Homosexual activity should not be allowed

Dear SDP,

I have been a good reader of some of the articles in SDP website, and I’ve seen nice/intelligent articles written on CPF, economic justice, etc. which of my interest.

However, there is one sentence that caught my attention, hopefully by asking you, you would be able to help me to understand. You wrote:


“As a nation, we must not only show tolerance but also acceptance of our fellow citizens regardless of their race, religion, sexual orientation, or political persuasion. Discrimination of our fellow human beings has been one human frailty that has wreaked much destruction and misery.”

May I know what is meant by “regardless of sexual orientation”? Does it mean that “homosexual” parties are allowed to perform and legalise their “homosexual” activities. Many first world countries like US have begun to see the “negative side” of letting go “homosexual activity”. Homosexual activity should be differentiated from homosexuals themselves who are people who are capable of making mistakes, and deserve a second chance.  “We forgive and love the sinners, yet reject the sin and encourage the sinner to
step away in a better life away from sin.”

We need to help them to let go that “sexual tendency” and let them live in a normal/traditional marriage as stated in many countries as well as all religions: “a nuptial union between a man and a woman.”

Many studies done by secular and religious groups have indicated that homosexual activities are causing negative things in the medium and long term.

Definition, Pro & Cons

One of the solution


SDP: Dear Michael,

As we have stated in our manifesto, the Singapore Democrats do not discriminate against any segment of our society and that includes homosexuals. Discrimination has led many societies to much chaos and strife: Jews in Nazi Germany, blacks in apartheid South Africa, women in rural South Asia, Muslims in India, Hindus in Pakistan, protestants in Ireland, Catholics in China, and so on. Human beings must learn to live peaceably with one another with genuine acceptance of our differences and beliefs.

Many of SDP’s members have their own personal faiths and beliefs but that must not supercede the principle that the SDP believes in and that is tolerance. For example, our Christian members may not agree with our Muslim members on religious doctrine but we all work together to ensure that our freedom to practice our faiths are protected and agree to disagree on our religious beliefs and practitioners. Imagine the chaos and turmoil that would result if Christians tried to ban Muslims from practicing their faith and vice versa. 

In a similar vein we may or may not agree with what homosexuals do in their privacy, or what Falungong practitioners believe in, or the kind of music heavy-metal rock singers play, but the SDP believes that these people have a right to live their lives according to how they see fit – as long as they do not do harm to themselves or other persons, and the property around them, or advocate violence and hatred.

If one believes that homosexuality is a sin, then one should persuade homosexuals to change their ways. But to adopt it as a party policy and, by logical extension, turn that policy into legislation when the party becomes the government is both impractical and undesirable. Morality cannot be legislated; it must be lived and experienced in a personal way.

%d bloggers like this: