Fears Of Homosexual Vote ‘from Ignorance’ (Press, 4 June 1975)

On 3 June 1975, Rev. F.C. Donnelly, a senior lecturer in community health at Auckland Medical School, expressed concerns regarding upcoming legislation affecting homosexuals, scheduled for discussion by Parliament in two weeks. The concerns were specifically directed at an amendment proposed by Dr. G.A. Wall, a Government MP for Porirua, as part of the Crimes Amendment Bill. Donnelly criticized the potential for MPs to vote "from a position of ignorance," citing a lack of contemporary understanding and research regarding homosexuality among lawmakers. Donnelly pointed out that many members of Parliament were relying on outdated myths about homosexuality, which he deemed factually incorrect. He challenged arguments made by Dr. Wall regarding what constitutes normal versus abnormal sexuality, emphasising that modern science recognises a spectrum of sexual orientations. He noted that it is commonplace for adolescents to experience a phase of homosexual attraction, countering claims that such tendencies could be altered by external influences or propaganda. The discussion further highlighted statements from the Minister of Police, Mr. Connelly, who suggested that homosexual individuals required mental treatment rather than legal reform. Donnelly refuted this, stating that homosexuality is no longer classified as a psychiatric disorder. He also addressed comments from Opposition MP Mr. T.F. Gill, who, despite acknowledging the flaws in current law, opposed changes that could grant homosexuals "an air of respectability." Donnelly expressed concern that lawmakers might proceed without adequate education on the subject matter. Moreover, Donnelly stressed the importance of open conversations about sexuality, which, he argued, were crucial in coping with feelings of guilt and shame. He cautioned that restrictive measures, such as those proposed in Dr. Wall's amendment, might lead to a detrimental environment surrounding discussions of homosexuality, especially in educational settings. He noted that while Wall’s amendment permitted counselling from doctors and clergy, these professionals often lacked specialized training in sexual identity issues, which are best addressed by school counsellors and trained social workers. Donnelly concluded by asserting that the existing law on homosexuality was difficult to enforce, predicting that any new measures proposed by Dr. Wall would likely face similar enforcement challenges. He called for a more educated and thorough approach to discussions on sexuality, emphasising the relevance of these conversations in aiding young people as they navigate the complexities of sexual identity.

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