Homosexual Law Change (Press, 26 March 1985)

In March 1985, the debate over homosexual law reform in New Zealand became a focal point of public discourse, reflecting a sharp divide in opinions. Letters to the editor revealed a range of viewpoints on the issue, which was largely centred around the proposed Homosexual Law Reform Bill spearheaded by Fran Wilde. One correspondent, Ian Hood from Blenheim, argued that the private behaviour of consenting adults is none of anyone's business and that opposition to the reform often stems from outdated religious beliefs rather than rational thinking. He highlighted a perceived double standard, noting the unfairness of criminalising male homosexuality while female homosexuality remained legal. Hood questioned whether New Zealand was ready to progress into the twentieth century regarding this issue. Conversely, Varian J. Wilson expressed his belief that homosexuality is a mental illness, despite contradicting perspectives from the American Psychiatric Association. He recounted personal experiences during debates, including accusations of attempted entrapment and threats to his safety, yet maintained a sympathetic attitude towards individual homosexuals while being critical of what he described as predatory behaviour associated with some homosexuals. Vernon Wilkinson presented a perspective suggesting that societal norms should discourage sodomy and offered a comparison to a cigar, indicating that the majority of heterosexual males would be found in the "centre" while sodomy is at the "tip." He cautioned that elements of permissiveness in society could lead to detrimental long-term effects, such as increased instances of rape and incest, as well as health issues. A. S. Maitland voiced concerns over the potential consequences of legalising homosexual acts for those over the age of 16. He contended that legalisation might encourage the youth to explore homosexuality, which he deemed repulsive and contradictory to societal norms. Maitland speculated on whether this trend could escalate to a point where homosexuality might become compulsory. Lastly, Alison Kearney, identifying herself as a Mrs. Kearney, expressed her opposition to the bill, insisting that it would effectively legalise sodomy. She referenced a biblical passage from Leviticus as a moral guideline and prayed against any measures towards liberalisation of the laws concerning homosexuality. Overall, these letters reflect a society wrestling with deeply held beliefs about morality, legality, and the rights of individuals versus perceived societal norms, encapsulating the tensions surrounding the homosexual law reform debate in New Zealand during that time.

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