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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS