The Alliance for the Happiness of Future Generations, an anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) group in which conservative Christians are a majority, has again launched a petition for a “marriage definition referendum” and last week submitted a proposal to the Central Election Commission.
The proposal calls for “a referendum on the definition of marriage,” yet its real purpose is to oppose the legalization of same-sex marriage.
To justify the legitimacy of its proposal, the alliance said in a news release that “holding a referendum is the exemplification of a democratic country and democracy is the pride of Taiwan.”
Using “democracy” to defend a referendum that is against same-sex marriage is to misunderstand the concept of democracy by erroneously simplifying it to mean “protest through the ballot box.” It also ignores that democratic politics should be founded upon the fundamentals of social equality and justice.
While holding referendums is an essential aspect of a democracy and public consensus plays a vital role in politics, understanding democracy as merely an exercise in majority rule is extremely dangerous. When dialogue cannot be conducted fairly, the rights of minority groups are easily compromised.
A referendum on the rights of minority groups would likely only reflect social prejudices rather than social justice.
This is exactly the case with the anti-LGBT alliance: They keep proposing referendums that are against same-sex marriage by manipulating the logic of majority rule to prevent LGBT people — who form a minority — from striving for equal civil rights.
About half a century ago, many US states still had laws that prohibited interracial marriage. It was not until the 1967 case of Loving versus Virginia that the US Supreme Court ruled marriage between white and black persons legal.
Yet, according to opinion polls at that time, no less than 70 percent of US citizens opposed interracial marriage. If a referendum had been held, the result might have produced a huge step backward for fundamental human rights in the US.
In the past few years, Taiwanese anti-LGBT groups have proposed a series of referendums that were opposed to same-sex marriage, while social campaign groups have repeatedly made it clear in response that issues of human rights should never be determined by casting votes.
Dealing with the rights of minority groups through referenda not only demonstrates a misunderstanding of democracy, but would also be an abuse of the referendum process which deprives society of opportunities to more proactively facilitate equality and social justice.
Last year, the Council of Grand Justices ruled in favor of social campaign groups in a constitutional interpretation on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage: “Homosexuals, due to demographic structure, have been a discrete and insular minority in society. Impacted by stereotypes, they have been among those lacking political power for a long time, unable to overturn their legally disadvantaged status through ordinary democratic process.”
Despite the council asserting gay people’s equal civil rights through a constitutional interpretation, anti-LGBT groups continue to promote a referendum.
These groups, with their strong religious backgrounds, will never give up, just as there are still racist extremists in the US, despite interracial marriage being legal for half a century.
Conservatives and prejudice will not disappear overnight, but the struggle for social justice and equality should never be compromised. Democracy does not exist to serve prejudice.
Jiang Ho-ching is a doctoral candidate in anthropology at American University in Washington.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry