Connect with us

Opinion

Should Christians Support Gay Marriage? (1)

Published

on

To answer this question, one must look to an external source for truth which is the Bible. Christians and non-Christians alike are made in the image of God  says Genesis 1:26-27, 9:6.

Humankind surrendered their natural state (the image in which they were created) to worship themselves rather than God.

God’s intention was for sexual pleasure between a man and a woman in a monogamous marital relationship. It is also for reproductive purposes. Gay marriage contradicts what God intended. Genesis 2: 22-24 says “Then, the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called “woman,” for she was taken out of man.’ For this reason, a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.”

God did not make man for man in this context, God made the woman for the man.

Writing on “A case against gay marriage”, Mark B. Blocher, President, Christian Worldview Concepts writes: “A large majority of Americans are opposed to “gay marriage”, but they often do not have the vocabulary to articulate reasons for their opposition”.

This white paper attempts to state the principal reasons to oppose gay marriage. The author’s hope is that pastors will use this material as talking and teaching points with their congregations.

Imagine thirty years ago, a pastor standing in his pulpit on Sunday morning, predicting that in 2004, the residents of the United States would have to propose passage of a constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Most, if not all, of his congregation would have thought he was nuts. Yet, on February 25, 2004, former President George W. Bush did exactly that. He endorsed the passage of a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Prior to this, 38 States had taken legislative action to pass defense of marriage legislation to protect heterosexual marriage.

Many Christians are tempted to give up any resistance to the homosexual onslaught because it seems like a lost battle. When we consider the fact that majority of those who work in the mass media are in favour of gay marriage or same sex “domestic unions,”  some people make every attempt to silence those who oppose their position. Even among Christian college students, there seems to be widespread support for “homosexual marriage”.

Pollster George Barna’s research published in November 2003, revealed that over 40 per cent believe that two committed homosexuals should be allowed to legally marry. Baylor University, a Southern Baptist school, saw their campus newspaper publish an editorial in favour of “homosexual marriage”. In an editorial in the Lariat, the editors said, “Like many heterosexual couples, many gay couples share deep bonds of love, some so strong they have persevered years of discrimination for their choice to co-habitate with and date one another. Just as it is not fair to discriminate against someone for their skin colour, heritage or religious beliefs, it is not fair to discriminate against someone for their sexual orientation. Shouldn’t gay couples be allowed to enjoy the benefits and happiness of marriage, too?”

Evidently, these editors have not read the Bible recently. The University’s administration denounced the editorial but has not disciplined the editors. Despite the backing of Hollywood and much of the national Press corps, Americans are largely opposed to homosexual marriage. In August 2003, an Associated Press poll found that 52 per cent favoured a law banning gay marriage.

Even the New York Times/CBS poll, conducted in December 2003, found that 61 per cent were opposed to gay marriage. In short, Christians should not be so quick to give up. Much of the American population is with us on this topic, regardless of what the Press tries to tell us. Despite decades of relentless propaganda in television programming, film, music and news coverage portraying homosexuality positively, Americans still have not accepted homosexuality as a normal behaviour.

Therefore, Christians should be more vigilant and confident in opposing attempts to mainstream gay marriage. There are a number of strong arguments to be made against the gay rights agenda, particularly its efforts to legalise gay marriage. However, Christians need to remember that taking a position against homosexual practices or homosexual marriage does not give one license to mistreat homosexuals. Regardless of a person’s actions, beliefs, etc., he still deserves to be treated with dignity since he was created in God’s image.

Homosexual marriage is not a civil rights issue. Proponents of “homosexual marriage” argue that denying homosexuals the right to marry is a violation of their civil rights. They claim that just as it was wrong to prohibit blacks and whites from marrying, it is also wrong to bar homosexuals access to the rights and benefits of civil marriage.

For many years, state laws prevented interracial marriage, but the U. S. Supreme Court found these laws unconstitutional and in violation of the equal protection provisions of the constitution. Some gay rights activists make a similar argument for gay marriage, claiming that they are being discriminated against for being what nature has made them. They cannot help being homosexual any more than a black can help being black. In short, homosexuals claim that sodomy is a natural occurring act that should be protected by law in a manner similar to the legal protections afforded race.

However, skin colour and sexual behaviour are entirely different. The first is an inborn characteristic, while the second is behaviourally based and has everything to do with individual character, moral choices and society’s basic rules of conduct. If civil rights laws can be used to justify the behaviours of homosexuals, there is virtually no place to stop. New laws would need to be passed on a daily basis to accommodate the claims of smokers, gamblers, pornography addicts, etc. Activists react strongly to the contention that homosexuality is contrary to nature. Yet, the scientific evidence is stacked against them.

No reputable scientific research supports the claim that homosexuality is a naturally occurring condition. The medical literature is devoid of peer-reviewed research supporting the claim that homosexuality is biological. Some gay rights activists acknowledge that homosexuality is not natural, but intend to press for legalisation of same sex marriage anyway. Organizations such as Better Humans contend that we should not let what is “natural” define our social values. Instead, they contend that we should deploy reason over nature, refusing to submit to what is natural.

As one activist puts it, “Just because heterosexual marriage has been the only form of marriage recognised for the last two thousand years is no reason to not change it.” Some people who subscribe to transhumanism, which is a permutation of humanism, claim that we must reject the so-called natural order to improve humanity and that we should do what is “reasonable,” not what is natural. However, this refusal to accept the norms of nature notwithstanding, there are certain facts of life that must be recognised. Social features are open to change. Inherent, natural ones are not.

Marriage, like many important social institutions, is a combination of natural reality (the biology of procreation) and social contract (the culture that nurtures and supports procreation).

Transhumanists may truly believe that medical technology may one day remove the obstacles to same sex procreation. May be. But this technological Tower of Babel will not eradicate other significant gender-specific features of heterosexual procreation and marriage. Scripture condemns homosexual practice. First, it is not necessary to condemn people who have homosexual “desires” any more than we should condemn those who have heterosexual desires.

Dr Akpogena, a Christian writer, lives in Port Harcourt.

 

Lewis Akpogena

Continue Reading

Opinion

Restoring Order, Delivering Good Governance 

Published

on

Quote:”But the tide must now turn. With the Senate’s approval of a record ?1.485 trillion budget for Rivers State for 2025, a new opportunity has emerged”.

The political atmosphere in Rivers State has been anything but calm in 2025. Yet, a rare moment of unity was witnessed on Saturday, June 28, when Governor Siminalayi Fubara and Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike, appeared side by side at the funeral of Elder Temple Omezurike Onuoha, Wike’s late uncle. What could have passed for a routine condolence visit evolved into a significant political statement—a symbolic show of reconciliation in a state bruised by deep political strife.

The funeral, attended by dignitaries from across the nation, was more than a moment of shared grief. It became the public reflection of a private peace accord reached earlier at the Presidential Villa in Abuja. There, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu brought together Governor Fubara, Minister Wike, the suspended Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Martin Amaewhule, and other lawmakers to chart a new path forward.

For Rivers people, that truce is a beacon of hope. But they are not content with photo opportunities and promises. What they demand now is the immediate lifting of the state of emergency declared in March 2025, and the unconditional reinstatement of Governor Fubara, Deputy Governor Dr. Ngozi Odu, and all suspended lawmakers. They insist on the restoration of their democratic mandate.

President Tinubu’s decision to suspend the entire structure of Rivers State’s elected leadership and appoint a sole administrator was a drastic response to a deepening political crisis. While it may have prevented a complete breakdown in governance, it also robbed the people of their voice. That silence must now end.

The administrator, retired naval chief Ibok-Ette Ibas, has managed a caretaker role. But Rivers State cannot thrive under unelected stewardship. Democracy must return—not partially, not symbolically, but fully. President Tinubu has to ensure that the people’s will, expressed through the ballot, is restored in word and deed.

Governor Fubara, who will complete his six-month suspension by September, was elected to serve the people of Rivers, not to be sidelined by political intrigues. His return should not be ceremonial. It should come with the full powers and authority vested in him by the constitution and the mandate of Rivers citizens.

The people’s frustration is understandable. At the heart of the political crisis was a power tussle between loyalists of Fubara and those of Wike. Institutions, particularly the State House of Assembly, became battlegrounds. Attempts were made to impeach Fubara. The situation deteriorated into a full-blown crisis, and governance was nearly brought to its knees.

But the tide must now turn. With the Senate’s approval of a record ?1.485 trillion budget for Rivers State for 2025, a new opportunity has emerged. This budget is not just a fiscal document—it is a blueprint for transformation, allocating ?1.077 trillion for capital projects alone. Yet, without the governor’s reinstatement, its execution remains in doubt.

It is Governor Fubara, and only him, who possesses the people’s mandate to execute this ambitious budget. It is time for him to return to duty with vigor, responsibility, and a renewed sense of urgency. The people expect delivery—on roads, hospitals, schools, and job creation.

Rivers civil servants, recovering from neglect and under appreciation, should also continue to be a top priority. Fubara should continue to ensure timely payment of salaries, address pension issues, and create a more effective, motivated public workforce. This is how governance becomes real in people’s lives.

The “Rivers First” mantra with which Fubara campaigned is now being tested. That slogan should become policy. It must inform every appointment, every contract, every budget decision, and every reform. It must reflect the needs and aspirations of the ordinary Rivers person—not political patrons or vested interests.

Beyond infrastructure and administration, political healing is essential. Governor Fubara and Minister Wike must go beyond temporary peace. They should actively unite their camps and followers to form one strong political family. The future of Rivers cannot be built on division.

Political appointments, both at the Federal and State levels, must reflect a spirit of fairness, tolerance, and inclusivity. The days of political vendettas and exclusive lists must end. Every ethnic group, every gender, and every generation must feel included in the new Rivers project.

Rivers is too diverse to be governed by one faction. Lasting peace can only be built on concessions, maturity, and equity. The people are watching to see if the peace deal will lead to deeper understanding or simply paper over cracks in an already fragile political arrangement.

Wike, now a national figure as Minister of the FCT, has a responsibility to rise above the local fray and support the development of Rivers State. His influence should bring federal attention and investment to the state, not political interference or division.

Likewise, Fubara should lead with restraint, humility, and a focus on service delivery. His return should not be marked by revenge or political purges but by inclusive leadership that welcomes even former adversaries into the process of rebuilding the state.

“The people are no longer interested in power struggles. They want light in their streets, drugs in their hospitals, teachers in their classrooms, and jobs for their children. The politics of ego and entitlement have to give way to governance with purpose.

The appearance of both leaders at the funeral was a glimpse of what unity could look like. That moment should now evolve into a movement-one that prioritizes Rivers State over every personal ambition. Let it be the beginning of true reconciliation and progress.

As September draws near, the Federal government should act decisively to end the state of emergency and reinstate all suspended officials. Rivers State must return to constitutional order and normal democratic processes. This is the minimum requirement of good governance.

The crisis in Rivers has dragged on for too long. The truce is a step forward, but much more is needed. Reinstating Governor Fubara, implementing the ?1.485 trillion budget, and uniting political factions are now the urgent tasks ahead. Rivers people have suffered enough. It is time to restore leadership, rebuild trust, and finally put Rivers first.

By: Amieyeofori Ibim
Amieyeofori Ibim is former Editor of The Tide Newspapers, political analyst and public affairs commentator

Continue Reading

Opinion

Checking Herdsmen Rampage

Published

on

Quote:”
Do the Fulani herdsmen have an expansionists agenda, like their progenitor, Uthman Dan Fodio? Why are they everywhere even the remotest part of other areas in Nigeria harassing, maiming, raping and killing the owners of the land?”
According to reports,   suspected Fulani herdsmen on June 25, 2025 invaded Ueken, the ancestral home of the Tai Kingdom, in the Ogoni Ethnic Nationality of Rivers State and murdered one  Goodluck Dimkpa, a father of one. The attack has reportedly caused panic and led to residents fleeing the community. It also generated coordinated protests from aggrieved Ogoni youths.
In a swift reaction, The Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) decried and  strongly condemned the  invasion  by suspected Fulani herdsmen.

In his denunciation,  MOSOP President Fegalo Nsuke described the incident as very unfortunate and deeply troubling, warning against a recurrence of the violence experienced in Benue State. “The killing of yesterday is bad and very unfortunate. We are getting preliminary information about how the herders gained access to the farmland, and it appears some hoodlums may be collecting money and granting access illegally.”

He called on the Hausa community in Rivers State to intervene swiftly to prevent further attacks.
“We want the Hausa community in Rivers State to take urgent action to ensure these issues are resolved”.
But will such appeal and requests end the violent disposition of the Fulani herdsmen? It is not saying something new that the escalating threat and breach of peace across the country by the Fulani herdsmen or those suspected to be Fulani herdsmen, leaves much to be desired in a country that is bedevilled by multi-dimensional challenges and hydra-headed problems.

On June 13-14, 2025, about 200 adults and children were reported to have been gruesomely murdered and burnt in Yelewata, Guma Local Government Area of Benue State, by suspected herdsmen who stormed the community, attacked the innocent people, and wreaked  havoc described as one the deadliest attacks in the Middle Belt of Nigeria, in recent times.Two days before the Yelewata senseless massacre, precisely on June 11, 2025, about 25 people were killed in Makurdi still by people suspected to be Fulani herdsmen.
Plateau State, Southern Kaduna and other Middle Belt States have their own tales of woe from the unprovoked attacks by the Fulani herdsmen leading to loss of lives and properties.
Some upland Local Government Areas  of Rivers State, such as Etche, Omuma, Emohua, Ikwerre, Oyigbo, Abua, Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni, have severally recounted their ordeals, as herdsmen invaded farmlands, destroyed crops, raped female farmers and killed protestant residents.

In my considered view the Fulani herdsmen whom life means nothing to, have gone too far. The right to life and property are fundamental but the  herdsmen’s invasions violate such inalienable rights of the people.Already Nigeria seems to exist on a precipice with the majority of her about 200 million people groaning in the quagmire of unpopular economic policies, reprehensible democratic practices translating to a gale of decampment to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) which is a tell-tale sign of an imminent one party State, looting of public funds with impunity and barefaced corruption in all sectors of the nation.
Nigerians, therefore, cannot afford to live with the debilitating consequences that the activities of the Fulani herdsmen portend in the face of the trending precarious socio-political and economic challenges. In fact, in all the States like Benue, Borno, Plateau, where incessant herdsmen attacks are frequent, residents live in petrified fear because of the disregard and disrespect for the sanctity of human lives. This fear leads to gross lack of development.
The governors of those States though Chief security officers, seem to be incapacitated, to carry out the primary responsibility of protection of lives and property of their citizens as enshrined in the grand norm. The mayhem caused by herdsmen in many states of Nigeria has left indelible pains in some families and communities, sufficient enough to make the government to control the activities of the herdsmen.
Some of these men who claim to ply their occupation are seen carrying lethal weapons. Which law in Nigeria gives people right to illegally possess weapons? How could the herders publicly carry lethal weapons without security operatives’ arresting and questioning them? The Fulani herdsmen, it’s not out of place to say,  are above the law. Because of their possession of weapons, the herdsmen are licensed to destroy lives, property and crops-the source of livelihood of others, thereby increasing food insecurity, poverty, hunger,  hostility and lack of development.
Do the Fulani herdsmen have an expansionists agenda, like their progenitor, Uthman Dan Fodio? Why are they everywhere even the remotest part of other areas in Nigeria harassing, maiming, raping and killing the owners of the land? Such nonsense must be made to stop, no matter whose ox is gored. Security operatives should be proactive to check  attempts of Fulani herdsmen to breach the peace. They should arrest and prosecute culprits because Fulani herdsmen who perpetrate  the heinous  acts have always been allowed to go  non reprimanded.
There is need to enhance vigilance and community coordination while residents should be alert,  take necessary precautions and work with traditional rulers, chiefs, youth leaders and local vigilante to stem the ugly trend.
Again the wanton destruction of lives and properties which no doubt has overwhelmed the Nigerian Police, makes the clamour for State Police, indispensable. The National Assembly should consider the amendment of the Constitution to allow States to have their Statutory policing agencies.
Igbiki Benibo
Continue Reading

Opinion

Is Nigeria Democratic Nation?

Published

on

As insurgency has risen to an all time high in the country were killings has now grown to be a normal daily activity in some part of the nation it may not be safe to say that Nigeria still practices democracy.

Several massacres coming from the Boko Haram and the herdsmen amongst all other insurgencies which have led to the destruction of homes and killing, burning of communities especially in the northern part of the country. All these put together are result of the ethnic battles that are fought between the tribes of Nigeria and this can be witnessed in Benue State where herders and farmers have been in constant clashes for ages. They have experienced nothing but casualties and unrest.

In the month of June 13-14, the Yelwata attack at the Guma Local Government Area by suspected gunmen or herdsmen who stormed the houses of innocent IDPs (Internally Displaced Persons) claiming the lives of families, both adults and children estimated to be 200 victims. They were all burnt alive by these unknown gunmen.

This has been recorded as one of the deadliest insurgencies that had happened in recent years.  Some security personnel that were trying to fight the unknown gunmen also lost their lives.

Prior to the Yelewata attack, two days before the happening, similar conflict took place in Makurdi on June 11, 2025. 25 people were killed in the State. Even in Plateau State and the Southern Kaduna an attack also took place in the month of June.

All other states that make up the Middle Belt have been experiencing the farmers/herders clash for years now and it has persisted up till recent times, claiming lives of families and children, homes and lands, escalating in 2025 with coordinated assaults.

Various authorities and other villagers who fled for safety also blamed the herdsmen in the State for the attack that happened in Yelwata community.

Ehebha  God’stime is an Intern with The Tide.

Continue Reading

Trending