Homosexual Law Changes (Press, 14 June 1985)

In June 1985, the Presbytery of Christchurch and the North Canterbury Methodist Synod convened a joint meeting where they passed significant resolutions regarding the Homosexual Law Reform Bill. They expressed deep concern over the emotional, uninformed, and uncaring comments surrounding the bill. As a collective of caring Christian individuals, the Synod and Presbytery affirmed their support for the bill, urging all parties involved to engage in discussions with sensitivity and understanding about this complex issue. They also called for a careful interpretation of biblical references to sexual relationships, prompting a modern understanding in the context of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In response to the ongoing debate, a letter from Paul Maling criticises a particular amendment proposed by Mark D. Sadler. Maling asserts that Sadler's proposal amounts to a more oppressive form of apartheid than that seen in South Africa, suggesting it would criminalise homosexual relationships for males aged 16 to 20 and their older partners, potentially leading to imprisonment. Maling argues that current societal concerns about relationships should take into account the greater social risks present in heterosexual relationships, advocating for equal rights and human dignity for homosexuals. He emphasises that Members of Parliament should vote with integrity towards equality for all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation. Conversely, a letter from Dr Janet Say raised concerns about the potential health implications related to the proposed reform. Dr Say, an Auckland venereologist, warned that the A.I.D.S. virus could lead to one of the worst infectious epidemics in history. She highlighted various diseases that could affect homosexuals, including hepatitis and other sexually transmitted diseases, suggesting that the passing of the bill could hurt public health rather than improve it. Overall, the discussions reflect a broader societal struggle with the implications of the Homosexual Law Reform Bill, demonstrating a division between those advocating for equal rights and those raising alarms about health and moral issues linked to homosexuality. This debate illustrates the complexities in approaching legislative changes regarding sexual orientation in 1985 New Zealand.

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