Been talking about s377A pretty much in law school this semester. Well for the record, I think it's by now too over-used and over-rated that we should move on? But yeah, I do know it'll still be brought up now and then because it's pretty much a good example to talk about morality and the law. Anyways, just decided to pen down my views for s377A (which I have to disclaim first do not represent any formal views of any organisations, institutions, ministries, religion etc; nor does this seek to further any political agenda. All perspectives raised are solely personal opinion which has no other intention apart from penning down my own thoughts. And if the discussion of sex and homosexuality offends you, then please do not read this. Further, I perhaps should label this at least an NC16 post.)

For the uninitiated, 377A was widely debated a few years back when the government was reviewing the Singapore Penal Code (Cap. 224). Essentially, the provision criminalises sex between 2 consensual males, even if the act is done in private. It escalated into the whole Repeal377A faction against the Keep377A camp. And largely, the arguments were based on morality issues.

After all, what harm can there be if 2 guys had consensual sex behind closed doors and no one else knows. Granted they harm themselves because gays spread HIV/AIDS. As much as the label of AIDS as a 'gay disease' has relatively waned in recent times, it is note-worthy that my mum was bordering on the edge of falling prey to the misconception that gays = AIDS and vice versa.

Then there's the argument that should 377A be repealed, we are endorsing the homosexual lifestyle and thus undermine the larger social fabric - essentially the harm done to society. The main thesis there is that 377A stands to protect the community's standard of decency. Should we decriminalise homosexual sex, there will be rampant increase in homosexuality, which would be disastrous to society.

Well, wrong on both counts.

1) It is fallacious to argue that repealing 377A will result in a rampant increase in homosexuality. Ask a straight guy, 'Now that 377A has been repealed and consensual homosexual sex is no longer illegal, won't you want to try/do it?' and the reply you are likely to get is more like than not, 'Hell no!'

2a) An increase in homosexuality prevalence in Singapore would be disastrous to society. Well, if you're looking at the family building block as the core unit of making up your society because they are the one who will produce offspring for the next generation, then arguable, yes it is disastrous to that effect. Yet, there are homosexual couples who would love to have their own kids and, should the law allow adoption of kids for homosexual couples, I don't quite see the concern behind it.

2b) And apart from the falling birth rate, I don't quite see what other major social repercussions there can be. Unless you buy the whole homosexuality = immoral theory.

In fact, s377A has been seen to serve a more denunciatory function - that it expresses the social condemnation and the law expresses the state of social norms/morals at that time. Yet we have seen the government take the lead in some socially-not-too-well-received policies. I'm not saying that the government should do this all the time - indeed, I do agree that it takes a delicate balance to sort this out, but we should not forget that one of the main aims of the government is to steer the country in the 'right' direction.

Before I sound one-sidedly biased and sound like some ardently-repressed poor soul, let me qualify myself by saying that this is meant to be more of an academic discussion of which, if by now it is not clear, I am for repealing 377A. No, I'm not some gay rights activist, and neither would I push strongly for repealing 377A. But if ever there comes a day for a national referendum, I think it's pretty clear where my vote will go to.

Living in a multi-cultural, multi-racial country has seen a good deal of tolerance with regards to the law. The law doesn't favour one race over the other, nor discriminate one religion more so than the other, for after all, Singapore is a secular country. If that's the case, shouldn't or can't sexuality be viewed as a form of 'minority' such that even if we do not confer on them 'minority rights', surely they have a right to be recognised and respected?

Then, I will foresee social vehemence at my suggestion - because homosexuality is wrong and immoral!

Uh, question... Wrong and immoral by whose standards? Your standard, my standard, the govt's standard, a particular religion's standard?

Oh, no, it's just that it's obviously an unsaid thing that everyone feels that it's immoral and wrong!

Hmm, alright maybe so, maybe not. By doing a random simple asking around sort of survey, you may find people who are against homosexuality and its status as an alternative lifestyle, but when asked whether they think homosexual sex should be criminalised, more often than not it's replied in the negative.

So the above are some of my views to the issue - putting down for the record. Well, if you really want to discuss anything with me, I'm more than happy and welcome to talk about it.

With all the above said, let me progress to something more optimistic before I conclude.

While 377A is still good law, and I do find it oxymoron-ic and paradoxical that the government strikes a compromise by stating in no unclear terms that they will not actively enforce the statute (which even more supports my proposition that it should be repealed because it seems to be left there to pacify part of the masses), I am equally thankful that the government has at least promised not to actively enforce it. This is a paradigm shift from the 1990s where the police frequently conducted what is known as sting operations to flush out the well-known 'gay areas'. Sting operations are, in its most simplified terms, operations where policemen infiltrate such areas and pretending to be a gay, and seeking to procure/encourage homosexual advances, which would then allow them to successfully arrest and prosecute them under the law.

Perhaps I'm being far too optimistic but as the saying goes 'To live is to want, to want is to suffer' and hence to break out of it, I guess a good way would be to find things that one can be thankful for.

Back to my optimistic view of liberalisation of Singapore, such issues are now more frequently raised (as compared to the past where such topics are hush-hush or even taboo), and the media seems to take into account the rise of homosexuality. Or so I term it. Starting from brokeback mountain which is the classic example of homosexuality in the theatres, there has been more subtle undertones along the way. And in Valentine's Day which I watched with my cousins some 2 weeks ago, *spoiler alert* yes, there's the usual lovey-dovey plotlines with the predictable twists, with very awesome actors/actresses, but what struck me pretty hard was the inclusion of a gay couple. It was more of a sideplot and the development to the final culmination in such a revelation caught me off guard. I did not see it coming at all.

Perhaps, I rejoice too soon, too much, at the most little of things. Indeed, as I said, I'm no gay rights activist, nor do I seek to further any such agenda. I'm picking up this clues/hints as I go along in my daily life which makes me bear the hope that in the not-too-far future, 377A will be brought up again, and that the whole homosexuality issue will surface once more, with a more positive outcome, with one step forward in the name of liberalisation. I think more can be done if we shift our focus to helping poor teenagers (and indeed, even people of older ages) struggling with their sexuality grow up and receiving proper help/counselling such that they will not feel being an outcast - all these rather than spending the efforts in downplaying the plausible alternative of homosexuality, condemning it as a social abomination, and seeking to suppress it as much as we can.

If you think I'm feeling too strongly about this issue, then maybe you can consider that I've seen too many people struggle with such issues that it becomes destructive, they lose sight of their purpose in life, they spend more time agonising over it than other arguably more important things, they end up being all so emotional and unaccepting of themselves that it becomes dysfunctional, when all they need is support in order to have a childhood which is not all that traumatic. Do we really want to continue using such labels of social immorality and abomination which are inevitably destroying the childhood of our loved ones (even though we may not know it)? And when you realise that you have friends who are determined in leaving Singapore for another country because they find the culture here too unaccepting and too judgmental, perhaps you may also then find such an impetus to write in support of this issue. I'm not saying that we should promote homosexuality, or that homosexuality is right or wrong. I just urge everyone to be more tolerant (like we have been of different races and religions) and accept how some people are, and to love them the way they are simply because they are fellow human beings, with a rational mind and the same emotional needs.