Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Singapore court denies Lord Goldsmith permission to defend gay rights case in country

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Another British colony enthusiatically prosecuting laws introduced by their former oppressors. Why can they not see what is right and not follow sheepishly the Judeo-Christian laws their Empirical masters imposed on them?

    1. ‘Imperial’, not ‘Empirical’, which means something quite different.

      And just to be precise, Singapore in its present form was founded and created by the British, it wasn’t conquered or taken over by force. (One reason why ethnic Chinese, rather than Malays, dominate the society today.)

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 20 Sep 2013, 4:19pm

      So how would you explain former French colonies, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Niger, Senegal among others who criminalise homosexuality and issue punitive jail sentences? Although that wasn’t a legacy of French colonialism it doesn’t always follow that a nation ‘oppressed’ by the British has to retain such laws. They wanted independence, so we gave it to them. Cases in point, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, some of the former American colonial states and India who’ve since abolished criminalisation, several of them with equal marriage already in force and way ahead of the UK. I’m sick and tired of the blame game. That was then, many many decades ago but this is NOW.

      1. Pretty condescending attitude Robert. You gave the former American colonies their independence? I believe the American colonists won a war against you to gain their independence…I think the American expression is “they whipped your butt good”. As for Canada, Australia and New Zealand what were you going to do, go to war to keep them as colonies as well?I gathered you learnt a lesson from your American experience. As for India and many other former colonies you had no choice in the matter. Britain simply could neither hold onto or afford to maintain an Empire.
        And I don’t believe time diminishes responsibility for what could only be considered in modern terms as crimes against humanity … but was formerly referred to as Imperialism.
        Many commentators continually point the finger at the RCC for the Spanish Inquisition and God only knows what else that happened centuries ago.
        So I gather it is alright to play the blame game just so long as it isn’t your lot being blamed?

      2. de Villiers 21 Sep 2013, 5:23pm

        Jake28, I do not agree. English people can today speak of Napoleon without the disgust that existed at the time he tried to impose the Continental system to defeat England. They can speak of the French ambitions of those times in neutral terms without seeking to judge or afford responsibility on to French people today. In this way alternatively with the Spanish inquisition.

  2. The Bishop 3 Oct 2013, 4:00pm

    The Article says the appeal has been refused, but actually it hasn’t been heard yet. The refusal was to deny Lord Goldsmith a right of audience, despite his clear qualification to do so.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all