Some of the posts that were posted during the short time period on 21st May 2013 at Gay SG Confession Page. Visit the link at the end of posts for the response towards them.
– To whoever is running this page: you should not be encouraging the propagation of the homosexual agenda. It is clearly against the law in this country and you should have more respect for our society’s wishes. (link)
– Let’s keep our island a safe little red dot from the activists who would like to paint it pink for the sake of our families and many other nations and the millions of families out there that look to us as a model to follow. Keep 377A. That’s the right way to go for everyone, for Singapore and every other nation waiting to see if we in Singapore would repeal 377A. We dont’ want to follow the road of those who have yielded to the agenda of the LGBT. We call on every Singaporean to rise up against this organized attempt to rob us of a decent place to live in our beloved country. (link)
– I saw Singapore’s progress in 1 generation with good policies implemented in the 1965 on (anti-corruption, educational opportunities). Singapore being a small city state, the impact of policies can be felt, pretty fast.
If we take a wrong path, the same dynamics will apply. We can also see it a quick regression. I am thankful because Section 377A guards the moral tone of society and it must be kept. Repealing it is not a risk we can afford. (link)
– Let’s suppose that just because it cause no harm, both are consenting, loving and committed adults, in the privacy of their bedroom and no other party is hurt and we can accept it by law; there are other examples that fall into this category.
Just for illustration, take an example of an adult child with an adult parent, in the privacy of their bedroom, not hurting anyone, seriously in love – will we allow that? The law calls this incest and is a crime.
Embedded with every law is a value and belief; sometimes a moral one which will overlap into the religious domain too. If law does not make a judgment on what is right/decent/acceptable, then nobody can says the incest case is wrong.
Hence going by the principle of “nobody is hurt”, “done in private”, “committed in love” cannot be the sole considerations for a law, it wouldn’t be complete.
Can we love a person committing an illegal act and yet pass a law that criminalise the act? I would think yes. If my family member is caught stealing, I would still support the law of classifying theft as a crime but I love my family member no less. (link)
– I have friends who have different preferences and I respect that but I still believe that 377A should be kept. (link)
– If homosexuals can stand by their beliefs and urge the government to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code, why cant we as Christians stand by our beliefs and speak up about how we feel about this too?
We are also Singaporeans who love his country and wants the best for this country, and as citizens we represents a certain number of us in this country wanting to be listened to, we should be heard and considered too. if LGBTs have the freedom to speak up for your beliefs, i believe we should have the freedom to do so too. (link)
– 377A has it’s place in Singapore. It serves as a mirror for us to see black as black, and gives us the chance to clean up if we are willing to. It also warns us from messing up with others. Removing it will rob us and the generation behind us from all the benefit of it. Thus it is indeed more beneficial to Singapore if 377A can stay… (link)
– Proper family and traditional values consisting of a father, a mother and children. Values like filial piety (honoring your parents), respecting elders, diligent and modesty are highly valued in Singapore still. (link)
– As a christian, if we cannot use our basis of morality (the bible), what then do you propose we use as a basis of morality? Are we so daring as to say that God (by whatever name we would call him) would have no role to play in public debate? Doesn’t that mean that religious people have no role to play in society?
Secularism is the separation of state and religion. In theory, it is great and it had a purpose. But with education, that philosophy is becoming rather redundant. In the old days, the priest and typically only those of that order, would be able to ‘comprehend’ and read the holy text. Today, that is not true and the opportunities for churches to ‘brainwash’ people is over. Read the posts here. How many christians have openly declared support for 377a in rejection of the Pastors and churches stand? How is that brainwashing?… (long post) (link)
Homosexual activity is obviously unnatural and wrong. Though there is this arguement that people are born that way, the actual fact is, many in the LGBT community, became part of this community, not out of their own will but because they might be sexually abused and confused by others when they were young.
I read an article on the zaobao newspaper that a guy interviewing many thai transexuals and their stories are more or less the same.. i.e. they were sexually abused by men when they are at their teenage years. That confused their sexuality and lead them on this path. In our local news, we read about it occasionally in Singapore too! What will happen to these unnamed young boys who were molested when they grow up? May be another group of sexually confused young man!
It’s really painful to see that happening in Singapore. Why do we want to say that black is white when deep within us, we all know black will remain as black no matter what is said. the tragedy ends here. Seek help and I am sure help is always available. Making noise and making everybody accept that black is actually white is not the way. (link)
377A HAS to be retained. We do not ostracised the LGBT in our midst, we are against the repeling of this code. I am doing it protect my kids, my future generation and my beloved nation. We accept you as friends, as a fellow citizen of this nation BUT that doesnt mean you can push your agenda against the majority. (link)
Ask ourselves why was Sodom & Gomorrah destroyed? God is holy. A sin is a sin. Just because God is merciful we should not continue to sin and take God’s love for granted and say that God will still love you…yes God loves all of us but we must follow God and be holy. Just like parents who love their children parents will discipline their children and teach them the right path….in the same way we cannot condone the sin….
I’m truly saddened that our moral values have deteriorated to such a state….Christ have mercy on us and intervene in this situation. Amen Lord Jesus. (link)
I respect gay’s choice of sexual orientation. But I’m coming from a mother’s perspective that I want my kids to be taught in an environment which is aligned with how Nature works. You need a man and a woman to have kids and to form a family, that’s nature and that’s how I want my kids to be taught.
Again, there are definitely other friends/folks whom have different preferences and I respect that but I do not wish that it becomes legal or to have the possibility of promoting it in the kid’s sex education in future in Singapore. (link)
I am glad that 377A will be kept. There is no conclusive evidence, at least to date, that proves that sexual orientation is substantively inborn or uncontrollable (conversely true).
While homosexuals are free to choose the lives that they want to lead, promoting of their lifestyles, or tone-setting it as a mainstream norm is something that would have serious and severe long term implications/negative externalities on the economic (e.g. birthrate) and social fabric of the nation, which Pastor Khong has substantively articulated.
The tone of the overall Singapore society, in my view as a Singaporean and as a parent, should therefore remain conservatively and conventionally straight, and legislation should therefore continue to reflect this norm. Any change in legislation would be signaling a different position that the government is taking. Therefore, keep 377A.
Again, this should be de-coupled from the love or what we term as ‘discrimination’ that we should extend towards our friends who have homosexual orientations. Let’s not fuse (or confuse) this with diversity and inclusion that borders around acceptance and love for fellow Singaporeans, regardless of race, language, religion or views. (link)
As a Singaporean student going to be a contributor to the country, economy and society, I reject the repeal of section 377A of the penal code because it WILL erode the moral values that govern and build this nation.
The government and numerous organizations have painstakingly, through hard work and toil, enforce moral values, ethics and principles into the lives of Singaporeans. We teach from our textbooks, broadcast our annual PM’s message about moral values being integral, crucial and vital to our nation’s stability and growth.
If section 377A of the penal code is dissolved, what we and our forefathers have built since the independence of this nation is down the drain.
I am firmly convicted that there are many crucial reasons why moral values are taught, preached and proclaimed in all religions and faith and the gist of these values are not changed through history despite their outwork being different through time.
Moral values enforced by laws such as section 377A of the penal code, sets the benchmark for moral standards on a national level.
Without moral values, men are no more than beasts. (link)
Seeking a repeal of 377a goes against a large and I dare say the majority of what Singaporeans view homosexual acts. Seeking a repeal IS asking Singapore to conform to their way of life, which is to condone such acts.
There is no middle ground here. The burden of proof is on those seeking repeal to justify why it should be repealed. “Discriminatory” is not a strong argument because i every single thing is discriminatory. A child can say it is discriminatory if he cannot watch an NC 16 movie. A more substantive argument would be “whether we should allow a child to watch a NC 16 movie”. Similarly, the argument should be “whether we should legalise homosexual acts” and merely saying a law is discriminatory only state the plain obvious. (link)