Search Browse On This Day Map Timeline Research Free Datasets Remembered About Contact
☶ Go up a page

Crimes Amendment Bill (1974) - second reading

This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It is not a transcript, it has not been checked by humans and will contain many errors. However it is useful for searching on keywords and themes by using Ctrl-F, and you can also play the audio by clicking on a desired timestamp.

[00:00:00] This audio comes from the collections of the lesbian and gay archives of New Zealand For more information visit it [00:00:09] will follow [00:00:14] these unnatural practices [00:00:19] effect will have on the moral fiber of these boys, some of them quite young and under 21 the practices are illegal and yet suddenly on the morning of the 21st birthday, like and do what they like and Viale [00:00:37] which will defy evil influences which are seeking to undermine the very foundation of our national character. define them do not help them ahead. Some scientists [00:00:49] said so himself that such practices are allowed in France the night our country. We are not [00:00:57] aware not other nationals. We are positioning Gone. This is some of the listeners some of the thoughts of roadman Camry. In this regard. My attention mr. speaker to read further evidence that came forward to suit my case, I will admit [00:01:15] that because I think the subjects been covered, [00:01:19] very employed I know house is ready I believe to buy the finally could I say [00:01:25] expressed in the simplest terms I suggest [00:01:27] the ratio is this is this half or is it not to give away to the museum and people by agreeing to a bill which will have the effect of undermining the moral fiber of the youth of America and that's my feeling [00:01:44] right on to [00:01:47] others other men. And [00:01:55] young remember for Rodney will excuse me for [00:02:00] Excuse me for taking that line. Mr. Speaker [00:02:05] sexual acts is absolutely [00:02:08] repulsive to me. [00:02:14] So I'm not going to compliment the member of not fulsome lead lead member for egg mom. [00:02:22] I was taken away. [00:02:26] We never heard of it [00:02:29] was never heard of these quests which the problems would go away. And I suppose Having said that, then when asked to join the government service guys and bringing something forward that will wish was not grown folding, and that the problem itself simply dissolve as a beer. [00:02:57] The problem is there from time to time. questions whether borrow legal, emotional, whatever they are, they will arise and have public common currency and be discussed have to be and have to be settled. Two years ago, I confess quite openly two years ago, one year ago, one year ago, I would have voted against such a proposition with this debate, I will vote for saying that homosexual acts out of noxious to me, and I think just about all of us are the majority. And then my natural instinct is to measure against any change in the law because of the natural [00:03:50] lash out against the law or [00:03:55] the law because [00:03:57] the context of the subject dealt. That's natural emotional reaction. But I believe we must use more than that we use judgment as we can. Whatever logic we have, so I'm not going to do at this stage of the debate going to go over all over and indeed over very few of the arguments that have been produced by other members performed against except except I want to say this that I am not convinced that the President sanctions in Milan, have achieved very much. I won't say they haven't achieved anything. But I don't think they've achieved the law in balance to warrant the continuation. Remember, for Rodney, it was a lot of figures in respect to convictions and the law and the kind of pedals is that been impressed. I'm sorry, I didn't listen closely enough to him before he came to that passage in his speech. I have to ask him, whether I'm correct when I say image I imagined he was dealing with all the offenses taken under these headings, not with the offenses in the narrow range in which this will do and that is homosexual acts between consenting adults and [00:05:34] folders law [00:05:34] doesn't offer all the rest of the month. That would have been interesting if we had the figures and I was in the hat. If you had the goes to show how many cases have been brought, that would be affected by this amendment of the law. [00:05:58] All kinds of Emma say July. It's not just for the sexual acts, but the very narrow array, which are dealt with in this proposed amendment. What is the difference the differences is a member for Rodney quoted figure, to prove something to prove that we should not carry this amendment. He was dealing with figures that have nothing to do whatever with this amendment. That's the point I make. Or if I had, I shouldn't say whatever. But I need to a very, very small extent I believe. [00:06:38] Well, the sex natural the beginning. [00:06:42] Private secret, naturally Not Not Not Not many are detected, although, of course, some. I thought the figures were misleading in the present the wider field homosexual acts committed against the law. How the courts had figured. It was an interesting comment that I felt was mainly motherly, but mainly irrelevant to this proposed amendment. [00:07:17] I would think so, of course, that we mentioned by the member mentioned by other members that the very nature of the homosexual act that we are discussing, that is Emma sexual acts committed by males consenting males in private, that truly not many of them are detected and come before the gods and for that very reason, an existing law has very little application that is virtually in in effect. I was I want to speak very briefly the main points have Determine me to vote in favor of the law instead so often, very briefly, I repeat them, I believe there should be no difference in the treatment and the law of males and females. And that has been dealt with a great length and I say no more about it. Secondly, I asked myself does the present law has the presence of law prevented or deterred homosexual acts between between miles? I would say no one can prove it. I would think to a to some extent, but very, very much, I will invoke the advantage here would have been so minimal, that it would not weigh heavily with me at least, as against the disadvantages as against the disadvantages under the existing law with the propels as possible the proposed amendment 10 To increase the number of homosexual acts between males, adult males. From my experience from what I have learned and what I've heard, I doubt it. If it would, it would be me to a very, very minimal effect, and indeed, we cannot prove it. So I am certainly not convinced that the floodgates will be utterly convinced that that argument is wrong. I am impressed also by the statement of the middle of the month verified by some other members of the select committee which took the evidence that every body Every person and every organization giving evidence to the committee was asked this specific question Every, every, every I'm correct. Every judge was asked this specific question or perhaps not in these exact words, but in this sense, if the existing law was as is now proposed in this amending bill, existing law was as he is now proposing this amending bill, would you be proposing and crusading to change it, to change it to what the law is? and proper thought and consideration, the member and others confirm that all the churches said no, we would not be asking for the law to be changed to what it is at the present time. With the exception of one, I think small section of the Anglican Church, an evangelical evangelical section crusading, the crusading section? [00:11:02] So I think is that is the heart [00:11:05] and they said the core of the whole question does exist is the existing law and an anachronism? Are we clinging to it or some people cling to it simply because it's that David will not bear as it is not fair for females would be a crusade to Jason today to what is that the existing sanction under Allah will not they will not be a widespread crusade. I that was the Crusades all in one, it would be I believe, very, very minor, very, very minor. Indeed. [00:11:49] This to me is, is a very important aspect. [00:11:56] The whole question [00:11:58] is I'm also influenced By experiences that I've had in public live in offices that I've held in this house, and in this country, the knowledge I have people in quite high places, thank you so much, quite high places, exercising considerable responsibility and judgment. But who were homosexuals or homosexuals in prior [00:12:37] subject to blackmail, [00:12:40] blackmail and mental torture as a result of all that stems from that mental torture, the way it affected their whole lives, their relationships in the [00:12:55] family, [00:12:57] and indeed the individual other people. Please [00:13:09] Please have no knowledge with what I say. [00:13:23] I said [00:13:25] I'm all I'm saying is that I have [00:13:29] I have knowledge of it I have personal knowledge of it and and of the of the mental torture, my spiritual torture, now that these people [00:13:40] that these people went through [00:13:44] the number who are still alive, I suppose, still going through. [00:13:51] I'm not saying that they should not have some mental experience some mental torture in the sphere, because I'd say at the outset I'm still have the same opinion that homosexual acts between males females lead men as well we're talking about male is haven't heard To me [00:14:16] it is to me and unnatural [00:14:20] and and abnormal. So I suppose anybody experiencing this for whatever reason whether they all have these tendencies will that whether they're forced upon them through their environment or whatever, I suppose it's a natural thing again that they will suffer some mental torture and pay some price in that respect. But from the experiences that I have in the positions there, which I help convince me that these people suffer to great event. This is something that one can use One once again, as well as one person observing another [00:15:06] what what penalty should [00:15:10] I believe the cases that I knew love these people suffer to greater penalty to great a mental and spiritual torture because of the fear of discovery because of the fear of publication, indeed, because of the possibility of the exercise [00:15:34] of the law as it exists. [00:15:38] That again, perhaps more than any other thing with me, has decided to vote in favor of feet again. The two years ago, perhaps one year ago, I [00:15:53] would have been difficult to [00:15:55] convince me to support the law, but today, I do see Really amendment. [00:16:08] Mr. Bear [00:16:09] began, like, nice. [00:16:13] Like many members of his house on both sides, [00:16:17] I've had very considerable difficulty in deciding whether I should support or oppose the private member's bill of my colleague, Amanda. [00:16:31] Like him, I have considerable compassion for the problems of the hammer sexual problems which the hyper sexual many others, including, including many highly qualified, [00:16:50] believe that the problems are centered around the intrusion [00:16:54] of the statutes into [00:16:57] moral issues. [00:17:00] In an effort to fully understand how the Crimes Act created additional pressures on those with homosexual tendencies, I joined the member bregma in a number of early discussions with a law before society, [00:17:20] like Alan discussions, I was very impressed with the ability [00:17:29] and the quality of those who were supporting, have a sexual [00:17:37] is not an issue where one can or should look at the law solely through the eyes directly involved that one must rather consider in one's conscience [00:17:56] effect of changing a lot on society. [00:18:03] I have found [00:18:07] very long consideration, that I believe that homosexual [00:18:11] behavior [00:18:14] is not a behavior that I could accept as normal [00:18:18] and over I wish to take part in any action that would be thing to [00:18:28] encourage or even passively accept, have a sexual practice. [00:18:35] And it says for that particular reason, I find that I am able to support [00:18:42] I believe that to [00:18:44] support the bill would be seen to conduct even though passively, however, sexual [00:18:53] services then with much regret that [00:18:59] Mr. able to support the member for a month. [00:19:03] I also greatly regret that there is this anomaly in the law whereby action by female homosexuals and privates [00:19:15] seem to be and is within the law and action by my own homosexuals and private is outside the loop. [00:19:25] I take the point that has been made by member fragment and many others. When he raises the question, that if one is not able to support his bow, then should one not be promoting law for an amendment to bring females have a sexuals within the transactions as well. [00:19:49] I would answer the member for a month in this way [00:19:53] that I have not satisfied [00:19:57] until society is prepared to provide more positive assistance with eyes will have a sexual behavior and until society is prepared to concentrate more on its resources into I study of the of the inherent inboxes, which brings about homosexuality [00:20:23] and is prepared prepared to [00:20:25] do more [00:20:28] important fields that I believe this law should be challenged. [00:20:35] So I also make the point that the [00:20:37] law falls on [00:20:39] evenly on sections. [00:20:43] All of us, all of us, even in this [00:20:48] call of criminal action, [00:20:50] we are discouraged from doing so or becoming [00:20:57] criminal actions, by the facts that we do Doing so I would lose the respect of our family, we would lose the respect of our fellow man. And finally, we're discouraged because of the punishment itself. [00:21:12] But the greatest return of all was that then moving outside of accepted standards, we transgress the norms of society, [00:21:27] accepted behavioral standards set up and adopted by society itself. I fully appreciate that [00:21:35] 10 things to [00:21:38] normally accepted standards, also for [00:21:44] some peculiarity of our chemistry, our background, early childhood environment makes it more difficult for some, then it does for others I [00:21:55] fully appreciate that. [00:21:57] However, the attitudes of the community Its leaders. And most important, the attitude of Parliament itself is vital to the standards accepted [00:22:09] by society. [00:22:12] It seems to me therefore, in balance, that any [00:22:16] actions seem to [00:22:19] condemn [00:22:20] any action center [00:22:21] except [00:22:24] they have a six year hypersexuality itself [00:22:29] can have considerable [00:22:30] influence on the views of society but [00:22:36] for that reason that I am unable to support the member for a month and his efforts to have the bill introduced and the lower [00:22:48] much better, I believe, for society to work hard in devoting more resources to understanding the influences that bring about homosexual [00:23:00] behaving [00:23:01] much better [00:23:03] to divide [00:23:05] our efforts to correcting something which [00:23:11] I believe has agreed is not a normal human [00:23:16] situation. [00:23:18] I regret therefore, that I will be voting. [00:23:25] Mr. downing my colleagues [00:23:30] in the house and congratulating the member Bregman in bringing this bill before the house. I think we all know that has taken a great deal of courage to do this, because we're in an area of discussion, an area of the by [00:23:50] which it is difficult [00:23:52] to see clear lines of action, which will follow the results of this bill. [00:23:59] I think we're all aware of the degree of concern [00:24:04] that is expressed by all people throughout the country in this matter. And I think it's equally true to say that we have no evidence to suggest that by the removing of legislation in this area and overseas countries, there has been any lessening of the promiscuity, which has been is causing considerable concern. [00:24:34] I believe it is right and it's proper, that [00:24:36] this topic should be discussed in this house. As there is increasing controversy on the subject of homosexual behavior. We have had the anomalies pointed out to us today and last night very clearly, of the situation which exists as far as the male is concerned and as far as the female is concerned. [00:25:01] It would also be true to say, it would [00:25:04] also be true to say that [00:25:08] we are not going to, in any way, improve the situation as far as the male's concerned by introducing legislation against female behavior. [00:25:25] I think it's also true to say [00:25:30] that the likelihood [00:25:34] the likelihood of reducing the activities, the of noxious activities of a number of the groups is going to lessen. With the passing of this legislation, I don't believe it will. I have a number of years in the last few years and particular had many very convincing arguments with changing the law and licensed homosexual. [00:26:02] And while a very convincing, [00:26:05] liberal, logical [00:26:06] they are to a very great degree academic and largely have no I know, very offensive behavior, which undoubtedly causes considerable concern in the community. [00:26:24] I think it is true and one of the difficulties with which we're confronted that [00:26:31] we are able to obtain driving licenses of 15. It is unlawful and illegal to drive under the age of 15 is acceptable [00:26:42] about that. [00:26:44] Like why is the laws relating to drinking? Likewise, the law as far as voting is concerned, what we're saying now, Mr. Speaker [00:26:54] is [00:26:56] that we are going to have an age whereby certain acts are acceptable above an age that unacceptable below that age. And this is one of the difficulties that I find in making a decision. As far as changing this legislation is concerned. I fully [00:27:17] appreciate the [00:27:18] fact that the the is this anomaly does exist to the law but is equally true to say that as has been pointed out by the member for Rodney, that is that there is no mandatory sentence attached to [00:27:37] this [00:27:38] as it appears on the board for the moment. In other words, there is no imprisonment involved and a lot has been made of this side of the argument. But as I say, it has not been proved and shown [00:27:54] that that [00:27:56] is sufficient reason for changing the law. Think when we make a change in the law, we must be extremely careful. I see that has been pointed out [00:28:08] in the endless bill, [00:28:11] that everything relates to this magic age. It does appear that we don't consider the various people above that age can be influenced [00:28:21] or can be seriously influenced. [00:28:24] But I would suggest, Mr. Speaker that they [00:28:27] and they are and can be seriously influence and generally [00:28:32] have a serious effect on the lowering of the moral standards. I think [00:28:39] a great disservice is done to this cause by such movements as the gay liberation movement and some of their publications. And I don't believe anybody in this house would condone the material which they put out. I'm saying here particular issues of their of some of their brands. I'm referring particular to one extremely offensive article, which appeared from Christchurch earlier this year. This was written by a self confessed, practicing homosexual. [00:29:14] And he was glorifying the acts [00:29:16] of the errors. He went to state. [00:29:20] The Thousand homeless act had been [00:29:24] that had been acted. [00:29:28] Were actually changed psychologically as a result of it. I'm quite certain this area a lot of very [00:29:35] serious [00:29:36] and careful thought [00:29:38] should be given before [00:29:40] making a move to change this legislation. I think it has also been very noticeable while the agitation to change the bill has been going on the act rather, has been going on for many years. It's been evident that these groups have been operating the streets [00:30:01] have been [00:30:03] putting out an increasing volume of material and literature to advance the cause. But I think it is having the reserve reverse [00:30:13] effect as far as the public is concerned. [00:30:17] While I do believe that the could be a change made to the law, I am not convinced and have not been convinced from the arguments that this bill is presented over the amendments suggested would answer the necessary criteria, which would be required to make a change which would be to the advancements and in the interests of our society. [00:30:47] For this reason, Mr. Speaker, [00:30:49] I find it impossible to support this bill while recognizing the difficulties when they in the end dividuals problems that are associated with it. I fail at the bill in its present form, does not and would not do what it claims to [00:31:11] be, Mr. [00:31:14] Speaker, I rise right under the bank to speak briefly on this bill said, [00:31:20] I like my colleague, the member for Franklin, I was involved early in the discussions with the member for a month with those who sought a reform in the law. [00:31:32] And I listened, sir with interest to the submissions I faced before us, and to the argument say advanced [00:31:39] I must confess that they were unable [00:31:43] to show us or to indicate to us where the operation of the present law was repressive on anyone was being harsh. On those you had a natural inclination towards homosexual acts. [00:31:59] Sarah [00:32:00] Stipe quite clearly. role now I understand and sympathize with the intention of this bill. I will not be voting for the second reading [00:32:11] of this. [00:32:12] The reasons advanced for the bill for broadly into three main categories as I heal, one compassion reloadable center compassion for those who are so inclined to that the Laura's present written, cannot be enforced. And three at the present law permits the ostracization or blackmail of a person so inclined. [00:32:43] Can we briefly look at those three items [00:32:48] there are many sectors in society so I submit here require compassion. [00:32:53] But they all come under the same general law. We have and we know within this Are those who are [00:33:02] much more prone to violence? Much more primitive objects. And yet I, sir, excuse me, [00:33:14] sir commander, the general bill, regarding violence in society. [00:33:21] We also have the [00:33:22] question of the law been unable to be enforced. [00:33:27] There are many laws that are extremely difficult to enforce. The simple law on faith is most probably enforced only 50% of times. That's the case. [00:33:38] But we do not suggest that we all the law, [00:33:40] because it's difficult to enforce that law or many others. We also then look at the equation of blackmail. [00:33:50] Sir, unless the place the Saudis [00:33:53] attitudes towards the [00:33:55] state of active homosexual alters the process ability of blackmail will not be removed by the passage of the legislation we are present tonight. So there's also would not be achieved. If we vote in favor of the bill [00:34:12] speaks they're in favor of the bill advance. [00:34:15] But as I read they [00:34:16] all listen to them. That data consider that it is a natural act by a totally opposed to perverting the young and I opposed to learning the general standards of society. Sarah, I submit that there is some inconsistency. Because in this bill, and I have waited to hear some explanation for it. In this bill, we are excluded from its ramifications, those who are in the armed forces and those who are in police force. I submit that the passage of This legislation creates another anomaly then that for some reason, [00:35:06] those who are in the Army or in the police, I consider more likely [00:35:13] more susceptible, because of because they are exclusive to homosexual activities. Because they are exclude [00:35:23] the member for Rohini said they come under different act, but I am still not permitted in private, as I read the eighth by still not permitted in private to engage in homosexual activities. I would think Sarah and I would advance the idea that they would be probably no group as a group that would be more mature in a job look than those two groups in society. And I wonder Sarah and I would invite someone to advance reasons why it was considered desirable to exclude those two segments from the passage of this from the ramifications of this legislation, or the question that must be discussed and was discussed in the committee stages, I understand from reading the evidence, and also has been raised in this house. This is the question of the definition of an adult. The bill is originally introduced except to the the old standard, if we might term it that have an adult 21 years. The bill has now allowed that lower that to the age of 20. But as you are aware, so there is considerable agitation among those who support a reform and the law, that the age should be lowered substantially below that of 20 years. And it is advanced by way of argument that head for sexual activity is permitted at the age of 16. That you are permitted to vote at the age of 18. And that it is repressive. There in this field of sexual activity, should be restrained until the age of three. And probably the most all the stronger arguments. The strong arguments strongest arguments advance in favor of this was from the Methodist churches submissions or the the public questions committee of the Methodist Church be more accurate. And I said there is justification for reducing the size to 18 years or alternatively to 16 years and supportive reducing the it to 16 years and the proposed amendment. It is noted that a girl of 16 years my consent to carnal knowledge with a man it is difficult to find reasons that will permit such a girl to make a decision concerning a sexual conduct with either a male or a female, but yet deny the same right and responsibility to a 16 year old male. So there are strong arguments abroad sir to reduce the age To 16, because that is the heterosexual lines. But sir, we must look at this question one step further, you will be aware that there is strong support in the community to lowering the age in which contraceptive advice and paraphernalia can be supplied to young girls. And it is logical that if we supply this to young girls, [00:38:24] we will have to lower the age [00:38:26] of consent for girls to less than 16 years. And we then can advance the argument that was advanced before that we would have below the age of homosexual activity to a similar [00:38:38] lower high. [00:38:40] It is clear that the reason that the bill and I'm quite sure this is the intention of a member for a man who is moving it has retained an age of 20 years is because he wants to be sure that a person has this strong and permanent orientation. Towards homosexual activities, and that those of a younger age should not be attracted temporarily, and then finally committed to this type of action or this type this type of sexual activity. But, sir, is that if we pass this bill, we will again, be asked to reduce the age within the next few years on a continuing downward Skype. And then we run into not only the Armed Forces because we have a single group of miles together, not only the police, we run into the additional problems of our single sex schools, who would then be placed in the same position, and will we exclude those from a passage of some future legislation. So [00:39:46] I believe that the [00:39:48] bill containing to correct the situation, which is frankly untidy, would produce the situation which would be equally untidy and I don't in any way, believe that the present situation is a perfect solution. Because I don't believe there is a perfect solution. But what we have to ask ourselves is whether the alternative proposed under this bill [00:40:13] would improve [00:40:14] the situation or whether it would not enter my submissions it would not serve. There's been some discussion on the question of morality and its place in relation to the law. And there is some conflict You know, there. [00:40:29] But Western societies laws are historically based on traditional morality, [00:40:35] and that I think is a statement of fact. [00:40:38] And let us consider on what other buys or other God will we use to buy cielos. [00:40:48] If we, if we do not have this spice to ellos what will we substitute? [00:40:57] I submit and I know that there are many interpretations as to where a moral stance should be taken. But I do not believe that as simple or as accurate to say that morality has no place in drafting laws in this country. It has always been a guideline. It is always established [00:41:19] some degree [00:41:21] of parameters on an area under discussion, and always provided lawmakers down through history and you're dealing with guidance, if not direct solutions to the problems of writing law. [00:41:37] Sir, it's been [00:41:39] put forward by many [00:41:43] fat there is no solution to the problem of a homosexual to place them in prison. [00:41:49] I don't disagree with that. [00:41:53] But sir, the position is quite clear. The law does not automatically [00:42:00] On those very rare occasions that a homosexual is brought before the court have to punish such a person to prison. [00:42:08] There are many other punishments that are available to the law. [00:42:12] And this Sarah, I think, should be understand should be understood by all, it is not simply a matter of immediately ending up in jail and I would, I would suggest on the evidence that was for the discussions I had earlier before this bill was brought to the house, that there are very, very few homosexuals in jail for the simple reason all the sole reason that they are practicing homosexual, there is one [00:42:44] and this is that there is no law against having homosexual inclinations. None whatsoever. [00:42:53] There is no law for being hot tempered, open and trying to be like [00:43:01] There is a law. There is a law against violence when you actively participate in bars. There's a law against light fingers, if you actively steal something, there is a law against homosexual activities when you partake not merely sir, the condition of being a homosexual is not illegal under the law as a standard at the present time, [00:43:25] sir, for these reasons, [00:43:28] and for others, I will be fighting against the second reading of this book. [00:43:38] Question has been [00:43:40] quite extensively I have nothing much [00:43:43] additional to add, but [00:43:45] I intend to support the second reading because I believe the present law is based, [00:43:51] illogical, [00:43:52] and unfair and unenforceable. [00:43:55] It's a logical and fair analysis. Good night, guys. [00:44:00] Man, I think, [00:44:02] first of all, if in fact the state isn't have the power of easy access to the bedrooms of the nation, and once we give them left right [00:44:12] to try and [00:44:14] determine or to influence, what they are unnatural acts and what are unnatural acts, what is normal, what is a normal way we create a dangerous precedent that the state should not become involved in these issues in that way. I think except also, some people, there's no matter what their sexual inclinations are. They've got [00:44:43] no [00:44:44] way whatsoever of changing any more than I ever changing their eyes from blue to brown. I do accept that all these people in the past have been subject to write their own misery. They've been subject to intimidation by being subject to [00:45:02] blackmail. [00:45:04] And that's undesirable. I also accepted I support for Dr was proposition that there should be some restraint on the activities of those who seek to advocate a different lifestyle. I think these extremists do the cause a disservice. Because I do believe in these cases that people with bisexuals or tendencies can be influenced and if they are exposed at an early age to this [00:45:36] type of [00:45:38] promotion, if you like that can influence them and do untold have and whilst I can't accept the amendments that Dr was proposed, I would still like to examine the opportunity later on, to see if something can be done in this regard because I think it is quite important my Every days at see quite a bit of this activity going on. So enough database convinced me that young people can be influenced in a way that they should not be. I think no matter what the lower is the stage social stigma will remain. And that's still the most powerful influence against the type of activity that's referred to here. But I say again, at the present law is a logical, [00:46:30] unenforceable, and I intend to support the further progress of this major before the House [00:46:40] Speaker during the course of the 1972 election campaign, I and I have no idea nice candidates for Parliament at that time. were asked at some stage on a public platform, what are these were relating to homosexuality. I gave What? I know to be an honest answer at that time, I was not fully enough informed as to the full ramifications of any proposed change, to be able to state categorically at that time, my views on the issue, but I did give a pledge to people of my electorate in 1972, that I would apprise myself of the background and the ramifications of any proposed change. In this I have done. [00:47:35] There has been a lot of debates about a program, the Dr. Brian Edwards program on TV, [00:47:42] which [00:47:44] I openly discuss the whole practice of homosexuality. within one week of that program during the course of my moving around my liquid I met with and had a very forthright discussion with one of the people who participated in that particular program. I must confess that as a result of all the discussions and the welter of Peiffer observations, observations that I is someone in this house come into during the debate on the hospital's Amendment Bill have been torn in two directions. And I have been asking myself if the law as a prison written and more importantly interpreted by authorities as oppressive and unfair to practicing homosexuals. I think four points image and I will be brief and my observations. Every parliament and every country legislates in some way in the moral field. Under the existing law, no homosexual To go to jail, there is no mandatory jail sentence. Although conceivably, as the law stands now, there is a maximum jail sentence which can be imposed if we remove the legal sanction regarding adult time and sexuality, the fact is that, in my opinion, the social stigma remains and this point was confirmed by the Minister privacy's trade just a few minutes ago, the proposed bill won't mean more acceptance for them. And as other members have observed, it is possible that if this major is passed, they will be public pressure on parliament, again in a year or two or five, to reduce the age of consent in this regard down to us 1316 and so on. If the law has changed now, will it lead to a more overt aggressiveness on the part of famous sexual sexuals? We can only speculate on that. But again, I believe that if any member has any doubt, he should vote against the bill. The fact is that we do have a law on our statute books now. And we are proposing to amend that, in the way suggested by my colleague the member for Egmont and as brought out in the select committee hearings. Any enactment, Mr. Speaker by this parliament to change the law must be seeing rightly or wrongly, to condone the act of homosexuality. I know that is not the intent of the bill and certainly not the intent of my probably the member fragment, but it will be seen [00:51:00] rightly or wrongly, [00:51:01] by the public, to, in some degree condone the hammer sexually. I agree that the state has no place in the bedroom of the country, that the fact is that we are debating here, something that goes far beyond that. I do not believe that the amendment will lift the threat of blackmail, which is approved by all members of the sales. Everyone who has spoken either in favor or against the bill has made some passing reference to that fact. No one has yet convinced me or is made any strong attempt to indicate that homosexual behavior is normal or natural. It is isotype. many miles of course born with strong homosexual traits and that is accepted by me But I asked myself, should we do anything as a parliament to encourage or condone a move to a situation where homosexuality is accepted and where we might give people who are torn between the homosexual and heterosexual situation to give them the easy way as it were to adopt the homosexual trade? I don't believe it is the wrong indeed the duty of Parliament to do such a thing. Mr. Speaker, I am very, very sympathetic to the plight of milesi find that they have strong homosexual characteristics and I do not say that in any patronizing manner. I believe that with help certain of these people can be counsel to help them through what is offered Often for them a very difficult period. And of course, the the whole question of the home environment has been mentioned and brought out an earlier debate and I will not elaborate further on it. But I, I know that that does not cover the whole situation. I repeat again that I have white up in my own conscience, all of us that have been experienced over the last two and a half years since the election and when I gave a promise to the people of my electorate that I would look very, very closely at the ramifications of chain. [00:53:38] I am [00:53:39] finally swayed by the fact that under the law as it is written and interpreted now, there is no jail sentence mandatory, no mandatory jail sentence, which can or will likely be imposed by the courts of New Zealand. I am also [00:53:59] joined To the fact that [00:54:03] the passage of this bill will not change the social stigma which will attach to people who are homosexual. Mr. Speaker, it's after taking into account all of these considerations, without malice, or heat or antagonism to any person that I will be voting against the second reading of this bill. [00:54:29] Right honorable so john Marshall. [00:54:34] I just want to say just simply and directly at the beginning of what I [00:54:40] wish to say about this bill of I'm opposed to legalizing homosexual behavior. [00:54:46] My view it's an unnatural act. [00:54:50] I don't see any way in which it could [00:54:53] reasonably be claimed to be otherwise. The human body is made for [00:54:59] sexual relations between a man and a [00:55:01] woman, not [00:55:05] a man with another man. And as I see it, it is. Yes. [00:55:13] And for me, [00:55:16] that seems to mean that homosexual behavior, whether the dream to men or women is a position. [00:55:27] And for me it is not only unnatural, but repulsive. [00:55:34] There are some who just take that view, but [00:55:38] I think a distinction should be made very clearly between homosexual tendencies, [00:55:45] which some people unfortunately have, [00:55:49] and how much sexual behavior [00:55:52] there I believe a number of people do [00:55:57] homosexuals. [00:56:00] Live with the problem and keep it to themselves. [00:56:05] And for them, there is no condemnation, [00:56:09] that there should be understanding and commendation for the restraint that they share. And there is nothing illegal [00:56:18] or immoral being a homosexual. [00:56:23] What most people and as far as I can [00:56:26] gather all members of the House regarded as immoral [00:56:32] is the performing of sexual experts persons of the same things. [00:56:38] I would agree that [00:56:41] sexual behavior was only a moral issue. You have a sexual behavior between two people have the same second [00:56:48] head no as a consequence, [00:56:52] that they might be left as a matter of morality and [00:56:59] in my view, You [00:57:00] how much sexual behavior does raise more than moral issues. I believe it has social consequences. I believe it has [00:57:11] public [00:57:13] consequences, which ought to be the concern of the community and the responsibility of the state [00:57:23] in the first place, [00:57:25] and I think that it is a responsibility of the state. And I'm not talking now about government but of [00:57:33] the community as a whole, [00:57:37] to be concerned about the preservation and protection of the family. [00:57:43] I think the maintenance of family life is important for the stability and the happiness of that community. [00:57:52] And I'm therefore concerned [00:57:55] that I form of contact which in my view is With [00:58:01] the preservation of [00:58:04] family life [00:58:06] should be legalized. I believe there are people who have, as I've said homosexual tendencies, do not give white to them. [00:58:18] There are others who [00:58:20] might [00:58:21] go either way, you might [00:58:25] become addicted to homosexual behavior or [00:58:27] who might [00:58:29] develop as normal people having [00:58:33] normal sexual relationships. [00:58:36] If homosexual behavior were legalized, as this bill proposed, it would cease to have the restraint of the law. To the extent that it then became more widely practiced, it would in my view, tend to undermine what might otherwise have been a normal family relationship. For the same reason, legalizing of homosexual behavior would strike at a fundamental responsibility of the state, as I see it, to protect the community from the spread of practices which are unnatural, which are a perversion [00:59:18] and which if [00:59:20] I were to spread would threaten the future of the right. [00:59:25] the spreading [00:59:28] of this and natural progression in my view, has in it the seeds of national degeneration that have been speakers in this debate. You have referred to the fact that in Britain and in a number of other countries, homosexual behavior between consenting mouths and private has been legalized. And they have claimed that this has been done without a parent. Hmm. I wish I could feel it. That was sad. But I don't think that the President social and economic conditions in Britain, name only one country provide a model for this country to follow. It is sad that this should be sad. It's very sad for those who have a great effect for but [01:00:22] the plain fact is that malaise has come upon that once great country. [01:00:29] There is a general permissiveness, the lack of discipline and self control, which I would like to see encouraged in this country. [01:00:40] The attitude to homosexual behavior in Britain, of course, it's just a small facet of that general malaise, but I want to have no part of it. [01:00:52] It's been claimed in this debate, and I believe wrongly that the law as it now stands, it's not enforced and not enforceable. [01:01:02] It's true that the police don't invade [01:01:07] private places [01:01:08] where these offenses are likely to be reformed. I certainly wouldn't support that [01:01:13] kind of [01:01:17] intrusion. [01:01:19] But when the police do have evidence [01:01:21] of these offenses proceedings that taken them the ordinary course of the administration of the [01:01:26] law. [01:01:28] This [01:01:30] is common enough in the administration of laws of the sky and is not a reason for repeating. There is some evidence that wife beating still goes on to some extent in this country and occasionally a husband is [01:01:48] brought before the court for assaulting his wife. [01:01:52] But the fact that very few such cases come to the notice of the police, even though as I am Maybe more prevalent [01:02:02] is not an argument for legalizing life. [01:02:06] And similarly, the fact that there are very few cases of prosecutions for [01:02:14] homosexual behavior is not a case for repeating the law. To speak, I would concede that imprisonment is not normally an appropriate punishment. But as has been pointed out, that is not the end the deterrent is available to the law. I would set the table right, a reform if it's necessary to amend the law to provide for other forms of punishment for periodic detention for fines for probation for requirements system treatment. I believe that that can In any case, be done. Now, [01:02:58] just speak of the final comment that I make is that I [01:03:02] would hope that if this bill does get to the committee status, that the amendment proposed by the member for power will not be will not be accepted. It seems to me that that and I'm proposed to debate the merits of it, that would be a very retrograde step to speak up for these reasons. [01:03:26] I am not prepared to support this bill. [01:03:31] In reply, to speak, what do you think all members who have taken part in this debate [01:03:39] I have an understanding [01:03:42] for and with those who have struggled with a consensus before they have decided [01:03:47] how they will speak [01:03:49] in this debate, and how they will vote on this major. [01:03:54] I think all of us have been able to think past and in distinction that we have within us, and consider the plight of people whose feelings we know we do not feel it is easily to comprehend that to speak naturally. I think those you who have indicated their supports their support for the provisions in my bill, and particularly those who have stood on their feet and this house and have acknowledged that over the course of years, they have changed their opinion, never an easy thing to do. I also understand those who have spoken against the proposals of the crimes Amendment Bill advocate because of a deep religious conviction year I know there are many others have equally deep religious convictions who strongly favor the measure. Mr. Speaker, one cannot help but be persuaded by the support from from a wide section of the established churches for the provisions that are contained in my bill. Mr. Speaker. There have been some suggestion and the K one particularly from my colleague member Rodney that well, we shouldn't really change that or even proposed to change it because there's no one in prison at the present time. So I can only refer him to submissions that were made by the New Zealand association of probation officer to the select committee. And I said this arrest trial and sentence for a homosexual is otherwise I law abiding citizen can be devastating. Career Opportunities may be destroyed. Purpose and the goal in life may be lost. satisfactory adjustment and I worthwhile contribution to society can become more difficult [01:06:00] Furthermore, they say, [01:06:02] it may be argued that adult persons engage in homosexual activities and private at the present time, not at risk of prosecution. So, the probation officers say this, in our experience, this is not always they there also remains for the persons concerned, I knowledge the law has been broken a constant fear of detection and the possibility of the various forms [01:06:33] of exhaust exhaust explosion. [01:06:37] Mr. Mr. Speaker, [01:06:42] I do not propose to attribute to specific members whose arguments have been in opposition to the bill. But let me say this, I find it difficult to understand the opinion of members who's in flexibility opinion has required them to argue on matters not contain, nor even implied in the measure. The question of the age of consent was argued on the basis of next it will be it, then it may be 16, then it may be 14, then it might disappear altogether. So, the members who use these arguments know full well that a number of submissions were made to the select committee, and the submissions advocated allow age of consent for close to the bill. So that in spite of this, the consensus of opinion of the committee and the provisions of this bill was the that the age of consent should be the age of 20. Some who have argued against the bill Have equated legality with morality as indeed the said john that who preceded me immediately in this debate, there have been other criticisms about the definition of in private and a criticism of the definition of a place of resolve from a member of the town and I point out that those matters are not contained in the bill, they have been removed by the amendments. Mr. Speaker, I make the point, as I have done time and again, that it is essential we define between what is legal and what is moral. So, those who oppose the bill have three main arguments. society needs a moral code any breach of his code, we can succeed at the society, even when no harm is accompanying the breach. Therefore, the law should reinforce this moral code. But surely, this can only apply when everyone shares the same code of morality. And those who support this idea must claim that morality must be one with the whole of society today, sir, our society is heterogeneous, very there are various views of the morality involved, and I'm sure that they present at present a majority of New Zealanders support a change in the law. So in any case, how does one judge in a law what is moral? Secondly, Sir, it is said that punishing the homosexual demonstrates society's condemnation of the air. So, punishment is usually held to be either retribution or the terror that it is. It does something to the individual to make him atone for what he's done for prevents others. from doing the same thing, in fact, the president law does. So few times there are consequently few prosecutions. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that society as a whole cannot feel strongly about the need for punishment. And other point of view, the did that if society is more, don't condemn act, then they must be taken to condone them. That is blink not current amount of sociological research that shows that people don't necessarily associate what is morally wrong with what is illegal, and that by repealing a law, people would not feel that moral sanctions weakened. Sadly, thirdly said there are those who state that the law though ineffective is I want Showing society's condemnation, and its repeal would weaken the moral condemnation and lead to a change of morality and more permissiveness. So I believe this is completely incorrect. People have a very clear idea on what is morally wrong at [01:11:22] the same time, they have a very unclear idea of what is against the law. Let me ask you this question, sir. What good does it have? is it to have a law against homosexuality, if the law doesn't stop those who at present homosexuals ends and sending sending these people to prison won't stop them either, Mr. Speaker, there is no point in a member suggesting well, although the penalty is not imposed, we will leave it there. It is our responsibility as legislators to ensure that penalties fit the crime, and that the penalties are applied, so unless the law is more rigidly enforced, then at present fear of being caught won't stop anyone either. In fact, legal enforcement of morality by punishment may indeed be a bag, a bad thing. There is a grave danger, there's a moral sense may wither away and leave only a fear of punishment. Mr. Speaker, people conforming through fear, and not through belief, I don't believe is a solution that is sought even by those who oppose this measure. So everyone has the right to moral view and the right to persuade or educate others to know what is morally right. But the law does not do this. And nor should it have responsibility. So let me repeat my invitation to those members who who have argued that the laws and the morals are in the visible, if I consider that lesbian acts are immoral, and I believe that they would hold this point of view, then let one of them introduced a bill making this the case. Similarly, if those opposed to the reform in my measure, insist that the present law is is the end for morality, then it is their responsibility to see that they present law is enforced. Otherwise, the case has no logic. So, my amendment to the crime Zach is proposed on the basis of humanity, of logic, and of equality. I believe New Zealand is a country where these values held high So let me conclude my summary by repeating what I said in my introductory speech. There are times and countries where humanity becomes lost in laws inherited from the past. Equity, compassion and logic, each demand that Parliament's all to such laws. So I move the second reading of the crimes Amendment Bill. [01:14:28] The question is what the crimes Amendment Bill the narrator second time, [01:14:32] as many years of that opinion will say I [01:14:35] company opinion will say now. [01:14:39] Division call call [01:14:41] ringing the bells. [01:14:45] bells are ringing and Parliament's buildings summoning or members to the chamber debate and a division [01:14:52] will return to the house and Mr. Speaker puts the question again [01:14:56] until this happens and interview in interval Music [01:15:25] question is that the crimes amendment will be now read a second time. The eyes will go to the right. The nose will go to the left. [01:15:33] Tell us for the eyes Mr. v. Young [01:15:35] and Dr. Beth. Hello. [01:15:38] The Honorable mr. Thompson.

This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It is not a transcript, it has not been checked by humans and will contain many errors. However it is useful for searching on keywords and themes.