LGBTQIA is NOT a Human Right — it is a SEXUAL LIFESTYLE CHOICE & cannot be forced on others

 

 

The August 2025 visit of the UNHRC Head to Colombo revealed a disturbing trend. Instead of respecting Sri Lanka’s sovereignty, the High Commissioner demanded same-sex marriage legalization — a direct challenge to our constitutional, cultural, and moral framework. This push is part of a broader pattern: foreign diplomatic pressures, conditional aid, and international activism seeking to normalize LGBTQIA lifestyles in ways that undermine families and society with a larger sinister objective.

Sexual lifestyle choices can never be accepted as human rights.

 

1. Constitutional Equality:

Sri Lanka’s Constitution guarantees equality before the law to all persons. “ALL” makes clear no one is denied.This means every citizen, regardless of their private conduct or personal choices, is already protected.

To now carve out a separate category as “LGBTQIA rights” and ONLY for LGBTQIA community creates an artificial hierarchy of rights and privileges, undermining the very principle of equality. If equality is to be upheld, then non-LGBTQIA citizens must enjoy the same right not to be compelled, coerced, or indoctrinated into accepting or practicing LGBTQIA lifestyles in public as well as in offices. Any attempt to elevate a lifestyle choice into a distinct human right contradicts constitutional protections, discriminates against the majority, and destroys the balance of rights that must apply equally to all.

 

Corporate Coercion: Increasingly, companies are compelling employees to declare themselves “LGBTQIA-friendly,” ignoring the rights of non-LGBTQIA citizens to hold different views without discrimination. Even job applications now contain dozens of confusing new categories that most people have never heard of, reducing professional merit to ideological compliance. This practice not only undermines equality but also creates a workplace environment where silence or dissent is punished, while active promotion of LGBTQIA is rewarded.

 

2. Government Measures Pushing a Lifestyle Agenda

 

Recent actions and proposals reveal how Sri Lanka’s policies risk eroding moral and family values:

 

• Introducing LGBTQIA content to Grade 1
• Providing condoms in schools
• Statements permitting sexual activity for 16-year-olds
• New bill restricting parental/teacher authority even verbal reprimands
• Tourism Board endorsing Homosexual Tourism

 

These are not isolated measures but a coordinated program to normalize sexual lifestyles in schools, law, and public policy – craftily being embedded into society.

 

3. External Pressures & Aid Diplomacy

 

These domestic policies are being reinforced by international pressures:

 

• Aid conditions: Funding and loans tied to LGBTQIA acceptance.
• Scholarships / University funding: “gender studies” and donations for professors promoting.
• Diplomatic coercion: Foreign envoys & UN officials publicly endorsing Pride and same-sex marriage.
• Symbolic enforcement: PRIDE flags imposed as “human rights” symbols.
• Job Promotions, perks & privileges: Linked to endorsing LGBTQIA.
• Media campaigns: using algorithms, filters to lure teens and adults towards LGBTQIA lifestyles

 

Result: These measures collectively attempt to reshape societal values, override constitutional safeguards, and prioritize foreign agendas over children, families, and civilizational identity.

 

The Government will change in 5 years but the damage they are doing or would have done would be irreversible.

The victims of this term would face irreversible consequences.

No new Government can under the damage done to children and adults.

 

4. Sexual Lifestyle are NOT Human Rights

 

Human rights are intended to protect life, liberty, equality, and dignity — not lifestyles. Elevating sexual behavior or identity to “rights” distorts the framework.

 

• Treating sexual lifestyle as a human right could justify polygamy, incest, or drug use.
• UN Treaty bodies like CEDAW and CRC are misused to pressure nations beyond their scope.
• Countries with stricter moral codes (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan) are rarely targeted — revealing political selectivity.

 

Scientific Perspective: Sexuality is primarily reproductive. Non-reproductive sexual behaviors are minority practices and not universal needs.
Legal Perspective: Human rights protect survival and dignity, not preferences. Sexual orientation is a choice, not a necessity.

 

5. Social and Civilizational Impact

 

The push to normalize LGBTQIA lifestyles threatens society:

 

• Children:Exposure to early sexual content, confusing gender messages, and parental authority undermined,
• Youth:Social experimentation is being engineered, not organically chosen.
• Families:Increased risk of breakdown, neglect of intergenerational responsibilities, and erosion of traditional values, children being separated from parents who do not accept LGBTQIA ideology, medical profession abusing children’s inability to comprehend health & mental risks of opting for transgender surgeries.
• Economy & Corporates:Global firms are retreating from Pride campaigns after financial backlash — ideology over business proves costly.
• Language: even the English language is being turned upside down.

Ethical & Civilizational Concerns: Many civilizations emphasize duty-based morality, intergenerational responsibilities, and religious obligations. Elevating sexual preference to a human right undermines these principles, disrespects local customs, and weakens parental authority.

 

Sociological Perspective: LGBTQIA identity is largely self-expression and community belonging. Promotion of such lifestyles in schools and media reflects social engineering, not natural universal needs. Sexual orientation can be fluid, highlighting that it is chosen rather than an inherent right.

 

Historical Perspective: Across history, societies tolerated, regulated, or condemned homosexual behavior without declaring it a human right. Modern international “rights” frameworks largely stem from Western cultural imposition, revealing these claims as socially constructed rather than universal.

 

Logical Perspective: Declaring sexual behavior a human right risks normalizing practices like polygamy or public sexual acts – which people will demand as a human right.

Human rights must cover essentials, not personal sexual lifestyles.

 

The attempt to declare LGBTQIA a “human right” is a false narrative. It is a lifestyle choice — one that cannot be imposed on entire societies without undermining sovereignty, constitutional law, and civilizational heritage.

 

Sri Lanka must resist both domestic policy missteps and foreign ideological pressure:

 

• Uphold Sections 365 & 365Ato protect children and morality.
• Reject UN and diplomatic overreach on marriage and family matters.
• Strengthen national awareness of the dangers of cultural engineering.

 

Our children, our families, our culture — must remain our priority. These are not bargaining chips for foreign experiments or agendas.

Our cultural and civilizational inheritance alongside our duties must be protected and preserved as our highest priority.

 

 

Shenali D Waduge