HPB sexuality FAQs smacks of liberationist propaganda

From ‘HPB’s sexuality FAQs undermine family’, 6 Feb 2014, contribution by Lawrence Khong, Opinion, MyPaper

The FAQs On Sexuality page on the Health Promotion Board (HPB) website is shocking and deeply upsetting. The tone of the entire article gives the impression that HPB condones same-sex relationships and promotes homosexual practice as something normal. The author appears to have taken sides on a highly contentious and politicised subject. Here, I address five issues covered in the FAQs.

ISSUE 1

The FAQs draw a false equation between heterosexual and homosexual relationships in a manner that smacks of liberationist propaganda intended to mainstream homosexuality.

ISSUE 2

HPB adopted a biased and selective approach by naming only a pro-LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) group to help those who are looking for support. We are disappointed that HPB’s original article referenced only one option for help, namely Oogachaga. Its hotline is run by specially trained LGBTs or LGBT-affirming counsellors.

To exclude other available avenues of care, such as Liberty League and Focus on the Family, is to discriminate in favour of LGBT-affirming organisations. This is both unjust and harmful.

Lawrence Khong is an avid supporter of the arcane 377A law that criminalises gay sex and believes that repealing it is a ‘looming threat’ to the family unit. His idea of ‘avenue of care’ is undoubtedly seeking a ‘cure’ for homosexuality. One of the support groups cited, Liberty League, aims to help people who want to ‘overcome same-sex attractions’. It is also partly financed by the Government. The ‘Focus on the Family‘ website is largely silent on LGBT issues, and pretty useless if you want to know more about sexual identity. What is ‘unjust and harmful’ is misdirecting gays who need counselling to what is secretly ‘sexual rehab’, the risks and consequences of which remain unknown.

Oogachaga, on the other hand, embraces LGBTQ individuals and ‘diversity’. The site itself has a wealth of resources for those interested, though it can be challenging telling your LGBTs from your GLBTI (gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, intersex). Then there are the bears, cubs and G-men from the ‘Bear Project’, which celebrates big gay men though it also sounds like a special interest group for ‘furries’.  HPB somehow deleted links to Oogachaga among other support groups after FAQ launch, and it remains to be seen if the conservative tyranny of Lawrence Khong, among other religious types, had anything to do with it.

ISSUE 3

…We disagree with the claim that moral objection to homosexual behaviour is based on “irrational fear, disgust, or hatred” of homosexuals or bisexuals because they “do not conform to traditional sexual roles and stereotypes”. Far from it. Moral objection is based on the intrinsic physiological nature of the male and female bodies.

I think what Khong meant is ‘human male and female bodies’. Anyone who reads beyond the Holy Bible would have heard about same-sex shenanigans going on even among our primate, God-created, cousins.  A pastor and magician, Khong is even claiming to be an expert in not just human biology, but ALL biology.

ISSUE 4

The FAQs fail to give an accurate picture and clear warnings of the health risks posed by alternative sex. According to medical research and mental-health studies, the threat is real and severe. Homosexuals have a shorter lifespan, more sexually transmitted infections and more health problems than the general population.

General population meaning compared to heterosexuals? What does Khong mean by ‘health problems’? If they do experience greater problems such as depression, could it be because of the rest of us – the ‘conservative majority’? A ridiculous, sweeping statement made with all fire and brimstone emotion and not an ounce of rational thinking or data to back it up, using annoyingly vague categories to disguise the fact that you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

ISSUE 5

The FAQs make an unproven assertion that homosexuals can have long-lasting relationships and, in this way, the FAQs clearly promote a “mainstreaming homosexuality as normal” bias. We disagree because this claim is only theoretical. Some research findings show a different trend. Homosexuals register a higher incidence of short-lived relationships and sexual violence.

Looking at the rate of cheating, divorces and domestic violence among ‘normal’ couples, I find this assertion rather hard to swallow. We can, however, study the rates of divorce among same-sex couples eventually, since SEVENTEEN other countries in world have already legalised gay marriage. Lawrence would have none of that, obviously, and even if someone could convince him that gay marriages can work long term, he’ll pull some ‘research findings’ out of his magician’s hat to support his point that homosexuals are worse off than heterosexuals.

What I would like to see, however, is a live debate on national TV between pastor Khong and gay champions like Alex Au, though the entertainment of such a confrontation may be ruined by the likelihood of Khong making himself vanish into thin air when he’s on the verge of losing a critical argument.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: