A group calling itself the Alliance of Religious Groups for the Love of Families Taiwan held a press conference at the Legislative Yuan on Wednesday to denounce efforts to legalize same-sex marriage. However, what came across in statements was an appalling amount of claptrap and intolerance.
While everyone has the right to their own view on what does or should constitute a legal marriage, the pronouncements made by some of the religious representatives should not go unchallenged, especially because they fall into the same broad categories used by bigots of all stripes worldwide.
The first of these fallacies was “the end of civilization as we know it” warning. Unification Church Taiwan vice president Paul Chang (張全鋒) said legalizing same-sex marriage “is a downward step that will lead to the collapse of civilizations.” This warning is almost as old as time itself and is used for every manner of dire predictions. Civilizations do collapse, but as a result of a combination of factors including environmental and climate changes, hostile neighbors and social or cultural problems.
Lutheran Bishop Chen Chih-hung (陳志宏) raised the issue of family lineage and Taiwan’s declining birthrate, asking: “Would you like to see the birthrate continue to decline due to same-sex marriage?” and “If your child or grandchild told you that he or she is homosexual and your family lineage would end with them, could you accept it?”
Taiwan does have one of the lowest birthrates in the world and this has been the cause of much angst. The fertility rate fell to 0.9 births per woman in 2011, before rebounding to 1.265 at the beginning of this year, a bump that the Ministry of the Interior attributed to government policies such as subsidies and expanded preschool and daycare centers, and to the last lunar year being the Year of the Dragon, which is considered an auspicious time to give birth.
Women are choosing to have fewer children because of greater education and job opportunities for them, rising costs of education and living, lack of affordable childcare and other socio-economic factors. Same-sex unions are not a factor. Pressure from parents on their descendants can be intense, but that does not always lead to good marriages or children. Being gay also does not mean you cannot procreate or be a good parent.
Buddhist master Shih Ching-yao (釋淨耀) also focused on the need for families that produce children, which he termed both a duty and the basis of social stability. He probably did not intend to introduce a note of levity to proceedings by adding: “People should not sacrifice this important moral value just because they want to enjoy sex.”
In case these warnings were not enough to cause panic, Chang came out with several non sequiturs, such as “legalizing same-sex marriage is legalizing adultery, incest and group sex,” that the gay rights movement just wanted to create more homosexuals through group sex, and that children raised in same-sex families are more likely to become criminals or victims of sexual violence.
About the only positive thing to say about his fantasies is that at least he did not raise the possibility of same-sex marriages leading to human-animal marriages, as some politicians in the US have done.
Then Chen said: “Would you like to see more people being infected with AIDS due to same-sex marriage?” This was another non sequitur, as research reports have noted that while more than 90 percent of the people known to have HIV in Taiwan are male, since the mid-2000s, intravenous drug users have accounted for more than 50 percent of the new cases.
There should be a rational debate over whether to legalize same-sex marriage, just as there should be for any major change to the legal system. However, little of what was on display at the alliance’s press conference could be called rational. Despite the group’s name, there was also very little love.
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is