Representatives of religious groups and Taipei City councilors have attacked plans by the Taipei City Government's Department of Civil Affairs to fund this year's parade by the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) Civil Rights Movement.
Some have stated in public that tolerating homosexual behavior would cause "sanitary problems" and make Taipei a "breeding ground" for HIV/AIDS. They even consider homosexuality a sin that violates good morals and needs to be "corrected."
This blatant and openly homophobic discourse highlights the gravity of discrimination in Taiwan and how urgent it is that this discrimination is dealt with. The most pressing task for civil rights groups, civic organizations and all levels of government right now is to promote an anti-discrimination law to combat mainstream social prejudice and ensure basic civil rights for disadvantaged and non-mainstream groups.
The criticism leveled by religious groups is based on several rational and scientific fallacies. Homosexual orientation is not something that can be "corrected," homosexuality is not the primary source of HIV/AIDS, nor will legalizing same-sex marriage lead to the extinction of the entire human race, since same-sex marriage will not "correct" the sexual orientation of heterosexuals and turn them into homosexuals. The deeper issue is the relationship between values and power.
Regardless of whether homosexuality or any other non-mainstream sexual orientation is genetically determined or voluntarily chosen, why should the state or society try to "correct" these orientations? Even if same-sex marriage were to be legalized in Taiwan, would this inconvenience heterosexuals in any direct way?
In a secular, pluralistic society in which church and state are separated, sexual orientation is a matter of individual choice and practice.
As long as it doesn't interfere with the lives of other people, being either homosexual or heterosexual is part of our fundamental freedoms.
Unfortunately, the protectors of heterosexual dominance cannot tolerate the appearance of new and diverse social values, and they use public resources to suppress and discriminate against those who differ from them.
This merging of superior power with mainstream values and the rejection of the other is the essence of discrimination.
Taiwan has not experienced the frenzied student and civil rights movements that occurred in western Europe and the US during the 1960s. This is one reason why Taiwanese lack a sense of awareness and the ability to reflect on the issue of discrimination -- they seem to think that it is the natural order of things to bully the weak and let the majority steam-roller all over the minority.
In addition to the hateful anti-gay rhetoric of religious leaders and politicians, other examples of how Taiwanese society believes in the law of the jungle and that might makes right include the selective approach police officers apply to home parties organized by homosexuals, politicians' contemptuous comments about female immigrants from Southeast Asia and China, and the hostile attitudes in residential communities toward people with HIV/AIDS or those with physical or mental problems moving into their community.
In dealing with the problem of discrimination, the government should not organize activities or offer benefits out of pity or as if it were acting out of charity. Rather, it should actively work to correct such malign social prejudice and prevent discrimination and prejudice from festering in public life.
Although the city government, for example, has sponsored activities which have achieved good results and international visibility, it has no concrete and effective anti-discrimination regulations to guarantee that marginalized groups -- including homosexuals -- do not suffer discrimination and oppression.
The Taipei City Government's current draft self-governance ordinance for the protection of human rights (
This conciliatory way of "placating the weak, but not correcting the mainstream" is still very far from respect for human rights.
Taipei being the capital city of Taiwan, the government should immediately take the following steps:
First, the government should clearly declare a firm stance in this "cultural war." It should not be allowed to vilify a homosexual orientation and lifestyle, and the government should continue to support similar activities based on the spirit of preserving cultural diversity.
Second, it should formally respond to religious groups. Any government agency canceling or withdrawing sponsorship for LGBT activities for religious reasons may be in violation of the principle of separating church and state, which is ensured by the Constitution.
Third, as the basic law on human rights (
Bruce Liao is an assistant professor of law at Soochow University and an adviser to the Taipei City Government's Human Rights Protection Committee.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS