providing both parents with a say in significant decisions, such as whether to bring a pregnancy to term. While this is a sensitive area, finding ways to involve fathers more in these decisions could reduce feelings of exclusion and unfairness.
• Flexibility in Child Support Laws: Reforming child support laws to consider the unique circumstances of each case. For example, allowing for more flexibility in determining support payments based on actual time spent with the child, rather than relying on rigid formulas.
• Legal Avenues for Relinquishment of Parental Rights: Allowing fathers (and mothers) the option to relinquish parental rights under specific circumstances, provided there is no harm to the child’s welfare. This could create a more balanced approach to parental responsibilities, recognizing that not every person is ready or willing to be a parent.

5.      Conclusion: Striving for Fairness and Balance

Ultimately, the aim should be to create a legal system that balances the rights and responsibilities of both parents while prioritizing the well-being of the child. Such a system would recognize the evolving roles of mothers and fathers in modern society and ensure that both parents have the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to their child’s life. Achieving this balance will require thoughtful discussion, legal innovation, and a commitment to fairness for all parties involved.

By addressing these challenges through reforms and a more nuanced understanding of parental roles, society can move toward a system where fathers feel equally valued and respected in their parental duties, and where children benefit from the love, care, and support of both parents.

Easter Thoughts

Resurrecting Hope: A Dialogue Between Easter and Ernest Becker

In the grand tapestry of human existence, few concepts stir the depths of the human soul like that of resurrection. It is the cornerstone of Christian faith, a beacon of hope that transcends the bounds of mortal existence. Yet, amidst this celebration of life beyond death, the words of Ernest Becker echo in the corridors of philosophical inquiry, challenging us to confront the undeniable truth of our mortality.

Easter, the holiest of Christian observances, beckons believers to embrace the promise of resurrection. It is a time of rejoicing, of renewed faith, and of profound reflection on the transformative power of sacrifice and redemption. The story of Jesus Christ’s resurrection serves as a testament to the triumph of life over death, of love over despair. It is a narrative that resonates through the ages, offering solace to the weary and hope to the downtrodden.

However, Becker’s seminal work, “The Denial of Death,” casts a shadow over the certainties of religious doctrine. In his exploration of human psychology, Becker posits that the fear of death is the driving force behind much of human behaviour. He argues that our instinctual urge for self-preservation leads us to construct elaborate defense mechanisms to shield ourselves from the terrifying reality of our own mortality.

At first glance, the concepts of resurrection and the denial of death may seem irreconcilable. How can one embrace the promise of life after death while simultaneously acknowledging the existential dread that pervades human consciousness? Yet, upon closer examination, we find that these seemingly contradictory ideas are inextricably linked.

The Christian belief in resurrection offers a profound response to Becker’s diagnosis of the human condition. It provides a framework through which we can confront our mortality with courage and conviction. In the face of death’s inevitability, the promise of resurrection offers a glimmer of hope, a beacon of light in the darkness.

Moreover, the Easter narrative challenges us to transcend our individual fears and embrace a collective vision of redemption. It calls us to live lives of compassion, kindness, and selflessness, knowing that our actions have the power to create ripples that extend far beyond our mortal existence.

In this sense, the Easter message serves as a powerful antidote to the existential despair that Becker identifies. It invites us to confront our mortality not with fear, but with a sense of purpose and meaning. It reminds us that, ultimately, death is not the end but a gateway to a new and eternal life.

Yet, even as we celebrate the promise of resurrection, we must heed Becker’s warning against the dangers of denial. We cannot simply ignore the reality of death or the existential anxieties that it evokes. Instead, we must confront these fears head-on, acknowledging their presence and seeking to find meaning and purpose in spite of them.

In the end, the dialogue between Easter and Ernest Becker reminds us of the complexity of the human experience. It challenges us to grapple with profound questions of life, death, and meaning, knowing that the answers may elude us but that the search itself is inherently valuable.

As we gather with loved ones this Easter season, let us embrace the hope of resurrection while also acknowledging the realities of our own mortality. Let us find solace in the promise of new life while also confronting the fears that lurk in the depths of our souls. And let us remember that, ultimately, it is in the journey itself that we find meaning and purpose, even amidst the uncertainty of life and death.

Eternal Courtship

Forever Courting: The Eternal Dance of Marriage

In the grand tapestry of life, marriage is perhaps one of the most intricate and enduring threads we weave. It’s a union that transcends mere vows and ceremonies; it’s a commitment to perpetual courtship, a dance of love and companionship that evolves and deepens over time. Antonio Hurtado de Mendoza’s timeless wisdom encapsulated in the words, “Think not because you are now wed, that all your courtship’s at an end,” resonates with profound truth and insight into the essence of marriage.

 

Marriage is not the culmination of a romantic journey but rather the beginning of an endless adventure. It’s easy to fall into the trap of complacency once the wedding bells have faded, believing that the chase is over and the prize has been won. However, the truth is far more enchanting and demanding. Marriage is a daily invitation to rediscover and reinvent the magic of courtship, to woo and cherish our partners with the same ardour and enthusiasm as when we first met.

 

Just as a garden requires constant nurturing to flourish, so too does a marriage demand ongoing attention and care. It thrives on the small gestures of love and kindness, the whispered words of encouragement, and the shared laughter that fills the air like music. Every thoughtful act, every moment of genuine connection, serves to reaffirm the bond between two souls journeying through life together.

 

Yet, amidst the busyness of daily life, it’s all too easy to lose sight of the romance that initially sparked the flames of love. We become consumed by work deadlines, household chores, and the myriad distractions vying for our attention. In the midst of this chaos, we must remember to prioritize our relationship, to carve out sacred moments of togetherness where we can pause and revel in each other’s company.

 

True intimacy is not found in grand gestures or extravagant displays of affection but rather in the quiet moments shared between two hearts. It’s in the lingering glances across a crowded room, the gentle touch of a hand, and the knowing smile that speaks volumes without uttering a word. These are the threads that bind us together, weaving a tapestry of shared memories and experiences that withstand the test of time.

 

Marriage is a journey of growth and self-discovery, a mirror reflecting back our deepest fears and greatest aspirations. It’s a commitment to stand by each other’s side through life’s triumphs and tribulations, to weather the storms together and emerge stronger than before. In the embrace of love, we find the courage to face our vulnerabilities, to embrace our imperfections, and to become the best versions of ourselves.

 

So let us embrace the wisdom of Antonio Hurtado de Mendoza’s words and remember that marriage is not a destination but a continuous voyage of love and exploration. Let us cherish each day as an opportunity to cultivate deeper connections, to nurture the flame of passion that burns within our hearts, and to embark on the adventure of a lifetime hand in hand. For in the end, it is not the destination that matters but the journey we share with the ones we love.

Geopolitics and World's Indifference to African Problems

Sudan’s Silent Struggle: A Call for Global Eyes on Khartoum

 

In the shadow of global headlines dominated by crises in Ukraine and Gaza, the war in Sudan has been, shrouded in the veils of neglect. The clash between the Sudanese Armed Forces, led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, under the command of Hemedti, which erupted on a fateful day during Ramadan in 2023, has been relegated to the middle and back pages of many news headlines as the world remains largely oblivious to the turmoil, as if Sudan’s struggle were a mere footnote in the grand narrative of international affairs.

 

While the plight of nations caught in geopolitical crossfires demands attention, it is crucial to question the selective nature of global focus. Sudan’s capital, Khartoum, and the beleaguered Darfur region have become battlegrounds, echoing with the cries of a population caught between rival factions within the military government. The streets, once filled with the spirit of unity during the revolution that ousted Omar al-Bashir, now bear witness to a discord that threatens to unravel the very fabric of Sudanese society.

 

As the world turns its gaze elsewhere, it is imperative to critically assess the consequences of this war on the ground. Lives are lost, families are torn apart, and displacement becomes a harsh reality for countless innocent civilians. The urgency of the situation demands that we lift the veil of indifference and acknowledge the human cost of this conflict.

 

In the face of such devastation, one cannot help but question the silence of the African continent and the African Union. Regional solidarity and collective action should be the bedrock of Africa’s response to Sudan’s turmoil. It is high time for African nations to recognize their responsibility in fostering stability within the continent and to stand united against internal strife.

 

The African Union, as a key player in regional diplomacy, must take a proactive stance in mediating between the warring factions. Diplomatic pressure, coupled with a commitment to finding a peaceful resolution, can pave the way for a Sudanese-led reconciliation process. By leveraging its influence, the African Union can amplify the voices of those silenced by the clash of arms and advocate for a ceasefire that allows for humanitarian aid to reach the affected regions.

 

While the world is preoccupied with crises that dominate the headlines, we must not allow Sudan’s struggle to be relegated to the shadows. It is a call to action, urging us to prioritize humanity over geopolitics, to recognize that every conflict, no matter its scale, leaves a lasting imprint on the lives of those caught in its crossfire.

 

Let us not be blind to Sudan’s silent cries. Instead, let our collective conscience demand that we extend our gaze beyond the well-trodden paths of international attention. The African Union and its member states must rise to the occasion, demonstrating that African solutions can indeed address African challenges. It is only through unity, empathy, and a commitment to peace that Sudan can emerge from the shadows of war into a brighter, more hopeful future.

MARRIAGE AS A FORM OF FREEDOM

How to Escape the Prison of a Bad Marriage

Marriage is a beautiful institution, designed by God to reflect His love and grace to the world. It is a covenant of mutual commitment, respect, and sacrifice, where two people become one flesh and share their lives together. Marriage is also a gift, a source of joy, and a means of growth and sanctification.

But what if your marriage feels like a prison? What if you feel trapped, unhappy, and unfulfilled in your relationship? What if you long for the freedom and excitement of your single days, when you could do whatever you wanted, whenever you wanted, with whomever you wanted?

If you are in this situation, you might be tempted to think that you made a mistake in choosing your spouse, or that you deserve better, or that you have fallen out of love. You might be looking for a way out, a divorce, or an affair. You might be blaming your spouse for your misery, or yourself, or God.

But before you take any drastic steps, let me suggest that the problem is not with your marriage, but with your perspective. You see, if your marriage feels like imprisonment, you have either not matured enough for marriage or your perspective on marriage is deeply flawed and secular that you want to retain the freedom of a single life within marriage.

Let me explain.

Maturity Matters

Marriage is not for the immature. It requires a lot of wisdom, patience, humility, and self-control. It demands that you put the needs and interests of another person above your own. It challenges you to grow in character, faith, and love.

But many people enter marriage with unrealistic expectations, selfish motives, and childish attitudes. They think that marriage will make them happy, fulfil their dreams, and solve their problems. They think that marriage is all about romance, passion, and fun. They think that marriage is easy, effortless, and automatic.

They are wrong.

Marriage is hard work. It involves a lot of compromise, communication, and conflict resolution. It exposes your flaws, weaknesses, and sins. It requires a lot of grace, forgiveness, and healing. It tests your faith, hope, and love.

If you are not ready to face these challenges, if you are not willing to change, grow, and learn, if you are not prepared to die to yourself and live for another, then you are not mature enough for marriage.

And if you are not mature enough for marriage, then your marriage will feel like imprisonment. You will feel frustrated, bored, and resentful. You will feel like you are missing out on life, like you are wasting your time, like you are losing your identity. You will feel like you are in a cage, and you will want to escape.

But the solution is not to break free from your marriage, but to grow up in your marriage. You need to realize that marriage is not about you, but about God and your spouse. You need to understand that marriage is not a contract, but a covenant. You need to accept that marriage is not a fairy tale, but a journey.

You need to mature.

Perspective Matters

Marriage is not only a human institution, but a divine one. It was created by God, for God, and to God. It is a reflection of His nature, a representation of His relationship, and a revelation of His purpose. It is a picture of Christ and the church, a partnership for the kingdom, and a platform for the glory of God.

But many people have a secular view of marriage, influenced by the culture, the media, and the world. They think that marriage is a social construct, a personal choice, and a human right. They think that marriage is about happiness, compatibility, and convenience. They think that marriage is flexible, optional, and disposable.

They are wrong.

Marriage is sacred, permanent, and exclusive. It is a holy union, a lifelong commitment, and a faithful bond. It is about holiness, covenant, and service. It is a divine design, a divine calling, and a divine responsibility.

If you have a secular perspective on marriage, then your marriage will feel like imprisonment. You will feel dissatisfied, restless, and ungrateful. You will feel like you are missing the point, like you are living a lie, like you are disobeying God. You will feel like you are in a trap, and you will want to escape.

But the solution is not to abandon your marriage, but to renew your perspective. You need to see your marriage as God sees it, as a gift, a blessing, and a privilege. You need to value your marriage as God values it, as a treasure, a mystery, and a testimony. You need to honour your marriage as God honours it, as a witness, a ministry, and a worship.

You need to change your perspective.

Freedom Matters

Marriage is not a prison, but a liberation. It frees you from the bondage of sin, the tyranny of self, and the deception of the world. It frees you to love, serve, and honour God and your spouse. It frees you to experience, enjoy, and express the fullness of God’s grace and glory.

But many people confuse freedom with license, autonomy, and independence. They think that freedom means doing whatever they want, whenever they want, with whomever they want. They think that freedom means having no boundaries, no obligations, and no accountability. They think that freedom means being single in marriage.

They are wrong.

Freedom is not the absence of restraint, but the presence of purpose. Freedom is not the ability to choose, but the power to obey. Freedom is not the right to indulge, but the privilege to sacrifice. Freedom is not being single in marriage, but being one in marriage.

If you want to retain the freedom of a single life within marriage, then your marriage will feel like imprisonment. You will feel restricted, limited, and oppressed. You will feel like you are losing your freedom, like you are giving up your rights, like you are surrendering your will. You will feel like you are in a prison, and you will want to escape.

But the solution is not to reclaim your freedom, but to redefine your freedom. You need to realize that freedom is not about you, but about God and your spouse. You need to understand that freedom is not a selfish pursuit, but a selfless gift. You need to embrace that freedom is not a single life, but a married life.

You need to enjoy your freedom.

Conclusion

If your marriage feels like imprisonment, don’t despair, don’t give up, and don’t run away. Instead, mature, change, and enjoy. Grow up in your marriage, renew your perspective, and redefine your freedom. Escape the prison of a bad marriage, and enter the paradise of a good marriage.

Remember, marriage is not a prison, but a liberation. It is a beautiful institution, a divine design, and a glorious gift. It is a covenant of mutual commitment, respect, and sacrifice, where two people become one flesh and share their lives together. It is a source of joy, a means of growth, and a platform for worship.

Marriage is a blessing, not a curse. Marriage is a freedom, not a prison.

THE SUPREME BAN

Kenya’s Supreme Court: A Comedy of Errors in the Theatre of Justice

In a scene worthy of Kafka, the Kenyan Supreme Court has decided to silence a lawyer, Mr. Ahmednasir Abdullahi, for his outspoken criticism of the Judiciary. To say this is an affront to freedom of expression is like calling the Grand Canyon a pothole. It’s a chasm, a gaping maw of injustice that threatens to swallow the very essence of a democratic society.

Imagine, if you will, a football match where the fans are banned from booing the referee, even for the most egregious offside call. Can you picture the pent-up frustration, the simmering resentment? That, my friends, is the atmosphere you create when you try to silence dissent, especially in the hallowed halls of justice.

Or, imagine a world where doctors who diagnose illness are banned from treating patients. Where artists who paint flaws in society are forbidden to exhibit their work. Where journalists who expose corruption are silenced by the very pen they wield. This, in essence, is what the Supreme Court has done to Mr. Abdullahi. His criticism, however harsh, falls squarely within the fundamental right to freedom of expression, enshrined not just in Kenya’s Constitution, but in the very fabric of a democratic society.

Mr. Abdullahi’s crime, it seems, is his sharp tongue and unsparing critique of judges he believes are corrupt. Now, let’s be clear: accusing someone of corruption is a serious matter. But here’s the thing, in a functioning democracy, such accusations are not met with censorship, they’re met with scrutiny. If the judges have clean hands, as they so vehemently claim, then why fear the light of public criticism? Shouldn’t they welcome the opportunity to clear their names?

The Supreme Court’s decision is not just an affront to Mr. Abdullahi, it’s an insult to every Kenyan who values a free and vibrant democracy. It’s a declaration that criticism, however pointed, is not welcome in the hallowed halls of justice. It’s a chilling reminder that the road to silencing dissent is paved with good intentions, but leads to a graveyard of liberty. The ban on the Grand Mullah, as Mr. Abdullahi likes to call himself, reeks of a banana republic more than a beacon of justice. It smacks of a desperate attempt to silence a thorn in their side, a critic who dared to hold the mirror up to their alleged flaws.

But let us not forget, the right to free expression is enshrined in the very fabric of the Kenyan Constitution. Article 35(1) declares: “Every person has the right to freedom of expression, which includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and disseminate information.” This is not just some feel-good clause, it’s the bedrock of a free and open society.

And to those who argue that Mr. Abdullahi’s words might damage the reputation of the Judiciary, I say this: a reputation earned through censorship is like a trophy won through cheating. It’s hollow, meaningless, and ultimately, unsustainable.

The true strength of any institution, including the Judiciary, lies in its ability to withstand criticism, to engage in open debate, and to emerge stronger from the crucible of dissent. Silencing Mr. Abdullahi is not just an attack on him; it’s an attack on every Kenyan’s right to speak their mind. It’s a chilling message that dissent is not tolerated, that questioning authority is a dangerous game.

So let me be clear: the Supreme Court’s decision is not just wrong, it’s an embarrassment. It’s a stain on the Kenyan flag, a betrayal of the very values this nation was built upon. And let us not forget the words of Justice William Brennan of the US Supreme Court: “To punish a person for expressing a critical view is to punish the critic for the government’s own failure to tolerate criticism.”

This is not the end of the story, my friends. This is just the intermission. The curtain has risen on a new act, a play where the stakes are high, and the audience is restless. Let the voices of dissent ring out, let the pen mightier than the sword continue its fight. For in the end, the only way to silence the truth is to bury it, and burying the truth is a sure-fire way to suffocate the soul of a nation.

So, let the Supreme Court have their gag orders and their pronouncements. We, the people, have our voices. And we will use them, loud and clear, until justice prevails. Let this be a reminder, Kenya: the theatre of justice is not a closed door affair, it’s a public spectacle where the audience has a right to boo, to hiss, and to demand a better performance. The show must go on, and we, the people, are the critics who will not be silenced.

NEVER CHEAT NO MATTER THE SITUATION

When Hearts Collide: Tending the Sacred Orchard of Marriage.

Imagine marriage as a sun-dappled orchard, where two saplings, chosen with youthful hope and trembling joy, intertwine their roots and reach for the sky. The soil is rich with laughter, forgiveness, and whispered secrets. Sunlight filters through a canopy of shared dreams, casting dappled patterns of joy and sorrow on the fertile ground. But like any garden, marriage demands constant tending. Weeds of anger and resentment threaten to choke the tender shoots of trust, and storms of misunderstanding leave scars on the bark of love.

Now, picture a trespasser – a stranger with calloused hands and greedy eyes, drawn by the sweet scent of ripe promises. In a moment of weakness, one partner, parched by a perceived drought of affection, considers letting this stranger step over the fence, offering a forbidden sip of a different fruit.

But hold! Before that fateful step is taken, consider the cost. To cheat, even in the heat of anger, hurt, or loneliness, is to plant a bitter seed, poisonous to the very roots of marriage. It’s like severing a branch, not just depriving your partner of its shade, but weakening the entire structure, making it vulnerable to the harshest gales.

Remember, anger and tears are like summer storms, necessary for the garden to breathe. Hurt, when acknowledged and nurtured with compassion, can become fertile ground for deeper understanding. These turbulent emotions, though challenging, are internal, contained within the sacred orchard of your commitment. To bring in an outsider is not just to betray a vow, but to invite a predator into a sanctuary built on trust and vulnerability.

Instead, face the storms together. Weather the droughts of frustration with the refreshing spring of open communication. Prune the weeds of resentment with the sharp sickle of forgiveness. For even the sturdiest oak was once a fragile sapling, nurtured through sunshine and rain, nurtured by the unwavering commitment of its roots to one another.

And remember, dear spouse, you are not just partners in this orchard, but co-creators. The soil you till, the seeds you sow, the branches you prune – all shape the haven you share. So tend it with care, with laughter and tears, with whispered apologies and fierce forgiveness. Guard its borders not with fear, but with the unwavering knowledge that the sweetest fruits, the most fragrant blossoms, can only flourish within the walls of your shared commitment.

For in the end, marriage is not just a haven, but a masterpiece. A tapestry woven with threads of shared stories, laughter lines etched by countless jokes, and scars of battles fought and won together. And like any masterpiece, it deserves respect, protection, and unwavering dedication. So choose, in the heat of every storm, to nurture the garden you’ve built, not to abandon it for the fleeting mirage of an alien orchard. For, within the walls of your love, lies a paradise unlike any other, waiting to be nurtured, cherished, and eternally enjoyed.

Now, go forth, hand in hand, and tend your sacred orchard. Let it be a testament to the enduring power of love, a whisper of hope in a world that often forgets the beauty of two souls intertwined. And remember, even the sturdiest oak started as a tiny seed, held precious in the palm of someone who believed in its magic. Believe in yours, too. 

Couples' New Year Wisdom

Conquering the First Frontier: Starting the Year as a Christian Couple

A brand new year gleams like a freshly-minted coin, possibilities dancing in its silver sheen. For Christian couples, it’s not just a calendar change, it’s a fresh canvas to paint a masterpiece of love, faith, and, yes, even a dash of holy hilarity. So, grab your finest spiritual paintbrushes and let’s tackle this joint venture called “Starting the Year as One.”

 

Firstly, ditch the “resolution blues.” Forget those gym memberships you’ll inevitably abandon by February. Instead, vow to flex your spiritual muscles together. Join a Bible study, not as competitors, but as co-pilots navigating the celestial map. Discuss sermons over Sunday brunch, turning theological nuggets into playful banter (“Honey, did the pastor say ‘agape’ or ‘appetizer’?”). Be each other’s accountability partners, gently reminding each other that prayer shouldn’t be a dusty corner of your phone.

 

Speaking of phones, let’s address the elephant in the digital room. Technology, a blessing and a curse, can be a marital minefield. So, establish boundaries. Carve out “phone-free zones” where conversation reigns supreme, be it over candlelit dinners or cozy board game nights. Remember, your spouse is more fascinating than any Instagram reel, their eyes hold more depth than any TikTok challenge.

 

Now, let’s talk goals. Ditch the generic “be more patient” and dream big. Plan a mission trip together, volunteer at a local shelter, or embark on a pilgrimage to a place of spiritual significance. Share your aspirations with God, not as a shopping list, but as an open invitation for His divine orchestra to play its masterpiece in your lives.

 

Remember, humour is the stainless steel coating of any good marriage. Laugh at yourselves, at life’s inevitable mishaps, and even at the occasional theological debate that gets a little heated (“Honey, I’m pretty sure Noah didn’t pack two unicorns on the ark!”). Laughter is a bridge, not a wall, and it can carry you through the toughest storms.

 

Finally, nurture your individual flames within the shared bonfire of your marriage. Pursue your passions, support each other’s dreams, and celebrate each other’s victories. Remember, a strong marriage isn’t about two halves merging into one bland cookie; it’s about two whole cookies dancing a delicious duet.

 

So, dear Christian couple, as you embark on this fresh year, remember, you’re not just two ships in the night. You’re a fleet, sailing hand-in-hand towards a shared horizon, guided by the stars of faith, fuelled by the laughter of love, and ready to conquer whatever waves may come. And don’t forget to pack your sense of humour – it’s the life jacket that keeps you afloat when things get a little choppy.

 

Happy New Year, fellow voyagers! May your love story be the most epic saga of 2024. Now, go forth and paint your masterpiece, one prayer, one laugh, one shared dream at a time.