Meeting Discusses Homosexuality Law

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31498, 12 October 1967, Page 14

Meeting Discusses Homosexuality Law

It was improper for a detective superintendent to pronounce on the dangers and degradation of homosexual practices without backing his statements by facts and evidence, Dr J. R. E. Dobson told a meeting called last evening by the Howard League for Penal Reform to discuss homosexuality and the law.

Dr Dobson said there was no satisfactory evidence to show there were dangers in these practices.

“I asked him to back up the statements he made'to the Christchurch Lions Club. He said he would, and he hasn’t, and he thereby stands condemned,” Dr Dobson said. “Even if you could get some of your friends in the police to read something of recent research on the topic it would help. I do not believe all members of the police are as ignorant as the detective superintendent who made these comments,” said Dr Dobson.

He said that the public were ignorant about homosexuality. Persons would not read about it because they did not want to. They were content to allow legislation to continue aimed at the persecution of a minority. “In any case, in such a time of expenditure trimming we can’t afford to have the police hanging round public lavatories,” he said. The chairman of the league (Mr P. H. T. Alpers) said to about 30 persons at the meeting that it had been called because the time seemed ap-

propriate to do something about the topic. Historically, the league had an attitude towards it

“New Zealand as a whole has contented itself with following unquestionably the English, statutes. The New Zealand climate for thinking on philosophical and social subjects is such that it has drifted on ever since under the impression that this is a respectable law to have,” Mr Alpers said. “This is combined with an extraordinary reluctance to talk about the topic. The Wolfenden Report, however, has made some people think again,” he said. The two main events, which had impelled the league to call the meeting were the decision of a Christchurch magistrate to discharge two persons under the Criminal Justice Act with the Supreme Court decision on appeal to remit the case back to be dealt with by another magistrate, and the published address of the Minister of Justice (Mr Hanan) at Victoria University. in which he expressed sympathy with the notion of liberalising the law. “The minister implied that enlightened opinion favoured reform, but public opinion did not support such reform at present. The view that public opinion must support such

a move is one seriously open to question since public opinion impelled. Mr Hanan to say some harsh things about the Indecent Publications Tribunal.

“It is questionable whether that very wide public opinion should be consulted before a Government decision Is made,” he said. “Should it not be those who have at least read and z done some thinking on the topic?”

Mr Alpers said the justification for penal laws was that they acted as a deterrent and were an expression of public abhorrence.

It was open to question whether the law on homosexuality had any effect, and on the contrary, it gave the commission of the offence a furtive quality rendering it more difficult to detect It tended to bring out the more sordid aspects. “The public has no right to be abhorrent unless it is properly satisfied that harm is done to other people or the community as a whole. The question is does homosexual practice threaten the State or the community? For myself, I think the answer is no. “Assuming the practice takes place between adults, it is wholly uprroven that there is any corruption whatever. The assumption that a man may be tempted into homosexual practices is a complete misconception. A leopard can’t be made to change his. spots in that way,” he said. The Rev. W. S. Dawson said homosexuality was a human problem which should be dealt with in a humane way. “It would be unwise to conclude that we know all the answers on the problem and how it arises: I feel we have to be prepared to talk a lot more about these things,” he said. Other speakers expressed the view that homosexual practice was not in accordance with Christian teaching, and for that reason they were not in sympathy with the views expressed by members of the league in seeking reform.