EMPLOYEES should not be penalised for refusing to support pro-LGBT workplace diversity efforts, several Members of Parliament (MPs) said on the first day of debate on the repeal of 377A, a colonial-era law criminalising sex between men.

At least four MPs said that some employees were worried about being pressured to attend pro-LGBT events, or being shunned as unsupportive. Mountbatten MP Lim Biow Chuan asked the government to ensure that no organisation or company can “compel their staff... to participate in gay community projects if they do not subscribe to the same values”.

In the National Day Rally in August, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had announced that Singapore would repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code while amending the Constitution to prevent legal challenges to the definition of marriage.

The debate on both changes began on Monday (Nov 28), with 22 MPs and three political officeholders speaking on issues ranging from the erosion of family values to the need to protect LGBT Singaporeans from stigma and discrimination.

The five Workers’ Party (WP) MPs who spoke were split between supporting and opposing the repeal, as WP chief Pritam Singh had lifted the party whip to let them vote and speak freely. Noting that the People’s Action Party (PAP) had not done the same, Singh said: “Given the varied public opinion on the impending repeal of 377A, there is a risk that the democratic value of Parliament could be diluted if the views of Singaporeans on this subject are not adequately ventilated in this House.”

In his opening speech, Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam reiterated that Singapore is “more than ready” to repeal 377A, and that it is the right thing to do. Continuing to leave the matter to the courts would be an “abdication of duty”, putting political capital over doing what is good for Singaporeans, he added.

A NEWSLETTER FOR YOU

Friday, 8.30 am

Asean Business

Business insights centering on South-east Asia's fast-growing economies.

Sign Up

Ang Mo Kio MP Darryl David said that repealing 377A sends a strong signal that Singapore recognises and respects individual differences. Tampines MP Baey Yam Keng supported the repeal so that future generations would not “be restricted by today’s traditions and norms”, saying: “Instead, we should advocate for more freedom for them to decide how they want to live their lives.”

But others, like WP’s Gerald Giam and PAP’s Cheryl Chan, raised concerns that the repeal could lead to an erosion of traditional values or a normalisation of homosexuality in public life.

MPs stressed that the issue must be handled delicately, to avoid sowing discord among Singaporeans and polarising society, as seen in countries like the United States.

Minister for Family and Development Masagos Zulkifli stressed that groups advocating for either side should not “push beyond what is acceptable”.

“For all the diverse groups that may be for or against homosexuality, no one can violate the laws of the land, or instigate violence or intimidation towards others or a particular group,” said the minister. “We are protected by the constitutional right to be free to profess, practise and propagate our religion, but the right is not absolute.”