Sustain buggery law!

THE EDITOR, Sir:

I refer to the Letter of the Day titled 'Redefine buggery law and promote tolerance', published Wednesday, August 17.

The idea of keeping the buggery law but redefining it may appear attractive at first blush, but problems arise on closer examination. The intrinsic feature of this act of buggery for us in this country is that it is wrong, regardless of whether it is done consensually.

A change of the law, as suggested, would not reflect this perspective. This is the same concept as regards laws relating to incest. It is also wrong to inflict physical harm on another person, albeit that the other person consents to the act. Obviously, involuntary involvement is more repulsive than the acts when done consensually.

We need to be careful in thinking that our private acts are without consequences. Private consensual acts have public consequences: certainly, there is an impact on the health sector. Further, when adults are allowed to do what they want, children seeing the lifestyle as distinct from even the actual act of buggery grow up confused as to distinctions in this area.

Addressing intolerance

My problem with the principle of 'tolerance', as it is being used in the homosexual debate, is that it has been divorced from the principle of truth. Therefore, even discussing the actions and behaviour of others is labelled 'intolerant'.

We are not just being asked to be non-violent to towards homosexuals, which we all agree with, but we are being asked to mentally accommodate buggery as normal behaviour. Thus, a more valuable ethic in this debate is self-control. In this way, we are allowed to comment on the behaviour of others, but at the same time, we are constrained and restrained in our response.

Some things become more valuable with time. The anti-buggery law is one such. If ever there was a time it was needed, it is now! The value of established principles is that they provide us with a reference point in times of confusion. This is what will guide our educators as the contents of textbooks and our media persons as to what is acceptable for public viewing. For us, this principle of ours, the anti-buggery law, still provides a beacon of light in this age of moral darkness.

S. RICHARDS

Kingston 10