Homosexual Law Changes (Press, 27 March 1985)

In a series of letters published on 25 March 1985 in response to Professor Ken Strongman's comments on homosexuality, various individuals expressed their viewpoints, highlighting a spectrum of beliefs. John Skeates refuted Strongman's assertion that the origins of heterosexual behaviour require further exploration, asserting that heterosexuality is inherent for species reproduction. He claimed that homosexual behaviour lacks a natural basis and described it as a perversion, while also arguing that the examination of heterosexuality is straightforward from a biological perspective, contrasting it with the need for psychologists to address homosexual behaviour. Ron Wallace echoed similar sentiments, describing heterosexual behaviour as normal due to its role in procreation, and he questioned how evolution would advance without offspring. He labelled homosexual behaviour as abnormal and called for legal measures to redirect those with homosexual inclinations back to what he deemed ‘normality’. Colin Brown, however, presented an opposing view. He referred to a 1979 resolution by the Synod of the Anglican diocese of Christchurch that supported legal changes to remove penalties on consensual homosexual acts, indicating a broader church endorsement for the legislative reforms being considered. He urged church members to remember this support to avoid being swayed into opposing the proposed reforms. Varian J. Wilson critiqued Strongman's dismissal of certain myths and questioned the validity and responsibilities surrounding homosexuality. He mentioned the lack of understanding regarding the causes of compulsive homosexual behaviour and complained about the discrediting of the Kinsey report. Wilson cautioned against trivial comparisons, suggesting that homosexuality could not be likened to benign preferences and underscored the harmful implications of a low age of consent. C. A. Bass Podger provided a theological perspective, asserting that while Christians are called to love, this love should not extend to sexual relations as would be legitimised by the proposed law reforms. He emphasised the long-term impact of today's decisions on future generations. Lastly, B. Morrison critiqued the Salvation Army for its opposition to the Homosexual Law Reform Bill, positing that such a stance would perpetuate societal issues related to alcoholism among homosexual individuals. He expressed discontent with the church's condemnation of love between individuals of the same sex and announced his withdrawal of financial support until the organisation changes its perspective on love. Overall, the letters reflect a significant divide in public opinion regarding homosexuality and highlight the interplay between religion, psychology, and societal norms at 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