More than 80% of Singapore profess adherence to an organised religion. It is most disturbing that a nation that has developed in such an amazing fashion by strictly adhering to laws and policies that promote family life and personal responsibility should find itself now branded by an elite group of liberals as defective, intolerant, and unprogressive. Why is a tiny minority seeking to overthrow the values of the vast majority? The majority has rights, too.
IS SINGAPORE A SECULAR STATE SO RELIGION HAS NO PART TO PLAY IN DETERMINING PUBLIC MORALS?
The definition of the word “secular” is from the Latin saeculum meaning “worldly” or “temporal.” This doesn’t mean that religious viewpoints are automatically excluded but rather that the State should not be exclusively allied with or against any particular religion.
The Government maintains a position that all religious communities are free to give voice to their conscience in matters that have moral impact. People of religious faith have equal right to be included in rather than dismissed from the public forum of debate.Some homosexual rights advocates argue that religious citizens should refrain from arguing that the State laws should criminalise conduct that they consider immoral. This line of argument actually contradicts the definition of secularism. For what they are really saying is “You shouldn’t make laws based on your morality, but on mine instead.”
On a broader point, Singapore (in a classical sense) can never be called a pure secular state because it allows certain anomalies to exist:
- Independent Schools (both primary and secondary) that are set up and run by religious groups e.g. ACSI, SJI. These schools are directly funded by the State;
- Islamic Family Courts system enacted in 1968 under the Administration of Muslim Actadministers Muslim personal law in legal matters governing marriages, divorces, the nullity of marriages and inheritance in Singapore.
- The Common Law system underpinning our whole legal system is rooted in the Judeo-Christian philosophical worldview. In the seventeenth century, Sir Matthew Hale declared that the whole Bible made up the common law of England. In 1767, Lord Mansfield qualified this only slightly by declaring, “The essential principles of revealed religion are part of the common law.”
IS IT RIGHT TO CRIMINALISE SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR?
The laws of the State already criminalise all sorts of sexual behaviour e.g. we have age of consent laws, laws against bigamy, laws against paedophila/bestiality, sexual harassment etc. We even have the right to divorce under the Women’s Charter for adultery. It is not true that the State has no role in policing morality. It does and it has. If personal enjoyment, consent, and commitment are all that is now required to declare a sexual behaviour legitimate, then there is no reasonable basis for withholding public recognition of polygamous/polyamorous, adult brother-sister unions or even adult-adolescent unions.
It is galling for Singaporeans, who have seen their country progress so well to now be lectured by an elite group of liberals that they are “intolerant bigots.” For no other nation in human history, since empirical records have been kept, has advanced as quickly as the little island nation. Despite having virtually no natural resources, Singapore has gone from being a Third World country in 1965 to a First World country in less than half a century. The World Bank recorded that the GDP of Singapore has grown 3700% from 1965 whereas the USA only grew 300%. Children from the least privileged backgrounds have risen from great poverty to achieve remarkable success. Acute poverty is now rare in Singapore.Other measures of success are equally impressive. Infant mortality has been reduced faster than any other society in the last 50 years. Students in Singapore now top the charts consistently in international tests. For instance, the OECD ranked Singaporean children number one in the world in a recent global rankingof “Universal Basic Skills” in mathematics and science. Yet we are told that we are “backward” and “intolerant.”
HOMOSEXUALITY IS SEEN IN OTHER SPECIES SO IT IS A NATURAL PHENOMENON
Animals engage in all sorts of sexual behaviour that none of us would ever endorse as morally legitimate. They rape, steal, murder, indulge in incest etc. with seemingly no moral conscience to violate. Humanity is unique because we intuitively recognize that we must live by a moral code and that we have a conscience that guides us. When we violate those norms it affects us physically, emotionally, and even spiritually. As the celebrated academic and author, C S Lewis put it,
“Human beings all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it. Secondly, that they do not in fact behave that way. They know the Law of Nature; they break it. These two facts are the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in.
YOU CAN’T LEGISLATE MORALITY
This is one of the silliest arguments. All laws are expressions of morality – good morals or bad morals. However, morality is not determined by the scientific method. Morals standards do not just magically appear from nothing but are the values we hold as individual moral agents. Hence the moral standards in the laws of the State generally reflect the moral values consensus espoused by that wider society.
Singaporeans have made clear repeatedly that the vast majority oppose any attempts to remove s377A. This majority has likely grown over the last few decades with the growth of conservative religions, like Christianity, in the wider population. For those who advocate repealing s377A we must ask: What moral standards do you appeal to that will persuade us that society’s current moral consensus is wrong?If you can’t persuade the majority, what gives you the right to declare by fiat that your moral code must supersede that of ours?
THE MAJORITY OF THE WORLD DO NOT CRIMINALISE HOMOSEXUALITY
Singapore is a nation that prides itself on being “uniquely Singapore.” Being part of the majority of world opinion has never defined the nation. We are content to be one of the relatively few nations that has capital punishment (particularly for drug trafficking), judicial caning, corporal punishment in schools and we are unashamed to legislate and implement legislation such as the Internal Security Act that is not followed by a majority of the UN countries. It is not true that we look around at other nations and shake our heads, “Well, the people here are eventually going to accept it because the West does, so we might as well get in line now.”
Singapore has always recognised that it is an Asian country. Most of our neighbouring ASEAN countries maintain a very strong opposition to the homosexual lifestyle. Indeed, on the 21stSeptember 2018, the current Prime Minister of Malaysia, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was unequivocal,
“There are certain things that we cannot accept, even though they are considered human rights in the west. This include LGBT and same-sex marriages.Our concept of family remains the same.A couple with children or adopted children are considered a family, but two men or two women are not considered a family.”
It would be wholly irresponsible for the laws of Singapore to ignore the reality of the geopolitical forces that surround us.
The majority of people in Singapore recognize that the homosexual lifestyle is harmful for the individual and society in general. Statistics abound from all over the world to back up that statement with drug abuse, Sexual Transmitted Diseases, depression, suicide rates disproportionately affecting those in the non-heterosexual population. Life expectancy is considerably lower. This is found to be universally true; even in societies where homosexuality is celebrated and encouraged. Homosexuality leads to vastly inflated risks of physical and emotional harm to the individual. Families and society at large are then often left to pick up the pieces of such a destructive lifestyle.
IS HOMOSEXUALITY A CHOICE?
All the three great Abrahamic religions are crystal clear that homosexuality is always a choice that can be rejected. Society is replete with anecdotal evidence from both secular and religious people, who have “turned their backs on the lifestyle.” The weight of scientific evidence demonstrates that it is not innate or congenital, like skin colour, but rather an aspect of our freewill. The “gay gene” theory has been overwhelmingly debunked!
The laws of Singapore understand that humanity is not in a state of perfection. We often are influenced by external factors to make wrong choices. Hence there are laws enacted to discourage advertising and public words/images that may induce others to make wrong choices. We discourage positive advertising of smoking, drug taking, pornography, and even adulterous sexual relationships for that very reason. Choices have consequences. That message needs to be clearly reinforced. There is no free lunch here!
The fact that all the objective evidence demonstrates that homosexuality is clearly a choice means that society must guard against any action that encourages others to make the same choice. That’s why the s377A law is so vital to discourage any public action or words that encourages others to “try it out,” especially young people who are prone to try to rebel against the norms of society during their teenage years.
WHY MAINTAIN S377A?
For thousands of years, all successful human civilisations have been built on the foundation of family life. The social recognition of committed heterosexual bonding as a superior model has been consistent down the centuries. Singapore is no exception in recognising this for the common good for the propagation and stabilization of society. We have thrived as a nation when the founding fathers of the Republic put the family unit as paramount to our survival. HDB policies, the Woman’s Charter, Child Bonuses, and even Tax laws have all been used to promote the reality that this is best for our society.
Society needs the institution of heterosexual unions for continuity and stability. It recognises that homosexual unions are far from the ideal role model to raise children. Same-sex couples cannot produce biological children, nor ensure a child’s basic right to be raised by his mother and father. All the evidence reveals that children function better in all kinds of categories when raised in a home founded on a stable heterosexual union.
There is no example in history of a society that turned against that principle and succeeded! What the homosexual activists term “homophobia” is in fact a recognition that the vast majority of citizens intuitively understand that committed heterosexual bonding is a superior way of life. It is also a recognition by the majority that homosexual attraction is an aberrant desire for what one is as a sexual being, which is sexual narcissism or sexual self-deception. We recoil or are at the least disturbed by it because of that intuitive understanding.
Most Singaporeans are suspicious that the repeal of s377A would unleash a range of thorny problems that would deeply disturb the fabric of our society. They have seen from the evidence to date in other countries that it leads to mandatory indoctrination of our children in the education system, gay adoption, gay marriage, discrimination against employees who morally disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, and flamboyant Gay Pride parades. Some have even found themselves fined or imprisoned for opposing homosexual practice. In his 2007 speech in parliament that advocated retaining s377A, the current Prime Minister, Mr Lee Hsien Loong wisely noted that to change the law would result in the reality that “gay activists will push for more.”Mr Ho Peng Kee, then-Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs in 2007, also noted that there was an inherent danger in removing s377A. He pointed out, “whilst homosexuals have a place in society, repealing section 377A will be very contentious and may send a wrong signal that Government is encouraging and endorsing the homosexual lifestyle as part of our mainstream way of life.”
So, the repeal s377A activists are asking us to gamble the future of our society just to impress some Western liberals that we are “progressive.” There is no evidence yet to suggest that this is progressive rather than regressive. Indeed, the Prime Minister added concerning s377A,
“We will stay one step behind the frontline of change… Watch how things work out elsewhere, before making any irrevocable moves…….We were right to uphold the family unit when Western countries went for experimental lifestyles in the 1960s. We are right to accommodate homosexuals in our society, but not to encourage activists to champion gay rights the way they do in the West.”
Nothing has changed since 2007, save for the fact that Singaporeans have probably become even more religious. There is no objective evidence that the world is a better place for the diminishing of the traditional family unit as the central building block in any of these Western societies. Our society has prospered and developed at an incredible rate by maintaining our core family values.
It would be wholly irresponsible to risk that progress by indulging in social experimentation to appease the whims of a very tiny minority. This would likely expose us to all kinds of social upheaval. There would be a great risk of undoing the multicultural and multi-religious sensitivity and harmony that Singapore has worked so hard to construct and maintain. The ultimate objective of the state lies in promoting the welfare of the people. The retention of S377A is part of that duty.
Singapore Affairs 