An Appeal to Reason (and Love) on 11/24

On Saturday, Taiwanese must use their precious vote to cast the devil of unreason, of lies and maliciousness into the dark pit where it belongs.

 

This coming Saturday, millions of Taiwanese will head for polling stations nationwide to elect new heads of local government. Concurrently with the quadrennial elections, a total of ten referendum questions will be presented on a variety of issues — four relating to energy, one to the name under which Taiwanese athletes should compete at international sports events, and five to marriage and gender education. Christian-led anti LGBT groups are behind three of the questions that voters will be asked to decide upon, all aiming to restrict marriage rights for LGBT couples and what children learn about in school (see table at the end of this article).

After hopeful momentum since 2015, what with the election of a “gay-friendly” Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in the January 2016 and a landmark ruling by the Council of Grand Justices in May 2017, the issue of marriage equality in Taiwan has sadly come to this. Indecisiveness on the part of the government has given anti-LGBT groups the time, space and oxygen they needed to intensify a campaign that, at its core, seeks to legalize discrimination and prevent young minds from learning about certain natural facts about human sexuality. The human rights of a minority — that of being able to form a family and to be treated as equal citizens — are to be decided by plebiscite

As if referenda were not problematic enough in and of themselves, the campaign organized by the anti-LGBT coalition has utilized fear, intimidation, legal threats, recalls, dishonesty, and a large amount of disinformation — all backed by significant financial resources — to sway the voting public. Back in November 2013 I exposed the role that Cher Wang, chairwoman of HTC Corp, was likely playing in financing the anti-LGBT movement and inviting American preachers from extremist churches/cults like the International House of Prayer (IHOP) to Taiwan. An investigative report published this week in Apple Daily provides new details.

Through sermons, propaganda, mass rallies, foreign assistance and the spread of disinformation via social media, the anti-LGBT campaign has succeeded in affecting public attitudes on the subject, with an increase in the number of those who oppose marriage equality, especially among the elderly in rural parts of the country.

Throughout all this, the anti-LGBT side presented itself as a protector of children and of the institution of marriage from a dangerous foreign import. Despite indubitable evidence that the majority of its claims were little more than lies and confabulation with no grounding in science and in defiance of evidence elsewhere, the coalition benefited from a moral equivalence, sustained in part by government indecision, which turned the whole affair into a supposedly normal dispute between two rational sides. Consequently, a discriminatory discourse that, without question, constituted libel and hate speech, and which relied on anti-scientific “evidence” and the narrow interpretation of a religious text that governs the spiritual beliefs of no more than 5 percent of Taiwanese society, received equal treatment to the argument that members of the LGBT community are entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals.

Those of us who countered the disinformation and who exposed the principal actors in the anti-LGBT camp were subjected to attack: we were anti-democratic, intolerant of religion, or meddlers in Taiwan’s domestic affairs.

If I sound like I am mocking these groups, that’s because that is what they deserve from us — that and, as the late Christopher Hitchens once added, contempt.

As a result, we have referendum questions on Saturday that met the threshold using a campaign of lies. Groups of people who have shown utter disregard for equality, reason, tolerance and science are now in a position to determine the future treatment of members of the LGBT community and the education that young Taiwanese will receive. Before you cast a vote on Saturday, ask yourself if you are comfortable with the idea that the masterminds of this whole campaign build upon a form of Evangelical Christianity that seeks to impose its views all over the world (this is known as dominionism), that is both cultish and vehemently antithetical to scientific evidence, that has inspired laws in Africa that criminalize homosexuality, that narrowly defines marriage as a conveyor belt for procreation, and that would relegate women to the kitchen (and bedroom when procreation is called for — missionary-style, it goes without saying). The very people who have turned this campaign of hate into a seemingly legal democratic endeavor have warned us that marriage equality would, among other things, result in an epidemic of AIDS, incest, bestiality, rape, the homosexualization of an entire society (merely being in contact with, or being raised by, a homosexual will supposedly turn a heterosexual person into an homosexual, as will the consumption of gay pornography, as if the latter act was not itself the result of an individual’s natural proclivities), the end of the “bloodline,” dwindling birth rates and other ills. Pathologically (and worryingly) obsessed with sex, the leadership of that coalition has portrayed homosexuals as deviants eternally thirsting for the flesh (especially after the sun goes down), with or without the consent of would-be victims. It has claimed that the legalization of same sex unions would force the disappearance of the terms “mama” and “baba,” and result in persecution for those who obstinately hold on to those terms. They have claimed that gender education would not limit itself to “brainwashing” fragile young minds into becoming homosexuals, but that teachers would be forced by the government to also teach bestiality (the most alarming part about this particular piece of disinformation is that it was picked up by one of Taiwan’s main TV stations and sounded convincing enough that otherwise intelligence people who received it on their phones felt compelled to ask friends close to the Tsai Ing-wen administration whether such plans indeed existed). Those groups favor gender and sex education which would limit information about contraceptives, safe sex and other matters; experience in U.S. states that have adopted such restrictive curricula shows that this would likely result in an increase in unwanted births and sexually transmitted diseases Those same communities have silenced, threatened, and in some cases expelled co-religionists who disagreed with them, which reaffirms the view that the religious groups behind this movement are totalitarian and anti-democratic — and yet willing to use democratic instruments to achieve their nefarious objectives. They have shown deep resentment for other religions, including Buddhist practices, which are to be treated with fear and avoidance. Members of those groups have yelled at members of the LGBT community, wished them death and perdition; they have spat upon, and on some occasions physically assaulted, young LGBT individuals, their supporters, and members of the press. Those groups believe that a personal relationship with Jesus Christ will earn one diamonds, the ability to see auras around homosexuals, and to wield a sword to slice the gay away; they ululate, get into a trance, break into prayer publicly, believe that prayer can “heal” homosexuals, and have memorized a script passed on from above which does not brook any deviation (I have tried to have conversations with them and realized I would have better chances of success debating a recorder).

If I sound like I am mocking these groups, that’s because that is what they deserve from us — that and, as the late Christopher Hitchens once added, contempt.

It became evident long ago that it is impossible to have a debate with the core members of this group. Theirs is an inflexible Religious Law masquerading as true love and altruism. Those groups, furthermore, refuse to take account of the large body of evidence, in countries that have already legalized same-sex unions, that societies become more, not less, cohesive after legalization: the birth rate did not drop, there was no increase in AIDS or incest, rape, bestiality or intercourse with inanimate objects (come to think of it, heterosexuals do have frequent sex with the inanimate, from inflatable dolls to a variety of vibrators — but this is, dare I say, slippery territory, given that this involves pleasure in sexuality and is highly unlikely to lead to the procreative act). Moreover, the citizens of countries that have done the right thing and legalized same-sex marriage have not become confused, and the terms “mama” and “baba” are as frequently used as they were before politicians took the necessary extra step and made the decision. My mother is lesbian, and she has married a woman. My father, her former husband, also has remarried (a woman). I still call my mother “maman,” and my father “papa.” As to their partners, it’s really quite simple — they are my parents’ partners, spouses, wives, and when needed, I can simply call them buy the names they were given by their parents. And I, their offspring, am neither confused about my sexuality nor in any way was I shaped by my parents’ sexual preferences. It’s in my DNA: I am attracted to woman and am married to a wonderful one.

It is really that simple. We have all the evidence we need, and all the scientific proof to know that no great harm — no harm, in fact — will come to this society if marriage equality is adopted and if we teach what needs to be taught to young children about the mysteries, pleasures and risks involved in human sexuality. Unfortunately, through indecision and the hoisting of a false moral equivalence, our government has allowed a group of obscurantists to throw us into an age of confusion, where discrimination is love, and where confabulation has as much weight as scientific evidence. And it has given them a chance to curtail human rights, to impose antediluvian “values” that go against the current of human progress and the arc of justice.

On Saturday, give reason — and love — a chance. And with that precious vote, help cast that devil of unreason, of lies and maliciousness into the dark pit where it belongs.

 

You might also like

---

More from Society & Culture

---

Editor Picks

---