ST Online Forum: Gays: Be careful of double standards (April 3)

Straits Times Online Forum, April 3, 2008

Gays: Be careful of double standards

I REFER to last Saturday's Science section article by
Ms Chang Ai-Lien, 'MM's reassuring comments seal
researcher's move here'. The article reports that
Professor Kerry Sieh, who is gay, has recently
accepted to work at the region's biggest earth
observatory because of the increased tolerance of gay
people in Singapore. Also cited are Minister Mentor
Lee Kuan Yew's views in an interview last year, which
state that while homosexuality is genetic, the lives
of gays should not be interfered.

While this is symbolic of tolerance of sexual
minorities in Singapore, we must exercise caution at
how egalitarianism is strategically practised in
Singapore. Tolerance and acceptance of diversity
should not be expressed primarily in terms of economic
progress and development. It should extend beyond the
mere inclusion of non-Singaporeans.

If the increased tolerance of sexual minorities is
purely symbolic and articulated for the economic
imperative, for example, the attraction of foreign
talent, I worry for the local sexual minority
community, for little will be actually done to improve
public education and the social integration of people
of other sexual orientation. I hope this does not
result in a double-standard treatment of local and
foreign sexual minorities.

As Singaporeans so ingrained with the values and
rhetoric of economic pragmatism, we should be aware of
how we accept diversity. People should not be accepted
based solely on what we perceive them to be worth.
They should be accepted fundamentally for who they
are.

Ho Chi Sam

ST Review: MM's reassuring comments seal researcher's move here (March 29)

March 29, 2008
MM's reassuring comments seal researcher's move here
By Chang Ai-Lien
IT WAS, in every sense, his dream job.

But if Professor Kerry Sieh had been handed $300 million on a platter
to start the region's biggest earth observatory a few years ago, his
answer would have been a firm no.

'I would not have come here if my partner could not have come with
me,' said Prof Sieh, who is gay.

But the words of Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew changed his mind.

Though the male homosexual sex remains a crime in Singapore, MM Lee
had said in an interview last year that while Singapore wanted to
maintain its social norms, the Government should not pry on consenting
adults.

'We must take cognisance of the contemporary world that has become
more accommodating...

'Homosexuals are mostly born that way, and no public purpose is served
by interfering in their private lives,' said Mr Lee in an interview
published last July.

To Prof Sieh, who was on sabbatical at Nanyang Technological
University here last year, this was enough to show that attitudes
towards homosexuality here were changing.

'I'm no crusader, but I'm going to be myself,' he said.

Prof Sieh said the issue of whether he could take his partner with him
was the first one he raised with NTU when the university approached
him with an offer in October.

When NTU told him it had no objections, the 57-year-old said 'yes' to
the job of founding director at NTU's Earth Observatory of Singapore.

The facility will study plate movement, volcanic activity and climate
change.

Prof Sieh is giving up a 30-year career at the California Institute of
Technology to take up the appointment here full-time, and will move
here with his partner in August.

'I have developed a real love for South-east Asian earthquake
geology,' said Prof Sieh, whose current research interest is Indonesia
- the world's hot spot for giant earthquakes.

Being in Singapore will mean he is 'right next to the earthquake
experiment', he added.

'For me, it's a thrill that we're in a place that has the economic
wherewithal to take on something like this.'

He hopes his research will lead to earlier earthquake forecasts, so
disasters can be averted.

'The idea is not just to save lives, but to save livelihoods as well,'
he said.

His interest in nature started when he spent summer months on his
grandparents' farm in Iowa as a boy.

His work on the infamous San Andreas fault led to the discovery of how
large earthquakes are often triggered by it in southern California.

More recently, together with colleagues and students, he finished a
study of Taiwan's multitude of active faults and figured out how
earthquakes there are creating that mountainous island.

He is currently a member of the United States National Academy of
Sciences and chaired professor at Caltech's Tectonics Observatory.

On the big move here, Prof Sieh, who enjoys snow skiing, jogging and
gardening, added: 'I'm excited. You have to leave your nest eventually
and do something great, I hope.'

ST Online Forum: Situation for gays here is far from ambiguous (Sept 6)

Situation for gays here is far from ambiguous I refer to MM Lee Kuan Yew's latest remarks to the International Herald Tribune about Singapore's laws regarding homosexuals.

With all due respect to MM Lee, I would like to point out that while it might be politically expedient for the Singapore Government to hold an ambiguous position on this matter, there is nothing ambiguous about the current situation for gay Singaporeans.

Because, while this ambiguity might sound benign, it is far from it. It denies gay Singaporeans equality.

This isn't about demanding gay parades or special rights. It is about eliminating a law that puts a minority at a significant disadvantage.

For, even though this law is supposedly not enforced, the threat of persecution stands as an unambiguous acknowledgement that Singapore's gay citizens are second-class (never mind that they are actually branded criminals).

It legitimises discrimination and perpetuates a climate of fear, shame and hatred.

Put simply, it makes it harder for gay Singaporeans to live their lives.

More poignantly, it makes it more difficult for gay Singaporeans, and their families and friends, to wholeheartedly celebrate their country.

This antiquated British law - already overturned in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong, as MM Lee pointed out - hangs like a Sword of Damocles over a vital and vibrant community of Singaporeans and permanent residents.

It is talent pool that Singapore can ill-afford to lose or turn away.

Now China recognises its gay citizens, the reasons given as to why Singapore needs to keep this law on its books sound less and less convincing every day.

MM Lee, you said in the interview that this law will have to go in time. I contend that gay Singaporeans should not have to wait a day longer.

Mr Alan Seah Chang Wei

ST Online Forum: We cannot afford to wait for conservative views to change before dropping laws against gays (Sep 4)

We cannot afford to wait for conservative views to change before dropping laws against gays

I refer to your report, 'S'pore must stay connected globally to grow'. (Aug 31)

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew cited the homosexual issue again and re-affirmed his positive views on the issue after what we can always expect was very careful study and analysis.

His need to balance the interests of different groups in our pluralistc society is appreciated.

The interesting fact that emerges in his interview with the International Herald Tribune is that China, Hong Kong and Taiwan have 'allowed and accepted gays'.

He is convinced that it is a matter of time before Singapore follows suit.

But the question is how much time.

The headline of this article states that Singapore must stay connected globally to grow.

Growth is essential, but can we afford to wait, or grow slowly?

We have a conservative sector of our population, but they should not hold back the growth of our nation. They should not impede the progress of the country in becoming a world-class society.

Allowing and accepting gays is necessary and shows respect for the laws of the country.

To have a law and not enforce it can only mean that it is redundant and must be removed from the statute books as soon as possible. The rationale of keeping the law to satisfy the conservative minority brings the legal system into disrepute.

It is simply not right to label a minority of the population criminals because they were born homosexual. What makes the consensual same-sex sexual act a criminal offence?

All the allegations about irresponsible sexual acts apply to consensual opposite-sex acts as well.

We can ill-afford to wait and watch the world progress ahead of us. We need to stay ahead of our competitors in attracting foreign talent and foreign investment.

MM Lee has warned us of our nation's vulnerablities. We have been able to overcome one crisis to another thus far.

Let us stay connected and continue to grow. We cannot retain a fishing-village mentality in the 21st century.

Let us work together in harmony irrespective of race, creed, gender and sexual orientation to make pluralistic Singapore a continued success.

Dr Yap Kim Hao

MM LEE'S INTERVIEW WITH BERITA HARIAN (July 2, 2007)

July 2, 2007

MM LEE'S INTERVIEW WITH BERITA HARIAN

No prying on gays but no marriages either

GAY marriages are recognised by some countries, but Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew does not see Singapore going that way.Singapore, a more conservative society, wants to keep its social norms, he said.

But the Government should not act like moral policemen, 'prying on consenting adults', he added.

MM Lee made the point in an interview with Malay daily Berita Harian, published yesterday.He said: 'At present, the West accepts homosexuals, and some countries even recognise gay weddings.

'We cannot go that far. We are a more conservative society.'

Citing the Church of England, Mr Lee noted serious tension between the Anglican church in England, which was more tolerant of homosexuality, and the Anglican communities in Africa and Asia that rejected it totally.

'In Singapore, we want to maintain our social norm, which is that men and women marry and form stable families within which they bring up children,' he said.

But neither should the Government pry on consenting adults, he added, reiterating a view he has expressed a couple of times this year.

'We must take cognisance of the contemporary world that has become more accommodating. ..Homosexuals are mostly born that way, and no public purpose is served by interfering in their private lives,' he said.

Mr Lee also said the integrated resorts (IRs) and Formula One racing will increase Singapore's buzz, attract a few million more tourists and make the island a lively place to visit and do business.

The IRs are expected to open from 2009, and Singapore will host the F1 Grand Prix from next year.

Mr Lee said: 'If we remain static and unchanged, known only as clean and green Singapore, but otherwise with an international reputation for being a dull and antiseptic place, we will lose out in this fast-changing world.

'High-level executives want to be posted to a country not just for an increase in their pay but also what lifestyle they and their families can enjoy.'

Hence the need for a lively pop culture like the IRs and bars, and a vibrant high culture like concerts, he said.

MM Lee also stressed the need for Singapore to attract foreign talent and foreign workers to thrive.

Foreign talent will create more jobs for Singaporeans, while foreign workers will do jobs locals avoid and bear the brunt of layoffs in a recession, he said.'

The more talent - local and foreign - we have, the more dynamic our economy and the better-off Singaporeans will be.

'The less talent we have, the less our economic vitality with fewer jobs, and more unemployed.'

ZAKIR HUSSAIN

ST Forum: Religion, politics and sexual minorities (May 28, 2007)

ST Forum

May 28, 2007

Religion, politics and sexual minorities

I HAVE been following the online and printed articles on sexual minorities following MM Lee Kuan Yew's St James Power Station talk.

Now it seems that, along with science and acacdemia, religion has crept into the debate.

Religious fundamentalism and/or blinkered subscription to specific academic and scientific doctrine, whether religiously or politically charged, have severe social implications.

Based on the 'knowledge' generated from these seemingly legitimate fields, laws are imposed.

We have to look way back to Seventh Century A.D. Spain where Christianity and the monarchy justified persecution and violence to sexual minorities.

In another account, the definition bestiality is to have relations with someone (a human being) outside one's race, and this was defined by Christian leaders many centuries ago.

Christian Europe, by the 13th Century, came to regard sodomy as a 'wicked and unnatural vice' and legislation was enforced. Throughout that century, homosexual activity went from being completely legal in most of Europe to one that incurred the death penalty. Christianity was the motivation behind this.

Governed by the 'truths' in science and religion in the past century and a half, the following acts were performed on homosexuals: Surgical transplantation of testicular cells from straight men to gay men; castration of gay men; cerebral ablation of 'sexual deviants'; androgen replacement; aversive condition, including electrical, chemical and covert; hypnosis; and psychoanalysis. These acts would be otherwise condemned as inhuman in today's context.

Religious fundamentalists and blinkered academics who based their knowledge on dated information are often unable to account for changes in society, boundaries and socially-related definitions. These people need to understand the histories of their respective beliefs, however embarrassing, brutal, bloody and silly.

I recall one Singaporean motto that promotes life-long learning and recommend it for those who are impassioned by religious fundamentalism and blinkered academic subscription. Learning also involves understanding your past and knowing about your past through many sources, rather than only one source into which you might be already pre-conditioned and taken for the 'truth'.

There is no need for a moral panic. Sexual minorities are not a disease. All we have to do is to look at all the homosexuality- related moral panics in other countries in the past and the atrocities committed against them based on narrow and stubborn views.We are Singapore. Let's not only embrace diversity, but also celebrate diversity while respecting one another's boundaries without encroachment.

Ho Chi Sam

Is there a place for God in public morals debate?

May 18, 2007

FRIDAY MATTERS

Is there a place for God in public morals debate?
By Chua Mui Hoong, Senior Writer

GOD often enters the picture when there is debate on issues of morality and values.When it comes to gay issues, for example, some Christians may say that homosexuality is a 'sin' - not just any old sin but a particularly grievous one that harms individuals and children and families and indeed puts the entire bedrock of society at risk - and should thus be criminalised.

Back in 2003, when the Government liberalised its hiring policy and said being homosexual was no longer a bar to holding a sensitive government position, the gay issue erupted into the national consciousness.

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's recent remarks have caused the issue to be raised again. He said that if homosexuality is genetically determined, 'why should we criminalise it?' But he also said Singapore is a conservative society, and the Government did not wish to upset citizens' sense of propriety.

So the situation in Singapore remains: homosexual sex acts remain a crime, but the state won't act like a moral police and go around barging into bedrooms.

Once again, the battle lines are drawn clearly, with the notion of homosexual sex acts as a 'sin' cropping up.

But 'sin' is a theological concept, defined by some religions as an offence against God. Should it have a place in a public discussion on morals?

Or to frame the question in another way, should religion have a place in public discussions on morality? To what extent? And are there ground rules for such debate, so people of different or no faiths can engage in meaningful dialogue?

One solution is to give up and say that people of different beliefs can never engage since they start off with different a priori positions.

Nominated MP and lawyer Siew Kum Hong noted: 'How do you convince, through argument, a Christian who is convinced that homosexuality is evil and immoral, a sin that needs to be outlawed? I don't think you can.

'I am more sanguine. I not only believe Singapore can evolve ground rules for discussing moral issues among people of diverse or no faiths, but I also believe it is essential that we do so, given the increasing sway of religious teachings, and the rise in values-related issues Singapore will confront.

The gay issue is just one example. Others include recent debates on casinos and stem-cell research, and sexuality education (abstention or contraception? ), and one day, perhaps, euthanasia.

With moral debate a certainty in public discourse, it behoves Singaporeans to develop an understanding of how to engage in such discussions fruitfully.

Some people may respond by saying that religion and private morals have no place in public debate.

The thinking here is that Singapore is a secular state made up of people of many or no faiths, so God should be kept out of policy discussions.

But this position ignores the psychological reality that people's values are shaped by their religion, so religion will slip into the picture anyway.

As the 1989 White Paper on the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act states: 'It is neither possible nor desirable to compartmentalise completely the minds of voters into secular and religious halves, and to ensure that only the secular mind influences voting behaviour.'

In Singapore, 85 per cent of the population profess a faith, such as Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Christianity or Hinduism and others, with diverse teachings on ethics.

It may be more realistic to acknowledge that religion affects an individual's private morality, and hence shapes his view on public issues.

Should the line then be drawn here, to let citizens practise their private morality, but curtail their ability to use religiously motivated views to influence the public agenda?

In 2004, I wrote a commentary arguing this point of view, saying that religious groups should limit their influence to their own flock, and not try to organise to get others round to their point of view.

I have since come to see the limits of such a position, which curtails individuals' and organisations' right to influence the policy process.

So, should people of faith be allowed to use religious justifications for their views and influence others accordingly? For example, can the argument to keep homosexual acts a crime be based on religion?

Prescribing this would be foolish in a multi-faith society with people who adhere to different religious teachings.

Those who want to advance public discussion must make use of public reason, and put up public justifications for what they believe in.

In other words, religion may influence your view on an issue. But when arguing your case in the political arena, you need to present arguments understandable and acceptable to those of different faiths.

Influential moral thinker John Rawls' The Law Of Peoples is devoted to the issue of whether religious doctrine is compatible with democracy.

He sets out to distinguish a person's value system or 'comprehensive doctrine, religious or non-religious' as one which 'we do not expect others to share'.

In political discussions on an issue, however, 'each of us shows how, from our own doctrines, we can and do endorse a reasonable public political conception of justice...The aim of doing this is to declare to others who affirm different comprehensive doctrines that we also each endorse a reasonable political conception'.

For example, Christians may cite the Good Samaritan story to say that Jesus taught that we should care for our neighbours.

But to convince non-Christians, they have to 'go on to give a public justification for this parable's conclusions in terms of political values', notes Rawls.

How can they do so? Well, they may argue that we owe a duty of care even to strangers, using the principles of proximity and reciprocity: You were there, and can help, so you should, because you would want others to do so if you were in such a situation.

Such use of 'public reason' is accessible to all regardless of religious faith.

This way, individuals may hold fundamentalist religious views that are non-negotiable, yet are able to take part meaningfully in discussions on morality using 'public reason', appealing to common values held by those of different faiths.

But this requires mutual respect, a spirit of civil tolerance and a willingness to bracket one's own religious beliefs to hear others out.

Most important of all, it requires a willingness to consider that one's private morality, based on one's own religious beliefs, need not be the basis of public law.

muihoong@sph. com.sg

ST Forum: Rev Yap's Response

I refer to the report "Homosexuality: Govt not moral police but it's mindful of people's concerns." (ST, April 23). This pragmatic understanding of homosexuality of Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew is certainly appreciated.

MM Lee has accepted the opinion of the doctors he consulted that due to "the nature of the genetic random transmission of genes" homosexuals are born that way. According to his view homosexuality is a "genetic variation." This is in line with the vast majority of doctors, psychologists, psychiatarists, and social workers who agree that homosexuality is a sexual orientation which makes therapeutic change impossible. They have declared this officially in their professional associations at different times since 1973! Therefore people should no longer regard homosexuality as an abnormality, sickness, disorder or unnatural.

Recognizing the concerns of conservative citizens and their inhibitions towards homosexuality the government has adopted a pragmatic approach and "would not be 'proactive' in enforcing this (existing) law against consensual homosexual acts that take place in private." Therefore the homosexual act should not be seen by the people as a criminal offence except only when done in public.

On the question of morality, an act by homosexual or hetersosexual is immoral when it is harmful, hurtful, destructive and exploitative. The question of morality does not come into play when the sexual act is consensual, in a mutually committed relationship and in privacy.

Time and circumstances change and the teaching of the religious communities need to change their conservative view of homosexuality as well in order to serve as a credible moral force in the age of globalization.

Rev Dr Yap Kim Hao

SAFE Singapore responds to MM Lee on his comments in Reuters

PRESS RELEASE
27 April 2007

SAFE is a group of family and friends who affirm and support gay and transgendered people as persons with equal rights to respect, dignity, acceptance and empowerment in society.

We are writing to express our appreciation and thanks to MM Lee for his recent comments at the dialogue with Young PAP and the interview with Reuters.

We appreciate the two cogent points he made,
1. That homosexuals are born with this propensity and not by choice. It is a genetic variation, not an aberration.
2. That the existing criminal law against homosexual acts in the Penal Code is outmoded.

We at SAFE fully agree with and support these points and are hopeful that the law that criminalises homosexual acts will be abolished in the proposed amendments to the Penal Code. We see this as a logical and responsible next step.

As with all complex human traits and behaviours such as intelligence, homosexuality is probably a result of many factors. Rather than arguing about whether particular genes can be found for these traits and behaviours, we should continue to accept our fellow Singaporean citizens and residents who deserve the same rights to respect, dignity, acceptance and empowerment as everyone else, and to be treated equally under the law.

We cannot agree with a law that proclaims our sons, grandsons, brothers, nephews, uncles, relatives and friends are criminals for a propensity that is not of their volition, is innocuous and part of their private lives. For far too long our gay loved ones from a young age, have suffered deep internalized oppression, often resulting in the disintegration of family, compromised relationships, low self-esteem, stunted maturity and unavoidable deceitfulness.

We therefore support the proposed decriminalisation of oral and anal sex as proposed by the Ministry of Home Affairs this past November, and ask that it apply equally to all consenting adults.

Since the 1970s, the law has been used in Singapore as an educational tool; we implore the Government to use it again for the same purpose. This will be a first step in educating the public on the nature of homosexuality, educating them to become more understanding, respectful and accepting of our human diversity.

The homosexual community is an essential element in the tapestry of peoples that make Singapore such a unique and cosmopolitan community. Homosexual men and women enrich our lives through their participation in business, the professions, the arts, and government. They are our sons and daughters, colleagues, neighbors, and friends.

Legal discrimination against homosexuals is unfortunate, outdated, and regrettable. It tells them that they are less than fully welcome; that their participation in Singapore life is subject to government forbearance. It diminishes the entire Singaporean community by allowing laws to stand that criminalise many of our fellow citizens. While contributing to intolerance it leaves the government and legal authorities open to the charge of being hypocritical for not enforcing a standing law.

As we focus on the richness gay people bring to our lives and our love and support for them, we not only liberate them, we also become a society committed to the Asian values of real family – strong, whole and committed to love against all odds.

Reuters: Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew questions homosexuality ban

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore's powerful former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, acknowledging the view that some people are genetically destined to be homosexual, has questioned the city-state's ban on sex between men. "If in fact it is true, and I have asked doctors this, that you are genetically born a homosexual -- because that's the nature of the genetic random transmission of genes -- you can't help it. So why should we criminalize it?" Monday's Straits Times, a pro-government daily, quoted Lee as saying. Under Singapore law, a man who is found to have committed an act of "gross indecency" with another man can be jailed for up to two years, though prosecutions are rare. But Lee -- who remains the most powerful minister in the cabinet of his son, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong -- said Singapore should not actively pursue homosexuals who engage in sex. Lee said that while homosexuality was not widely accepted in Singapore, authorities must take a pragmatic approach. "Let's not go around like this moral police ... barging into people's rooms. That's not our business," he told a weekend meeting with the youth wing of the People's Action Party, Singapore's ruling political party. In November, the Ministry of Home Affairs said it was considering decriminalizing oral and anal sex between consenting heterosexual adults, but not between homosexuals. The authorities have banned gay festivals and censored gay films, saying homosexuality should not be advocated as a lifestyle. But, despite the official ban on gay sex, Singapore has a thriving gay scene. Lee's comments come at a time when many groups, such as Singapore's Law Society, are clamoring for a review of the laws against homosexual sex, which they view as outdated and archaic. © Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.

Reuters: Singapore considers legalising homosexuality - Lee

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore, striving to cast off its staid image and overhaul its economy, might have to legalise homosexuality to become more cosmopolitan, but will preserve its core values, the city-state's founder Lee Kuan Yew said.

The conservative Southeast Asian state aims to be Asia's most vibrant centre, with glitzy casinos and a lively arts scene to attract more tourists and increase its population of 4.5 million.

"They tell me that homosexuals are creative writers, dancers. If we want creative people, then we have to put up with their idiosyncrasies," Lee, 83, told Reuters on Tuesday.

Lee was independent Singapore's first prime minister, from 1965 to 1990, and remains the most influential minister in the cabinet of his eldest son, Lee Hsien Loong.

"Let's not pretend it doesn't exist," Lee said in an exclusive interview, adding he saw no option but to legalise homosexual sex. Under Singapore law, a man who is found to have committed an act of "gross indecency" with another man can be jailed for up to two years, though prosecutions are rare.

In November, the Ministry of Home Affairs said it was considering decriminalising oral and anal sex between consenting heterosexual adults, but not between homosexuals.

Singapore wants to attract 2 million well-educated and wealthy immigrants to boost its population to 6.5 million and transform its economy from a low-cost manufacturing base into a centre for science, technology and financial services.

With foreigners pouring into the property market and banks beefing up their wealth management operations, salaries and overall costs have surged.

In a public forum at the inauguration of Reuters' new headquarters in Singapore, David Conner, CEO of Singapore's Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp., asked Lee when the government would start to worry whether the increases could erode Singapore's competitiveness.

"We are not Hong Kong. We cannot afford to let rent prices become astronomical," Lee said referring to Singapore's main rival.

Lee said the pressures were a sign of confidence in Singapore's prospects, with investors from as far as Monaco buying property in the city-state.

He forecast economic growth this year would probably be at the upper end of the government's 4.5-6.5 percent range.

RICH INDONESIANS

Singapore is confident the terms under which it has chosen partners for its two casinos will avoid the sleaze and crime often associated with the gambling centre of Macau, he said.

Singapore scrapped a ban on casinos in 2005, and has started to build two gambling resorts for a total investment of US$7 billion as part of a drive to boost tourist arrivals to 17 million people by 2015 from nearly 10 million last year.

Lee also said an extradition pact between Indonesia and Singapore, agreed late on Monday, won't frighten rich Indonesians away from Singapore or hurt the city-state's booming property and banking sectors.

"Do you believe that any Indonesian who was likely to be extradited would be here at all?" Lee said, adding the treaty would inhibit corrupt businessmen from using Singapore as a base.

"It does give an extra barrier for any would-be escapee from their system," Lee said.

Indonesia has long expressed its desire for an extradition treaty because of its concerns that some Indonesians, for example those who owed money to the authorities following the 1997-98 financial crisis, had taken refuge in Singapore.

The city-state is home to a large number of rich Indonesians. One third of Singapore's high-net-worth investors - those with net financial assets of more than $1 million - are of Indonesian origin, Merrill Lynch and Capgemini said in a report, adding that these 18,000 Indonesians have total assets of $87 billion.

A far bigger threat to Singapore's future is global warming, Lee said, warning that the low-lying city-state could find itself partly submerged under six metres of water in the worst case.

"What dykes can we build? Where do we get materials for the dykes? Do we excavate the sea bed? We are into a very serious problem," Lee said.

© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.

MM Lee Speaks About Homosexuality in Singapore

Homosexuality: Govt not moral police but it's mindful of people's concerns
Zakir Hussain, The Straits Times, Home, H4, Monday, April 23 2007

The Government is not the moral police on the issue of homosexuality here - but it cannot at the same time ignore the concerns of conservative citizens.

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew addressed the issue in his reply to a question from Young PAP activist Loretta Chen, who had asked where censorship was headed in the next two decades.

Having related the issue of how the topless revue Crazy Horse was allowed to operate here, he turned to the question of homosexuality.

It was an issue that "raised tempers all over the world, and even in America".

"If in fact it is true, and I have asked doctors this, that you are genetically born a homosexual - because that's the nature of the genetic random transmission of genes - you can't help it. So why should we criminalise it?"

But Mr Lee also noted that there was a strong inhibition towards it in all societies - be they Christian, Islamic, Hindu or Chinese.

Singapore, too, was confronted "with a persisting aberration".

"But is it an aberration?" he asked. "It's a genetic variation".

"So what do we do? I think we pragmatically adjust, carry our people..don't upset them and suddenly upset their sense of propriety and right and wrong.

"But at the same time let's not go around like this moral police...barging into people's rooms. That's not our business.

"So you have to take a practical, pragmatic approach to what I see is an inevitable force of time and circumstance".

When the Home Affairs Ministry announced proposed changes to the Penal Code on a range of offences last year, it said it would retain the ban on acts of "gross indecency" between men. The penalty remains a maximum of two years in jail.

The ministry said homosexuality was not widely accepted here, but added that it would not be "proactive" in enforcing this law against consensual acts that take place in private.