Sexuality rights and procreation
Many people in our society condemn or disapprove of homosexuality or deny gay rights as human rights simply because, as they claim, homosexuals cannot procreate.
COMMENT Many people in our society condemn or disapprove of homosexuality or deny gay rights as human rights simply because, as they claim, homosexuals cannot procreate.
According to them, homosexuals do not contribute to the reproduction and survival of the human race, and therefore homosexuality is wrong. Simply put, these people believe in the mandatory enforcement of the procreational model of sexuality.
Is procreation the sole meaning of life? Is it the most important goal in sexual relations? If it were, then the sale and use of contraceptives by married or unmarried heterosexual couples should be prohibited, as their use would be sinful behavior, as Catholicism believes.
If one believes that procreation is everything in sexual relationships, then one has to say to heterosexual couples that if they cannot procreate for whatever reason, or are unwilling to procreate, they cannot and should not be falling in love, as their love is abnormal, and an abomination.
Thus, it is ridiculous, at best, for those who oppose homosexuals to appeal to procreation in order to promote their definition of ‘normal' sexuality.
Do we prohibit heterosexuals to love and to marry if they are knowingly barren? Do we criminalise marriages between people who are over 65 years of age or who can no longer procreate?
Do we say to heterosexuals that they cannot love if they cannot or refuse to procreate?
Many are not aware of the fact that Malaysia's penal codes 377 (A) and (B), that forbid sexual practices ‘against nature,' have their roots in England. In 1533, Henry VIII secularised what, until then, had been religious injunctions against nonprocreative sex when he broke with the Catholic Church.
Since Malaysia is a secular state and we are no longer colonised by the English, we must seriously consider outlawing codes 377 (A) and (B).
Varying attitudes towards contraception
In this twenty-first century, not many people believe that procreation or reproduction should be the central purpose of marriage, or the sole purpose of sexual relations.
Even many Catholic priests would not teach that the use of artificial contraceptives is a sin, even though it is a mortal sin according to traditional church teaching. Some priests even have contradicted
Humanae Vitae
and have stated that contraceptive use is not sinful.
Life is not all about procreation. Besides, we should recognise that sexual orientation is not about what one does.
Just like race and gender, sexual orientation is a deep-seated characteristic of a person which has profound influence and meaning for one's form of self-expression and sense of happiness.
Being respectful to others is to see them as human persons. Even though they might be different from us in many ways, they are human, nonetheless.
Thus, they should be treated as such, instead of as inert objects. People need to know what homosexuality is and that gay people are not pathetic beings, but creative moral and social agents.
Homosexuality is not wrong, and, as a matter of fact, it is good, especially if one realises that the overpopulation of human beings has put heavy burdens on our global ecosystem.
As David Pimentel, a Cornell University ecologist, once stated, the global population must be slashed. If current trends persist, by 2100 we will have a population of 12 billion to 15 billion people and an "apocalyptic worldwide scene of absolute misery, poverty, disease, and starvation."
How could a reasonable person inveigh against non-procreative sex, and be oblivious to the issue of overpopulation that will affect many lives negatively and will threaten the welfare of the human race?
Some people who oppose homosexuality even say that if we were to normalise homosexual practices or legalise gay marriage, everyone would want to be gay and our human race would be brought into extinction.
I am always flabbergasted by this argument against homosexuality, because it assumes that homosexuality is so appealing that once our society accepts it, everyone will want to be gay.
As a gay man, I have to say that this understanding of homosexuality is very wrong, but I am flattered, nonetheless.
REV O YOUNG is an ordained Christian minister at MCC New York. He holds two masters degrees in both sociology and theology. Currently he lives in New York city and teaches sociology at St Peter’s College. He has published 20 books on sociology, theology and sexuality. He is also a columnist for Sin Chew Daily . He is currently finishing his doctoral degrees in sociology and theology.


Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.