Sometimes I wonder how stupid the fundamentalist christians think we are. Just because you don't put your religious views into a letter, we don't know where you are coming from?
Take this letter from Renae. My rebuttal is in blue.
Today, Voices
18 October 2007
Most not for gay agenda
by Renae Sim Pei Pei
I AM concerned about the recent petition to Parliament to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code, which forbids men from having sex with each other in public or private.
I am not against homosexuals; I recognise that they are as human and Singaporean as I am. As citizens, they already enjoy the same rights as the others.
Does this sound familiar? Let me refresh your memory, "Love the sinner, hate the sin". Let me paraphares this, "I am not against homosexuals but I still want them to be criminals". Sound hypercritical?
And what about her fabulous statement, "they already enjoy the same rights as the others". Let me see, the rights that heterosexuals have that we don't
1) Get married
2) Have children (i.e. adopt as a couple)
3) Protected when your spouse dies
4) Being able to put your spouse's name as beneficiary on insurance forms
5) No security (financial or otherwise, i.e. we don't get our partner's CPF, pensions)
Does it look like we have the same rights! Furthermore, to add injury to insult, we have to serve the army, pay taxes AND considered criminals. Does that sound like we have the same rights?
But what they are pushing for now is the Singaporean majority's approval of their behaviour. It is clear the majority does not covet the agenda that gay activists are pushing for. If Parliament repeals Section 377A, we will be unwittingly consenting to such behaviour.
So not have S377A means the gahmen/Singapore is consenting to gay men having sex. So the gahmen/Singapore consents/condones extra marital affairs, pre-martial sex and how about the latest - anal and oral sex between heterosexual couples. These are all condoned by the gahmen/Singapore and I presume (using Renae's assumption) is actively promoting it too. So the gahmen is sending a message to Singaporeans that you should have extra martial affairs (because there is no law against it), that you should have pre-martial sex (because there is no law against it), that you should have oral and anal sex with your spouse (because there is no law against it). Gosh, as a fundamentalist christian, aren't you cringing? Now that you know our laws are for/condoning these things?
Health factors are another reason why Singapore must not repeal Section 377A. Studies in the United States, Australia and Cambodia have shown that men who have sex with men are most vulnerable to HIV.
This really takes the cake. Studies are now sighted. Let me just tell say this, men are going to have sex with other men REGARDLESS of S377A. Just because it is illegal is not going to stop men from having sex with men. Look at the statistics. Men who have sex exclusively with other men are still around, and it has not stopped nor will it every stop, regardless if S337A is there or not.
Studies have also shown that people with multiple sex partners have a higher chance of getting HIV. And it doesn't matter if you are gay or not. How about a law against having multiple sex partners? Yea, like that would put a stop to people having more than 1 sex partner.
Why not have a law that makes men who have foreskins criminals? Studies have shown that circumcised men are less venerable to HIV.
The problem with people like this is that they don't see the bigger picture. If S377A is so useful in preventing HIV transmission (because NO men is having sex with each other) then why is the HIV numbers of men who have sex exclusively with men (MSM) on the rise (which made the gahmen do a double take). If you use her logic, then HIV infection rates for MSM should have fallen or even become zero.
The problem with S377A is this, with it there, the gahmen cannot launch a campaign to educate MSM about the risk of unprotected sex. How can you campaign it when it is actually illegal in the first place. And this is the big problem. The HIV infection rates in Singapore are increasing (not only with MSM but everone) because our education about safer sex is so lacking. Not everyone in the world are like fundamentalist christians, who can withhold sex until marriage or even have sex with only their spouse. They believe the world is "clean and pure" as sex is the biggest taboo in the christian culture. Violence is okay but sex is BAD, BAD, BAD.
I am most unwilling to see society degenerate with the legal approval of homosexual behaviour and fully support the Government's decision to preserve the law.
Let we really see where she's coming from, typical fundamentalist answer. "Do not want to see society degrade...".
Just a note from history, when African-Americans were considered 2nd class citizens (very much like gays in Singapore now), when thinking people started to protest against their unfair treatment, the answers the fundamentalist christians gave were, yup you guessed it, "... do not want to see society degrade..."
Which brings be to the 2nd letter (see below), which is basically the same thing. This is getting so boring, every point that fundamentalist christians bring up have been rebutted and refuted by thinking people. Sad to say, like a broken record, they will keep repeating the same statements over and over again, even when more and more people stop believing in them.
And because they are so worried about morality of society, I'll like to propose the follow laws:
Pre-marital Sex
"Whoever voluntarily has gross indecency before they are married under the law, shell be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years"
Adultery
"Whoever voluntarily has gross indecency besides their spouse with any man or woman, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years"
Orgies (yes, heterosexuals do have orgies too)
"Whoever voluntarily has gross indecency with more than 1 man or woman at the same time, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years"
Toys
"Whoever voluntarily has gross indecency using sexual aids like toys, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years"
Masturbation
"Whoever voluntarily has gross indecency with themselves, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years"
I think with these extra laws to keep the morals of Singaporeans, Singapore will be the most moral and upright nation in the world.
Today, Voices
18 Octobel 2007
The measure of indecency
Charis Lee Ting Li
I refer to Felicia Tan Ying Yi's letter ("Teach youth the spirit of the law, not just its letter", Oct 17). Ms Tan talks about the importance of giving the youth the right tools and attitudes to help them make their own moral decisions, which I fully agree with.
However, I believe the most basic tools take the form of laws, which, beyond being a strict taskmaster, serve to reflect the consensus of the wider population.
Morality is not a black-and-white issue but if Section 377A prohibits "gross indecency", some sort of moral compass is needed here.
The problem is that not many people want to recognise that "gross indecency" is exactly what the term implies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Hi Wolfgang, thanks for speaking out against that letter. I've featured your post at The Singapore Daily [singaporedaily.wordpress.com]. We are trying to raise awareness on the petition. Keep blogging!
i think you need to back up your comment about fundamentalist christians being opposed to equal treatment of african-americans "because they did not want to see society degrade". it's true that this argument is one that has historically been deployed against oppressed groups (eg as you have noted in this case, sexual minorities), but from what i understand this attitude seems to have been prevalent in the society as a whole due to many factors, rather than being the result of the overwhelming influence of any one particular group. also, christian organizations such as churches (i'm not sure whether you would classify them as "fundamentalist" or not) played significant roles in the abolitionist movement and the civil rights movement. otherwise, i think your response to that letter was spot on - the letter-writer certainly has no right to impose her personal values on others.
sheep man - just a note, i believe that most christians are not fundamentalist. i have a different classification for conservative and fundamentalist christians. i believe most christians are conservative (and i have nothing against them) but there are a minority of christians who are fundamentalist, the same way we think that most muslims are not fundamentalist (or extremist for want of a better word).
the difference between the 2 (to me), conservatives would listen to reason and facts and would change their mind of a situation if they find the reasons reasonable and facts are correct. fundamentalist would never change their mind even if there is overwhelming evidence against the contrary, they would try to poke holes in the evidence (like using the bible, "the bible tells me so) which makes their arguments sound stupid when confronted by hard facts, or create "artificial" facts that are not backed up by peer reviews. and these are the people that would use the some old tired lines to justify their prejudices. for e.g. it is not natural, god didn't intend for it to be this way, society will crumble, morality will degrade if we..., etc. (these are the same reasons they give when denying african-americans their rights, the same ones they used to deny women their rights)
that done (i think you understand me better now), before the african-american civil rights the people that wanted a change were actually the conservative christians, the ones fundamentalist were the ones that used that phrase. the voice of this small conservative christians grew in number until the fundamentalist's voice was drowned. you can find this information in a number of history books. one of the books that i loved which really showed up the fundamentalist christians is philip yancey's what's so amazing about grace.
Adult Dating. Access to millions of ads Adult Dating - Are you looking for a little spice in your sex life? World's largest adult dating site with online adult personals. It's FREE, easy, and anonymous to join!
Post a Comment