2022: Sought clarification in Parliament on MSF’s position on section 377A of the Penal Code and the changing societal attitudes towards marriage and family

Mdm Chairman, I have three clarifications to ask. The first is to Minister Masagos Zulkifli. First, I thank him for reiterating the importance of strengthening family resilience and his articulation of what family means. Recently, Minister K Shanmugam made a statement on section 377A of the Penal Code and the changing societal attitudes towards marriage and family. So, my first clarification to the Minister is whether he could give us the Ministry's position on this.

https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/#/sprs3topic?reportid=budget-1897

https://fb.watch/s1ANrwk3Lw/

‍

2007: Refuted Siew Kum Hong's "tyranny of the majority" argument

With regard to section 377A, I have heard many stories and quotes that Mr Siew Kum Hong has related about homosexuals living in Singapore.  It is difficult not to be moved by them.  At the same time, I know that his accusations about the tyranny of the majority are false.  This matter is one of principle and not of numbers.  If we acted with the tyranny of the majority, why do we have the GRC system, where ethnic minorities are protected?  Or if we were truly trying to be on the side of numbers, why did we not go along with the Malaysians in 1963 when they asked us to be part of a Malay Malaysia?  Or in the case of Myanmar, why do we not side with China or India, and take a completely "hands off approach"?  The numbers are certainly there.  Or why do we not be like the US or Europe?  The number of people may be smaller but the guns are larger.

https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/#/topic?reportid=018_20071023_S0003_T0002

‍

2007: Slippery slope of repealing Section 377A is real

Sir, this is the real slippery slope.  If we abdicate debate and discourse for mere accounting, we would not be upholding our role as Members of Parliament.  I believe that this debate has given an airing to both sides of the argument.  My own view is a simple one.  I would be the mother who loves her gay son.  I would be the man who loves his gay brother.  I would be the first to stand up for a gay man's right to be treated as an equal under the law.  Yet, I am a Member of Parliament who believes that, as a nation, our families are not ready to have an open acceptance of the gay lifestyle, including same-sex marriages and gay adoption of young children.  I believe that these key institutions would be weakened by the repeal of section 377A.  This view, like this debate, is a matter of principle, not of numbers.

Sir, I support the Bill.

https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/#/topic?reportid=018_20071023_S0003_T0002

‍

2007: As an MP, would not support pro-gay policies

Yet, I am a Member of Parliament who believes that, as a nation, our families are not ready to have an open acceptance of the gay lifestyle, including same-sex marriages and gay adoption of young children.  I believe that these key institutions would be weakened by the repeal of section 377A.  This view, like this debate, is a matter of principle, not of numbers. Sir, I support the Bill.

https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/#/topic?reportid=018_20071023_S0003_T0002