Bearing, Adopting and Other Parenting Issues

O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? (Galatians 3:1)

Let us look at the church with a parent’s lens. It will help us appreciate the reason we have the issues we see in the church today. That a parent determines to a very huge extent how a child turns out is not in doubt.

The major reason is that the relationship between a child and parent will set in motion a path (I may call it a rut) the child may be unable to leave however hard he tries. That is the plain teaching of the Bible.

What do I mean? You may be wondering.

Do you know how hard it is to discipline a neighbor’s child, however undisciplined he may be? Do you know how disconcerting it may be to rebuke, even scold an adopted child?

Why is that?

The parental link is a loose one. And it is temporal however permanent you may want it to be. Sad to say the step-child step-parent bond for the most part fails due to that.

Your child on the other hand is yours and you made the connection that leaves no gaps, no options. You can therefore beat him sore and he won’t think of running away as he has no better place to run to. But it is also because he is assured of love and concern; they know that however painful it might be, it stems from love.

I have had a slight experience with an adopted son. And it was not a pleasant one. There are things I really wanted to say or do but couldn’t as I was not sure his past experiences enable him to handle the new things or facts I was presenting. Their past injuries, probably neglect may have predetermined them to be unable to receive my concern. There is a rebuke I may have but am unsure they may be able to even recognize it as such or may think of it as hatred.

You relate with them with gloves in your spiritual hands. Because they may just choose to walk away from all your love and concern like mine did without notice.

That is why discipleship is so important to spiritual growth. You see, spiritual relationships are not much different. One’s level and depth of involvement in the spiritual life of a believer determines their level of intervention especially if something goes wrong.

It explains the reason very few pastors preach against sin. They are scared their ‘flock’ will run away and look for another shepherd. Another reason is that they really are not spiritual parents as they are not interested in properly feeding in that flock.

If truth be told, they are just interested in the offerings those sheep keep bringing. But even if we overlooked the offering expectation, there is no real familial connection to warrant an open rebuke because the pastor is just one of the people the believer meets in his journey of life. He therefore has no spiritual ‘moral’ status to rebuke someone else’s child since their connection consists of the sermons he preaches. His sacrifice is therefore limited to the preparation of those sermons and nothing else.

That is the reason marriages are breaking all around us as no congregant trusts his pastor with his intimate and deep issues since he was never involved in their foundation. They do not trust you with their bosom matters. They will only call you when they are celebrating this or the other as that is what your sermons feed them on. Many pastors know their sheep has divorced from the rumors. And he is not ashamed to be called their pastor!

I have heard pastors complaining that people are filling other people’s offices (who are not employed as pastors) even as the pastors lie idle. One actually made that complaint in a staff meeting. They think the title pastor is all a person needs to approach someone for spiritual assistance. Some pastors get frustrated when they realize that their secretary is more spiritually sought than they are. They sometimes accuse their secretary of sabotage or insubordination without realizing that someone will always go where they are sure of getting the required assistance. It is therefore not strange to find a gateman handling more spiritual issues than the pastor who has employed him because he has a better father heart than his boss.

Why are churches so full of divorcees, single mothers and women who call men dogs? The pastor supports them. And I mean what I have just said.

Why does the Bible say that God hates divorce? It is simply that, God hates divorce. This directly means that He loves it when marriages are healing or healthy. That is God’s standard.

It therefore means that a pastor with God’s heart will seek healing for all those breaking or broken marriages. He will lack sleep looking for solutions for those relationships. And instead of preaching success and breakthrough he will concentrate on healing for those relationships. Because he seeks to deal with one thing he knows God hates.

Some talk of irreconcilable differences. What makes them so? What have you done to decide they are such if the only word you have is from one of the two parties? Has God told you? Has He told you He tried and failed to restore the relationship? How much prayer have you invested in the healing?

A hurting person kicks very hard to prove to the world that they are past the injury; and spiritual and emotional injury is even worse. They may be acquiring this and the other to prove that they have moved beyond the injury and especially to show the partner who was involved with the injury that their departure was of no consequence. That show of success is a very thin veneer to cover a very bleeding heart and spirit that only a genuine shepherd can see.

That is why I am talking about a father’s heart. It is because a good father can see beyond braggadocio to an injury being covered. And it is because he is interested in the inner person as opposed to outside manifestations. He is aware that those outside accomplishments are temporal and have no capacity at all to offer real contentment or fulfillment. They are even worse as they might divert someone’s focus from the eternal. Imagine your sheep going to hell as you are applauding his earthly accomplishments!

The modern pastor is just a druggist specializing in pain killing medication (spiritual). He is not much different from the methamphetamines people take to dull their frustrations instead of facing them. His teaching dulls people from their injuries, making them live in denial as if the denial will make the issues disappear. Then they will start to pursue other interests to fortify that denial.

When was the last time you saw a pastor introducing a couple whose marriage he has helped restore? Have you even seen such an event in any church you have attended? Does it mean that all broken marriages have irreconcilable differences?

It is interesting, however, to find out that the hurting will rarely run to a pastor without a father’s heart, even if he does not have the title. It is just like with children who have a home with the best toys yet will never run there in a crisis but will run to the one with a heart sober enough to parent them.

Have you seen a pastor weeping for broken marriages in his church? Have you seen a pastor in pain because his young people are not seeking his blessing before starting to cohabit? Have you seen a pastor calling for a fast to reverse the tide of breaking and broken marriages? Ever heard a pastor threatening to resign if the leadership does not exhibit Christlikeness? Remember Ezra?

This points to a pastor who is an employee instead of a father. He is what Christ called the hireling. The state of his congregation does not warrant his pain, however agonizing their hurt is.

I simply want to state that a father experiences more pain than his hurting flock/ children.

That is what is lacking in the church today. Very few pastors have any empathy for their congregation. Their pain does not affect the pastor, unless it is those with resources to pamper him. And it lacks because very few pastors are interested in parenting their flock. That is why nowadays the only ‘sin’ warranting excommunication is disagreeing with the pastor or his leadership.

Paul could write those tough words because he was not scared the church could desert. And we see the same when we read his letters to the Corinthians and many other letters. He was writing as a father to churches he not only preached the Gospel to but was also involved in their discipleship. His position of authority over them was therefore not under any threat.

Another thing I will add is that a father is not a crisis handler. He sees ahead of time and therefore prepares the child to avoid danger ahead.

As an example, no failed marriage failed after the wedding. The grounds for the failure were laid much earlier, in the betrothment and the courtship and the preparation for the wedding. It many times starts with the company the two kept and their views on marriage. And of course the foundation was laid in the kind of marriage their parents had.

A good father (pastor) will therefore be more interested in the preparation for the marriage than he will be in the wedding ceremony. Some wedding ceremonies are the foundation for failed marriages for the simple reason that they elevate the event way above the relationship.

It therefore means that a godly pastor will ensure that the relationships of the people under his watch are real and healthy. That display for this or the other is minimized, if not killed altogether as it has a capacity of diverting attention from the real important issues.

Again this is what discipleship is and does.

And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. (Acts 2:42)

Instruction is a must, instruction on the scriptures. The youth will not be left to wander in the maze of relationships without fatherly (pastoral) instruction as it is a sure recipe for failed marriages.

This is just one aspect I have dealt with. Suppose pastors would ask God to give them His heart for His flock. Will they look at His flock in the same way?

I have not even touched on the hurting, especially the ones whose hurt or shame drove away and the fact that a father will look for them wherever they may have gone hiding. Again as a father he will spare no cost to restore. That is the plain teaching of the Bible. That is one reason David was elevated from shepherding sheep to reigning over God’s heritage. I remember reading the story of a father who became ‘homeless’ on the streets to be able to reach and rescue his drug addicted daughter.

A Biblically persuaded pastor will not only weep for the hurts of those he shepherds. He will actively seek those who even think they are beyond rescue. He will go to the dumpsters to rescue sheep that have sunk that low and have no capacity to even imagine rescue is possible.

Like Christ said, a pastor with His heart will not seek the healthy, but seek the sick to bring them Christ’s healing.

What kind of pastor are you? What kind of pastor shepherds you?

The ‘Papa’ Folly

And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. (Matthew 23:9)

I want us to look at this trend disturbing church and ministry lately; that of calling ministers dad, and even mum. And I want us to examine the reason Christ Himself forbid it.

Let me state before saying anything else that those fond of either calling or being called so are spiritual leeches, each feeding on the other. One is feeding on undue and undeserved authority the title father offers while the other is feeding on the cover the fool receiving the title has.

Let me explain. The ‘father’ is feeding on illegitimate authority, or authority derived from expanding his crib by adding innumerable babies to his family. As such he really has authority because his children are not growing and have him bottle feeding and changing them. They will never outgrow the nursery or they will know why Christ issued the commandment. His word therefore to these children is the law, as if from God Himself, however illegitimate it might be. The ‘children’ do not mind having a father because he will take responsibility of their soiling themselves again and again since which babe does not do it anyway?

As a father I understand that command very easily.

My firstborn is an adult and living independently. I therefore do not relate with him as I do with the others. He also does not look at me like the others do.

Would it not be a shame if he came all the way to ask me whether he should buy a shirt?

Though he honors me as his father, it would be ridiculous if he called me to ask whether he should go to sleep or what he should have for breakfast.

He still consults me on issues, but on a different level with his siblings. My authority over him, though it still exists, exists to give him wings to fly. The others will do what I tell them because they are still children directly under my watch.

A spiritual papa should grow his spiritual children to adulthood, connecting them to their common Father in heaven.

And I have innumerable spiritual children, some who run off to other papas when they realize that I will not slack down on their need to grow and become spiritual disciples. They run off when they realize that I will continue holding them accountable for their growth until they mature enough to become fathers themselves.

For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. (Hebrews 5: 12, 13)

These are the kind of people who love having papas all over. They are simply not willing to grow and take responsibility for their lives. They will therefore thrive under one papa or the other. And the papas are happy to have so many children that they do not care whether they are growing or not. And they have no time to know whether they are responsible believers or not. Having children is their all compassing reality.

Jesus command not to call anyone on earth father is indicative of the spiritual reality of discipleship.

You see, the Great Commission requires us to make nations Christ’s disciples and not our children. We may start with children but the end game is people who are answerable to Christ alone, not requiring our authority or permission.

And it is not much different in the physical realm. A parent is most proud when he is talking with his children more as equals as they have grown enough to control his estate even in better ways than he had done his whole life.

A father is never threatened because his children have broken through any ceiling placed their way even if the only ceiling he broke was taking them to school as an illiterate or removing his children from herding or farming to get an education he did not understand.

I was raised at a time when most parents were not educated. Yet it always amazes me hearing a father boasting to his age mates that he sold his land to take his children to school, some who have crossed oceans and even taken residence there yet he does not even have any chance of visiting them.

That is the spirit Christ expects us to have as spiritual parents. We are supposed to grow our spiritual children to the point they are connected enough to Christ to need our permission to thrive.

But probably a bigger reason we were forbidden to call anyone on earth father is because that father can fall as he is all too human. Or he may plateau in his spiritual journey thus placing a limitation on your growth.

Consider David and Saul. David was Saul’s son in more ways than one. But Saul had sinned and been rejected by God. Imagine what could have happened had David continued ‘papa’ing Saul instead of continuing his pursuit of God and His will?

Yet that is what many people choose to do when they think their significance and impact is tied with their hanging on their papa or mama. A son who continues insisting on hanging on my papa coattails is certainly a deficient son. Otherwise why do we frown on a son living with his parents in his adulthood? Or do we think it is different in the spiritual?

Let us go to the Bible and the closest I see with God’s expectation is Barnabas.

He rescues Paul from rejection and walks with him for a long time; exposing him to ministry until he attains his own status as an apostle. If that is not a father, we need to look for another definition.

Then he sees another young man needing his fatherhood. However, Paul will have nothing to do with the deserter and decides to go his own way and let Barnabas deal with another reject.

Now suppose Barnabas was like our present day papas? I suspect he could have given Paul a piece of his mind, probably cursing him in the process for not recognizing his office.

Yet what do we see? He doesn’t even seem to mind the harsh words his son throws as he rejects Mark. He just picks Mark and starts walking with him as he had walked with Paul.

Though we do not hear of Barnabas again, we read about the product of his fatherhood when we read the book of Mark. Look also at what Paul had to say about the reject.

Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry. (2Timothy 4:11)

Theologians tell us that Mark was useful beyond Paul to even Peter. And of course he wrote the Gospel carrying his name.

We do not hear Paul and Mark mentioning Barnabas as their spiritual father anywhere in their writings. Yet he meets all the requirements of a spiritual father.

We do not parent for visibility of influence. We do it because that is Christ’s command. We parent so that God can have better children and not so that we can amass children.

There is no badge for the one who has the most children. God rewards those who faithfully make disciples for Him. In other words, He is excited by believers who raise responsible sons for him. It means raising children for myself goes contrary to His command.

The faster I release my spiritual children to be solely God’s children determines my effectiveness as God’s minister. The bigger the nursery I run determines the farther I am from the Great Commission.

It really is a shame that people who should be raising a third generation of spiritual children are still hanging on another papa. And they do not see anything wrong with it.

That is why I am saying that the papa folly feeds on itself. And it does not please God. Otherwise He could not have issued that command not to call anyone on earth father.

I know I am appearing heartless to some of you. But why do you think Christ issued that command?

I am sure you realize that He is not threatened when a man is called father. It is for our good and safety that He forbids it.

Let me demonstrate one of the things He seeks to protect us from.

There is a couple being charged with murder. The other day I read in one paper each father swearing about  the innocence of their child. And what was their argument? My child can never do that.

Of course they are not convicted as the case has just started and so I will not argue either way. But allow me to give other examples.

Have you seen ‘famous’ criminals on the police wanted list? Yet what are we always exposed to when they are gunned down?

Their families will start arguing their son’s innocence and police brutality, as if one can peacefully arrest an armed man. And it is the same when the tables are turned.

We will defend our children and parents irrespective of what they have done

Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure. (1Timothy 5:22)

Do you realize that this is the reason churches are more ashamed of sin being found out that pained about the sin itself? Fornication becomes sin when a pregnancy can’t be hidden. Even then it is the girl who is shelved from ministering with that evidence of sin. The man continues serving as he has no visible ‘blot’. And on the same line pastors can get away with anything as his totos will fight for him.

This is why I say that this papa nonsense feeds on itself and actually is an abomination to God.

I want to hear the responses of proponents of the papa doctrine, using scriptures of course.

I will repost abut fatherhood

Baiting for Christ

There is a worrying trend in the church of today. We are trying to bait people with worldly goodies to bring them to Christ.

From miracles in advance of a gospel presentation (if it really can be called so), to bringing up crazy sermon topics to attract people to our services, we have become peddlers of what Christ died for, all for the purposes of improving our balance sheets..

Why is it so hard to lift Christ up, the only thing that is guaranteed to draw people to Christ?

Why must we entice people to receive Christ when we actually are inviting them to the guillotine? Why pamper people to salvation when there is enough of a battle to overcome sin?

Is it any wonder we are scared of preaching against sin? Is it any wonder that spiritual growth is an option instead of mandatory as the Bible advocates?

(I trust I will be able to build on this once I get a computer. Please pray that God provides one soon)

Christian Woman

I want you to imagine the following as a Christian woman.

Suppose your husband came up with the following orders, just like that

• Stop attending the church you have attended most of your adult life
• Cut all links to a pastor who has helped you develop into the confident woman you are
• Stop being involved and supporting a ministry that has given you immense fulfilment
• Cut all links to your most valued friend circles
• Resign from that job

What will you do in response to this?

Do you have any scriptural backing for the decision you will take?

Let the discussion start. I will throw in Numbers 30 to set the ball rolling. And i will appreciate passages than isolated verses.

Let us get talking (using keyboards of course)

Gambling Inc

My post today will be brief as I am using a borrowed computer since mine is down.

I have been responding to people who wonder where in the Bible gambling is addressed.

Of course instructions against greed form a firm foundation against most of the practices even believers are fine with.

Then God gave me Proverbs 1: 10 - 19

Just read it and get to understand God's take on everything from gambling to pyramid schemes and speculative enterprises.

I hope to build on the message when I get a computer soon.

Please pray about it. But read that passage.

God bless you

Judgmental Innocence

I want today to confront our biases, especially because we are so quick to say one should not judge when we are performing worse judgment. And I will look at two high voltage incidents that are trending in Kenya these few days; the insulting Chinese and the murdered student.

Let us start with the Chinese. Do we really have the whole story? Is that small clip all we are using to dump a young man so badly?

I do not support his dirty language. He is clearly guilty. In fact I am sure he is regretting ever going that direction.

But let me ask a small question. Did he start insulting us from thin air? Was he deranged to speak such insults without caring who heard them, and in a foreign land? Was that the way he always talked about Kenya and Kenyans?

I suspect he was severely provoked, either there or elsewhere to be angry enough to pour his heart in such a manner.

As usual let me give an example.

Suppose we are in a house and disagree. Then I insult you so badly that your fuse blows.

Then, just as you are lifting up your fist to knock me a neighbor walks in, getting you just as you are knocking me to the floor, senseless. He then picks me and rushes me to the hospital and the hospital says that they must have a police report from the kind of injuries I have sustained. What do you think he will report? Can you ever defend yourself?

Remember a world cup where Zidane was told something and head butted the provoker, getting a red card and soiling his clean playing record in his last game of his career? Everybody knew that he had been provoked badly, but there was no witness to prove it. What was evident was the head butt.

It is possible that his Chinese guy is a victim of such a scheme. But we will never know as we were given the only evidence the keyboard battalion knows how to use.

How different is he from Kenyans who condemn whole communities? They are all thieves, they are all sex maniacs, they kill at no provocation, etc.

Of course the case of the student is even more blatant in its usage of the facts. And the facts we already have have muddied the narrative almost to an irreparable extent.

We were made to believe that the death was of a young and innocent university girl who was killed for wanting to expose a ‘sponsor’ whose child she carried. Nobody wanted to hear any questions as to what a small girl was doing in bed with her father (we are Africans, meaning anybody my father’s age is treated as my father). Nobody wanted to deal with the sexual sin.

Then it was revealed that she was living high yet she could not even pay her fees. And of course it was from the same sponsor.

Then we were told that she not only was moving with her father, she was also moving with his own son, something that brought some issues with the sponsor.

A journalist comes into the picture with a blurred story, leading to some suspecting that he is the one who betrayed her trust and led to her murder.

Finally we get to know that she actually had been a married mother of two.

Let us start the story from behind.

She was a married woman who deserted her marital bed for the thrills of an expensive life funded by a rich politician, meaning she was just an expensive harlot, hate me if you will.

The fact that she was not content with her old man (sponsor) to have a relationship with his son is telling, and I will not discuss it here.

Could there have been other sponsors in the story? Could there have been other hot blooded young men in the mix? Could there have been other men seeking her expensive services, some she may have rejected, probably insulting them in the process?

How was her husband feeling seeing or knowing that the wife he married is making a fool of herself with rich old men? What about their families? What kind of reproach was she bringing to them? What about the family of the sponsor? How does it feel knowing that a father and son are sharing the same woman?

The one who killed her is a murderer. But that will never make her a saint.

She was a home wrecker and harlot and a shame to the whole community. Defending her because she was killed is excusing her sin, making you an accomplice.

Do you remember the sins that will send people to hell in Revelation? The first one is cowardice (fear) and the last is lying. Reporting or responding to a story in a way that does not offend is both.

And I am not talking about shaming anyone, though I have not heard anyone feeling guilty of shaming the Chinese. Why are we scared of speaking the truth about the dead? Why are we not feeling any remorse condemning the living, even calling for his arrest even before the police have done their investigations? Yet this story has enough twists and turns to make a huge investigative novel. It is possible that many will have to swallow their words once the truth comes out. It is only that I have never seen keyboard warriors express remorse.

Let me finish with the Bible as usual

And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD. (2Chonicles 19:2)

You realize that Jehoshaphat was the king who sent his praise team ahead of the army to war. He therefore had a real relationship with God. Why is God angry with him?

Do you realize that in this incident he was helping his brother out of oppression? He was simply helping in sorting out an outstanding issue a fellow king, who was also an in law, needed to address.

He was not a warmonger.

How then does helping out a brother offend God?

You see, when you join yourself to God, He dictates your whole life, even your friends and enemies. Joining yourself to someone not as sold out to God therefore offends Him. Remember 2 Corinthians 6: 14? Fighting for people and issues not related to His revelation is therefore sin. Incidentally that is what most believers have turned out to being the name of social media justice.

Why did the kidnappers allow the journalist to escape? And do not feed me the lie that he jumped out of a speeding saloon car yet he was sandwiched to the tarmac and was able to later outrun them to a homestead. Either he talked them into letting him go, a thing they would have done anyway, or they played with his mind so that he thought he had escaped.

You can’t jump out of a car at 40 kph. Even the hair-raising heroics touts do are below 20 kph, and from a standing position. And a car with the intention of crime will not be driven slowly. They let her companion go because he was not part of the equation.

Why did they rape her and leave the evidence of the same at the scene? Why did they stab the baby in her womb? It would have died after the death of the mother anyway. Why did they not make her body disappear, especially as they had a vehicle?

I suspect that woman’s death was a ritual killing. And it fits with the specifics of the facts already released, especially the fact that she was moving with a father and son, an abomination in any community I know of, and also the Bible.

It is possible her killing was a cultural cleansing of the abomination her conduct had caused. And that is why very few in that community want to make much noise. Her killers may be viewed as cleansers of such abomination. And we know that the community is awash with many cultural affairs. Remember a case about a snake?

Do not be surprised if this case disappears just like that if what I suspect turns out in the investigations. There is a very recent case like that which has also gone quiet. You cannot take culture to the courts.

Believers, please stick to your lanes. Stick to what God is telling you and doing for you.

There are many cases in the Bible like Jehoshaphat’s; people who were punished for showing more mercy than God.

King Saul lost his kingdom because his hands became weak when a king and fat animals needed to be killed. Ahab was killed because he negotiated with a king God wanted dead.

Lessons from Prison 4

I will today use my prison experience to talk against lawyers and journalists. And I mean to say that they are part of the problem, the rot in the system.

In all the time I was incarcerated, from being in the van to the holding cell to the court to the actual cell to the prison I did not see a single lawyer or journalist.

Does it mean that that court is not a court of law? Does it mean that it is beneath the standard or qualification of a lawyer? Could it be that the legal system has let loose that court to steal from the weak that it has ordered lawyers out of its vicinity?

The other day a big fish was taken to court. It is interesting that some lawyers who had not attended court for a generation as counsel became counsels that day. And I doubt they were responding to a distress call. We have hordes of lawyers representing one person even as hundreds are sent to the gallows on trumped up charges daily.

What does it require to draw lawyers’ attention that the court at City Hall lacks?

Are ‘criminals’ arrayed in that court less criminals than those in the other courts that we have lawyers hawking their services in other courts, even begging to represent someone? Are cases in that court not cases that no lawyer places himself within reach?

And the media are as complicit, if not more so.

If I was really after informing people, would the court at City Hall not be the best place to place permanent reporters? At that location I will be able to sniff news from all over the city, from corruption to land grabbing to county assembly fights. And of course the hundreds of cases daily would make good human interest stories.

How much money is there to be made from petty traders and ‘offenders’? Where will they get those brown envelopes from? Is that what motivates you?

Why have I never heard of a news item from that court yet there are reports from courts around the country every day?

Why is the media always crying about the freedom of the press when they are not interested in the freedom of the small persons?

Why are we always getting informed about atrocities in far flung areas of our country and world yet none from under our noses? Is it ignorance?

I beg to differ. I dare say that the media, like the lawyers, are part of the problem.

They are looking for money. And if stealing from the small people can bring that money they will have no problem with it, even if it means closing their eyes to the atrocities being committed in the process.

And I am not only talking about hawkers.

How many shop owners lose their merchandise in the same way? The council staff trump up charges and confiscate things so that they can produce proof of their compliance. After their proof they are then set free; minus what was confiscated. And that is replicated again and again because the eyes of society (at least that is what they would have us believe) have gone in bed with the oppressor.

Council staff are not only dreaded; they are also hated. A few years ago it was a risk to travel the streets in their uniform for the same reason. They travel in hordes, and accompanied by armed police. Then they can do whatever they like.

One day I remember seeing them forcefully arresting a woman and dragging her so that her dress went up, exposing her badly, in the process enraging the onlookers who overcame their fear of violence and arrest and started to come to rescue the woman who was being openly shamed.

Of course the police stepped in and threw tear gas, scattering the bravest of them.

Stop being cowards. Confront that impunity. Fight for the weak even if it doesn’t give you as much money as you would may want.

And the police also fall in the same category of oppressors, especially as they offer back up to all the oppression going on.

Like I said in last week’s post, participating in this, whether actively like the teams I mentioned earlier, or passively by looking the other direction as I have written today is a magnet for judgment, even a curse on your posterity.

Will you do something about it?