Singapore's LGBTQ News & Section 377A Discussion (compiled)

[Guest Guest]

You are dreaming ...if you think the Government will go against public opinion and legislate for a minority.

Singapore last time I checked was a democratically elected Government.... So they are hardly going to go against the majority wishes as it would be political suicide.

[bluerunner]

I think the Government will be taking some actions towards Section 377A Penal code.

There is something that I do not quite understand. Hope someone here could very briefly explains this:

In the wake of this section 377A repeal action, the (straight) community has concern over the marriage issue and somehow they link it to Section 377A.

What has repealing 377A got to do with straight people's marriages?

[thickhead79]

On 8/21/2022 at 9:24 AM, bluerunner said:

I think the Government will be taking some actions towards Section 377A Penal code.

There is something that I do not quite understand. Hope someone here could very briefly explains this:

In the wake of this section 377A repeal action, the (straight) community has concern over the marriage issue and somehow they link it to Section 377A.

What has repealing 377A got to do with straight people's marriages?

What is the purpose of 377A?

Section 377A was introduced into the Singapore Penal Code in 1938 to criminalise all other non-penetrative sexual acts. It is descended from the Labouchere Amendment.

In 2007, the government reviewed the Penal Code and introduced the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill which proposed significant changes to the law.¹ The topic that caught much attention involved section 377 which prohibited oral and anal sex between consenting adults. The Bill had proposed the repeal of section 377, but opted to keep section 377A which prohibited similar acts between homosexuals. This proposal was hotly debated between gay supporters, who claimed the clause was discriminatory, and their opponents, who supported the retention of section 377A.²  

 

Description
Section 377 of the Penal Code had stated that “whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animals, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years, and shall also be liable to fine”.⁷ This clause was repealed in the Penal Code (Amendment) Act in 2007 and a new section 377, which criminalises sex with a human corpse, was instituted in its place.⁸

Section 377A of the Penal Code had stated that “any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years.” This clause was retained in the same 2007 Penal Code review.⁹ Whether the act was performed privately or publicly was not relevant in the eyes of the law.¹⁰

[thickhead79]

On 8/21/2022 at 9:24 AM, bluerunner said:

I think the Government will be taking some actions towards Section 377A Penal code.

There is something that I do not quite understand. Hope someone here could very briefly explains this:

In the wake of this section 377A repeal action, the (straight) community has concern over the marriage issue and somehow they link it to Section 377A.

What has repealing 377A got to do with straight people's marriages?

by the law, 377A mean not allow anal sex which is gays need to do.

 

Section 377A of the Penal Code had stated that “any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years.”

 

So majority believe once 377A removed, mean gays can have anal sex OFFICIALLY which is no longer under any law 

 

next the gays group will ask for marry rights.........

[bluerunner]

On 8/21/2022 at 10:28 AM, thickhead79 said:

 …. next the gays group will ask for marry rights.........

They are ‘counting the chicks before the eggs hatched’. 
Even if it’s so, what has the straight people got to worry? 

[thickhead79]

On 8/21/2022 at 10:55 AM, bluerunner said:

They are ‘counting the chicks before the eggs hatched’. 
Even if it’s so, what has the straight people got to worry? 

Maybe they themself got no trust is normal marriage 

 

or maybe once gays can get marry 

 

more guys will turn gays? LOL

 

anyhow only

[fab]

The National Pledge is:

English version

“We, the citizens of Singapore,
pledge ourselves as one united people,
regardless of race, language or religion,
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation."

 

Where's the justice and equality with 377a?

[Guest Guest]

If 377A is repealed, does it mean that gay couples in SG can hold hands, kiss passionately etc. (not sex in the open lah) in the open / out in the streets like the ang mohs do? 🤔

[Guest Guest]

Since there’s so much discussion going on since last year I think, 377A will be repel sooner or later. 
 

Might not be announced tonight, who knows? But definitely soon I believe. 

[Guest Repeal Coming Today]

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/unpacking-the-issues-around-section-377a

Unpacking the issues around Section 377A

Ng Wei Kai and Tham Yuen-C
UPDATED 28 MINS AGO

SINGAPORE - The law criminalising gay sex has been in the spotlight in recent weeks, amid talk of a possible review. The Straits Times looks at some of the key issues.

What is Section 377A about?
Section 377A of the Penal Code is a law criminalising sex between men, which is not enforced.

It was introduced in 1938 by the British colonial government, and was likely partially aimed at stopping European men from engaging Asian male prostitutes, based on documents declassified by the UK government between 2014 and 2016. Before Section 377A was introduced, the colonial government used a different, more loosely worded law - Section 377 - to prosecute men who had sex with men.

This law was adopted from the Indian penal code in 1872 and criminalised "carnal intercourse against the order of nature", which included oral and anal sex between heterosexual couples.

Similar laws were put in place in territories ruled by the British empire around the world, including India and New Zealand. Some of these countries have since repealed such laws over the years.

Singapore kept Sections 377 and 377A after independence in 1965, but the Government repealed Section 377 in 2007 after a comprehensive review of the Penal Code. A new law was instituted in its place, criminalising sex with a human corpse. Section 377A was retained - a decision which generated fierce debate in Parliament.

In a speech then, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said the Government would not actively enforce Section 377A.

What was the outcome of recent legal challenges to Section 377A?
Since 2007, there have been several legal challenges contending that Section 377A should be struck down as it is unconstitutional. None was successful.

In 2010, a man was charged under Section 377A over having oral sex with another man in a public toilet cubicle. Although the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) later amended the charge against Mr Tan Eng Hong to one of committing an obscene act in public, he subsequently filed a suit challenging the constitutionality of Section 377A.

In 2012, gay couple Gary Lim and Kenneth Chee also challenged the law. The Court of Appeal eventually ruled in both cases that Section 377A was constitutional.

In 2019, three men filed another constitutional challenge against the law. They were: Dr Roy Tan Seng Kee, a retired general practitioner and an activist for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights; disc jockey Johnson Ong Ming; and Mr Bryan Choong, the former executive director of LGBT non-profit organisation Oogachaga.

The Court of Appeal, led by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, ruled that the law would stay but was "unenforceable in its entirety".

In its arguments for the case, the AGC said the question of whether to repeal Section 377A is a deeply divisive socio-political issue that should be decided by Parliament, not the judiciary.

What does it mean to constitutionalise a marriage and how is it done?
Why have Articles 9 and 12 of the Constitution been cited in legal challenges to 377A?
Many of the constitutional challenges to Section 377A have revolved around these two articles of Singapore's Constitution.

Article 9 states: "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law."

Article 12 states: "All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law."

Constitutional challenges to Section 377A have contended that the law is not consistent with these articles, and hence should be void.

A town hall attended by about 1,200 people was held on July 23 arguing for Section 377A to remain. PHOTO: PROTECT SINGAPORE TOWNHALL
In their legal challenge, Mr Lim and Mr Chee argued that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 9 should include a right to privacy and personal autonomy for a person to express love towards another human being.

But the apex court rejected this interpretation, holding that the phrase "life or personal liberty" refers only to a person's freedom from an unlawful deprivation of life and unlawful incarceration.

Lawyer M. Ravi, acting for Mr Tan Eng Hong, had argued that Section 377A was absurd because it criminalised a minority based on a core aspect of their identity that was unchangeable.

The court rejected this, saying there were still conflicting scientific views on whether sexual orientation is unchangeable, and it was thus premature to express any conclusive views on it.

The court also said Article 12 does not cover the issues involved in Section 377A. While the provision specifically prohibits discrimination based on religion, race, descent or place of birth, the words "gender", "sex" and "sexual orientation" are noticeably absent.

In throwing out the challenge against Section 377A in February this year, the Court of Appeal noted that the courts had established another approach to the "reasonable classification" test used to determine if a law is legal under Article 12.

This could make a difference to how Section 377A is evaluated, depending on how the legislative object of Section 377A is framed.

If Section 377A is a law meant to express societal disapproval of homosexual acts between men, then it would not violate the "reasonable classification test" and will be considered constitutional under Article 12.

But if the object of Section 377A is to show societal disapproval of homosexual conduct in general, or to safeguard public morality generally, then that would strengthen the case that Section 377A falls foul of the "reasonable classification" test.

That is because in these scenarios, Section 377A would appear to be under-inclusive because it does not criminalise female-female homosexual conduct, for instance.

Similarly, if Section 377A is a law meant to express societal disapproval of male prostitution, it may then be considered over-inclusive, and thus also unconstitutional under Article 12.

When was 377A last debated at length in Parliament?
In October 2007, as the House debated amendments to the Penal Code, then Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong filed a citizen's petition to repeal Section 377A. The move sparked a passionate debate on the topic with fierce arguments from both sides.

Mr Siew, a lawyer, appealed for gay men to have equal treatment under the law, arguing that criminalising sex between men discriminates against them and is unconstitutional.

Then Nominated MP Thio Li-Ann, a law academic, called for the retention of the law, saying repealing it would "further batter the institution of marriage".

Most People's Action Party MPs argued for keeping the law on the books to signal society's disapproval of the homosexual lifestyle, but not enforcing it so as not to actively oppress gays.

Former Punggol East MP Charles Chong was among the few who spoke out in favour of repeal. He said that if homosexuality is inborn, it would be wrong to criminalise and persecute those who are born different, regardless of how conservative Singapore society claims to be.

Workers' Party chairman Sylvia Lim said her party would not be calling for the law to be abolished as it had not come to a consensus on the matter.

Wrapping up the debate then, PM Lee said the Government's position was that it was better to accept the legal untidiness and ambiguity of keeping the law on the books, while not proactively enforcing it to "maintain a balance, to uphold a stable society with traditional heterosexual family values, but with space for homosexuals to live their lives and to contribute to the society".

How has the public debate evolved since then?
In 2018, veteran diplomat Tommy Koh called on the gay community in Singapore to mount another challenge to the law, after India's Supreme Court struck down the country's law against consensual gay sex.

Former attorneys-general Walter Woon and V.K. Rajah also separately said it was not desirable for the Government and Parliament to direct the AGC not to prosecute offences under Section 377A.

In a paper published in 2019, former chief justice Chan Sek Keong called for a review of Section 377A.

In it, he asked whether the law violates the fundamental rights of all to equality before the law and equal protection under the law, as provided for under Article 12 of the Constitution.

What did the Attorney-General say in response to these calls?
Following the comments by Mr Woon and Mr Rajah, Attorney-General Lucien Wong said in 2018 that the Public Prosecutor retains independence in deciding whether to pursue a case under Section 377A.

The police, when conducting investigations into an offence under the law, "will decide whether or not there is sufficient basis to refer the case to the Public Prosecutor".

The Public Prosecutor will then determine whether to charge an offender under the law, and in doing so exercises his independent discretion solely on the basis of his assessment of the facts, the law and the public interest.

"While the PP (Public Prosecutor) is entitled to consider public policies in exercising his discretion, these do not fetter the exercise of prosecutorial discretion," he had said.

"The Public Prosecutor's exercise of prosecutorial discretion has always been, and remains, unfettered. In the case of Section 377A, where the conduct in question was between two consenting adults in a private place, the Public Prosecutor had, absent other factors, taken the position that prosecution would not be in the public interest. This remains the position today."

How did the apex court rule on the most recent challenge?
In February, the Court of Appeal, led by the Chief Justice, held that Section 377A is completely unenforceable in its entirety, meaning that while the law will stay on the books, it cannot be used to prosecute men for having sex with other men.

Legal scholars and the gay community lauded the decision for giving gay men real protection from prosecution under the law.

The apex court said that the Attorney-General's comments in 2018, when he said the Public Prosecutor would not prosecute two consenting men for having sex in private, had given legal significance to the political compromise struck in 2007 when PM Lee said the law would not be proactively enforced.

Mr Wong's representations had also given people a legitimate expectation of not being prosecuted under Section 377A, based on the administrative law doctrine of substantive legitimate expectations, the court said.

As such, Section 377A would remain unenforceable unless and until the Attorney-General of the day revokes the 2018 representations.

Given this, the three men who challenged the law - Dr Tan, Mr Ong and Mr Choong - do not currently face any real and credible threat of prosecution.

They thus do not have the legal standing to mount constitutional challenges against the law, the court said, dismissing their bid.

The ruling could also mean that other gay men will not have the standing to challenge the constitutionality of Section 377A, unless and until the Attorney-General's stance changes.

How did the Government respond to the latest court ruling?
Following the Court of Appeal's ruling in February on Section 377A, Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam said the Government is carefully considering the best way forward on the law.

He also reiterated the Government's stance on the law, noting PM Lee had said in 2007 that Singaporeans want "a stable society with traditional heterosexual family values, but with space for homosexuals to live their lives and to contribute to society".

But Mr Shanmugam, who made the remarks in Parliament when responding to questions from MPs on the ruling, had also said that public policies need to evolve to keep abreast of changes in views in society, and legislation will also have to evolve to support updated policies.

He said that if the Government decides to move on the law, it will "do so in a way that continues to balance these different viewpoints, and avoids causing a sudden, destabilising change in social norms and public expectations".

Shortly after, the Government started its review of the law, consulting widely, including religious and LGBT groups.

[Guest Helpful Guy]

https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/public-opinion-do-you-want-377a-to-be-repealed-voice-your-vote-now-before-pm-national-rally-speech-at-1845.6797349/page-3#post-143385713

 

We are losing out in votes. Can help to poll?

[Guest Guest]

What for? It's not going to change anything, isn't it?

 

Whether the govt wanna repeal anot, we will know later.

The decision is already made.

[Guest Guest]

Help also no use. The LGBT community so small …. 😅. Like someone said, decision already made.

[jason]

Na

Edited August 22, 2022 by jason
Edit

[Why?]

As I was typing, the rally had already begun.  Because I am not readily persuaded by what the same individual has been saying for almost two decades, I didn't want to listen.
Bringing up the phrase "once bitten, twice shy." It takes more than just preaching to earn someone's trust. The same language, tone, laws, and people do not lessen discrimination or ensure that everyone has access to basic livings. The main stream media has already been informed of what will be stated, and it will be published first thing before the light of dawn. Politicians' minds are already carved out of stone, rock, and walls.  I am not expecting anything new to warrant ground-breaking.   

 

[Guest will 377A be repeal]

English speech is delivered now, cross fingers.

 

 

[Guest Yeah]

A step foward!

[Guest Repeal]

Announced liao..WILL repeal.

[lonely57]

but what does it mean if its repealed? we still have sex privately.

[Guest Guest]

OMG FELLOW BROTHERS THIS IS A HISTORIC MOMENT.

 

377A WILL BE REPEAL AT LAST IN SINGAPORE.

[Guest Repeal]

On 8/21/2022 at 8:36 PM, lonely57 said:

but what does it mean if its repealed? we still have sex privately.

Private does not mean legal.

[Dreamz80]

This still need the parliament to vote right before they can officially pass it? 

[lonely57]

On 8/21/2022 at 8:38 PM, Guest Repeal said:

Private does not mean legal.

 

but they didnt really enforce it. we still see so much sexual activities around before the repeal. 

[Guest Guest]

NDR 2022: Govt will repeal Section 377A, decriminalise sex between men

 

SINGAPORE - Singapore will repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said on Sunday (Aug 21), confirming months of speculation that the Government might move on the law criminalising sex between men which has been a lightning rod for polarisation.

 

More at https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/ndr-2022-govt-will-repeal-section-377a-decriminalise-sex-between-men

[Guest Yeah]

On 8/21/2022 at 8:44 PM, lonely57 said:

 

but they didnt really enforce it. we still see so much sexual activities around before the repeal. 

Yes, not really enforced but the stigma was there.

Legally, a guy was a criminal when he had sex with another man. The conservative people will use this against gays.

[Guest Yeah]

On 8/21/2022 at 8:36 PM, lonely57 said:

but what does it mean if its repealed? we still have sex privately.

 

M2M sex was illegal even if done in private, just like drug abuse.

With the repeal, it is not illegal anymore. And most importantly, stigma is removed.

[Why?]

On 8/20/2022 at 9:06 PM, Why? said:

Expect a lot of virtue-signaling, moral demnation of the LGBT community in the upcoming ND rally, followed by some reluctant motherhood to agree to repeal S377A with lots of "BUT" this and that.   I am sure everyone will get a earful, over something as straight forward as either you agree or you don't at all.  I am good to just listen to music on youtube tomorrow. 

exactly what I had imagined above.  This repeal of S377A is a reluctant gesture.  The government admit it was political implication not in their favour, regardless of the legal arguments in our favor.  Gay people are used as a political scapegoat to decide how we will be treated.  In response, PM Lee stated that the government has the final say and that gay people should not file complaints or seek equality through the legal system.  Speaking of no one being above the law, this contradiction is startling.
Gay people will not enjoy equal right in seeking discussions about housing, leisure activities, advertisement, education, or other gay-theme issues,  since our government's limited viewpoint prioritizes one-man, one-woman relationships.  Thus, the road ahead remain challenging for LGBT in this country.  I set my case down uncomfortably after listening to an extremely insecured morons.

[Guest Sizzler Supporter]

On 8/21/2022 at 9:03 PM, Sizzler said:

So .. continue to vote against PAP until they give equal rights to us gays

Well said! Very well said! Sarpork you.

[earth_tone]

Who else came in here right after LHL's speech? haha

 

[aedirn]

just take it one step at a time.

u can't have everything all at once in this country

[Guest Roy Tan]

 

[Guest Roy Tan]

We did it!

You may like to read about the long, tortuous history of Section 377A and how we arrived at where we are now:

https://the-singapore-lgbt-encyclopaedia.fandom.com/wiki/Section_377A_of_the_Penal_Code_(Singapore)

[fab]

On 8/21/2022 at 8:36 PM, lonely57 said:

but what does it mean if its repealed? we still have sex privately.

 

Can have sex loudly inside your room.

 

2 men can book a hotel room 😉🤣😜.

 

More gay saunas.

[fab]

With the repeal of the 377a but 

with the heterosexual marriage being enshrined in the Constitution, this seems to imply that constitution of LGBT marriage will not happen in the near future. 

[Guest Felix Tan]

Finally! So proud of SG making a stand !🏳️‍🌈

[Guest Marcus]

Still can't get married though. Singapore is so slow in these progressionStill can't get married though. Singapore is so slow in these progression

[Guest Keefe]

Finally we are doing the right thing! 🌈🏳️‍🌈💕 Love is love and love wins!

[Guest James]

As a Singaporean 🇸🇬, I'm proud and supportive of our government's move. It's definitely a step in the right direction towards curtailing discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community.

 

As a Buddhist 🙏🏼, Buddhism teaches me acceptance and love, and that ppl being LGBTQ+ isn't an issue. Only certain groups/religions think it is an issue.

 

Congratulations! 🏳️‍🌈

[Guest Two Steps Back]

This has got to be one of the worst "compromise" I have ever witnessed; a lose for all Singaporeans.

 

This marked, possibly the first time in our history, a loud minority religious group is able to coerce the gahment in changing the consitution to satisfy its demand. This surely must be a bigger victory for these fundies than if 377A is retained.

 

Not only that, there will be no change in how homosexuality will be taught in the schools; gay students will still suffer official discrimination, and can expect no help from  school counselors.

 

Books "advocating" homosexuality can still be removed from the public library upon a single complaint (https://twitter.com/OliviaParamour/status/1559772597499437056)

 

 

No change on how gays will be seen in the mainstream media too. Gays will continued to be portrayed as unhappy suicidal individuals with bad endings, or just plain pedophiles and psychopaths. No Oscar speeches celebrating homosexuality in film either, and Elton John holding hands with his husband will still be snipped.   

 

Shitty.

[Guest Guest]

This news even makes it to BBC:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-62545577

 

377A: Singapore to end ban on gay sex

 

Singapore will repeal a law that bans gay sex, effectively making it legal to be homosexual in the city-state.

The decision, announced by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on national TV, comes after years of fierce debate.

The city-state is known for its conservative values, but an increasing number of people have called for the colonial-era 377A law to be abolished.

Singapore is the latest place in Asia to move on LGBT rights, after India, Taiwan and Thailand.

The government's previous stance was to keep 377A but it also promised not to enforce the law, as a way to appease both sides.

But on Sunday night, Mr Lee said they would abolish the law as "I believe this is the right thing to do, and something that most Singaporeans will accept," he said.

He noted that "gay people are now better accepted" and scrapping 377A would bring the country's laws in line with "current social mores, and I hope it will bring some relief to gay Singaporeans".

But he also said the government would ensure better legal protection for the definition of marriage as one between a man and a woman. This would effectively make it harder for gay marriage to be legalised.

He said Singapore remains a traditional society with many keen on maintaining family and social norms.

Increasing LGBT support

Singapore inherited 377A from the British and chose to retain it after independence in 1965.

Though the law technically criminalises sex between men, it is effectively seen as a ban on homosexuality.

As it has not been actively enforced in recent years, a thriving and increasingly visible LGBT scene has developed in Singapore, including gay nightclubs.

But LGBT activists have long called for 377A to be scrapped, saying the law perpetuates social stigma against gay people, goes against Singapore's constitution which forbids discrimination, and has trickled down to influence other aspects of life.

For instance, any content deemed as "promoting homosexuality" can be banned from broadcast in Singapore, and TV shows and movies have in the past been censored.

The law is also at odds with Singapore's image as an open, diverse global financial hub and multinational companies based in the state have said it would hinder their efforts to attract talent.

While many in Singapore still support retaining 377A, in recent years the call for its abolition has grown stronger, with surveys showing growing support for LGBT rights.

At the same time both LGBT activists and conservatives - many of whom come from religious groups - have mobilised on both sides of the issue.

Protests and political gatherings are strictly regulated in Singapore, but every year LGBT activists hold the island's biggest civil society rally - known as Pink Dot - which draws tens of thousands of participants.

Meanwhile, conservatives have organised social media campaigns and events calling for the preservation of traditional values, and some churches have promoted controversial gay conversion programmes.

On Sunday, Mr Lee appealed to both camps for understanding.

In his National Day Rally speech - Singapore's equivalent of a State of the Union address - he said: "All groups should exercise restraint, because that is the only way we can move forward as a nation together."

Legacy of the British

Singapore is not the only former colony with a version of 377 - the law continues to exist in many parts of Asia, Africa and Oceania.

It was introduced by the colonial British government in India in the 19th Century, and forbade "carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal".

It soon spread outside of India as the British used the Indian Penal Code as the basis for criminal law codes in other territories they controlled. Several former British colonies such as Kenya, Malaysia and Myanmar still have some version of 377.

• The British law that left an anti-LGBTQ legacy in Asia
• Where it's illegal to be gay

In 2018, India's Supreme Court abolished 377 in a historic verdict, prompting hopes among activists that other former colonies would eventually follow suit.

In recent years, other parts of Asia have also moved to legalise gay marriage.

Taiwan became the first place to do so in 2019, and in June Thailand approved draft legislation allowing same-sex unions.

[Guest Syed]

377a was mostly symbolic in the 21st century, and an embarrassment for the government in international arenas. Repealing 377a but constitutionalising discrimination against the community changes nothing in terms of rights. It just allows anti-LGBT people to more legitimately discriminate against the community because we can't argue its unconstitutional (to do so), since the constitution itself will define discrimination as constitutional.

 

 I do think this is a milestone we should celebrate. It is a big deal and one for the history books. I just think we should fully appreciate the whole policy and what it means to the struggle for equality.

[Guest Matthew]

A positive step towards making our country a more progressive society. 
Archaic laws ostracizing people with differing sexual orientation have no place in a modern, forward-thinking world. Love, kindness, understanding and acceptance make us better people. 
🙂🌈🌈

[singalion]

On 8/21/2022 at 6:29 PM, jason said:

Parliament haven't approved can announce at National Day rally meh?

 

What's the PAP majority in parliament???

 

At least that law professor, damn nearly had written "bitch" , won't talk again about straws and noses...

 

I assume majority will be 80% with WP voting for change also....

 

 

 

 

[singalion]

To be honest, I see the move due to the negative comments at the yearly UN Human Rights Commission  reviews on Singapore. Now, is 1 human rights issue less. 

 

Second was that two very traditional Asian countries such as India and most recently Bhutan decriminalised gay sex. Singapore started looking very dated since then... and keeping the law but not enforcing it quite unpersuasive also...

 

 

[quanjishou]

just curious, since it is called 377A meaning there is a 377B or C?

if it is just one law it should be 377 right?

anyone knows 377B if there is?

[StockBottom]

On 8/21/2022 at 10:50 PM, quanjishou said:

just curious, since it is called 377A meaning there is a 377B or C?

if it is just one law it should be 377 right?

anyone knows 377B if there is?

 

Something about dead bodies and animals.

[singalion]

On 8/21/2022 at 1:11 PM, Guest Guest said:

If 377A is repealed, does it mean that gay couples in SG can hold hands, kiss passionately etc. (not sex in the open lah) in the open / out in the streets like the ang mohs do? 🤔

 

yes!

 

it actually means that you can have sex at home, hotel, any private place without fearing any police will raid your place while you have fun with a guy...

 

The most important is, nobody can change the stance on prosecution. 

 

While under 377A nobody was prosecuted there was always a risk that a different PM in future will instruct the Attorney-General to enforce the law. This has been taken away. 

 

What is of more interest to me now, is whether the stance of the Censor Board on gay movies, tv shows, etc will shift also and a kiss in an animated movie between 2 persons of the same sex will no longer be censored and also most important a homosexual relationship can be displayed in movie, tv as normal. 

 

 

[quanjishou]

On 8/21/2022 at 10:52 PM, StockBottom said:

 

Something about dead bodies and animals.

so all along there isnt any law against sex between females? so if no such law did not change the social norm or definition of marriage, why those str8 ppl so scared to repeal 377A then?

[Guest It's raining men]

Woo Hoo!!! Gays all over Singapore can have loud crazy sex anywhere, anytime, with anyone now!!! We will all be so fucking happy with our lives from now onwards!

[Guest Win Battles Lose Wars]

On 8/21/2022 at 10:53 PM, singalion said:

 

 

 

What is of more interest to me now, is whether the stance of the Censor Board on gay movies, tv shows, etc will shift also and a kiss in an animated movie between 2 persons of the same sex will no longer be censored and also most important a homosexual relationship can be displayed in movie, tv as normal. 

 

 

 

Very unlikely. The PAP Government's talk now of potentially enshrining the definition of marriage as between a biological male and female into the Constitution (something heavily driven by religious and conservative elements of society) with their supermajority (more than 2/3 of Parliament) is a very clear signal to the LGBT community: Do what you want in private, but in public this society will always be heterosexual, if not by societal norms, then by institutional definition. 

 

SG is currently at the stage of the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" time period in US LGBT history. Long long way to go. Conservative/religious biteback is going to be severe. 377A's official repeal and decriminalisation of sex between men is ultimately immaterial if you consider how SG has allowed gay saunas to open and operate for so long; they KNOW what is going on in those places yet they license them to operate anyway.