AI Chat Search Browse Media On This Day Map Quotations Timeline Research Free Datasets Remembered About Contact
☶ Go up a page

Crimes Amendment Bill (1974)

In 1974 Venn Young, National MP for Egmont, introduced the Crimes Amendment Bill. The Bill sought to legalise homosexual activity between consenting adults in private. The age of consent was set at 21. The Bill failed at its second reading: 34 votes against, 29 votes in favour and 24 abstentions. This recording contains part of the second reading debate in Parliament on 4 July 1975.

Audio and Text Download mp3Plain Text (for Gen AI)

Details

  • 0:00:00 - Logan Sloane (Hobson, National Party)
  • 0:01:44 - Keith Holyoake (Pahiatua, National Party)
  • 0:16:05 - Bill Birch (Franklin, National Party)
  • 0:23:20 - Gavin Downie (Pakuranga, National Party)
  • 0:31:10 - Jim Bolger (King Country, National Party)
  • 0:43:30 - Joe Walding (Palmerston North, Labour Party)
  • 0:46:38 - Ken Comber (Wellington Central, National Party)
  • 0:54:30 - John (Jack) Marshall (Karori, National Party)
  • 1:03:30 - Venn Young (Egmont, National Party)
  • 1:14:25 - Vote [result not included in this recording]

A full transcript of this debate is available online via Hansard

Summary

The recording captures a pivotal moment in New Zealand's legislative history. This recording features a detailed debate on the Crimes Amendment Bill introduced by National MP Venn Young. The bill aimed to decriminalize homosexual acts between consenting adults in private, setting the age of consent at 21. The recording documents various parliamentary members' viewpoints, encapsulating a spectrum of opinions on the bill, morality, legality, and societal implications of homosexuality.

Several members voiced concerns about the bill's potential impact on societal morals and the family unit, questioning whether decriminalizing homosexuality would lead to increased acceptance or normalization of homosexual behavior. There was a strong emphasis on differentiating between homosexual tendencies and behavior, with some members expressing discomfort with homosexual acts while advocating for compassion towards individuals with homosexual inclinations.

Arguments against the bill often centered on the belief that homosexual behavior is unnatural, with fears of it leading to societal degeneration. The debate touched on the law's role in upholding society's moral standards, with some members arguing that morality and legality should not be conflated and that existing laws, even if infrequently enforced, serve as a moral guidepost.

Proponents of the bill argued from a standpoint of equality, humanity, and logic, emphasizing the unfairness and inconsistency of the law, particularly concerning the different treatment of male and female homosexual acts. They highlighted the social and psychological impacts of criminalizing homosexuality, including fear of detection, potential for blackmail, and the stigma attached to being homosexual.

The debate was marked by a mixture of personal convictions, societal concerns, and legal considerations. It reflected a time of significant societal change and the struggle to reconcile longstanding beliefs with evolving attitudes towards homosexuality and human rights.

This summary is created using Generative AI. Although it is based on the recording's transcription, it may contain errors or omissions. Click here to learn more about how this summary was created.

Record date:4th July 1975
Audio courtesy of:Lesbian and Gay Archives of New Zealand (LAGANZ)
Location:Parliament buildings, Wellington
View on Map
URL:https://www.pridenz.com/crimes_amendment_bill_second_reading.html