Photo from ready4repeal.com

by Augustine Low

One side calls the other out for moral corruption and degradation. The other side points the finger at hypocrisy and self-righteousness.

When there are two vigorous opposing sides to Section 377A of the Penal Code, things can get pretty polarising.

And the “government is in the middle,” according to Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam. How neat! Just let society decide if it wants to keep or repeal 377A. The problem is that it is an issue which can sow discord and division, as seen by the tit-for-tat petitions, contentious videos and heated rhetoric.

Achieving common ground for 377A is clearly not easy – maybe near impossible.

It’s ingenious of the government to stay on the sidelines because even Pope Francis, the supreme pontiff, could not set the tone on sexuality issues for his flock of 1.2 billion Catholics.

In 2013, Pope Francis said in a media interview: “If someone is gay and is looking for the Lord, who aim I to judge him? You should not discriminate against or marginalise these people.”

Not words you would expect to hear from the head of the Roman Catholic Church, which teaches that gay sex is a sin.

The liberal and progressive Pope faced rebellion and fierce pushback from conservatives and traditionalists in the Vatican. They took issue with his openness and relaxed stance not only on homosexuality but also on cohabitation, abortion and divorce.

Opposition became so heated that some advisers explicitly warned Pope Francis to tread carefully to avoid a “schism” or split and division in the Church.

The result is that the Pope has had to take a step back, weighed down by conservative forces wanting to preserve the status quo on Church doctrine and sacred institutions like traditional marriage.

The supreme pontiff felt the impetus for the Church to transform and embrace contemporary cultural mores. But he could not overcome the huge blowback from those who resisted vigorously and even called him a ‘heretic” because they wanted to preserve the Church exactly as it was.

So here we are in Singapore, conservatives and traditionalists pushing back against liberals and progressives.

Advocates and activists say gay men face discrimination, have to live “in hiding, in shame and in fear” and are subject to “online assaults, vitriol and abuse.”

While institutions like the National Council of Churches of Singapore is against repealing 377A because the homosexual lifestyle “is not only harmful for individuals, but also for families and society as a whole.”

Each side opposes the other with vigour, sometimes even contempt. In such a scenario, how do we ever hope to achieve common ground?

Sooner rather than later, the government or Parliament will have to break the impasse. The longer the forces for and against 377A have a go at each other, the more polarising it becomes and the greater the likelihood of things coming to a boil.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

李函轩中暑身亡案:六名武装部队军人被控违反军事法

全职国民服役人员李函轩军训时中暑身亡,六名武装部队军人涉嫌违反军事法,昨日(20日)面控。 据国防部对昨日(20日)回应媒体询问时表示,警方已经将该六名被告移交国防部,以调查李函轩意外死亡事件。 而随着调查结束后,他们也将面临提控。 两名军人将面临武装部队法令的提控,分别为25岁连队指挥官谢智轩一级上士与26岁的二级上士许仁忠。李函轩于2018年4月18日参加快步行军训练后中暑,而当时谢智轩是快步行军的指挥官。 国防部表示谢智轩涉嫌未经批准的情况下擅自修改训练计划。 另名二级上士许仁忠则是当天快速行军的安全官员,他则涉嫌疏忽导致他人性命受威胁。 其余的人则包括国民服役人员包括庄鹏兴三级上士(22岁)、洪凯杰三级上士(24岁)和叶仁杰三级上士(22岁)。这三名分队长因在跑步训练中擅自执行惩罚,各面对三项控状。另一名服役军人陈觐扬(24岁)则是快步行军训练的医务兵,他涉嫌疏忽导致他人性命受威胁,面对两项控状。 事故发生于前年4月18日,19岁的第一精卫营士兵李函轩,在参加八公里快步行军后,出现热损伤(heat injury)症状。虽然当场接受降温急救并送院治疗,但经12天抢救后回天乏术,于4月30日在樟宜综合医院过世。 意外发生后当局成立独立调查委员会调查此事。报告显示,李函轩是因中暑导致多个器官衰竭,同时也无任何证据指出是医疗缺失所致,但很有可能是因为其间接缘故包括过度疲劳。 而日前被指控的31岁陈保树上尉则因被诊断患末期癌症,于上月初获无事省释。他于本月13日逝世。 为避免产生任何偏见,国防部亦选择将该六名军人的内部诉讼推迟,直至陈保树刑事诉讼结束,才开始对另六人展开调查。

20% households spend more than they earn, all households negative incomes’ growth?

By SY Lee and Leong Sze Hian We refer to the article…

Civil society organisations and activists release joint statement on proposed Prevention of Human Trafficking Bill

Civil society organisations AWARE, HOME, Project X and Workfair, as well as…