ST Forum: Beware loose use of term 'sexual minorities' (Aug 10)

Aug 10, 2007

Beware loose use of term 'sexual minorities'

I REFER to Mr Ho Chi Sam's letter, 'Why is gay forum against public interest?' (ST, Aug 8).

Apparently, this forum was not banned in its entirety, as Mr Ho claimed. Its organisers, a self-professed homosexual lobby group, reported on their website that 'the event will still go on. The topic may be altered slightly, but will still focus on the law and sexual orientation'.

Regretfully, the organisers had not posted the forum's programme on their website. However, Fridae.com, an Internet portal providing services aimed at homosexuals, posted an article attributed to the foreign speaker concerned, which presumably contains the gist of what he intended to convey.

This article argues for the repeal of criminal laws against unnatural sex by using foreign precedents and international law in certain ways, noting that decriminalisation paves the way for the next step in the agenda, i.e., to redefine marriage.

It presupposes that the repeal of such laws benefits our society, and, in so doing, sidesteps the very issue that we are trying to work out for ourselves, i.e., whether decriminalising homosexual conduct serves or undermines Singapore's interests and well-being.

Mr Ho introduced the expression 'sexual minorities', a term coined by political groups in countries like Canada and the United States to lobby for special (rather than equal) rights for self-professed homosexuals.

Attempts had been made to extend such special rights, to the point of banning religious texts like the Quran and Bible as 'hate literature' for 'incit(ing) hatred against sexual minorities' because these texts categorically reject homosexual behaviour.

An uncritical importation of such politically charged and legally loaded terminology not only confuses but also endangers the racial and religious harmony that Singapore has laboured to enjoy and keep.

While a group of people may be a numerical minority as a social fact, that cannot be the sole or conclusive criterion for conferring legal recognition as a minority at law, so as to merit the enjoyment of additional protection or privileges.

Under Singapore law, the only legally recognised minority groups are racial and religious groups. Sexual preferences do not qualify as a marker for special legal protection.

Lastly, I fail to see the relevance of Mr Ho's confession of being 'straight' in the context of a rational and informed debate in matters of public interest. What matters is the substance and veracity of what is being said, not the identity of the speaker.

Angela Thiang Pei Yun (Ms)

ST Forum: Why is gay forum against public interest? (Aug 8)

Aug 8, 2007
Why is gay forum against public interest?

THE Ministry of Home Affairs banned a public forum scheduled for yesterday which would have featured a talk on the topic, 'Sexual orientation in international law, a case for Asia', saying that it was contrary to public interest.The forum was to have been open to one and all who are interested tohear views and opinions related to society. How could it be against public interest?

I am a straight member of the public who wants to understand issues that sexual minorities confront, especially in an Asian country likeSingapore.

Another reason cited for the ban was that 'foreigners should refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of Singapore', a reference to the invitation to a foreign-based speaker to participate in the forum.

I believe that views and feedback from foreigners can improve our society and make Singapore stronger. This is important for Singapore as a cosmopolitan country, open to talents from all over the world.

It is a pity that the forum was banned, depriving people like me of the education and awareness it could have given with respect to minorities in our society.

Should we subject ourselves to censorship due to the vague notion of public interest?

What then is public interest?

Instead of a ban, restrictions such as an age limit could have been imposed. A small compromise from the authorities would go a long way for education and awareness.

Ho Chi Sam

AP: Singapore bans gay rights forum (Aug 3)

Singapore bans gay rights forum
Second time in a week city-state bans gay-issues event
SINGAPORE (AP) | Aug 3, 11:26 AM

Authorities in Singapore on Friday banned a gay rights forum at which a retired Canadian law professor was to speak, the second time in a week the city-state has forbidden an event that touches on gay issues.

The forum was to feature Douglas Sanders, a professor emeritus in law at the University of British Columbia, Canada, and Thailand's Chulalongkorn University, the event's organizer, Alex Au, told The Associated Press.

But because the Aug. 7 forum, titled "Sexual Orientation in International Law: The Case of Asia," was deemed contrary to public interest, police canceled the event's license Friday and immigration authorities rejected Sander's visa application, Singapore's Home Affairs Ministry said.

"Our laws are an expression and reflection of the values of our society; the discourse over a domestic issue such as the laws that govern homosexuality in Singapore must be reserved for Singaporeans ... foreigners should refrain from interfering," the statement said.

But Au, the forum's organizer, said Sanders had no such intention.

"He was going to do a lecture in Singapore about international trends. He is not an expert on Singapore and had no intention of talking about Singapore," Au said.

Singapore's censors earlier in the week banned an exhibition of photographs depicting gay men and women kissing, also organized by Au, saying the images "promote a homosexual lifestyle, and cannot be allowed."

The prohibitions have come amid a debate in the city-state on whether gay sex should be decriminalized. Singapore's founding leader, Lee Kuan Yew, a few months ago questioned the ban on gay sex, saying the government should not act as moral police.

Under Singapore law, gay sex is punishable by a maximum of two years in jail. Authorities have banned gay festivals and censored gay films, but despite the official ban on gay sex, there have been few prosecutions.

MHA Press Statement on Public Forum on “Sexual Orientation in International Law: The Case of Asia”, 03 August 2007

03 August 2007
Press Statement on Public Forum on “Sexual Orientation in International Law: The Case of Asia”, 03 August 2007

Police has cancelled a licence under the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act to organise a public forum on 7 Aug 2007 at 72-13 Mohamed Sultan Road on gay issues by a foreign participant. A Singaporean, Mr Au Wai Pang, had applied for the licence. He had separately applied to ICA for a professional visit pass for the foreign national to speak at the forum.

2. In reviewing the application, Police has assessed that the event is contrary to public interest. Our laws are an expression and reflection of the values of our society; the discourse over a domestic issue such as the laws that govern homosexuality in Singapore must be reserved for Singaporeans. Indeed there have been public forums where Singaporeans have debated and discussed the issue of homosexuality at length. Singapore’s domestic politics is the domain for Singaporeans and foreigners should refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of Singapore.

3. Police has therefore cancelled the licence to conduct this public forum. ICA has also rejected the professional visit pass application for the foreign national on similar grounds. It is an offence to organise an indoor public forum with foreign speakers without a licence [1]. It is also an offence for foreigners without professional visit passes to be speakers at the forum.

MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

03 August 2007

---

[1] Under the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act, Singaporean organisers of indoor public talks are exempted from applying for a permit if it is confined to Singaporean speakers. However, if the forum or talk involves foreign speakers, the organiser is required to obtain a permit.