Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient: Victoria University Students' Paper. Vol. 30, No. 10. 1967.

Editorials

page 6

Editorials

July 28, 1967

Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of VUWSA,

Law needs humanising

Homosexual Law reform was highlighted by the recent decision of Mr. H. J. Evans, SM, to revoke convictions for homosexual acts of two Christchurch men. A discharge was made under Section 42 of the Criminal Justice Act.

The learned Magistrate emphasised that the acts took place in private between fully consenting adults.

Movement of "informed and responsible public opinion" in this country, coupled with the changing law in England, were cited in support of the decision.

Though it is doubtful that decisions should be made on the basis of changing public opinion, or law in other countries, the humanism must be applauded.

Homosexuality is classified in the International Classification of Diseases and Disorders as a behaviour disorder. Experts tend to agree that it is a psychosexual state resulting from varied causes, generally beyond the homosexual's control.

Social upbringing figures high on any casual list.

In the last issue Salient published an article by the NCC chaplain, Rev John Murray, which urges the Church to find a way for the homosexual "to enjoy the companionship and love of another person which God desires for everyone."

An article in this issue by the Student Counsellor, Dr. A. J. W. Taylor, suggests where society condemns adult homosexuals, "it may be using them as scapegoats."

Any suggestion that homosexuality is destructive of social standards may be discounted. In France, Italy, Belgium, and many other countries, law does not seek to forbid homosexual behaviour —there have been no dire consequences.

It is unfortunate that some high ranking members of our police force do not recognise this.

Evidence suggesting homosexuality is not a perversion is incontrovertible. Society should accept it as a mere abnormality not to be punishable by law.

If such a view is unacceptable at least admit that homosexual behaviour between consenting adults is a matter of private morality. So private in fact, that the law has no business in interfering.

Let us hope that Parliament will act quickly to humanise the law.

—G.P.C.

Halls of residence — are they worth it?

With the current Combined Churches Halls of Residence Appeal well under way students can look forward to relief in the accommodation situation sometime in the future.

However, at well over $4000 per bed, Halls of Residence are the most expensive method yet devised for accommodating students, and have been publicly questioned as the best way of solving the problem.

Statistics show students do not favour Halls of Residence over flats for instance, which can be built at much lower cost.

However, the atmosphere of the Hostel is often helpful in getting the first year students to meet others and participate more fully in university life.

Over the past few years the universities and students have convinced the Government of the desirability of building Halls of Residence for students.

In response the Government announced in its 1965 Budget an 80 per cent subsidy on Halls of Residence up to $3600 per bed. A loan of up to 10 per cent was also allowed for.

Consequently Halls are to the charitable organisation which qualify for the subsidy, the most attractive proposition. Clearly the first step necessary is for the Government to extend the subsidy scheme to include flats.

It has been questioned whether the present scheme of leaving the responsibility of student accommodation to the inclinations of charitable groups, mostly churches, is in the general interest.

It does appear a little paradoxical that while the Government accepts responsibility for the construction of sufficient buildings to house all students, it has no desire to take a direct hand in the planning and construction of accommodation facilities. Experience has shown students need a particular type of accommodation close to the campus itself if they are to be most efficient.

Objections have also been raised against the churches owning what amounts to community subsidised buildings. According to the Christ-church Press last week students at a Canterbury Hostel are required to attend services in the chapel.

While the current Halls campaign will eventually benefit students at Victoria it is hoped an investigation of the economics of student accommodation will be instituted in order that the community may get best value for its money.

—B.G.S.