Posted on 07/20/2007 3:22:06 AM PDT by monomaniac
SINGAPORE, July 19, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Unable to find a "gay bar" or display nudity in an upcoming performance of Shakespeare's "King Lear", British actor Ian McKellen has now called upon Singapore's government to overturn laws against homosexuality.
McKellen, 68, is known to millions around the world for his roles as "Gandalf" the wizard in the "Lord of the Rings" and for his role as the evil villain and mastermind "Magneto" in the "X-Men" Trilogy and has used his star-power to promote homosexual issues.
"Coming to Singapore where unfortunately you've still got those dreadful laws that we British left behind... it's about time Singapore grew up, I think, and realized that gay people are here to stay," McKellen said in an interview with Class 95 radio station, a member of the state-run MediaCorp.
Singapore's Penal Code Section 377A prohibits homosexual acts and solicitations as "gross indecency with another male person" with prison time of nearly two years. The law dates back to the city-state's colonial 19th century administration by the British Empire and is supported by the Singapore's largely conservative population.
McKellen is performing with the Royal Shakespeare Company touring productions of William Shakespeare's "King Lear" and Anton Chekhov's "The Seagull." The Company's world tour starts Thursday in Singapore at the Esplanade, South-East Asia's most modern performing arts centre. McKellen agreed to forbear on his planned nude scene where Lear is sent into exile, in order that minors under 18 in the tiny city-state could attend the performances.
"Call it censorship, call it advice, it gets in the way a little bit. I think it's a little bit silly," McKellen was quoted as saying at a tour briefing.
"As a gay man invited here with the full cognizance of the government, how can they not notice that my right to have sex are inhibited by the country?" McKellen complained in an interview with Reuters. McKellen told the press agency that he only cared to discuss acting and homosexuality saying, "I am just public on those two issues."
Actually, yes, I am. I am washed in the blood.
I have a renewed appreciation for this law, after having been to an amusement park recently. I saw 300 pieces of chewed gum plastered to a wall, within arm's reach of the line leading to a roller coaster. It was nauseating to look at, and probably not very hygienic.
Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress;...
Actually, the representatives should oppose the laws peope support that would infringe on the rights of entire sectors of society.
So you want to take your Libertarianism global, eh?
Annnnnnd it doesn’t say anything in that article that opposes what I said. Great job.
Actually, yes, that would be nice, if I could do it without firing a shot.
Maybe so. Regardless, homosexuality, like abortion, is intrinsically evil. One doesn't have to be religious to understand this. Sodomy is a perverse and unnatural act.
It is no coincidence Islamic pagans hate Israel, Jews, Christians and Western Civilization. The entire basis of Western Civilization is Mosaic Law, something both the Neo-Pagan Left and the pagan Islamic thugs cannot abide and wish to destroy.
Mosaic Law (of which the Ten Commandments is just a part) is the foundation of Western Civilization. Genesis is the primary focus of the Declaration of Independence, from where our Constitutional rights are derived. The Ten Commandments are the foundation of our judicial system.
Dude, there’s a huge difference between an “oppressive theocracy” and having some laws that require sexual restraint.
If you don’t see the difference, you need to read some history — ones that contain the aftermath of what happened to nations as a consequence of licentiousness.
Do you want to see laws forbidding incest (father/daughter, mother/son, brother/sister) abolished? How about one man procreating with an unlimited number of women? Should it be against the law for someone with a known, fatal STD to have unprotected sex or would that be in violation of his/her rights, so long as the ‘partner’ knew about it?
Of course I believe it’s evil, but that’s a religious view. Many people do not hold that view. And if it doesn’t interfere with anyone’s rights, the fact that we view it as evil should not be a factor. That is the nature of freedom - I don’t get to impose my religious or moral beliefs on anyone, and the same goes for them. For many people in our Country, conservative or Liberal, that’s an “extremist” view.
And the Hindus and Buddhists don't like it either...
In the absence of all laws, anarchy takes over, but only for a very brief period. There will inevitably arise the deviant and violent who pray upon others. Reacting to this, those who do not want to be preyed upon will band together and fight back. There is either a quick conquest or a war that creates borders. Within each border a nation is formed with its own laws, just as we have it today.
Then, they only hold you a few months.
Ogfcourse,when they release you, it's in a box.
Gay people die and don't reproduce.
OK, so this right here shows that you're an idiot.
If you think that Genesis is the foundation of our law code, you need to research Deism and the humanist masonic views the Founding Fathers based our law code on. Our laws are only religiously based in the vaguest sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.