Gay Pride is a term used by activists to encourage the LGBT community to “come out”, and be proud and not be ashamed of who they are. This likely stemmed from a history of persecution in both the Judeo-Christian and Islamic traditions of non-heterosexual practice and orientation, during which there were recorded enclaves established for both physical security and financial livelihood for those excommunicated or exiled from traditional society.
Gay-themed events, festivals and parades have witnessed an increasing vice element, leading to increased police and community complaints related to sexual predators and criminal elements of alcohol and drugs.1 It should be noted that not all Gay Pride event participants are predators or criminals. In fact, criminal elements tend to exploit the emotional vulnerabilities of event attendees.
LGBT events are socio-equality or politically focused. Gay Pride and LGBT events are generally in the news together.
The modern LGBT movement arose in the 1980s during the AIDs epidemic, with lobbying for immediate medical aid, guaranteed hospital admissions and research grants to find a cure for AIDs. These were accompanied by lobbying for employment and benefits protection, police protection from violent neighbours and legal protection against discrimination on sexual orientation and lifestyle choice.
Developments in the Gay Pride and the LGBT acceptance movement has expanded to recognition of a family unit, access to adoption as a single gay person or family unit, spousal benefits in military and civil pensions, equal in standing for taxation grants/credits, tax incentives for family and housing, and most recently, in voting and electoral constituencies.
Singapore’s Gay Pride & LGBT events first took the form of annual Nation Parties2 starting in 2001. This was replaced by IndigNation3, Singapore’s annual, month-long lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer pride season, first held in August 2005 to coincide with the Republic’s 40th National Day. These events were relatively kept out of public knowledge until the launch of the annual Pink Dot event in 2009 (see Qn.24). Indignation’s recent attempt in 2014 to hold a ‘Pink Run’4 as an LGBT pride event in Singapore was turned down by the police.
These are the major Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender (LGBT) developments in Singapore in the past decade:
- AUG 2003: Goh Chok Tong, then Prime Minister, does “not encourage or endorse a gay lifestyle” but asserts that “gays, too, need to make a living”. He warns against backlash from the “conservative mainstream” should gays lobby for greater public space.1
- OCT 2007: The original Section 377 of the Penal Code against unnatural sex is replaced with a law that criminalizes sex with corpses.It is then debated if Section 377A, which criminalizes sexual acts between men, should be repealed as well.2
- MAY 2009: The new leadership at AWARE (which stands for Association of Women for Action and Research, a local non-profit organisation that advocates for women’s rights) seeks to address its Comprehensive Sexuality Education curriculum for schools, which carried some “explicit and inappropriate” content, including “messages which could promote homosexuality or suggest approval of pre-marital sex”.3 This matter receivesheavy media coverage and is polarisedalong religious lines. The Ministry of Education later suspends all sexuality education by external service providers. 4
- In the same month, Pink Dot is launched to promote “Freedom to Love”, diversity and acceptance of people of all sexual orientations. It garners the support of several high-profile individuals and celebrities, and has since become a highly publicized annual event5
- JUL 2012: Google publicly identifies Singapore as one of the countries targeted in the new phase of its campaign to oppose laws under which homosexuals are not accorded equal rights as heterosexuals, and to promote gay rights.6
- JAN 2013: The pro-family “silent majority” and more Christians and churches speak up on the cases challenging the constitutionality of Section 377A.7 Statements affirming the importance of the traditional family unit are made in the Singapore courts and at ministerial level.8
- AUG 2013:Yale University, popularly known as the “Gay Ivy” for its activism and emphasis on LGBT matters, collaborates with NUS to establish Singapore’s first liberal arts college9/10 with various LGBTQA campus initiatives.11/12
- FEB 2014: Several public figures weigh in on the discussion about the Singapore Health Promotion Board’s “FAQs on Sexuality”, with religious groups expressing their disappointment at the FAQs’ seemingly pro-LGBT view that contradicts the government’s stance on family.13/14
- JUL 2014: The National Library Board receives criticism after removing 2 children’s books with pro-homosexuality themes following a parent’s feedback. The matter draws heated public discourse with mixed views, petitions and public displays of disapproval with the NLB decision.15/16
8. Teo Xuanwei, Judgment Reserved on Challenge to Section 377A (TODAY, 15 February 2013)
13. Siau Ming En, More Parties Wade Into Debate Over HPB Sexuality FAQ (Today, 6 February 2014)
14. Charissa Yong, FAQ List Does Not Promote Same-Sex Lifestyles (The Straits Times, 19 February 2014)
15. Pearl Lee, NLB Defends Move to Remove Books (The Straits Times, 11 July 2014)
16. Pearl Lee, Yaacob Tells NLB to Put Barred Titles Back on Shelves (The Straits Times, 19 July 2014)
Three movements in the West – Alfred Kinsey’s controversial publications on sex, the Women’s Liberation Movement, and the Gay Liberation Movement – set the foundations for the sexual revolution of the 1970-80’s. This resulted in a widespread culture of individualism expressed as the “freedom to love”.1 Since then, time-tested social and gender roles have been rejected as archaic and invariably, the freedom of choice has resulted in conflict and confusion for the individual and society.
Societal mores. Although sexuality is a personal issue, it has effects beyond the individual.
Some argue that others should not interfere with the private and sexual lives of homosexuals if the relationship is between consenting persons. However, this argument has been equally applied to campaign for “freedom” and “equality” of other ideologies such as polygamy and incest.2
Continue reading “How does homosexuality affect society?”
Counters procreation. Human reproduction is biologically impossible between two people of the same sex; homosexuality undermines the longstanding institution and an innate purpose of the family. This has implications especially for a nation like Singapore that is trying so hard to encourage married couples to have (more) children. If the evidence is true that homosexual couples are more likely to raise children who subsequently identify as homosexual1, this would further impede efforts at building a sustainable population for Singapore’s future.
Poorer outcomes for children. Research reveals that children raised by homosexual couples experience more problems than children raised by married heterosexual parents, with lower academic, social, emotional and relational outcomes. Such children also reported earlier sexual experimentation and are at greater risk of sexual confusion, exploitation, and abuse.2/3
Note: Although some studies (such as the US National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study4) have shown that children raised by homosexual parents fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents, they have methodological limitations which call their credibility into question.5/6/7 For one, they have been conducted by persons who are known for homosexual activism.8 There is significantly more research to the contrary.
Perpetuates abuse. Studies have shown that homosexual people report having been the victim of more homosexual abuse (7 times more for male homosexuals and 22 times more for female homosexuals) than their heterosexual counterparts.9 At the same time, research reveals that homosexual persons commit about half of recorded child molestation cases, and homosexual teachers were involved in 80% of recorded teacher-pupil sexual interactions.10
2. Mark Regnerus, How Different are the Adult Children of Parents Who Have Same-Sex Relationships? Findings From the New Family Structures Study
(Social Science Research, 2012, Vol 41(4), pp 752-770)
3. Peter Sprigg, New Study on Homosexual Parents Tops All Previous Research
(Family Research Council, accessed on 15 July 2014)
4. Nanette Gartell and Henny Bos, Adolescents with Lesbian Mothers Describe Their Own Lives
(Journal of Homosexuality, 2012, Vol 59, pp 1211-1299)
5. Glenn Stanton, Revealing Facts on Same-Sex Parenting from Latest Research
, (GlennStanton.com, 7 March 2012)
6. Timothy Dailey, Homosexual Parenting: Placing Children at Risk (Family Research Council, Issue No.: 238,October 2001)
7. Glenn Stanton, Examining the US National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study
, (FocusOnTheFamily.com, February 2012)
8. Glenn Stanton, The Ins-and-Outs of the New Regnerus/UT Austin Study on Same-Sex Parenting
, (GlennStanton.com, 13 June 2012)
9. ME Tomeo, DI Templer, S Anderson, and D Kotler, Comparative Data of Childhood and Adolescence Molestation in Heterosexual and Homosexual Persons
(Arch Sex Behavior, October 2001; 30(5), pp 535-541)
10. George Frater, Our Humanist Heritage
(USA, 2010, pp 198)
Homosexual activists decry the use of this term on account that it suggests some sinister and shadowy conspiracy beyond their freedom to live private lives. However, some of them have publicly discussed an agenda to push for the universal acceptance – in the areas of morality, religion, education, economics and politics – of non-heterosexual acts and relationships as normal, leading to the development of the LGBT movement.1
Note: Not all homosexual persons are activists. Activists may be non-LGBT persons.
The gay agenda refers to a political agenda which seeks to radically reshape society and rewrite public policy and laws to affirm and celebrate homosexual behaviour as normal, natural and even desirable. The intensive and sustained lobbying has successfully overturned or influenced the laws of many countries2. At the international level, the United Nations’ (UN) efforts to address homophobia (an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people3) and transphobia (intense dislike of or prejudice against transsexual or transgender people4) includes further recommendations to introduce anti-discrimination laws that run counter to the definition of family and marriage in many countries.5/6
Homosexual activists have unified themselves across the world in a concerted propaganda effort to promote pro-homosexual sentiment through a comprehensive strategy developed by neuropsychiatric expert and Harvard graduate, Marshall Kirk, and marketing/public persuasion expert and Harvard doctorate, Hunter Madsen7:
1. Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s (Doubleday, 1989)