Homosexual Law Reform Debate ‘muddled’ (Press, 22 July 1985)

On 22 July 1985, the Futures Trust expressed concerns regarding the ongoing debate surrounding the Homosexual Law Reform Bill in New Zealand, suggesting that the discourse resembled attitudes from the Middle Ages. During a submission to Parliament's Statutes Revision Committee, they highlighted that the public debate was muddled and unscientific, criticising the circulation of petitions and calls for a referendum as indicative of a lack of scientific understanding within society. The trust argued that the discussion should not merely be framed as a conflict between homosexuals and the rest of society, but as a challenge to uphold evidence over speculation and conviction. The bill in question aimed to decriminalise consensual sexual acts between adult males aged over 16 and to amend the Human Rights Commission Act to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. The Futures Trust's advisory council includes prominent figures such as former Prime Ministers and heads of various councils. They stated that regardless of whether the bill was passed or not, many well-meaning individuals might become disillusioned with the parliamentary process. They advocated for informed public debate and offered to gather and disseminate relevant factual information. Historical context was provided, as the trust noted that consensual homosexual acts between adults had been decriminalised in Britain since 1967. They emphasised the importance of examining the outcomes of such legal changes rather than adhering to speculation. The trust proposed that conducting a referendum in the UK might yield more meaningful insights into the effects of similar legislation. Dr. John Hawley, a board member of the Futures Trust, indicated he would likely abstain from voting on the bill without evidence from regions where homosexual acts had been decriminalised. In contrast, the Employers' Federation opposed making sexual orientation a basis for unlawful discrimination in employment, with Deputy Executive Director Ray Taylor arguing that an employee’s private life should not concern employers unless it affected their work. Taylor also expressed the need for small businesses to have the option to employ individuals based on compatibility, urging for exemptions in case of potential industrial issues stemming from the legislation. Additionally, the Association of Proprietors of Integrated Schools voiced its opposition to the promotion of homosexual activity within certain schools, particularly Catholic institutions, citing concerns about maintaining the schools' special character as guided by religious values. Their chairman, Pat Hoult, argued for a higher age of consent than 16 to protect students from being engaged in unlawful homosexual activities within a school setting. Overall, the varied submissions reflect a spectrum of opinions on the Homosexual Law Reform Bill, highlighting the tensions between advancing rights and maintaining traditional values within New Zealand society.

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