The current travails of the Senegalese international and Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) of France football star Idrissa Gueye, who refused to wear his club’s apparel embossed with a rainbow for gay rights in difference to his religious convictions; has once again reignited the debate on the broad interpretation of civil liberties and the limits of freedom, and how far both could be stretched without infringing on the rights of others.
Gueye, the former Aston Villa and Everton star, who now plays for PSG, refused to wear the shirt for a scheduled match against Montpellier because the team numbers were set out in rainbow colours to commemorate the International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia.
In the context of the raging culture wars being fought globally on multiple fronts, Gueye starts from an undeniable position of disadvantage. The stakes are stacked against him.
READ ALSO: NBBF President: Who is witch-hunting Ahmadu Musa Kida? by James Bwala
In the past several decades, the West had continued the relentless expansion and elaboration of the broad definitions and interpretations of what constitutes absolute freedom and civil liberties which are often used interchangeably.
In recent times, it has also become painfully obvious that we were fast approaching a breaking point in the application of both concepts in an increasingly diverse universe compounding by the impact of globalization and all it entails.
The French football league(Ligue 1), like its English Premier League (EPL), Spanish La Liga , and the Italian Serie A; have all become melting pots of civilizations in terms of their playing personnel. That is why it has taken the principled stance of an African football star playing in France, to bring the issue of disproportionate or selective application of civil liberties to the front burner.
Gueye’s case is certainly the first of its kind in recent times, but it will definitely not be the last. How PSG and the French authorities deal with the situation will be landmark on how other ‘infractions’ related to the issue are handled in many respects.
What Gueye’s current predicament clearly reveals, is that the fine line between what constitutes freedom and civil liberties and absolute tyranny, are being gradually eroded, if not completely obliterated. How?
Well, in my considered opinion, tyranny is exhibited when the principled stance of a single individual not to partake in a gesture that promotes homosexuality, without even condemning it; is viewed as a major offence in the same principalities where we are frequently remind of the supremacy of individual liberties, freedom of religion, of expression, and individual choices including that of sexual orientation, not to mention the rights of women to have an abortion; even if the latter has now come under threat for Americans as a consequence of recent shenanigans in the US Supreme Court!
With the active connivance of the animal farm, we have always mistaken for the United Nations (UN), child rights, has also become the rule, rather than the exception, among its member nations regardless of the individual peculiarities and cultural preferences of their respective societies.
By historical accounts, up till the 1960s, homosexuality was not only regarded as a manifestation of mental illness even in the West. It was equally a taboo or something to be spoken about in hushed tones in the innermost recesses of homes and public spaces, that was, until men and women literally started popping out of the closets behind which they had cowered previously to disclose their sexual orientations.
Today, homosexuality and lesbianism has become a matter of pride, and heaven helps anyone who remotely dares to question the fact as Geuye has just discovered.
If things progress on the same trajectory, it now seems to be only a matter of time, before incest too, would be considered legitimate and a matter of ‘choice’ in the realm of the perverted interpretation of the cocktail of absolute freedoms favoured by the West, and which it tyrannically insists must also be the uniform standard for the rest of the world regardless of our individual and collective value systems.
And in the hypocritical if not tyrannical interpretation of the club and French authorities, neutrality is not even an option on the matter. Their tolerance level has been breached. It is either you are with them, or against them, with no place for sitting on the fence or any middle ground.
While the LGBT community is entitled to celebrate their status under the same freedoms, Gueye is being denied his in the refusal to have any remote association with them even on a matter as simple as the refusal to wear an apparel which does not inhibit their rights to defer on the matter of sexual orientation.
As Gueye has now been crudely reminded, the status-quo remains the same even if it conflicts with his religious beliefs. The message has been loud and clear from the same quarters that routinely celebrates the supremacy of freedom of choice, speech and association as the fundamental and major distinguishing attributes of liberty. On this particular matter, the choice to defer is being denied. And the last time I checked, the French principle of assimilation no longer applies to subjects from its former colonies.
As far as the subject is concerned, dissent for whatever reason is completely prohibited. As reported by the London Daily Mail, Gueye is already in deep trouble already. The National Council of Ethics of the French Football Federation (FFF) has demanded for and explanation for his behaviour.
At the same time, Valerie Pecresse, president of the Regional Council of Ile-de-France and a former government minister, has called for Gueye to be punished for his failure to show solidarity with the LGBTQ community.
Meanwhile, a leaked letter from the FFF is reported to brazenly stated in quote: “There are two possibilities. Either these allegations are unfounded and we invite you to speak without delay to silence these rumours. For example, we invite you to accompany your message with a photograph wearing said shirt. Or the rumours are true and we invite you to realise the impact of your act, and the grave error committed.”
The threat was unmistakable, and could ultimately result in the truncation of Gueye’s entire football career. And even if his contract is cancelled by PSG, it is difficult to see how he could be engaged by another club with the shiner of his alleged ‘discrimination’ against the LGBT community so prominent on his face.
That is precisely why his bold and courageous stand should concern all fair-minded people the world over regardless of their ethnic and religious inclinations. And that is even more so for mostly Asian and African countries whose entire value systems has come under relentless threat from the West and its hyper-liberal if not overtly hypocritical application of civil liberties.
If we accept even the most pedestrian interpretation of civil liberties being bandied about; the LGBT community the world over should be within their rights for their sexual orientation. But then, the same rights should also apply to Gueye in his refusal to either support, or associated with their deviancy. Anything else stinks of tyranny and dictatorial tendencies.
Certainly, the free fall into even more uncharted waters of endless possibilities in the concept of what constitutes civil, liberties and its limitations, particularly on issues that clearly offend our individual and collective sensibilities, we cannot afford to be neutral for the mere sake of political correctness.
The rest of humanity has an important choice to make. We either seek to redefine the theories of what constitutes civil liberties and their basic provisions, or stand idly by as our imperilled civilization continues on its free fall into a hollowed void of unbridled primitivity and decadence even our ancestors from the stone age would have been ashamed of.
Unless we are economical with the truth, the fundamental pillar of civil liberties as defined by the West, hinges on the supremacy of freedom of choice and association. Even under the extant statutes of the UN, there are provisions for abstention from voting under matters brought before the Security Council or the General Assembly for adjudication.
We must never be deluded to mistake manifestations of lunacy for acts of freedom and liberty, otherwise a day would come when it will become fashionable to walk naked in public places no matter how it offends the religious and cultural sensibilities of others.
But then, I am not too naïve to realize that the developing world, in particular, the task to salvage whatever remains of our cultural values is more of a herculean task. The ravages of colonization and imperialism made sure of that.
Today, in the name of freedom and human rights, the richer nations in the West utilize the instrumentality of the UN and the threat of sanctions to coerce our leaders to adopt most of the protocols on the subject despite their negative impact on their own people. They withhold grants and trade benefits unless the same nations capitulate to their demands. But it doesn’t end there.
Declassified reports from western intelligence agencies, have given graphic details of their diabolical roles in the undemocratic replacement of patriotic and legitimately elected leaders in Africa and beyond with stooges amenable to their governments in pursuit of the same objectives.
Needless to add that such practices have the exposed the hollowness of their democratic pretensions with its emphasis on freedom and civil liberties both of which are being hypocritically touted as the fundamental pillars of the universal value system they favour. But I digress, somewhat.
In the final analysis, as we watch the Gueye situation unfold in France, it is difficult to ignore historical lessons on the matter. Humanity has been down that road before with Sodom and Gomorrah. And we know how those who tempted God’s patience in that age ended up.
– Muhammad Kudu Ibrahim, who previously wrote under the pen name ‘Muhammad Al-Ghazali’; is the President/CEO of Niger Valley Resources Ltd. ghazalism@gmail.com
Follow the Neptune Prime channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va74ZvU2v1IqKByXoX3d
Do you have breaking news, interview request, opinion, suggestion, or want your event covered? Email us at neptuneprime2233@gmail.com
 of France football star Idrissa Gueye, who refused to wear his club's apparel embossed with a rainbow for gay rights in difference to his religious convictions; has once again reignited the debate on the broad interpretation of civil liberties and the limits of freedom, and how far both could be stretched without infringing on the rights of others.){kind=link}