Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
Why not be gay?
I’m not about to promote homosexuality here. In fact, I’m slightly homophobic. However, I am strongly against a witchhunt of any sort against gays/lesbians.
Whether being homosexual is biological, psychological or a matter of choice is something that is still being debated. The verdict is not out. Since the verdict isn’t out, I don’t understand why are some people rushing to conclude that homosexuals are bad, evil, etc. I thought that most societies these days operate on the presumption of innocent unless proven guilty?
Honestly, I see no difference between a homosexual and a heterosexual in most aspects, other than sexual orientation. And, that’s perfectly fine with me. To me, sex is something that’s in the private sphere, and as long as public decency laws are observed, what’s the problem? I don’t see that it is necessary to treat homosexuals any different from the rest.
Admittedly, some people are not comfortable with the idea of homosexuality because the paradigm of a male pairing with a female is so firmly entrenched in our minds. I think that’s perfectly okay. What is not okay is to take things a step further and deny others of their right to an alternative paradigm just because we are not able to understand the worldview of those who subscribe to the alternative paradigm. Being different is not a crime.
Homosexuals are ultimately human beings too, so why should they be denied any right that is accorded to a heterosexual? Didn’t the Universal Declaration of Human Rights state that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights”? Why should heterosexuals rush to condemn homosexuals instead of trying to understand them, and in return, get homosexuals to understand how heterosexuals feel?
I’m going to rephrase the words of the French philosopher Voltaire:
I may not like homosexuality, but I will defend to the death your right to be a homosexual.
Other reads
http://1moresg.wordpress.com/2007/02/27/to-be-gay/
http://kitana.wordpress.com/2007/02/27/there-is-no-why-to-being-gay/
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 28/02/2007 at 1:53 am, and is filed under Ramblings. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 3 years ago
“The American Psychological Association (APA) and ALL other mental health agencies in the states as of 2006 is of the %opinion% that Homosexuality is not a mental disorder and discourages all sorts of ‘treatment’.â€
Since when is opinion proof? And what has the opinions in the US got to do with Singapore? If going by your logic that we must follow the opinions of the US in whatever we do, then we should continue with the death sentence and start a war? Are you proposing Singapore becoming a state of the US?
about 3 years ago
Give up.
about 3 years ago
!!!!!
People not like you lar! People dun come to opinions based on nothing. Wah liew! Please grow up. I mean….I don’t know wat to do with you!
We are not talking about some cheap shot organisation or bias people here.
You are so blind you are so seeped into this…dark vicious cycle of irrational discouse till you spend hours online fighting on every popular blog.
You think why so many people disagree with you?
You think why so many people say you are intolerant?
You think why so many people laugh at you?
Why?
The reason is obvious, whybegay,
you just have to put some brain into it. Why don’t you check in with a SINGAPORE PSYCHOLOGIST! Show him or her what you have written so far, and talk to him or her about it!
about 3 years ago
Poor WBG. He a bit deluded. He dun seem to recognise tt APA = world-recognised authority on psychology. And Singapore dun have so established centres of psychology; our research and findings come from US one. (Also see http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_spit.htm, which analyses gayness thoroughly and comes to the same conclusions as well, everyone except you.)
Never mind WBG. Since you say that we cannot follow US, you show us your Singapore psychologist that say tt gay is psychological problem lor. Since you talk so much about it, you give us your Singapore proof. We want conclusive evidence ah, not any of tt half-baked opinion that you put up on your blog.
But in the meantime, aiyah. Who ever said anything about giving up? I haven’t had so much fun in weeks. Keep on going! The more you make me laugh, the more I feel inclined to share the lurrrve with you. =)
BTW, I think Ben asked if you are interested in meeting for coffee. You didn’t reply. The invitation’s been re-extended. =)
about 3 years ago
APA is not WPA(World Psychological Association), please read other than research.
And the burden on proof is on people who want to encourage homosexuality to a society who does not accept it. My blog is a counter to them so it does not have to proof anything.
And tell Ben I am not interested.
about 3 years ago
WBG spam both Aaron + my bwog, but I reply on my bwog liao, so you can see comment here: http://kitana.wordpress.com/2007/02/27/there-is-no-why-to-being-gay/#comment-2345.
Can keep discussion to 1 place better?
about 3 years ago
WBG,
Please show me some concrete statistics that Singapore is a society that does not accept gays. Did the Department of Statistics conduct a study that I don’t know of that says 90% of Singaporeans are anti-gay? Please don’t quote me cheesy newspaper statistics. Show me statistically sound numbers. If you cannot qualify your premise that Singaporeans are anti-gay, your arguments are invalid.
about 3 years ago
对牛弹ç´ã€‚。。(Just a Mandarin idiom which comes to mind when reading this discussion)
about 3 years ago
Diversifying to different blogs allows said person to “tap” into two blogs readerships…heh…
WBG,
as a matter of curiosity, what is ur religion?
about 3 years ago
Anyway i think that even if what u claim is true that u have a lower burden of proof…the fact of the matter is…u must have proof. So where is ur proof? I dun think a judge would rule in a party’s favour if the party claims that it has a low burden of proof but has naught to prove it.
about 3 years ago
Interesting relevant websites…
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/etc/quiz.html
I guess Mr. “Whybegay” (again, I assuming that it’s a “he”) will score quite high on the questionnaire at the second website…
about 3 years ago
The question ultimately is not a question of justice or equality, for no peoples group whether black, brown, yellow or white, or mixed have been called “sinners” for being who they innately are.
about 3 years ago
Homosexuality is not only seen in humans.
It is a natural behaviour documented in over 400 species in the animal kingdom.
Watch these National Geographic excerpts on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=DA7E030D2ECA1DFA
It is homophobia that is unnatural and immoral.
about 3 years ago
Hmmm, for some strange reason, the playlist link above doesn’t work.
So, you’ll just have to click on my YouTube profile and look for the animal homosexuality videos amidst all the other “Homosexuality in Singapore” videos I uploaded:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=groyn88
My apologies.
about 3 years ago
i haven’t read all the comments but i want to say that homosexuality has long been depathologised. therefore, it is unconstitutional to propagate dated misinformation to people that it is a pathology.
it is just like how christians in the early 2nd millenia view inter-race sex as beastiality.
i think it’s not really nice for wbg’s blog to post such views which promotes intolerance towards a minority in singapore.
about 3 years ago
Thanks to a university education, I have learned the beginnings of what passes for logical discourse.
But that is not the thrust here. In a ‘freer’ society, we have to accept that certain people hold opinions that may not truly reflect what the larger populace may hold. It will be up to the silent majority to speak up to show that the vocal minority do not speak for them.
If evinced from the postings on this comment thread, about 5 to 10 people are seeking to show that the premises proffered by WBG have logical fallacies. If we take this as an example of the blogging world in SG (59 samples to go), then, WBG’s views could be seen to be a minority opinion.
If we truly seek public discourse, than, yes, we will also have to “defend to death” his right to say what he wants. (however, the nice logic about hate speech laws ELSEWHERE is that if his turn at the lectern incites violence, then he can also be indicted/charged for bringing harm to others!) Its just a matter of time before his views may open himself to such risks.
What this thread has shown is, WBG is a minority view, and that at the end of the day, education can bring about a more enlightened and accepting society.
And in that sense, the unreality construct in SG will continue to implode, as the fallacies in its arguments appear more hollow with each passing cohort of students. I just wish logical analysis is taught to students at an earlier age instead of waiting until GP(?) or at university, so that the masses that may not reach tertiary education are not denied their opportunity to let their minds flourish with and without the alternative perspectives of demagogues.
E.o.M.
about 2 years ago
gay sex at $50 at little india.
totally lawless area. indians gather in hundreds and thousands in hdb void decks, lying on the floor, picnic with food and drinks and spit orange indian chewing gum on void decks floors. interesting. but noone doing anything
http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/viewPost5731.aspx