Heng...ah...I am not gay!

Heng…ah…I am not gay.

On the one hand, the “gahment” openly allows singles above a certain age to co-own a HDB flat, whether gay or otherwise. This was to ease its oversupply, so they say. It was purely a pragmatic solution, so they say. Some even called it the squeering strategy. But here’s the unintended consequences: What do you expect two closeted gays to do in the privacy of their co-owned HDB flat? Watch reruns of “Whose line is it anyway?”

On the other hand, you have the sodomy law under the allegedly toothless Section 377A. While the heterosexuals (marital, extramarital or fornicating) may go on a physical frolick of their own without fear, and for some, without shame, under the same HDB roof, the gays would just have to watch their back for fear of reprisals from their religiously guarded, socially conscious neighborhood watch.

Heng…ah…I am not gay.

On the one hand, our gahment in 2008 warmly welcomed an American gay professor to helm the SEA’s largest earth observatory in Singapore. He was assured that he would not be discriminated against and he could even bring his partner over. Obviously, he had tribal immunity from the lurking shadows of Section 377A.

On the other hand, this same privilege has not yet been extended to gay Singaporeans. Our gay community had thus gotten the short end of the policy stick I guess.

Heng…ah…I am not gay.

On the one hand, gays are considered the “canaries of a creative economy”. One Straits Times commentator wrote, “If Singapore is serious about attracting smart, talented people, whether gay or not, many more bigger steps towards greater tolerance – and not just towards gays – must be made. Remember, this is not about gay rights. This is about economic competitiveness.” (Chua Mui Hoong, 2003) The message? Gays are creative people and are therefore here to stay for the sake of the economy?

On the other hand, the gahment once warned queer Singaporeans not to “assert themselves stridently as gay groups in the West.” More relevantly, in the 2007 debates on the criminalization of male homosex, LKY commented, “They tell me and anyway it is probably half-true that homosexuals are creative writer, dancers, et cetera. If you want creative people, then we got to put up with their idiosyncrasies so long as they don’t infect the heartland.” The message? Gays are to be kept at bay? They should be seen and not heard? They should quietly contribute during the day and not infect during the night? Not so clear cut after all I guess.

Once again, heng…ah…I am not gay. I think enough is said. The bottom line is that it’s no fun being a gay here, to put it mildly.

On the one hand, it is comforting to hear this PM Lee’s assurance: “De facto, gays have a lot of space in Singapore. Gay groups hold public discussions. They publish websites. There are films and plays on gay themes. There are gay bars and clubs. They exist. We know where they are. We do not harass gays… and we do not proactively enforce Section 377A.”

On the other hand, the mainstream religion views them as such, “Homosexuality constitutes a threat and an aberration to the paternalistic state because same-gender unions usually do not result in procreation.”

Furthermore, these words from the then Att Gen Walter Woon can be a little disconcerting regarding Section 377A, “As far as I am concerned, it is still against the law and we still prosecute if there’s a need. The Prime Minister said that, if its consensual between two adults, we are not going to go after them if nobody complains…In the case of 377A…we are prosecuting some cases, such as where you have an older man preying on young underaged boys. If it’s two consenting adults, technically it’s an offence but, if nobody complains, the police aren’t going to beat the bushes in the parks to spy on you. If somebody does complain, then the question is: Do we prosecute or do we just warn? Very often, we warn rather than prosecute.”

Mmm…is this the “complaint guillotine for gays”? Aren’t Singaporeans famous for complaining?

Heng…ah…I am not gay.

But for some of my friends who are, let’s hope that no one complains. Let’s hope that they are nice to everybody, lest they complain. And if they do complain, let’s hope that these hapless gays will fall on the “Very often” side of the law and get away with just a warning. The last thing they want is for their bushes to be beaten by the blue-shirted men.

So, together now, heng…ah…we are not gay! Cheerz.

Ps: What is the difference between a repented sinner and a repented gay? A repented sinner sins no more? And a repented gay is still a gay?

Now, let's change perspective. What do a repented sinner and a repented gay share in common? They both love Jesus.

Maybe some of us as Christians have been asking the wrong question and have therefore been getting the same answers we have been getting all this while. The bias is there. It's just unavoidable.

When we focus on the differences, the gap widens. But when we focus on the common ground, the gap seems more reconcilable.

Here's another way of looking at it. What do a repented sinner and a repented gay share in common? They all need more time? Because this I guess says it all, "God loves us for who we are but He loves us too much to leave us as we are."