If You Could Change One Thing About Your Community, What Would It Be and Why?
In Singapore, words like “gay” are being used negatively. Gay marriage and sex between two males are illegal. It is clear that we are not accepting, and maybe not even tolerant of homosexuals. With some 6-8% of Singaporeans identifying as homosexual, it is in my opinion that greater efforts should be made to ensure greater equality for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender community in Singapore.
If someone were to say that Blacks are unnatural based on their perception that Adam and Eve are not Black, it would be a ridiculous notion at best. Yet in Singapore, Reverend Charles Seet cited that homosexuality is a sin because “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!” Why is this an acceptable argument when the first idea about Blacks seems absurd? Contrary to popular belief, homosexuality is proven to be biologically determined rather than a choice. Much like how we cannot choose our own race, homosexuals cannot choose the gender they prefer. Why then, should we deprive them from enjoying the same rights that heterosexuals do?
One reason: Pastor Lawrence Khong brought up that being more open about homosexuality would oppress the majority of Singaporeans at the expense of a minority who do not believe in religion. With 83% of Singaporeans being religious, this may seem true, but a second thought had me concluding: do all religious people reject the idea of homosexual equality? Furthermore, how is it oppression of the religious if homosexuals get to enjoy the privileges of heterosexuals? I feel that a union between a man and a man or a woman and a woman does not deprive, or even affect the lives of the religious. Sure, it may go against their moral values, but a religious person is not obliged to having a gay marriage if it is legalised. Clearly, this is not oppression of the religious. Others may cite feeling discomfort when they see two males or females married, but is that really a valid enough reason to deprive homosexuals from legal recognition of their
If someone were to say that Blacks are unnatural based on their perception that Adam and Eve are not Black, it would be a ridiculous notion at best. Yet in Singapore, Reverend Charles Seet cited that homosexuality is a sin because “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!” Why is this an acceptable argument when the first idea about Blacks seems absurd? Contrary to popular belief, homosexuality is proven to be biologically determined rather than a choice. Much like how we cannot choose our own race, homosexuals cannot choose the gender they prefer. Why then, should we deprive them from enjoying the same rights that heterosexuals do?
One reason: Pastor Lawrence Khong brought up that being more open about homosexuality would oppress the majority of Singaporeans at the expense of a minority who do not believe in religion. With 83% of Singaporeans being religious, this may seem true, but a second thought had me concluding: do all religious people reject the idea of homosexual equality? Furthermore, how is it oppression of the religious if homosexuals get to enjoy the privileges of heterosexuals? I feel that a union between a man and a man or a woman and a woman does not deprive, or even affect the lives of the religious. Sure, it may go against their moral values, but a religious person is not obliged to having a gay marriage if it is legalised. Clearly, this is not oppression of the religious. Others may cite feeling discomfort when they see two males or females married, but is that really a valid enough reason to deprive homosexuals from legal recognition of their