Quote:
Originally Posted by ClockWorkAngel
No HK's laws are independent, for a very long time. They have a democracy there, and might have something like 377a in it.
|
For lack of a better source:
"The rationale behind this law (Section 377A of the Penal Code) was originally based on English criminal law, which sought to prohibit sodomy. It was incorporated by the British colonial administration in the late 1850s, in particular by Lord Thomas Macaulay, who drafted the Indian Penal Code to replace Hindu criminal law which held sway over most of India at the time. Under Hindu law, consensual intercourse between members of the same sex was never an offence. In Macaulay's draft however, Section 377 criminalised 'carnal intercourse against the order of nature' which became punishable by harsh penalties.
"Section 377 became effective as part of the new British-imposed Indian Penal Code from Jan 1, 1862, and was adopted by the colonial masters, also as Section 377 into the Straits Settlements Penal Code in 1871. The cloned and transplanted law came into operation in the Straits Settlements of Singapore, Penang and Malacca on September 16, 1872.
"Similarly worded legislation was also introduced by the British into their other Asian colonies such as Hong Kong (repealed in 1991), Malaya (now Malaysia) and Burma in the late 19th century."
- Wikipedia
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClockWorkAngel
I don't understand why people are comparing Homosexuality and incest and pedophilia. They're different. It's a matter of consent. Not a matter of which is deviantial and such.
|
Because the supporters of such laws frequently invoke the slippery-slope argument to push their case. They believe that if they don't draw the line at forbidding homosexual sex, very soon, "militant liberals" would also want to decriminalise incest and paedophilia.
Basically, they are usually conservative people — frequently religiously inspired — who refuse to evaluate each type of behaviour in its own context. They see evil everywhere around them, without stopping to think what makes something "evil" in the first place.