Endoh’s Dungeon

I guess I have remained fairly quiet on this issue, despite the massive hype that has since been stirred up. My silence shouldn’t be read as automatic acceptance of such a lifestyle. Bear in mind, I once disclosed in my blog that a classmate and buddy of mine is gay too. Hence, I am only against the act of homosexuality but not anything against the homosexual as an individual.

It is interesting to see how the pro-repeal and anti-repeal camps shot arrows directly at one another. Individually, I am very much against the repeal of Section 377A. My stand is fairly simple to the point that I do not believe repealing this section, included in the Penal Code since the 1980s, will do our society any good. To repeal Section 377A will bring about serious social consequences which will affect our children and future generations.

Many pro-repeal individuals have surfaced a lot of questionable arguments in this “war” brought on by Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong. I am not sure if NMP Siew thought about the social backlash Singapore will face in the future when he decided and chose to represent this issue in Parliament. On this, I’m afraid NMP Siew is putting himself and his career on a very thin thread. After all, these positions are put in place to ensure the sustainability as a small country and not allow it to be degraded further than it has now.

I agree with some slight pro-repeal statements, but I do not hold firm my beliefs with the bulk of it. The reason being that, the pro-repeal camp has since took on a personal approach to the argument instead of picturing the bigger picture - the society and its values.

One of the most-used arguments, is the Rights to pursue one’s lifestyle. In general, I have no complaints about anyone seeking their Rights. Having more than one homosexual friends around me, I have never heard of any such displeasure from them. I boldly assume that the fight for this Rights was fueled by only a few individuals and not the entire scene as a collective group. When I spoke to my homosexual classmate earlier on, his answer towards the whole saga was crisp clear. “I don’t really care… I don’t wish to be a part of this contest. I will just live my life in my own ways without having to change how others accept me,” he said. Whether it is a collective voice of homosexuals, it is pretty evident. Therefore, I can only see this issue as a fight for individual gains or benefits in oppose to the proclaimed “fighting for the minority”.

Freedom as we know it, is a sacred commodity these days especially in Singapore. To what extend freedom should be advocated, everyone of us has our own definitions. However, real life situation has already proven time and again that once freedom is given, it is often mis-used and abused. We have already seen a whole list of such incidents, now do we need one more?

The repealing of Section 377A also brought about concerns of morality and family values. In an asian country like Singapore, we are brought up with our roots firmly in a complete family. By my understanding of complete family, it pointed to the union of a man & woman who both went on to procreate through natural biological means. A Singapore citizen, Winston, expressed it in his vote;

I’m signing this petition on behalf of my household as we share a common stand with regards to this issue…

To keep ourselves abreast of worldwide trends and to become a truly cosmopolitan society, we have to welcome and treat everyone equally. However, it should not be done at the expense of our local society’s values and identity. Rights to sexual orientation should not be confused with the Rights to work and live a normal life in a meritocratic society.

The repeal of Section 377A will obviously bring about a (undesirable) change in the way we view marriages and family structures. Given that Section 377A has not been repealed yet, we are already looking at the degrading of our social values and morality through many other forms of activities - which the homosexuals presented as a “personal choice”. Another Singapore citizen, Winnie O, said in her vote;

Our children are born innocent; they look to us for leadership. Let’s help them know right from wrong.

One of the immediate side-effects when homosexuality is allowed to be recognized and flourished, is the discontinuation of procreation within a proper family structure. No doubt there are adoptions and artificial insemination available widely, we have to understand the key purpose that these methods served. These are often methods used to help couples who cannot conceive, although there are a fair share of adopters who chose to help the orphans through adoption. This is a great act of charity, and these methods should not be abused by the same-gender practitioner as reasons to justify their unnatural union.

These children deserve a proper family and home, and not meant to be used in such a manner to justify or prove a point for an alternative lifestyle.

If parents begin to accept homosexuality as a norm, what messages are we passing down to our children? To accept homosexuality as a norm, and teaching our future generations not to discriminate homosexuals are two totally different contexts. Not discriminating them simply means, they should be given equal opportunities in employment, medical benefits, education opportunities and such.

The second immediate side-effect that we are passing on to our future generations, is the concept that by committing another mistake would make the initial “wrong” right. As the saying goes, two wrongs do not make one right. How so can we allow Section 377A to be repealed then? GBY, also a Singaporean presented his vote based on a simple analogy;

Respecting homosexuals is not the same as accepting homosexuality. To use the analogy of someone who broke the law; We accept an ex-offender but cannot say that his or her committed crime was not wrong.

It is time we start to come to terms that even with the repeal of Section 377A, it still does not make it acceptable and right. This is the eventual lesson and teaching that many parents and adults want to pass down for the future generations. Imagine Janice, Trinity, EastCoastLife, Walter… all parents with sons, how will they feel to discover that their sons are homosexuals? Are they supposed to keep mum about it and accept it as a norm, or address the sexuality problem? This is definitely a lesson that we cannot afford to impart to our future generations, that is to remain quiet even when we know something very wrong is going on.

Another critical side-effect brought about by a probable repeal of Section 377A, is watching homosexuals take to the streets openly with their acts. To have them mingle with the crowd and walk down Orchard Road just like anyone of us, I am perfectly fine with it. I have no reasons to object to that, because that is basic Human Rights. However, the possibility of homosexuals bringing their sexual conducts into the open is a definite no. Even if a male-female couple engaging in offending sexual acts openly in public can be booked and charged, need we still consider the possibility of similar conducts in the same-gender arena? The answer is obvious.

Homosexuals can do whatever they want in the comfort of their own homes, that I wouldn’t have any violent objections even if they are my immediate neighbours. However, this influence brought in by the western countries should not be seen as automatic qualification, such that it becomes a MUST for Singapore to follow suit. The last that we want to see, is how an “IN” trend is being positioned to become a social norm.

It is important to note that there isn’t anything substantial that the pro-repeal camp has presented to defend themselves against the stand of social values and morality so far. Can we actually agree that, there is little or simply no justifications against the roots of family values & social morality?

One interesting thing I have been looking out for through this argument is Science. Some believed in genetic explanations to homosexuality, some decided to turn a blind eye to it. Even though I belong to the anti-repeal camp, I have to admit that there are possible genetic relevance to homosexuality.

In the past decade, a lot of crime laboratories and genetic studies have shown that the tendency of crime can possibly be inherited over generations. It has become such an undeniable finding, after having studied on families with repeated involvement with crimes over generations. Unfortunately, most of these studies are conducted overseas and not very much in asian countries. What does this tells us then?

The Real Story on Gay Genes has presented a possible outlook when comparing genes of identical twins, either both homosexual or either one. If the same can be done for tracking the genetic reference behind crime, I believe there are possible genetic references we can study on homosexuality. Just like Aliens and UFOs, what matters is how far our Science technology can advance and discover these evidences.

While being against the repeal of Section 377A, let’s not discount such a possibility. To reject this scientific possibility totally, will see us paying a hefty price in the many decades and centuries down the road. When this particular area in Science is ruled out, we are also effectively ruling out ourselves the chance to identify this homosexuality problem as early as in the infant stage.

Should we allow Section 377A to be repealed? My answer is no. Not only have we slapped ourselves on our own faces of the morality and values we uphold, the possible price to pay is too hefty to deserve its place in the sake of legality.




Note: All quoted comments EXCEPT my buddy’s, were adapted from Keep377A.com, an online petition against the repeal of Section 377A.