Honestly, what do you think of this topic? From your point of view, christian or otherwise.
Straits Times, April 5, 2007
PROPOSED CHANGES TO PENAL CODE
By K.C. Vijayan
Turning to sexual offences - in particular, Section 377 of the Penal Code, which deals with sexual acts ‘against the order of nature’ - the society said the MHA’s proposal to retain homosexuality as an offence in Section 377A ‘cannot be justified’.
It described the retention as ‘out of step with legal norms in the modern law’.
The society stressed that it was not arguing that homosexuality is morally acceptable, and said a ’significant minority’ wanted the provision to remain, but the majority view prevailed.
The MHA’s approach is that homosexuality is not widely accepted here. Having said that, the ministry has said it will not be ‘proactive’ in enforcing this law against consensual acts that take place in private.
But the society sees this as an admission that the section is ‘out-of-step’ and ‘runs the risk of bringing the law into disrepute’. It suggests a complete review, and a new chapter in the Penal Code on sexual offences.
The society, expressing its gratitude that the MHA consulted both the public and it, also urged that a commission be set up to review the reforms.
Contacted yesterday, an MHA spokesman said all views received were being studied
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Penal Code Amendment
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
1 comment:
Am fine with the changes to recognise homosexuality as acceptable. Feel that any law which is as ambiguous as ‘against the order of nature’should be reconsidered. Considering that the order of nature also require me to kill off the dominant male in society and his offspring and mate with his wife I think maybe going against it sometimes is not a bad idea.
Post a Comment