This is a Generative AI summary of this newspaper article. It may contain errors or omissions. Please note that the language in the summary is reflective of the original article and the societal attitudes of the time in which it was written.
Summary: Homosexual Law Changes (Press, 27 May 1985)
In a series of letters to the editor published on 27 May 1985, writers voiced their concerns and criticisms regarding the Human Rights Commission's support for the Homosexual Reform Bill. One writer, J. Nihoniho, argued that the commission was contradicting its stance from December 22, 1980, where it claimed that homosexuality could not be equated with statuses such as race or sex. Nihoniho contended that the commission was abandoning moral absolutes and making the concept of "human rights" contingent on the members' views, raising concerns about the commission's independence and the implications of its role in the proposed legislation. Nihoniho pointed out that the commission, funded by taxpayers, was not an elected body and was thus not representative of the public's views when it took on a dual role as both promoter and implementer of legal changes. Another letter from Varian J. Wilson criticized the commission's support in light of the rising concern over A.I.D.S. in New Zealand, noting the fourth reported death linked to the disease at that time. Wilson expressed fears that New Zealand was becoming a "pederasty haven" and questioned the effectiveness of the proposed measures to control the spread of A.I.D.S. without registration of potential carriers. The letter suggested the need for stricter regulations, including requirements for tourists to disclose their health status and face penalties for non-compliance. Wilson also cited Dr. Janet Say, who had suggested that the A.I.D.S. epidemic could be significantly mitigated if individuals had only one sexual partner. He expressed scepticism about the likelihood of this approach being adopted, particularly within the gay community, arguing that it would not achieve the desired outcome in controlling the epidemic. Together, these letters reflect the contentious debate around the Homosexual Reform Bill and the implications for society, health, and human rights in New Zealand during the mid-1980s.
Important Information
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