Section 377A

I guess this is the most famous law in Singapore these days. Some people have been asking whether this is something worth knowing about and whether it can be used in essays/AQ. Well, here are some quick facts:

What is Section 377A?
- Criminalises gay sex (i.e. crime for men to have sex with each other, whether in private or in public)
- online campaign urging the Government to repeal a law criminalising gay sex has collected more than 2,200 signatures.

What can we learn from the debate
- Increased liberalisation and tolerance/acceptance of alternative lifestyles -> 10 yrs ago, 9 out of 10 Singaporeans frown on homosexuality. Today, only 7 out of 10 do so
- Ability to have civilised debate and dialogue over sensitive issues. But there is quiet acceptance of government's decisions because it is deemed as the best for society, readiness to conform to ensure stability
- The final decision to keep the law shows that we are ultimately still a conservative society that upholds traditional family values

Confusion
Even though gay sex is banned, the Government’s position is that it would not actively enforce the law and that it allowed gays in the civil service. So what is the message we are sending? Are we for or against it?

Famous gays in Singapore
Alex Au - gay activist
Otto Fong - a gay teacher in RI who went public

Arguments for keeping Section 377A
- Singapore is still a conservative society that believes in the family as its basic building block. This is defined as “one man, one woman marrying, having children and bringing up children within that framework of a stable family unit” -> Singaporeans not ready to change/ compromise their family values
- PM Lee acknowledged that homosexuals should be entitled to their private lives and are free to pursue their social activities but drew the line at allowing these individuals to promote their lifestyle to others (slippery slope for moral values if law is scrapped - rock institution of marriage, adoption by gay couples etc)
- But PM Lee states that the law will not be proactively enforced against homosexuals
- Singapore had to maintain a balance between upholding a stable society with traditional, heterosexual family values, and giving gays space to live their lives. (e.g. of Otto Fong who continues to teach in RI, gay films/clubs/websites allowed)
- This doesn't mean that they will be discriminated before the law but a result of society's choices. Once you have different groups that live in a society, you have to accept that there will be some restrictions on behaviour. In criminalising acts, we consider the wrongfulness of the act, the harm caused and how it affects the good of society

Arguments for repealing (taking away) Section 377A
- MP Charles Chong compared it to bar-top dancing, will not be a slippery slope -> arguments against allowing bar-top dancing claimed that it will lead to rowdy behaviour but we have permitted bar-top dancing for some years already and these have not come true.
- MP Baey Yam Keng argued that repealing Section 377A does not mean promoting homosexuality. Compared it to how we don't make smoking and drinking illegal although we do not condone them

Reaction from gay community
- feels that this debate was a milestone for a community that has hitherto been kept in the shadows. Will continue the dialogue because it understands that it is only through civilised debate and discussion that society can gain better knowledge and understanding of differing opinions
- look towards heightening the gay community’s visibility such as through volunteer work, support groups and events like IndigNation which include arts exhibitions and poetry readings
- This will help Singaporeans understand gays better, and be more comfortable among them