Monday, October 29, 2007

Non-repeal of 377A: Remember Rosa Parks and Don't Give Up!


Hi Friends,
I wrote this letter to the forum page today:
October 29, 2007
Dear Editor,

I refer to the ongoing debate on the non-repeal of Section 377A of Singapore’s Penal Code.

Though contentious and undoubtedly divisive, the debate was necessary and may prove to be cathartic.

By voicing our concerns about “gay” rights, Singaporeans from both sides of the divide are taking ownership of Singapore. Only when we truly care about this place, would we care to take a stand and either seek to change our laws or give justifications to keep the status quo.

Personally I feel that the jury is still out about the “nature versus nurture” origin of homosexuality and I am sure that the last word has not been said about it by far. But this has not prevented me from empathizing with gay Singaporeans’ plight.

I was especially disturbed that although heterosexual sodomy (ie anal sex) and oral sex have been decriminalized, these exact same acts between two men remain illegal. If this is not discrimination, I do not know what is.

Notwithstanding law professor, NMP Thio Li-Ann's attempt to explain away why such difference in treatment can justly be classified as “differentiation” rather than “discrimination”, I am not convinced that she is not just splitting hairs.

She also alluded to the “slippery slope” of the gay activists’ agenda and how gays would demand for ever more rights culminating in same sex marriages and child adoption rights.

Perhaps the exact fear was in the white bus driver who insisted that Rosa Parks gave up her seat to a white passenger on that fateful day of 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama. If Rosa and people like her were allowed to sit as they pleased, the blacks may actually demand for equality and other rights! What a frightening thought!

Although it is uncomfortable and troublesome when other fellow human beings demand for equality and an end to discrimination, I hope that our parliament will lead rather than follow, and show that Singapore is on the way to being a progressive and tolerant society.

Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
PS: Photo above is Rosa Parks being finger-printed after being arrested.

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am ashamed that even though I lived in Detroit for four years I did not make a similar logical connection.

You certainly raise a really good point!

nofearSingapore said...

Hi anon,
You mean because Detroit has many Afro-americans?
Anyway thanks.
Yes the keep377A lobby is not rational. The rabid fear and pigeon-holing of those different to themselves.
I am straight and truly do not understand how gay people can be attracted to each other, but that is beside the point.
Just by wishing that homosexuality does not exist or pretending that gay Singaporeans don't matter will not really help.
We are just postponing the inevitable and by then, many Singaporeans would have voted with their feet and we will have lost many of our own who could have helped us create a more vibrant and culturally diverse Sg.

Anonymous said...

Dear Dr Huang,

What are your views from the medical science perspective about the rectum as a receptacle for the male human organ?

Thanks. :)

Anonymous said...

I wonder - are we referring to the male receptacle, or the female receptacle. Is it any different, and how they both react to the human organ? Did Thio and the govt get it all wrong???

nofearSingapore said...

Hi anon 9.35,

Thank you for your interest in my opinion about such a scholarly topic. I had been awfully busy and had not had time to thing about it from a “medical science perspective”. I suppose the rectum is as good a receptable as the mouth or vagina for the male human organ. Maybe need more lubrication.

And as anon 11.06 pm has already alluded to (with some puzzlement), there is no difference between a male rectum and female rectum for this role.

Anonymous said...

The rectum's internal wall, its tissue qualities, its shape, its microscopic occupants, its PH state, its content, its storage purpose, its contractual movement..

And you say the rectum as good as a receptacle as a vagina?

We're puzzled! Doctor!

nofearSingapore said...

Hi anon (4.16):
Are you talking about the male or female rectum?

Anonymous said...

Hi Doc,
Is there a different?
I'm not been funny or sacastic or alluding to anything, just hope to understand from a doctor's point of view.. is the rectum a place for receiving the male organ?

Anonymous said...

Hi, maybe we can cut our doc some slack, shall we?

U see, he's been
"awfully BUSY"
"and HAD NOT HAD time"
"to THING"
"about it from a “medical science perspective”.
"I SUPPOSE"
"the rectum is AS GOOD"
"a receptable AS THE mouth or vagina"
for the male human organ.
"MAYBE NEED more lubrication."

Then he wanna clarify:
"Are you talking about THE MALE or FEMALE rectum?"

The CAPITAL LETTERS are my emphasis. Read those words again - U either realise the doc has answered our qns. Or he's really not a doc at all?

;-)

recruit ong said...

While we are at it, what about the mouth as a receptacle for the male organ?

Oh but I guess since S377 has been repealed, there must be overwhelming medical evidence in favour of it.

;)

Mr. White said...

Dr. Huang,

Are you a doctor of economics, agriculture or medicine? Might as well get this cleared up. (Maybe).

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Dr Huang, has there been any replies to your ST letter?

nofearSingapore said...

Hi
ST rejected
Today did not reply.
I guess the subject is now closed.
Too bad

Dr.Huang

Anonymous said...

BUT is this topic CLOSED in THIS blog here, dear doc?

Anonymous said...

Hmm, just had time to catch up on the doc's blogspot after being away for months. Congrads, doc on your millionth hit.

For mr white and anon at 5:25 PM, November 13, 2007:
If the doc is using his actual name, you can easily google for "Huang Shoou Chyuan". Of course, anything is possible, maybe another person with the same name or whatever. One chooses what one believes in.