Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
14 June 2024 Photo supplied
Siyanda Magayana
Siyanda Magayana, Senior Officer: Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination Office, Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice, UFS.

Opinion article by Siyanda Magayana, Senior Officer: Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination Office, Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice, University of the Free State.


A Paradox of Pride

The month of June is International Pride Month, a time to celebrate and commemorate the strides that have been made by various LGBTQI+ persons and groups, as well as allies to decriminalise homosexuality world-wide. It is also a time that serves as a symbol of solidarity, visibility, and resilience for this community. However, against the backdrop of ongoing criminalisation, homophobia, transphobia, discrimination, and violence targeted at this group across the globe, the question arises: can we truly celebrate? The significance that Pride Month holds for all LGBTQI+ people is noteworthy on a global scale. During this month, LGBTQI+ individuals are afforded the opportunity to affirm their identity, honour, and commemorate history, while equally advocating for equality in the volatile times on our continent and beyond.

However, it is important to note that despite the strides that have been made to recognise, legalise, and protect lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and other non-normative identities world-wide, LGBTQI+ individuals in Africa and globally continue to experience a complex mix of emotions. In Africa and globally again, even in counties like South Africa where same-sex relationships and marriages are legally recognised, violence, discrimination, resistance, and harassment remain prevalent issues for this community. This is indicative of the life-long struggle for equality and safety for LGBTQI+ individuals, underscoring the need for continued advocacy and support. Likewise, while Pride Month may offer a chance to commemorate moments of resilience, solidarity, and triumph, it equally serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing realities of being subjected to daily violence, rejection at home and by the system, and different forms of discrimination.

The Context of Criminalisation

There has been a surge in the criminalisation of same-sex relationships in several African countries, and worldwide – the most recent and most-talked-about being Uganda. Outside of religious arguments, the criminalisation of homosexuality and homosexual acts in Africa is often justified by claims that denote it as a foreign concept that undermines the history, traditions, and sovereign culture and foundations of the continent.

Consequently, many countries enforce severe punishments, including imprisonment and death sentences, for those found guilty of practising homosexuality. These laws represent a gross violation of human rights and contribute to a social crisis marked by stigma, fear, and violence against gender non-conforming and LGBTQI+ individuals. Likewise, as sentiments that argue that same-sex attraction and relationships are ‘un-African’ and a ‘Western import’ persist, the marginalisation and discrimination the LGBTQI+ community will continue, further entrenching their vulnerability within our societies. In addition, the criminalisation of same-sex identities and relationships has far-reaching and devastating effects on LGBTQI+ individuals globally. These effects permeate every aspect of their life, threatening not just their personal safety and freedom, but also their mental health and well-being, as well as access to justice and economic opportunities.

Impact on Human Rights and Dignity

The impact of the criminalisation of homosexuality on the human rights and dignity of gender non-comforting and non-normative identities cannot be overstated. It has far-reaching consequences for not only human rights and dignity, but also for social justice. The systemic oppression that continues to subject and deprive LGBTQI+ persons of their inherent right to freedom of expression, autonomy, and dignity, as enshrined in the constitution and global policies, calls for a national and international awakening for all. LGBTQI+ rights are equally human rights, and they are similar to the rights of those who are perceived to have ‘normative’ identities, such as heterosexual individuals.

Moreover, just as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and other identities have the right to live freely, express their love and pursue relationships without fear of violence, being jailed, or discrimination, so too should LGBTQI+ individuals. And, amid the criminalisation and ongoing chastising of LGBTQI+ identities world-wide, it is crucial to remember that their rights are not special privileges, but rather ensuring that everyone, regardless of gender identity and sexual orientation ought to be protected and enjoy the same freedoms and same rights.

Celebrating with Resilience and Solidarity

Although celebrating pride month is often fraught with complexities and challenges, it is still a time to reflect, celebrate and be courageous in the fight against gender inequality, discrimination, violence, and justice continues. This month, globally, continues to symbolise the resilience for LGBTQI+ individuals as they assert their right to exist fully, openly, and authentically. Therefore, amid the ongoing criminalisation and violence, it is crucial that we stand in solidarity, protect, and amplify the voices of the LGBTQI+ community by repealing any discriminatory laws that seek to erase and undermine their rightful existence. Furthermore, it is imperative that anti-discriminatory laws that safeguard everyone’s rights – regardless of gender identity and sexual orientation continue to be applied equitably.

In conclusion, pride month is a dual faceted observation for many. On the one hand, it is a time that is filled with joyous parades and reflective dialogues celebrating how far the LGBTQI+ community and movement has come. On the other hand, amidst criminalisation of queer identities, it is a sombre time for many who have been, and continue to be, subjects of violence, rejection, ridicule, and discrimination because of their gender identity and sexual orientation. As we celebrate this annual initiative, it is important for us to remember and support those who cannot do so openly, continue to advocate for a society where everyone, regardless of their gender identity and sexual orientation can live freely and openly without fear.

News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept