On the other hand, the assumption that the litmus test for a society to show that it is ‘civilised’ is to display an uncritical acceptance of the ‘liberal’ ‘homophilia’ that ‘normalises’ the flaunting of ‘gay’ culture, that mainstreams ‘gay pride’, that ‘educates’ the children in schools on gay culture, that reflects uncritical approval of gay life in film and literature, that shows gay sex in film for a non-gay audience, that is accepting of gay marriage and adoption and parenting rights is an unfair and ultimately unrealistic assumption that is doomed to failure.

All of this can be very confusing to the modern Nigerian, especially the youth, who aspires to be fair, but also aspires to be sure that he is thinking and doing the right thing.

What is the right thing to do in the homosexual battle? Where is the high ground, short of throwing out his right to question?

There are four ‘Core Principle’ zones for the critical thinker to work in.

One is how to ensure that all laws and conventions of human social behaviour respect the rights of every individual at all times, and that they do nothing to infringe on those rights, no matter how strong the temptation, or how powerful the pressure of the majority.

Another is the requirement for society now, and for all time, to de-criminalise the contents of the citizen’s private life. Affectionate relationships, carried out in private by consenting adults, can only be labelled criminal by a society that is itself criminally disposed to violate the rights and privileges of its members without justification.

A third, and very important zone, requires that the issue of adoption and parenting of the future generations by homosexual couples should be returned to the discussion table, so that society ultimately takes a stand only after a fulsome appraisal of its identity, and the future it wants for itself.

And the fourth is that cultural depictions, especially what is available in audio-visual media to a general audience, and more particularly to an audience of youth, should – no, must – be controlled by the society itself, based on a consensus about what it is, and what it wants to become.

The discussion, and the acrimony, will go on for a long time to come. Sadly, most of it is fuelled by passionate arguments based more on gut instincts that hard facts.

It would help everybody, and help the future of Mankind, if the hot air could be taken out of it, so that the best human energy could be expended on achieving some kind of consensus on the ‘Core Principles’ of a reasoned response to the living reality of homosexuality. Only this would provide a good roadmap to a liveable future.