NewsHong Kong
RIGHTS

Christians in prayer rally to fight gay law proposal

Religious groups say their freedom of speech is threatened by move to protect the rights of sexual minorities

Monday, 14 January, 2013, 7:26am

Poll

  • Yes: 81%
  • No: 19%
14 Jan 2013
  • Yes
  • No

Thousands of Christians staged a rally outside government headquarters yesterday to show their opposition to proposed legislation that would outlaw discrimination against sexual minorities.

The Evangelical Free Church of China Yan Fook Church, which organised the event, estimated that up to 50,000 people joined the "Inclusive Love Praying Concert" at Tamar Park, Admiralty, to voice their disapproval through singing and praying. They said such a law would restrict their freedom of speech on gay rights. Police put the turnout at 5,000.

"If this becomes the law, those who oppose homosexuality will have their freedom of speech restricted," said the Reverend Jayson Tam, convenor of the "praying concert".

In a separate public event, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam Chi-yuen said Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying would disclose shortly whether a public consultation would be launched.

"In this regard, our colleagues have already made preparations. We are ready [for a public consultation] once the chief executive finds it is the appropriate time … Once there are further communications and public discussions [in the community], I believe there will be an opportunity to conduct a public consultation, details of which will be addressed in the policy address," Tam said.

The chief executive delivers his maiden policy address on Wednesday.

The Reverend Tam said there were examples in Western countries of similar legislation leading to "reverse" discrimination. He added they did not oppose the government launching a consultation on the law, but they would voice their opposing views.

Wong Man-leung, 55, a Christian at the event, said: "I respect [gay people]. But I may be in trouble if I carelessly say something wrong about them."

He said homosexuality was against the idea of family in traditional Chinese culture.

Ann Chan, 22, a student, said: "I don't want the legislation as homosexuality goes against our Christian values." She was open to a consultation but would express her opposition.

Openly gay lawmaker Raymond Chan Chi-chuen said participants were misled. "I believe they were mobilised to come because there were people saying if legislation is approved, they can't talk about homosexuality in church or even Christian doctrine anymore," he said.

Chan said he was not hopeful that the chief executive would include the consultation in his policy address, but he would continue fighting for it as the first step to legislation to protect gay rights.

A gay-friendly clergy said Christians should be more inclusive of homosexuality.

"The world has changed. We should give gay people more reasonable treatment," said Silas Wong Kwok-yiu of the Blessed Minority Christian Fellowship.

The South China Morning Post reported on Wednesday that there was no timetable within the government for rolling out the consultation because it wanted to deal with "livelihood matters" first, a government source said.

In November, the Legislative Council voted down a motion to launch a public consultation.

"The government is open-minded on whether to consult the public [about] the legislation of the anti-discrimination law. The chief executive will further explain the matter … in the policy address," the minister reiterated.

39

This article is now closed to comments

forwhatitsworth
I’m not saying that we have to force others to become “modern”. If someone chooses to reject scientific evidence in favour of fairy tales written by a male dominated society years ago, then that’s their right to do so. Similarly, if someone in the future chooses to adopt the books of Harry Potter as a religion, that’s their right to do so as well.
It’s obvious that you don't accept ****exuals and that’s your right. The great thing about a civilised society is that we allow different points of views and lifestyles. We are fortunate that we don’t live in fear of being prosecuted or discriminated against due to our beliefs or lifestyle.
However, just because you don’t like someone does not mean they should be denied the same basic protection as everyone else. For example, your argument that the right to criticise a certain group will be categorised as “hate speech” is just an excuse. In the U.S. where there are anti-discriminatory laws, you are still allowed to openly criticise other groups and the KKK still exists. No one wants to limit your freedom of speech; they just want to protect the rights of others.
Likewise, your argument that churches will have to hire ****exual priests is again baseless. The point of a public consultation is to collect the views of everyone. How do you know that anti-discriminatory laws won’t allow religious groups to discriminate based on religious preference? Again, this just shows that your arguments are based on nothing but fear.
Camel
What a bunch of craps. Discrimination is not a right and can not be regarded as freedom of speech.
Otherwise racists as well can take the freedom of speech as a reason to insult and discriminate colored people.
Or chauvinists can take the freedom of speech and opinion to discriminate women.
One's right and freedom do not eliminate the other ones right and freedom.
pgrath1
The SCMP photo looks a lot closer to 50,000 than it does 5,000
jonhmli
While the reason given for the opposition to the proposal is a loss of freedom of speech, it's more likely the underlying reason is disapproval based on their teachings and/or fear of the unknown. Disapproval and fear dissapear quickly into compassion once you have understanding and increased awareness. If those in the protest had the capacity to engage and listen to the "other side," I'm sure many of their notions would be lost. Listen to your heart rather than someone's interpretation of someone else's interpretation of someone else's words.
gnowdranoel
Those people are products of brain-washing by their religions.
islemount
"Inclusive Love" through discrimination. Oxy-morons!
ruthleelsf
What has "being gay and acting gay" got to do with Christians? Why legalization of gay rights means the end of free speech for Christians, does it mean they can't criticise and discriminate as freely as before? If that's what they are afraid of, then the intention is not noble at all. It's draconian. Shame on them.
Snake Eyes
You will have as much freedom of speech about gay people as I currently have against Christians. End of story.
jilljiu.cho
Haters are just confused admirers - Justin Bieber
shirleyolivia
Does anyone know where we can find a copy of the proposed draft-ordinance?

Pages

Login

SCMP.com Account

or