Letter: Section 28 is wrong

David N. Taylor
Wednesday 10 November 1999 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Rupert Thorne (letter, 8 November) is wrong on at least three counts in his support for Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988. Homosexuality is not a matter of "choice" but the innate condition of a minority of the population. Others cannot acquire it by "promotion".

I, too, am a parent, but I believe in the individuality of the child as a person and that, if they grow into an awareness of being homosexual, they should be educated in an accepting environment free from the risk of bullying. Section 28 creates quite the reverse situation, with the only losers being those young people struggling to cope with their developing sexuality.

Orthodox Jews, Christians and Muslims may believe same-sex acts to be unacceptable, but they should not lose sight of the fact that, at the time the scriptures were written, their authors could have no comprehension of the homosexual condition and would perceive same-sex acts as between wayward heterosexuals. Be that as it may, none has the right to impose their religious mores on the population as a whole, or even their members, by use of the criminal law.

Given that the common scriptures of these religions are far clearer in their prohibition of adultery, which most certainly can be promoted, can we anticipate a movement for anti-adultery legislation?

DAVID N TAYLOR

Halifax, West Yorkshire

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in