377a

Over the years, you've probably heard the common refrain, "377A unfairly discriminates against homosexual men".There's just one problem though... It doesn't.

We've commonly heard the refrain, "It's a sin, but it shouldn't be a crime".Is that true, though?This opinion piece takes a look at some of the common arguments for repealing S377A to see if they hold water.

Like many other places, social and moral norms are increasingly contested in Singapore. One site of such contestation is Section 377A. While arguments in favor of repeal have asserted identity and self-fulfillment based on SOGI, arguments in response have focused almost exclusively on the moral and social consequences of repeal, revealing conspicuous gaps in conservative discourse.The challenge and opportunity for conservatives of all creeds is to articulate a proper anthropology and address the deep search for meaning without descending into false utopianism or ideological dogmatism.

We take a look at the legislative material that validated s. 377A's purpose, and the additional material which was deemed irrelevant by the court.

Summarising the High Court's 2020 Judgments on the three rejected constitutional challenges to 377A