A People's Action Party MP yesterday spoke out against the non-review of the law banning homosexual sex.

Tanjong Pagar GRC MP Baey Yam Keng said if it comes to a vote in Parliament, he would say 'yes' to doing away with the law which makes it illegal for men to have sex with other men.

He was joined by Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong who had previously made public his opposition to Section 377A of the Penal Code which bans homosexual sex.

Both were members of a forum panel yesterday that included gay activist Alex Au, founder of gay media company Fridae Stuart Koe, and Methodist church leader Reverend Yap Kim Hao.

They were discussing the legislation with about 100 participants. When the Home Affairs Ministry proposed changes to the Penal Code last year, it said it would retain the ban on acts of 'gross indecency' between men.

One participant, academic Russell Heng, 56, asked Mr Baey for his position if Parliament took a vote on this issue.

He said he would vote to repeal the law, a response which drew loud applause.

Explaining his stand, Mr Baey drew an analogy between homosexual sex and drinking or smoking.

'There should be a distinction between what the Government wants to discourage, and what it wants to criminalise,' he said.

'The Government can make it more difficult to access drinking and smoking, but you are still allowed to drink and smoke. So, you can discourage homosexual sex without criminalising it.'

He believed the Whip should be lifted if Parliament were to debate this issue. But he conceded that - from his understanding - not many MPs would share his views on decriminalising homosexual sex.

Lifting the Whip means MPs can vote according to their convictions, and do not have to toe the party line.

But Mr Baey emphasised that he did not think this issue would be decided through public consensus.

'From what I understand of how the Government works, I don't think the Government will make a decision based on a survey...The Government would want to make its own stand and position on issues like this,' he said.

Changing the law would require 'some progressive thinking and also people who are able to influence the Cabinet's thinking'.

Thus, recent remarks by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew were welcome, he added. 'We should be happy he made those remarks, and that will pave the way for some change in the thinking of the current Government.'

In an interview with Berita Harian published two weeks ago, MM Lee said the Government should not act like moral policemen, 'prying on consenting adults'.

He also reiterated his view that homosexuals 'were mostly born that way', but also recognised that Singapore is a conservative society and cannot go as far as some countries that recognise gay marriage.

Yesterday's forum also touched on issues about the gay community and what the religious view on the matter was.

Offering his view, Rev Yap said 'Contrary to the majority of the Christian views... I personally would call for it to be repealed on the basis that this is God's purpose - the existence of the homosexual community...We know there will always be a proportion of the population, generation after generation, who will be homosexual, and they are created by the heterosexuals.'

At the end of the forum, both Mr Baey and Mr Siew said it was good to have open discussion to increase awareness of the issue, but the absence of a different point of view meant the discussion lacked balance.

Said Mr Baey 'We were talking to the converted.'

* * * * *

 
16 July 2007 
'Today' newspaper, front page

The room was packed, the panellists were passionate and the questions came fast and furious.

This was the mood yesterday as over 200 people gathered to discuss a hot issue ­ should homosexuality remain outlawed here?

Leading the discussion, organised by local theatre company W!ld Rice at the National Library, were an eclectic mix of five individuals MP (Tanjong Pagar GRC) Baey Yam Keng; Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong; gay activist Alex Au; CEO of gay community website Fridae.com, Dr Stuart Koe; and Reverend Dr Yap Kim Hao, a former Methodist bishop who serves on the Inter-Religious Organisation (IRO) council.

Although Section 377A, which criminalises homosexual acts, may come up for debate in Parliament as part of the Penal Code changes, for two panellists at least, the prospect that it would be repealed any time soon seems highly unlikely.

Said Mr Baey: "Personally, I think the whip should be lifted for a very open debate and open expression of opinion by the MPs. And if that was so, I would vote for a repeal of the act. From my understanding of my parliamentary colleagues, my guess is that I will be in the minority."

However, Mr Siew told the audience ­ most of whom indicated during the forum that they wanted Section 377A repealed ­ that the battle was not to convince the naysayers, but those who are undecided about whether homosexuality should be decriminalised.

The NMP said change would only be possible "once you get that mass, enough people in the middle, to agree with you", but added "I don't think we're at that point."

Mr Siew cited a heartland survey published in May by Today, in which 62.3 per cent of 300 respondents disagreed that homosexuality should be legal.

"That shows that a clear majority are saying that homosexuality of people is not acceptable to them."

But even if more people were to support decriminalisation, that may not be enough.

Said Mr Baey: "From what I understand about how the Government works, I don't think the Government will be making a decision based on a survey ... The Government will want to make its own stand and position on issues like this, and for this it requires a mindset shift." . And to change mindsets, "you've got to frame it in a lingo that will convince the Government", Mr Siew suggested.

"And what's that lingo? I think we all know. It's all about growth, jobs, money. If you can make a convincing case that 377A is somehow affecting that, I think you've got a really good chance."

He acknowledged that changing the laws on homosexuality would put Malay/Muslim MPs in a difficult position with their community.

But it is not just the Muslims who feel strongly about the issue.

Reverend Dr Yap said that within the Christian faith in Singapore there was a "minority which is vocal" which strongly opposes any move to repeal the Act.

Mr Au, however, argued that the debate on Section 377A was not one of religion, but civil rights.

In response, Mr Siew pointed out: "Pitching your arguments in terms of civil rights ... will not take it very far."

His suggestion of linking the decriminalisation of homosexual acts to economic benefits drew a range of responses from the audience ­ as well as other panellists, including Mr Koe, who said he would feel insulted if the decision were to depend on dollars and cents.

Whatever their stand, almost everyone present agreed that such a forum would not have been possible five years ago ­ a sign that Singapore is now a lot more open to different points of view.

* * * * *

 
16 July 2007
Channel NewsAsia website

Should Section 377A of the Penal Code which criminalises homosexual acts be repealed?

This topic was hotly debated at a forum attended by over 200 people on Sunday evening.

Most put up their hands in agreement when asked by the moderator of the forum, organised by theatre group W!ld Rice, if section 377A of the penal code which criminalises homosexual acts ought to be repealed.

But will opinion polls shape government thinking?

Says Baey Yam Keng, Member of Parliament, Tanjong Pagar GRC, "I don't think the government will be making a decision based on a survey. The government will want to make its own stand and position on issues like this, and for this it requires a mindset shift."

Says Stuart Koe, CEO, Gay Issues website, "The role of the law is to protect minorities, not to protect majorities, so I disagree that we need a majority view before we repeal 377A."

Siew Kum Hong, Nominated Member of Parliament, believes, "You've got to phrase it in the lingo that will convince the government, and what is that lingo? I think we all know. It is all about growth, job, money. And if you can make a convincing case that 377A is somehow affecting that, then I think you've got a really good chance."

Says Alex Au, Founding Member, Gay Equality Lobby Group, "Taking the economic argument presents a danger, which is to buy into the whole ideology that ultimately humans are digits. I want to base an argument purely on the human rights.

"Gay identity is very fundamental, it is as fundamental as your ethnic identity, as your linguistic identity, as your religious identity. That being the case, therefore the state through its tools, law, should give equal recognition to that liberty to express your identity."

One forum participant says for MPs to be able to vote according to their conscience in Parliament the whip must be lifted for this bill.

Says Baey, "Personally, I think that the whip should be lifted for a very open debate and open expression of opinion by the MPs. And if that is so I would vote for a repeal of the act. From my understanding of my parliamentary colleagues, my guess is that I will be the minority."

Almost everyone at the forum agrees that such a forum would not have been possible just five years ago.

It is a sign that Singapore is now a lot more open to different points of views.