The hypocrisy, stupidity and ignorance involved in Section 377A

ST Sep 22, 2007

Views divided, so gay sex law stays

By Jeremy Au Yong

THE decision on whether or not to decriminalise gay sex is a very divisive one and until there is a broader consensus on the matter, Singapore will stick to the status quo.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was explaining the Government's decision not to repeal section 377(A) of the Penal Code, even as it introduced to Parliament recently a raft of proposed changes to that law.

He was responding to a question from a Law undergraduate, who said she was concerned about the kind of image Singapore's stand on this issue left on foreigners, including the talent that it wished to draw here.

Mr Lee said in reply: 'If everybody felt like you in Singapore...we could change 377A and we would de-criminalise gay sex.

'But the fact is many people in Singapore feel passionately to the contrary to the point of view which you have argued. And you have to take cognizance of that.'

He said that the Government's view was that it should not push forward on this issue but follow along as societal views shifted.

'And as of today my judgment is the society is comfortable with our position. Leave the clause' he said.

Sharing his own views on homosexuality, he said it seemed to him that it was a trait people were born with.

He stressed, however, that that did not mean gays should set the tone here.

'My view is that gayness is something which is mostly inborn, some people are like that, some people are not. How they live their own lives is really for them to decide. It's a personal matter,' he said.

'I think the tone of the society should really be set by the heterosexuals and that's the way many Singaporeans feel.'

He also made clear that the issue was something Singapore would deal with on its own. It did not need foreign speakers coming here to 'add sugar and spice' to the debate.

He was referring to a recent decision by the Police to cancel the permit for Canadian academic Douglas Sanders to speak in Singapore on the subject.

'Within Singapore, we will have to work this out in our society, and I think that's what we will do,' he said.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



After Dr Ng Eng Hen gave an exemplary display of illogical thinking with his lame reply to Low Thia Khiang's questions on CPF, PM Lee Hsien Loong was next in the Shoot-myself-in-the-foot queue.

First of all, how was he able to conclude that the majority of Singaporeans were against repealing Section 377A? Surely not from this flawed and biased survey did by NTU? In that survey, the questions were phrased in this manner

• they were asked whether sex between two men or two women was 'plain wrong' and whether homosexuals or lesbians were 'disgusting'.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that such a survey, if used to justify Section 377A, commits the logical fallacy of equivocation. The equation "plain wrong" + "disgusting" does not equate to "a crime". "Plain wrong" is not the same kind of "wrong" as in a crime.

Digging one's nose in public would be considered disgusting to most. Why don't I see anyone arrested for that? Writing 1+1=3 in a math exam paper is "plain wrong" as well! Why aren't those who can't count sent to jail?

Another conclusion made in that survey was

• Through statistical calculations, the study concluded that 'intrinsic religiosity' - viewing religion as the primary driving force in life - was the strongest predictor of anti-gay sentiment here.

Not surprising isn't it? If laws are passed based on public consensus which in turn is based on religious views, can we truly say that Singapore is a secular country? Even Malaysia doesn't impose the religious views of its majority by barring it's Chinese citizens from eating pork!

Saying something like "'If everybody felt like you in Singapore...we could change 377A and we would de-criminalise gay sex" just highlights the hypocrisy practised by the government. I'm damn sure PM Lee went along with public opinion on the casino issue!

While i do acknowledge that a substantial proportion of Singaporeans who are against repealing Section 377A judging from the letters publish on Straits Times Forum such as these,

1) Gay teacher's outing not appropriate

2) Preserve marriage as an institution

3) Let's conserve our marriage constitution as one between man and woman

I have not seen a convincing argument backed by evidence that homosexuality is harmful to society.

All I see are arguments fraught with self-righteousness, self-imposed morality, misleading statistics that fails to acknowledge that correlation does not imply causation (ie. gays = higher rates of aids infection) and even clear cut lies.

Some of the most convincing studies have shown conclusively that homosexuality is genetic or at least congenital can be found here, in the June 2007 issue of Discover Magazine. Other informative reads include this John Hopkins Magazine article and this BBC article (The Boy who was Turned into a Girl).

As such, there is no reason to criminalise homosexuality because they cause no harm to anyone. If you think otherwise, i challenge you to prove it. Find me a peer-reviewed paper published on a reputable journal that shows that legalising homosexuality brings about harmful consequences.

What is astonishing is the amount of misinformation that is spread in the public on the nature of homosexuality. You can have people believing that AIDS is created by god to punish homosexuals, that gays are paedophiles or even that your son can become gay if he is under "bad" influences.

So why am I spending my time writing about homosexuals and defending their rights. No, I'm not a homosexual. It's just that I believe that no one should be made to suffer because of your hypocrisy, stupidity and ignorance.