Should homosexuality remain a
crime? This is the prickly subject of an ongoing public debate in Singapore
that all began when the authorities wanted to decriminalise oral sex and sodomy
but keep the ban on gay sex.
Parties as diverse as Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew ("the MM"), the
Law Society of Singapore, members of parliament, a Methodist pastor, academics
and journalists have lent their esteemed opinions on this brewing polemic.
The MM, hinting that criminalizing gay sex may not be justified, has been
quoted as saying -
"If in fact it is true, and I have asked doctors this, that you are genetically born a homosexual - because that's the nature of the genetic random transmission of genes - you can't help it. So why should we criminalise it?"
Agreeing, the Law Society of Singapore cited the separation of law and morals and the philosophy that the criminal law’s proper function is to protect others from harm by punishing harmful conduct. In its report on the proposed changes, it said -
"Moreover, the assurance given by [the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA)] in the Explanatory Notes to Proposed Amendments to the Penal Code that were initially issued by MHA that prosecutions will not be proactively prosecuted under this section is an admission that the section is out-of-step with the modern world. The retention of unprosecuted offences on the statute book runs the risk of bringing the law into disrepute."
These statements have stirred up quite a storm of disapproval from conservative
quarters, which made me wonder -- surely those fighting to preserve the ban are
not gay? And if they're not gay, why one earth are they so passionate about
preserving this ban?!
I pondered the possibilities:
1) they are ultra-closetted gays who were born and bred in a homophobic society
that champions other more pragmatic causes like getting schooled, finding a
job, getting married, producing children, making money, and making more money.
They ended up getting married due to the familial and societal pressures of
their era only to find themselves trapped in loveless and unhappy marriages and
now seek to exact their frustrations upon their free and frolicking brethren
yet unbound by matrimonial leashes and deny them the pleasures of gay sex which
they have been deprived of; or
2) they are the religious zealots who see it as their God-ordained duty to
defend at all cost what they perceive as an audacious attack on morals and
morality, and which, unless defended, would lead humankind down that slippery
slope of debauchery into hell; or
3) they are the ultra-protective parents, stoutly labouring under that "it
can only happen to other people's kids, and definitely not mine" syndrome,
but who nevertheless fear that any step taken to decriminalize gay sex would
spawn some kind of new subculture of experimentation that could influence,
corrupt and convert their otherwise straight offsrping to the 'other side'.
Apart from the 'closets', who would themselves know how they came to being the
way they are, I am pretty sure that the zealots and parents regard
homosexuality as a lifestyle choice, a product of this hedonistic, concupiscent
generation.
But if this was so, shouldn't we be seeing an escalation in gay practices in
the same way that social ills such as drug and alcohol abuse, pre-marital sex,
adultery and divorce have burgeoned over time? I know of no report citing
increasing 'converts' to this lifestyle, or of escalating gay numbers as a
proportion of society at large.
Sure, gay people and their agendas may be enjoying greater prominence
(particularly in the developed world), but this is more likely due to societies
becoming increasingly open, inclusive and accepting, rather than a burgeoning
in gay practitioners.
Besides, if aberrational qualities in human beings (and indeed all creation)
have been known to exist since the dawn of time, why should it be difficult for
people to accept homosexuality as just another congenital aberration of nature?
From the perspective of religion, can we not regard this aberration as a divine
design in the same light that God created the great diversity in this world
with its attendant beauty and imperfections?
And, if some say God is the source of all love in this world, who are mortal
humans like us to qualify or place limitations on how such love is to be
expressed? From a Christian perspective, in particular, I find it odd that a
religion espousing so much disapproval of homosexuality should be adopting such
a stand when Christ himself is nowhere recorded to have uttered a word on the
subject.
In fact, if Christ's teachings are to be distilled to one simple exhortation, it is "love thy neighbour". Simplistic this may sound, but shouldn't religion be kept simple and pure? After all, aren't the values communicated by most of the major religions universally grounded in elements of simplicity, humility, and servitude of others? But instead, centuries of translations across languages, power struggles, political rivalry and other human interventions have taken their toll in expanding, embellishing and adulterating many a religious doctrine from what they originally were.
As historian Arnold Toynbee put it, all the major religions "are clogged with silt and flotsam and jetsam that they have picked up on their way through the world". Toynbee believed "all the religions need a great winnowing out of permanent truth in them from the accidental accretions."
I've digressed...
Turning back to the zealots and parents, and all those who seek to impose their morals and righteous views on homosexuality upon all and sundry, I'd recommend that you read Sharon Underwood's* letter to her local newspaper, the Valley News (published on 30 April 2000 and reproduced in its entirety below), and spare a thought for those who would inadvertently be victimised by your bigoted campaigns.
As the mother of a gay son, I've seen firsthand how cruel and misguided people can be.
Many letters have been sent to the Valley News concerning the homosexual menace in Vermont. I am the mother of a gay son and I've taken enough from you good people.
I'm tired of your foolish rhetoric about the "homosexual agenda" and your allegations that accepting homosexuality is the same thing as advocating sex with children. You are cruel and ignorant. You have been robbing me of the joys of motherhood ever since my children were tiny. My firstborn son started suffering at the hands of the moral little thugs from your moral, upright families from the time he was in the first grade. He was physically and verbally abused from first grade straight through high school because he was perceived to be gay. He never professed to be gay or had any association with anything gay, but he had the misfortune not to walk or have gestures like the other boys. He was called "fag" incessantly, starting when he was 6.
In high school, while your children were doing what kids that age should be doing, mine labored over a suicide note, drafting and redrafting it to be sure his family knew how much he loved them. My sobbing 17-year-old tore the heart out of me as he choked out that he just couldn't bear to continue living any longer, that he didn't want to be gay and that he couldn't face a life without dignity.
You have the audacity to talk about protecting families and children from the homosexual menace, while you yourselves tear apart families and drive children to despair. I don't know why my son is gay, but I do know that God didn't put him, and millions like him, on this Earth to give you someone to abuse. God gave you brains so that you could think, and it's about time you started doing that.
At the core of all your misguided beliefs is the belief that this could never happen to you, that there is some kind of subculture out there that people have chosen to join. The fact is that if it can happen to my family, it can happen to yours, and you won't get to choose. Whether it is genetic or whether something occurs during a critical time of fetal development, I don't know. I can only tell you with an absolute certainty that it is inborn.
If you want to tout your own morality, you'd best come up with something more substantive than your heterosexuality. You did nothing to earn it; it was given to you. If you disagree, I would be interested in hearing your story, because my own heterosexuality was a blessing I received with no effort whatsoever on my part. It is so woven into the very soul of me that nothing could ever change it. For those of you who reduce sexual orientation to a simple choice, a character issue, a bad habit or something that can be changed by a 10-step program, I'm puzzled. Are you saying that your own sexual orientation is nothing more than something you have chosen, that you could change it at will? If that's not the case, then why would you suggest that someone else can?
A popular theme in your letters is that Vermont has been infiltrated by outsiders. Both sides of my family have lived in Vermont for generations. I am heart and soul a Vermonter, so I'll thank you to stop saying that you are speaking for "true Vermonters."
You invoke the memory of the brave people who have fought on the battlefield for this great country, saying that they didn't give their lives so that the "homosexual agenda" could tear down the principles they died defending. My 83-year-old father fought in some of the most horrific battles of World War II, was wounded and awarded the Purple Heart.
He shakes his head in sadness at the life his grandson has had to live. He says he fought alongside homosexuals in those battles, that they did their part and bothered no one. One of his best friends in the service was gay, and he never knew it until the end, and when he did find out, it mattered not at all. That wasn't the measure of the man.
You religious folk just can't bear the thought that as my son emerges from the hell that was his childhood he might like to find a lifelong companion and have a measure of happiness. It offends your sensibilities that he should request the right to visit that companion in the hospital, to make medical decisions for him or to benefit from tax laws governing inheritance. How dare he? you say. These outrageous requests would threaten the very existence of your family, would undermine the sanctity of marriage.
You use religion to abdicate your responsibility to be thinking human beings. There are vast numbers of religious people who find your attitudes repugnant. God is not for the privileged majority, and God knows my son has committed no sin. The deep-thinking author of a letter to the April 12 Valley News who lectures about homosexual sin and tells us about "those of us who have been blessed with the benefits of a religious upbringing" asks: "What ever happened to the idea of striving . . . to be better human beings than we are?"
Indeed, sir, what ever happened to that?
Sharon Underwood lives in White River Junction, Vt.
* [From Wikipedia] Sharon Underwood, from White River Junction, Vermont, USA, is a mother of a gay son who gained fame in April 2000 when she wrote an open letter to her local newspaper, the Valley News, West Lebanon, New Hampshire, dispelling homophobic myths and denouncing the treatment her son had received.
