Homosexuality from Legal and Christian perspective

1. Homosexuality from Legal and Christian perspective By Anthony MW LAW

2. Homosexuality • What is homosexuality at law? • The law before 1991: - • 根據《刑事罪行條例》，男子(私下和非私下的情況)進行肛交(“同性戀”)或嚴重猥褻行為為刑事罪行

3. Homosexuality • What is 肛交? • 肛交 must be an act either between 2 men or a man and a woman, not an act between 2 women: see Michael Jackson, Criminal Law in Hong Kong (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2003), p.615.

4. Homosexuality • What is 嚴重猥褻行為? • R v Hunt [1950] 2 All ER 291 – “2 men put themselves in such a position that it can be said that a grossly indecent exhibition is going on”

5. Homosexuality • The parallel law in Britain had been successfully challenged to be against the right to privacy under an international human rights treaty (Dudgeon v United Kingdom [1981] ECHR 7525/76). • The Hong Kong government therefore amended it in 1991.

6. Homosexuality • The Law before mid-2005: - • 根據《刑事罪行條例》，雙方都已年滿21歲的男子私下進行肛交或嚴重猥褻行為並非刑事罪行，但非私下進行(有2人以上參加等的情況)或任何人唆使第三者進行肛交或嚴重猥褻行為則為刑事罪行

7. Homosexuality • In mid-2005, the Court of First Instance in Hong Kong declared in William Roy Leung v Secretary for Justice (2005) HCAL 160/2004 that the following parts of the law are invalid on the ground that they have infringed the right to equality on the basis of sex(sexual orientation) under the Bill of Rights: -

8. Homosexuality • (1) 雙方(或一方)不滿21歲的男子私下進行嚴重猥褻行為為刑事罪行 – the court changed the minimum age from 21 to 16 (since the minimum age for heterosexual and lesbian couples for私下進行嚴重猥褻行為 legally is 16)

9. Homosexuality • (2) 雙方(或一方)不滿21歲的男子私下進行肛交為刑事罪行 (since although heterosexual couples under 21 also cannot 私下進行肛交, they can have私下進行性交 legally at 16) • The Hong Kong government has already lodged an appeal against the decision on this point.

10. Homosexuality • (3) 男子非私下(有2人以上參加的情況)進行肛交或嚴重猥褻行為為刑事罪行 (since heterosexual and lesbian couples can 私下有2人以上參加的情況進行肛交或嚴重猥褻行為 legally provided that all of them have reached the said minimum age)

11. Homosexuality • Why the Hong Kong Court of First Instance refused to uphold the above laws? • The said laws constitute “a grave and arbitrary interference with the right of gay men to self-autonomy in the most intimate aspects of their private lives.  What is to be remembered is that [the laws] all go to consensual activities in private.”

12. Homosexuality • “I fail to see how imprisoning young men because of their sexual orientation, when there has been no abuse or exploitation of a third party, can today be said to represent a proportionate response to any perceived need to protect those young men against moral degradation.”

13. Homosexuality • “Where is the justification for holding that ‘recruitment’ into homosexuality deserves imprisonment but ‘recruitment’ into lesbianism does not?” • “In so far as the risk of AIDS or similar diseases may rationally require some difference of treatment between anal intercourse and intercourse per vagina, I fail to see how it can be said that the [laws] which are challenged provide a rational response or a proportionate one.” • Judgment of Justice Mr. Hartmann

14. Homosexuality • 目前，歐洲人權法院只承認異性婚姻 (Rees v United Kingdom (1986) 9 EHRR 56)，英國法院則 base on子女最佳利益，容許同性戀者領養子女 (Re W (adoption: homosexual adopter) [1997] 2 FLR 406)。[1] [1] Athena Liu, Family Law for the Hong Kong SAR (Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, 1999), pp.294-295.

15. Homosexuality • The Protestant Churches in particular oppose the implementation of an anti-discrimination law based on the status of sexual orientation given its impact on freedom of religion generally as well as the daily operation of Christian schools and other Christian organizations.[1] • [1]關啟文：是非、曲直 － 對人權、同性戀的倫理反思(香港：宣道出版社，2000年)， 頁45-71。

16. Homosexuality • It is, as a matter of principle, consonant with Christian moral values not to discriminate others on the basis of their sex, religion and race, etc., unjustly[1] as Lord Jesus told us to「你們該彼此相愛；如同我愛了你們，你們也該照樣彼此相愛。」[2] • [1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, para.358. • [2]《若翰福音》第13章第34節。

17. Homosexuality • However, our love for people doing unchristian things does not mean we have to agree with them. 例如，《聖經》便亳不含糊地不允許同性戀者享有同性戀的自由: 「因此，神任憑他們陷於可恥的情慾中，以致他們的女人，把順性之用變為逆性之用；男人也是如此，放棄了與女人的順性之用，彼此慾火中燒，男人與男人行了醜事，就在各人身上受到了他們顛倒是非所應得的報應」[1]。 [1] 《羅馬書》第1章第26-27節。

18. Homosexuality • 根據《創世記》的記載，所多瑪與俄摩拉兩個城市的居民即因欲對天使「行事」，而遭神以硫礦和火所消滅。[1][1] 《創世記》第19章第1-29節。

19. Homosexuality • 「同性戀. . . 是違反自然律的行為，排除生命的賜予，不是來自一種感情上及性方面的真正互補。在任何情形下同性戀行為是不許可的。」 [1] • [1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, paras.357.

20. Homosexuality • A marriage should be a voluntary union of one man and one woman(not, people of the same sex) to the exclusion of all others.[1][1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, para.625.

21. Homosexuality • 「當同性戀者進一步要顛覆主流社會而另起爐灶，建立另類社會單位，….. 社會便可以阻止。這是因為在個人自由與群體利益之間，我們必須兩者都兼顧，個人自由不是『大晒』；自由社會也有其道德底線。」[1][1]羅秉祥 ：自由社會的道德底線 (香港：基道出版社，1997年)，頁132。

22. Homosexuality • 「邪淫是錯亂的慾念，或性快感不羈的取樂。每當人排除生育和結合的目的，而只求性快感，在道德上是錯亂的。」[1] It is not proper for even married Christians to have unnatural sexual practices. [2] • [1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, paras.351. • [2]羅秉祥，繁星與道德 (香港: 三聯書店(香港)有限公司, 1993年)，頁90-91。

23. Homosexuality • 誠然，基督宗教信仰的人權觀並非與俗世的全無二致。事實上，基督宗教強調權利與責任是相向的。[1]就如信仰基督宗教的香港大學法律學院陳弘毅教授所言：「讓我們反思『外在自由』的重要性和珍貴性；讓我們學習虛心地聆聽古代的聖人和哲人的話語，… …吸收他們的智慧和人類各大文化和宗教傳統的心血結晶。惟有這樣，我們才有希望重建危機四伏、支離破碎的現代文明。」[2] • [1]陳弘毅：我思我在 － 陳弘毅的思想歷程(香港：突破出版社，1990年)，頁45-46。 • [2]陳弘毅：「《自由社會的道德底線》讀後感」，羅秉祥 (見註78)，頁154。

24. Homosexuality • 筆者是公教徒，但因新教的《聖經》中文譯本較流行的緣故，故本powerpoint中的《聖經》經文以思高聖經學會的中文《聖經》釋本字眼，《天主教教理》以天主教教務協進會出版社 (台灣地區主教團) 譯本，但採用新教所使用的人物及經書之中文釋名。此外，本powerpoint所指的基督宗教是指普世信奉基督的教會，並無派系之分，筆者亦將公教及新教對人權的觀點一併寫出，願能藉此促進原是一家的兩個基督徒團體之更深交流。 • 本powerpoint內容並不能作為法律意見。