Disagreement with Pink Dot is not hate

I agree with the writer of “End the slurs on LGBT people and their allies” (June 22, online) that we should support a society where everyone is treated with dignity and create a safe society, where discourse is civil.

Freedom of speech is the lifeblood of a healthy democracy in Singapore, enabling citizens to participate in matters of public policy. Conversely, name-calling and ad hominem arguments are an abuse of speech and do not advance democratic discourse.

Every person has intrinsic worth and dignity, and should be treated with equal respect. To quote the writer, we “must not practise double standards” in our treatment of people.

Regrettably, her letter fell short of her own standards, as she had referred to those who disagree with the Pink Dot event as “hatemongers” and “bigots”. While people are equal, not all behaviours or lifestyles are the same.

Love is not the unconditional approval of everything a person does. Likewise, disagreement with others’ lifestyles is not hate.

Indeed, tolerance implies disagreement and is expressed in the saying, “I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Just as it is inappropriate to hurl slurs at those who identify as being LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender) or those who support events like Pink Dot, it is equally inappropriate to insult those who disagree with LGBT lifestyles.

Going forward as a society, people on all sides of the debate should engage respectfully in constructive dialogue. Whatever one’s perspective on LGBT issues, we should disagree without being disagreeable or denying others the right to express their views.