Thursday, April 21, 2005

Drowsy Afternoon

The question of whether homosexuality is wrong is best answered by you. I'm not going to get into a debate about sexual preferences. It is you and your faith. Not mine. Not mine to worry about.

This whole idea of homosexual marriage probably isn't particularly of importance here in Malaysia. But I want to say my piece anyway. Relevant or not.

Other than the fact that there is practically no legal protection for homosexuals (plus sodomy is illegal in many many countrie) in terms of being in a marriage/partnership (no divorce laws, no tax breaks, no alimony, no inheritance laws, no children adoption, et cetera), there is also an issue of why legislate love?

Yup. You heard that right. I think no one can legislate who we love. Or who we should not love, that way. As long as they are not doing anything that harms society at large (well, to some, sodomy is harmful, and painful :P). Of course this is subject to the acceptance of the general populace. That's politics, I'm only speaking as an observer. And who are we to decide they should live like the rest of mundane us?

Now, extrapolate that idea. Can we then say we shouldn't legislate love even if it involves polygamy (religious rights aside)? As in, why can't a person marry more than one person if she/he loves them and it is acceptable to all parties involved? Must the one man one woman concept remain?

Or why can't a brother marry his sister or a close cousin (I'm not sure about this part. Can you marry a close cousin? ie. say your mom's niece)? Incest? Yes. It is incest. But aren't they adults capable of freewill and rational thinking, whereby there is no undue power being exercised? You see, there was this case a long separated siblings. They met, and fell in love. And got married. And had a child with much difficulties. Later on, they realised that they are actually siblings, hence the biological difficulties in conceiving healthily. If I recollect, the state asked them to separate (forgive me, it was a long time ago, and my memory is better used for studying :P). Not sure what happened after that. The point is, they didn't know and they love each other deeply. In a romantic-sexual way. That is sad.

Must we intervene in such circumstance? Adults, not abused/manipulated youngsters in this context. Now, do we legislate romantic love?


At April 21, 2005 4:47 pm, Blogger Solbi-wan Kenobi said...

Lemme ask you this: if you imply there should not be legislative limits on human relations, would you accept that there be no limits in all other aspects of human activity? Like those activities which society today consider criminal e.g. prostitution, bloody vendettas, slavery etc.. People who support these activities will give similar arguments as yours.

I agree romantic love should not be legislated.

At the same time, 'limits' that we impose on ourselves is what makes us human and not animals.

Despite my own fascist leanings (*grin*), I still support all efforts to limit government/legislative oversight in 'legitimate' endeavours. But I still have to draw the line someplace.

At April 24, 2005 7:19 pm, Blogger Resurrected said...

solb1 : nay, that's not what I'm implying :) I'm not for a free for all. there is a distinct difference there, in general, it doesn't harm anyone.

my questions were more of asking, where do we draw the line?

when it comes to homosexual marriage, it comes close to subjugation of a minority group, i think.


Post a Comment

<< Home