Homosexual Law (Press, 16 June 1967)

On 16 June 1967, a number of letters were published in response to a discussion on the legal and moral implications of homosexuality, triggered by comments from Varian J. Wilson. These correspondents express varied views regarding the nature of homosexuality and its treatment under the law. K. Chamberlain criticises Wilson's assertion that morality should guide legal boundaries, arguing that some immoral acts indeed warrant legal sanctions. He points out that there are no incarcerated individuals purely for homosexuality due to its private nature, as opposed to acts that disturb public order. Chamberlain asserts that reformers acknowledge homosexuality might be a perversion but maintain that unenforceable laws, like those against homosexuality, ultimately harm society rather than help it. J. S. Tanner argues from a psychological perspective, suggesting that morality requires choice and that most homosexuals do not choose their orientation. Tanner believes that punishment cannot change one's sexual orientation and says that public disapproval serves as a sufficient deterrent. He expresses sympathy for those who grapple with desires they cannot control and condemns societal persecution of homosexuals as either ignorant or immoral. Another letter, which remains unsigned, defends homosexuals by challenging the notion of them as “subhumans.” The writer, identifying as a heterosexual, recounts positive experiences with openly gay individuals, countering stereotypes of homosexuals as predators. They warn against the dangers of applying broad laws based on flawed perceptions, comparing historical extremes of moral policing to those who demonise homosexuals. Responding to the ongoing debate, an author named Broad-Minded suggests that society could benefit from legalising homosexuality for individuals over 21, similar to laws in Holland and Scandinavian countries. They argue that such reform would lead to a decrease in child exploitation, advocating for a more understanding and open-minded approach to homosexuality. Overall, the correspondence reflects a significant tension in societal views on homosexuality in 1967, with calls for reform countering traditional assumptions about morality and legality. The letters collectively advocate for greater understanding and acceptance of homosexuals, questioning the validity of existing prejudices and the effectiveness of current laws.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand