Pkchukiss - Reality Wine

The saga continues… the anti-gay faction probably decided to find someone with more experience in writing letters to the Straits Times forum - for in the blockquote lies the next salvo:

NMP overstepped role in championing gay cause
I AM writing in response to the article, ‘NMP to submit Parliamentary Petition to repeal gay sex law’ (ST, Oct 12).

As a Nominated MP, Mr Siew Kum Hong is supposed to be non-partisan and should not be affiliated with any particular political group.

However, he has chosen to be the sponsor of a parliamentary petition to present the homosexual agenda.

While he is free to present his personal views on any issue, Mr Siew has overstepped the boundary as an NMP when he chose to represent the homosexual interest group.

MPs in Parliament have to run for election, look after their constituents’ interests and represent their views. As an NMP, Mr Siew bears no such burden.

He should not adulterate the NMP role further by becoming the proxy representative of the homosexual interest group.

This is especially so as the Government has already taken one year to review the Penal Code, with input from various consultation channels, and taken into consideration the views of the majority of Singaporeans who are for maintaining family values and preserving Section 377A of the Penal Code.

Jenica Chua Chor Ping (Ms)

… and what a low-blow that was. Uncontent with just claiming that gays are forming political groupings (I don’t see any evidence of that), Ms Chua is accusing Mr Siew Kum Hong (who submitted a parlimentary petition for the repeal of 377A) of overstepping the boundary as an NMP, by aligning himself with the gays.

The last I’ve checked, gays are not forming themselves into political groups; neither have they been campaigning for the repeal of 377A. In fact, the people Ms Chua is talking about belongs to a group of Singaporeans who believe that the law has absolutely no place dictating a person’s actions.

In an exchange with xizor2000 yesterday, I outlined an example of how the 377A is absurd. The fact is, that law is also unconstitutional (see section 2 of the Open Letter in the link for more information). As a Member of Parliament, and a Singaporean, it is his duty to fight and uphold the Constitution. Therefore, his action is definitely above board.

Now, let’s examine why the anti-gay faction reacted in this way.

Fear of gays
The anti-gay faction didn’t want the law to go away, because it was either unconscionable from their religious point of view, or they fear that gays would have sex everywhere in the streets, and turn the whole world into a world of perpetual homosexuality.

Let’s get a reality check: It is a logical fallacy to say that gays will manage to turn people into homosexuals if they could. That statement alone implies that human beings can be educated to change their sexual orientation. If there is such a power existing in the world, it would be disastrous. It is also irrational to believe that gays would have sex everywhere in the streets if there is no law prohibiting it, simply because the police will arrest anybody who attempts to have any kind of sexual activities in public.

It is a slippery slope argument to say that making sexual activities between two males legal will cause pro-gay groups to lobby for more rights. Even if there are pro-gay groups doing so, are they so different from the AWWA (Asian Women Welfare Association) and industry lobbies?

Low blow a knee jerk response
I would classify Ms Chua’s letter as an attempt to galvanise outsiders of their cause to join in the fray. However, is the cause to discriminate against a minority of the country whom has no capacity to harm anybody the right one? Whenever Ms Chua recites the pledge, “To build a democratic society, based on Justice and Equality”, does she realise how contrary her views are to this sentence?

The majority can be wrong sometimes
Galileo Galilei, the inventor of the telescope was persecuted for claiming that the earth revolves around the sun. Later on, he was vindicated… years after he died. While the newspapers in this country may claim that the majority of the country are still against gays, the fact doesn’t change that 377A is still a discriminatory law, a contravention of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore.

Let’s repeal this, and stop telling a person what he can’t do with his personal life. Repeal 377A Now!

Filed under: Current Affairs, General