What LGBTQIA+++ Demands & Society’s Response
The ongoing discourse around LGBTQIA rights and recognition has sparked widespread debate across legal, religious, social, and cultural arenas. We look at th key demands put forth by LGBTQIA advocates and a comprehensive response grounded in legal principles, societal values, and moral considerations.
It addresses fundamental questions about personal identity versus biological reality, the scope of rights and equality, the protection of children and family, and the role of science and medicine in shaping policy. At the same time, it considers the broader cultural and political implications of LGBTQIA activism and its impact on public morality and social order.
Balancing respect for individual dignity with the preservation of societal foundations, this analysis aims to ensure that progress is aligned with objective truth, responsible governance, and the common good. Through this lens, society’s response seeks to uphold the welfare of all its members while safeguarding the enduring principles that sustain families, communities, and nations.
Personal Identity & Freedom
Personal feelings about identity cannot change biological facts.
Law and society must base rights and recognition on reality, not emotions or ideology. Protecting nature and public order is essential for the wellbeing of all.
They say: “I was born this way.”
We say: No scientific evidence confirms the existence of a “gay gene.”
A landmark 2019 study published in Science, involving nearly 500,000 individuals, found no single “gay gene” and concluded that genetics may contribute, but do not determine same-sex sexual behavior. Sexual orientation is shaped by a mix of environmental, social, and genetic factors, not biology alone.
Study: Ganna, A. et al. (2019). Large-scale GWAS reveals insights into the genetic architecture of same-sex sexual behavior. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aat7693
Sexual orientation is influenced by many factors, but not predetermined biologically.
Legal Maxim: Contra factum non valet argumentum – No argument prevails against the facts.
They say: “It’s not normal, but it is a natural manifestation of human diversity.”
We say: Just because something happens in nature doesn’t make it normal or good. Illnesses and disorders also occur naturally — but we don’t celebrate them. Societies set moral and social standards to protect health, order, and future generations.
Legal Maxim: Non omne quod licet honestum est – Not everything permitted is honorable.
They say: “It’s my body, my choice.”
We say: Bodily autonomy has limits where public interest, child safety, and biological integrity are at stake. Gender surgeries and hormone use have irreversible consequences, especially in children.
Legal Maxim: Salus populi suprema lex esto – The welfare of the people shall be the supreme law.’
They say: “Gender is a spectrum – not binary.”
We say: Human biology is male or female — that’s how life is created. Feelings don’t change facts. Society cannot function if everyone makes up their own gender and choose from 70plus invented genders which are increasing with each day. Law must follow nature, not personal identities. This confusion undermines truth, order, and public sanity.
Legal Maxim: Natura non contristatur – Nature is not to be contradicted.
They say: “Sex is assigned at birth, but gender is who I am.”
We say: Sex is not assigned — sex is recognized based on physical, biological facts present at birth. Gender ideology replaces reality with emotion. A feeling about who you are does not change what you are or what you are born as (male or female)
Scientific Reference: According to the World Health Organization (WHO) and standard medical texts, biological sex is determined by anatomy and chromosomes, not subjective identity. (WHO, Gender and Genetics, 2002)
Legal Maxim: Contra naturam suam nemo repugnare potest – No one can contradict their own nature.
They say: “No one can tell me how I feel inside.”
We say: You may feel anything internally, but law and society must function on objective truth, not self-perception.
Legal Maxim: Lex non favet delicatorum votis – The law does not favor the whims of the delicate.
They say: “Trans women are women.”
We say: Biologically, trans women are male. No surgery, hormone, or identity can change XY chromosomes, male bone structure, or reproductive function. Identity is not biology. Calling a man a woman doesn’t make it true.
Legal Maxim: Fiat justitia ruat caelum – Let justice be done though the heavens fall.
They say: “You can’t invalidate my lived experience.”
We say: Your experience may be real to you — but law is not based on feelings, it’s based on facts. Personal stories don’t rewrite biological or legal truth.
Legal Maxim: Ubi societas, ibi jus – Where there is society, there is law.
They say: “Misgendering is violence.”
We say: Words are not violence. Protecting biological truth is not hate. Coerced speech violates freedom of conscience.
Legal Maxim: Lex neminem cogit ad impossibilia – The law compels no one to do the impossible.
They say: “If I say I’m non-binary, you must accept it.”
We say: Society is not obligated to accept personal fantasies as fact. Legal systems cannot accommodate limitless identities or personal fantasies.
Legal Maxim: Nemo dat quod non habet – You cannot give what you do not have.
They say: “I feel like a man trapped in a woman’s body — identity is internal.”
We say: How do you know what it feels like to be a man if you were never one? Biology defines sex with clear facts — chromosomes, anatomy, hormones — which feelings cannot change. Internal perception cannot rewrite objective reality.
Legal Maxim: Nemo potest ex se sua conditione mutare – No one can change their own nature.
They say: “Denying my identity is erasing my existence.”
We say: Identity is not erased by disagreement. Law operates on facts, not feelings. Recognition must be based on truth, not ideological pressure.
Legal Maxim: Lex non recipit majora quam ipsa comprehendit – The law does not accept what it cannot comprehend.
Rights & Equality
Everyone, including LGBTQIA individuals, enjoys equal fundamental rights under the law. However, demanding special rights based on lifestyle choices goes beyond equality and risks undermining public morality, natural law, and the wellbeing of society—especially children and future generations. Laws exist to balance rights fairly and protect the common good, not to grant unlimited personal preferences as legal entitlements. Without these limits, social order and legal coherence break down, threatening the very foundations of family, community, and nation.
They say: “We deserve the same rights as everyone else.”
We say: Everyone has equal dignity and enjoys fundamental rights under the law, including LGBTQIA individuals. However, what is being demanded are special rights that go beyond equal treatment—rights that grant approval or accommodation for a select lifestyle. These special rights often conflict with public morality, natural law, and the wellbeing of children. Fundamental rights are universal and neutral, not a tool to impose particular lifestyles or ideologies.
If special rights based on personal lifestyle preferences become fundamental rights, it opens the door to demands for all kinds of bizarre or harmful lifestyle claims, undermining legal coherence and social order. For example, if lifestyle-based special rights are accepted, could one demand the right to practice polygamy, necrophilia (sexual acts with dead bodies), or other socially unacceptable behaviors under the guise of “identity” or “expression”? The law cannot accommodate unlimited, subjective claims as fundamental rights.
Legal Maxim: Aequitas sequitur legem – Equity follows the law.
They say: “Love is love — gender doesn’t matter.”
We say: While love is important, marriage is more than just feelings. It is a social and legal institution designed primarily for the biological complementarity of a man and a woman to create and raise children. This purpose sustains families and society over generations. Romantic feelings alone cannot replace the natural roles and functions that gender provides in marriage. Not all kinds of “love” serve this fundamental societal role.
Legal Maxim: Lex prospicit, non respicit – The law looks forward, not backward. Laws must preserve future generations.
They say: “Marriage equality is a human right.”
We say: Marriage is an universally accepted contract between a man and a woman, based on natural roles for having and raising children. Changing this to fit adult preferences breaks the foundation of society and harms future generations.
Legal Maxim: Matrimonia debent esse inter virum et mulierem – Marriage must be between a man and a woman (from Roman law).
They say: “Denying LGBTQIA rights is discrimination.”
We say: There is no right to demand approval of a lifestyle. Denying harmful or unnatural acts public recognition is not discrimination, it’s moral boundary-setting.
Legal Maxim:Lex iniusta non est lex – An unjust law is no law at all.
They say: “Minorities need protection from majority oppression.”
We say: True — but not when minority demands infringe on the rights, beliefs, and safety of the majority. Rights must be balanced, not weaponized.
Legal Maxim:Summum jus, summa injuria – Extreme justice is extreme injustice.
They say: “You don’t have to agree with me, just respect my rights.”
We say: Rights must be based on truth, not feelings. Respecting falsehoods under pressure undermines truth, law, and conscience.
Legal Maxim: Veritas vincit – Truth conquers.
They say: “Freedom of religion is not an excuse for hate.”
We say: Religious and cultural values are foundational to law and identity. Disagreeing with immorality is not hate. It is an expression of deeply held principles and moral responsibility.
Legal Maxim: Deorum injuriae diis curae – Offenses against the divine are the concern of the gods. Faith cannot be censored by ideology.
They say: “LGBTQIA rights are about human dignity.”
We say: Dignity belongs to every human being, but rights must be justified within natural, moral, and legal bounds. Not every feeling translates into a legal entitlement.
Legal Maxim: Dignitas non est argumentum pro erroribus naturalibus – Dignity is not an argument for violating nature.
They say: “Why do you care who I love?”
We say: Society cares because laws, public institutions, education, and family policy are all impacted. It’s not about private love — it’s about public consequence.
Legal Maxim: Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus approbetur – What touches all must be approved by all.
Children & Education
Protecting children means shielding them from harmful ideologies and premature exposure to complex sexual and gender topics. True inclusivity respects all children, especially those with normal development, by teaching age-appropriate values and preserving their mental and physical wellbeing. Decisions about gender and sexuality education must be made by parents and guardians, not activists, to ensure children’s safety and healthy growth. The state’s role is to act as guardian, prioritizing protection over indoctrination.
They say: “Teaching LGBTQIA topics in schools promotes inclusivity and stops bullying.”
We say: Real inclusivity protects all children. Normal children should never be taught or programmed to believe they are LGBTQIA. Forcing such ideas on young minds is propaganda, not education.
Legal Maxim: Parens patriae – The State must act as guardian of minors, protecting them from harm.
They say: “Children should be taught gender diversity from a young age.”
We say: Children should be taught basic values, not sexual complexity. Children need simple, age-appropriate values—not complex sexual or gender ideologies. Teaching gender diversity confuses normal children, risks their mental health, and disrupts healthy development.
Legal Maxim: In dubio pro natura – In cases of doubt, favor nature.
They say: “Puberty blockers are reversible and save lives.”
We say: That is a dangerous myth. Puberty blockers cause irreversible damage including weakened bones, permanent infertility, and long-term harm to brain development and emotional health. They can seriously impair a child’s physical and mental well-being.
Legal Maxim: Primum non nocere– First, do no harm (medical maxim adopted in law).
They say: “Affirming transgender children prevents suicide.”
We say: No credible long-term study supports this. Suicide risk remains high after transitioning. Affirmation can trap children in irreversible paths they later regret.
Legal Maxim:Lex non cogit ad impossibilia – The law cannot compel what is impossible: turning a boy into a girl or vice versa.
They say: “Children know who they are; we should listen.”
We say: Children also believe in fairytales. Children often have vivid imaginations and can believe in things that aren’t real. They lack the maturity and understanding to make life-altering decisions about gender. It is the responsibility of parents and guardians to protect them — including saying no when necessary.
Legal Maxim: Volenti non fit injuria – Consent is no defense when true understanding is lacking.
They say: “Gender identity is separate from sexuality.”
We say: This claim is often used to sneak sexual topics into education by framing them as ‘identity’ issues. In reality, gender and sexuality are closely linked. Children need protection from premature exposure to both, not separate treatment. Parents, not activists, should decide what their children learn about these sensitive matters
Legal Maxim: Nemo debet esse judex in propria causa – No one should judge their own cause.
They say: “LGBTQIA education protects queer kids.”
We say: True protection means safeguarding all children—especially the majority who are not LGBTQIA. Forcing all children to accept and adopt these ideologies risks harming those with normal development. Indoctrination is not protection.
Legal Maxim: Lex est tutissima cassis – The law is the safest shield.
They say: “LGBTQIA rights are about human dignity.”
We say: Every person deserves dignity and respect. But legal rights must be based on natural law, morality, and reason—not feelings or personal desires. Feeling or identity does not create a legal right.
Legal Maxim: Dignitas non est argumentum pro erroribus naturalibus – Dignity is not an argument for violating nature.
They say: “Why do you care who I love?”
We say: Society cares because laws, public institutions, education, and family policy are all impacted. It’s not about private love — it’s about public consequence.
Legal Maxim: Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus approbetur – What touches all must be approved by all.
Medical & Scientific Claims
The LGBTQIA agenda misuses science to justify radical interventions and social reengineering. But true science is cautious, not political. There is no gay gene, and gender dysphoria remains a recognized mental health condition by both the DSM-5 (APA) and ICD-11 (WHO).
What’s presented as “affirming care” is often activist-driven, profit-motivated, and medically harmful — especially to children. Long-term studies show no clear mental health benefit from transitioning. In fact, regret is rising, clinics are shutting down, and detransitioners are taking legal action against reckless treatments.
Medical institutions are not immune to past errors — from lobotomies to the opioid crisis — and cannot be blindly trusted when profits and ideology are involved. Science must remain open to challenge, especially when it risks irreversible harm to the next generation.
Legal Principle: “First, do no harm.”
When truth is silenced and ideology replaces science, law must protect the vulnerable, medicine must uphold ethics, and morality must defend what is natural and just.
They say: “Being gay or trans is not a mental illness.”
We say: Homosexuality was removed as a mental disorder from the DSM by the American Psychiatric Association in 1973 & from WHO in 1990, largely due to social and political pressure rather than new scientific proof.
However, gender dysphoria remains classified as a mental health condition in both the DSM-5 (APA, 2013) and the ICD-11 (WHO, 2018), showing that the medical community agrees people experiencing distress from a mismatch between their gender identity and biological sex need professional psychiatric and psychological care to address the distress caused by gender incongruence.”
DSM = Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Legal Maxim: Quod approbo non reprobo – One cannot approve and reject the same thing.
They say: “Conversion therapy is torture.”
We say: Voluntary therapy to help individuals overcome unwanted sexual feelings is not torture—it is a legitimate medical and psychological approach.
In contrast, forcing children into irreversible gender treatments without their full understanding or parental consent causes lasting harm and can be considered true coercion.
Legal Maxim: Consensus facit legem – Consent makes the law.
They say: “Studies prove transitioning improves mental health.”
We say: Most studies cited are short-term and politically influenced.
Extended follow-up studies little to no significant reduction in suicidality or lasting mental health benefits after transitioning. Increasingly, many children and adults are detransitioning, clinics are closing or facing legal scrutiny, and those who regret transitioning are speaking out publicly about their trauma and harms caused. This growing evidence highlights the need for caution and careful evaluation.
Legal Maxim: Argumentum ab auctoritate fortissimum est in lege – Argument from authority is strong in law, but only if the authority is credible.
They say: “There’s no harm in letting people live authentically.”
We say: Medicalizing identity leads to lifelong drug dependence, sterilization, and regret. “Living authentically” must not mean living artificially or dangerously.
Legal Maxim: Necessitas non habet legem – Necessity has no law, but only when true danger is present, not subjective discomfort.
They say: “Hormone therapy and surgery are life-saving care.”
We say: There is no empirical evidence that hormone or surgical intervention saves lives. It often leads to health complications, regret, and further psychiatric needs.
Legal Maxim: Cessante ratione legis cessat ipsa lex – When the reason for the law ceases, the law itself ceases.
They say: “You wouldn’t question cancer treatment — why question gender care?”
We say: Cancer is a proven biological disease. Gender dysphoria is psychological and requires mental health treatment, not body mutilation.
Legal Maxim: Distinguenda sunt tempora et causae – Times and causes must be distinguished
They say: “The science is settled — gender-affirming care is best practice.”
We say: There is no true scientific consensus. Much of the so-called “affirming care” model is driven by activism, not rigorous, long-term evidence. Countries like the UK (NHS), Sweden, Finland, and Norway have restricted or reversed youth gender treatments after independent reviews revealed risks, lack of benefit, and rising numbers of detransitioners.
Legal Maxim: Nullum crimen sine periculo – No medical intervention should be without assessment of risk.
They say: “Medical associations support trans healthcare — that proves it’s safe.”
We say: Medical support does not guarantee safety. History is full of medical disasters once backed by experts — lobotomies, thalidomide, and the opioid epidemic were all once “best practices.”
Today, transgender healthcare is a multi-billion-dollar global industry.
Pharmaceutical companies, gender clinics, and surgeons profit heavily — with some U.S. clinics earning $70,000 to $100,000 per transitioning child over time.
To keep profits growing, the industry is targeting children globally as lifelong patients — with puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries, and ongoing treatments.
Children are being turned into the next generation of medical consumers.
This is not neutral science — it’s commercialized ideology. Real medicine demands open debate, long-term safety, and freedom from political and profit-driven pressure.
Legal Maxim: Fallitur ergo corrigatur – If it is wrong, it must be corrected.
They say: “Transition regret is rare.”
We say: That’s misleading. Regret is rising, but honest data is censored or ignored due to politics and fear of backlash. Thousands of detransitioners are now speaking out, but their stories are often suppressed by media and medical institutions.
- A 2021 UK detransitioner survey (by detransvoices.org) found that 70% felt they didn’t receive proper mental health support before transitioning.
- The UK’s Tavistock Gender Clinic was shut down after an official review found serious safeguarding failures — including inadequate assessment and pressure to transition vulnerable children.
- Sweden and Finland have paused or limited youth transition treatments, citing lack of long-term evidence and rising regret.
- Lawsuits are increasing: Detransitioned teens are suing doctors and clinics for irreversible harm done as minors.
Transition regret is not rare — it’s rising, real, and ignored.
Legal Maxim: Suppressio veri, suggestio falsi – Suppression of truth is equivalent to the suggestion of falsehood.
They say: “Homosexuals and lesbians aren’t mentally ill — they’re some of the brightest and most artistic people.”
We say: Talent does not preclude psychological or behavioral conditions. Some highly gifted individuals struggle with depression, addiction, or identity confusion. Correlation is not exoneration. High creativity is no shield against inner conflict or social dysfunction.
The DSM delisted homosexuality in 1973 not through new science but political activism — this historical revisionism must be acknowledged.
Legal Maxim: Qualitas non excusat naturam rei – Quality does not change the nature of a thing.
They say: “Homosexuality is not a mental illness.”
We say: Homosexuality is not a biological inevitability — it is a psychosexual deviation influenced by emotional trauma, social exposure, abuse, or conditioning.
Many individuals have experienced same-sex attraction as a phase, response to early abuse, or confusion, and later transitioned out of it.
Labeling it purely as “identity” ignores deep psychological roots. The DSM delisting in 1973 was driven by politics, not science. Even today, gender dysphoria remains classified as a mental health condition in ICD-11.
Homosexuality is not a disease like influenza — but it is a mental condition, shaped and maintained through mental, emotional, and environmental factors. Like any mental pattern, it can be treated, changed, or redirected — as many who have de-transitioned or re-oriented can attest.
Legal Maxim: Mentis delictum non excusat factum contra naturam – A defect of the mind does not excuse an act against nature.
Also: Quod natura negat, medicina non praestat – What nature denies, medicine cannot provide.
They say: “There may not be a gay gene, but homosexuality is still natural because it happens.”
We say: Just because something occurs does not make it normal. Many human behaviors — like addiction, eating disorders, or aggression — can result from hormonal imbalances, early trauma, social conditions, or mental stress, yet are rightly addressed as conditions, not celebrated as identities.
Same-sex attraction can be conditioned, triggered, or reinforced during vulnerable stages (e.g., puberty, abuse, absence of a parent role model), making it a learned or reactive pattern, not a fixed biological trait.
No gay gene. No immutable biology. But a combination of emotional, social, and hormonal influences — all of which are changeable.
Legal Maxim: Abnormitas non constituit normam – Abnormality does not establish the norm.
Cultural & Political Rhetoric
LGBTQIA ideology is a political movement seeking special rights and societal approval, not simply a matter of equality. Its demands often clash with longstanding moral, religious cultural, and legal principles that protect families, children, and social order. True progress respects objective truth, cultural diversity, and the common good rather than imposing ideological conformity. Societies must balance freedom with responsibility, protecting all members—especially the vulnerable—from harm and preserving public decency and foundational values.
Legal principles remind us that law must be based on lasting truths, honor the will of the people, and protect the right to disagree during times of social change.
They say: “LGBTQIA rights are the new civil rights movement.”
We say: Civil rights protected people for who they are by birth — like their race or sex — not for what they feel or do. Feelings and behaviors are temporary & can change and may cause harm.
LGBTQIA ideology promotes subjective, fluid self-definitions that are neither fixed nor biologically grounded, and often come with irreversible medical harm and no proven societal benefit.
This is not a struggle for equality—it’s a political movement demanding approval of behaviors, not protection of identity.
Legal Maxim: Non est eadem ratio – The reasoning is not the same.
They say: “We are not a political movement”
We say: Any group seeking special laws, public funding, and societal approval for ideological beliefs is inherently political. Denying this does not change the reality.
Legal Maxim: Qui agit per alium, agit per se – He who acts through another, acts himself.
They say: “Opposition to LGBTQIA is on the wrong side of history.”
We say: History is not a moral compass. Many great civilizations collapsed after abandoning moral boundaries. Truth is not dictated by trends.
Legal Maxim: Lex retro non agit – The law does not operate retrospectively. Cultural shifts must still align with foundational legal principles.
They say: “Pride events celebrate love and diversity.”
We say: Many pride parades publicly feature nudity, indecency, and sexualized performances including children that violate public decency laws and expose children to harm.
Legal Maxim: Bonum commune communitatis est lex communis – The common good of the community is the common law.
They say: “You’re just afraid of change.”
We say: Change that undermines morality, family structure, and child safety is not progress. It is social engineering, not evolution.
Legal Maxim: Nullum tempus occurrit regi – Time does not run against the crown. The duty to protect society remains constant.
They say: “Censorship of LGBTQIA ideas is authoritarian.”
We say: Shielding the public, especially minors, from harmful sexual content is protection, not censorship. Free speech has limits under law.
Legal Maxim: Libertas non est libertinage – Liberty is not licentiousness.
They say: “Religious conservatives are forcing their values on society.”
We say: Every law reflects a moral view. Traditional morality has governed civilizations for millennia. Replacing it with gender ideology is equally coercive.
Legal Maxim: Fiat voluntas populi – Let the will of the people be done.
They say: “We just want tolerance.”
We say: True tolerance means respecting others’ rights to hold different views—including the majority who do not accept or accommodate LGBTQIA lifestyles. Tolerance is not compulsory celebration or forced approval.
Legal Maxim: Silent leges inter arma – The laws fall silent amid ideological warfare. Guarding freedom means protecting dissent.
They say: “The West is progressive because it embraces LGBTQIA rights.”
We say: Real progress strengthens families, protects children, and upholds truth. The West’s push for ideological LGBTQIA ‘rights’ often accompanies family breakdown, declining birth rates, rising mental illness, and social fragmentation. This is cultural collapse, not true progress.
Legal Maxim: Progressio sine veritate est regressio – Progress without truth is regression.
Supporting facts:
- Many Western countries face historic low birth rates, threatening demographic stability (e.g., EU nations (Italy Germany), US, UK some below replacement level).
- Rising youth mental health crises coincide with rapid LGBTQIA normalization and gender ideology adoption.
- Family fragmentation correlates with social instability and economic challenges
They say: “Traditional cultures need to modernize their values.”
We say: Cultures rooted in nature, morality, and family are not backward. They have preserved civilizations. Western cultural imperialism cannot dictate universal morality.
Legal Maxim: Fiat voluntas gentium – Let the will of nations be respected.
They say: “Visibility saves lives — pride must be everywhere.”
We say: Visibility without boundaries becomes coercion. Pride campaigns often breach public decency and oversexualize identity — especially in front of children.
Legal Maxim: Decorum publicum tuendum est – Public decency must be preserved.
Impact on Family, Marriage & Future Generations
Family is the cornerstone of any civilization — not merely a bond of affection, but a biologically grounded, gender-balanced institution essential for child development, cultural continuity, and national survival. While alternative arrangements may exist, none equal the stability, identity formation, and generational rootedness provided by a natural mother-father household. LGBTQIA family models, which exclude one gender by design, undermine this balance and accelerate demographic decline.
Legal Principle: Ius naturale est immutabile – Natural law is unchangeable.
Society must honor the biological and moral foundations of family to protect its future.
They say: “LGBTQIA families are just like any other.”
We say: Family is more than love or emotions — it depends on biological parents providing both male and female roles essential for a child’s healthy development. Children benefit from having both a mother and a father to guide them through life’s challenges. Same-sex households lack this natural balance, which can affect a child’s emotional and psychological well-being.
Legal Maxim: Matrimonia debent esse inter virum et mulierem – Marriage must be between a man and a woman.
They say: “Biological parents are not perfect — many harm their children.”
We say: While no parent is perfect, the natural family structure with both a mother and father provides unique, complementary roles crucial for balanced child development. Problems with individual parents don’t justify redefining family or denying children the right to grow with both genders represented. Protecting the family means strengthening its natural foundation, not replacing it.
Legal Maxim: Salus populi suprema lex esto – The welfare of the people shall be the supreme law.
They say: “Children of same-sex couples grow up fine.”
We say: Studies claiming equality in outcomes are often biased or short-term. Many adult children of LGBTQIA homes report confusion, identity crises, and emotional neglect.
Legal Maxim: Res ipsa loquitur – The thing speaks for itself.
They say: “There are many types of families.”
We say: Yes, but not all family structures are equal in stability or outcomes. The ideal, time-tested model remains a committed mother-father household.
Legal Maxim: Fiat natura, fiat ordo – Let nature and order prevail.
They say: “The world is overpopulated anyway.”
We say: Declining population is a global crisis. Most countries today face collapsing birth rates, aging populations, and shrinking workforces. When societies stop replacing themselves, they face economic decline, loss of cultural continuity, and national instability. LGBTQIA ideologies, which promote non-reproductive lifestyles, accelerate this demographic crisis by undermining the natural family — the foundation of future generations.
Legal Maxim: Lex prospicit, non respicit – The law looks forward, not backward.
They say: “Love makes a family, not gender.”
We say: Love matters, but gendered parenting shapes identity, behavior, and emotional resilience. Fatherhood and motherhood are not interchangeable.
Legal Maxim: Nemo potest mutare naturam rei – No one can change the nature of a thing.
They say: “You can adopt or use surrogacy to build a family.”
We say: Commercial surrogacy often commodifies women and children. It separates motherhood from biology and reduces children to products.
Legal Maxim: Persona non grata – A person should not be treated as an object or tool.
They say: “Queer families are a new norm — get used to it.”
We say: Trends are not truth. Norms must be based on what sustains society: reproduction, parental balance, and generational continuity.
Legal Maxim: Norma normans non normata – A norm must itself be grounded in higher order, not fashion.
They say: “We’re building chosen families — that’s valid too.”
We say: Chosen families may offer emotional support, but they do not replace the social and biological roles of fathers and mothers. Children need roots, not reinvention.
Legal Maxim: Naturalis ratio fundamentum est iuris – Natural reason is the foundation of law.
They say: “Queer parenting is no different.”
We say: Intentions don’t equal outcomes. Child development depends on complementary gender modeling, biological belonging, and generational clarity.
Legal Maxim: Ex facto oritur jus – Law arises from the facts, not aspirations.
Public Morality, Order & Majority Rights
Public morality is not a private preference—it is the backbone of law, order, and civil society. While individuals may seek freedom, society has the duty to uphold shared norms that protect children, preserve culture, and maintain stability.
LGBTQIA ideology has moved beyond private life into law, education, and governance, demanding affirmation, silencing dissent, and reshaping foundational institutions. This is not coexistence—it’s coercion.
Legal Principle: Salus populi suprema lex esto – The welfare of the people shall be the supreme law.
When minority activism overrides majority conscience, public order and moral truth are the casualties.
They say: “We just want to live our lives.”
We say: When private behavior becomes public policy, it affects everyone — law, education, children, media, and faith. It is no longer private.
Legal Maxim: Communis error facit jus – A common error becomes law only when unchecked by truth.
They say: “Live and let live.”
We say: True freedom requires moral limits. Societies cannot function on limitless individualism. The rights of the many outweigh the desires of the few.
Legal Maxim: Salus populi suprema lex esto – The welfare of the people shall be the supreme law.
They say: “You’re imposing your beliefs on us.”
We say: Societies are built on shared norms. Every law is a belief codified. The LGBTQIA lobby is equally imposing their ideology through law, education, and media & political activism.
Legal Maxim: Lex est norma recti – The law is a rule of right.
They say: “Morality is subjective.”
We say: Morality may vary, but public morality is essential to law and order. Without moral consensus, society collapses into relativism and chaos.
Legal Maxim: Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque – The Roman state stood by ancient morals and men of virtue.
They say: “We’re just asking for acceptance.”
We say: Tolerance has turned into coerced affirmation, censorship of dissent, and reversal of moral norms. This violates conscience and democratic balance.
Legal Maxim: Nemo tenetur seipsum accusare – No one is bound to betray their own conscience.
They say: “You’re judging us unfairly.”
We say: Law is based on judgment of conduct, not condemnation of persons. Upholding standards protects social order.
Legal Maxim: Judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur – The judge is condemned when the guilty go free.
They say: “We’re not hurting anyone.”
We say: The impact is widespread: confused children, broken institutions, lost traditions, declining birth rates, moral decay. Hurt is not always visible.
Legal Maxim: Caveat civis – Let the citizen beware.
They say: “Majority views shouldn’t dictate minority rights.”
We say: True — but public morality must reflect majority will in public policy. No group has the right to override national conscience or institutional norms.
Legal Maxim: Vox populi, vox Dei – The voice of the people is the voice of God.
They say: “It’s a slippery slope argument — let people live.”
We say: History shows slippery slopes are real: normalization leads to enforcement, censorship, and the silencing of dissent.
Legal Maxim: Principiis obsta – Resist the beginnings.
They say: “The world is changing — you can’t stop it.”
We say: Change is not always progress. Some things — like truth, morality, and family — are foundational, not negotiable.
Legal Maxim: Fundamenta non quatiuntur – Foundations must not be shaken.
The LGBTQIA quest to legalize homosexuality in Sri Lanka by rewriting Penal Code 365 & repealing Penal Code 365a completely.
They Say:
“Sections 365 and 365A criminalize consensual same-sex relationships between adults. Repealing them is necessary to ensure equal rights and personal freedom.”
We Say:
These laws were strengthened in 1995 and 2006 specifically to protect children from sexual abuse, exploitation, and grooming.
Repealing or rewriting them will remove the only existing legal safeguards that allow authorities to prosecute non-penetrative abuse, particularly by adults targeting minors. This is not about adult privacy — it’s about child protection.
They Say:
“These laws are outdated colonial relics that have no place in a modern, democratic society.”
We Say:
Many laws from the colonial era remain because they serve vital societal functions. These particular sections have been updated by Parliament, not inherited blindly.
Sri Lanka adapted them in 1995 & amended in 2005 to reflect national moral standards and cultural values, and to fill legal gaps in protecting vulnerable groups, especially children and women.
They Say:
“The presence of these laws encourages stigma, discrimination, and violence against LGBTQIA+ people.”
We Say:
No evidence has been provided of LGBTQIA+ individuals being prosecuted solely for their identity under these laws. Police statistics reveal this clearly.
What is being prosecuted — and rightly so — are non-consensual acts, acts involving minors, or public indecency. Decriminalizing all “private” same-sex acts would also decriminalize forms of abuse conducted in secrecy.
They Say:
“We want the right to love who we want, in private, without the state interfering.”
We Say:
Sri Lanka does not criminalize “love” — it criminalizes acts deemed harmful to public morality, especially those with implications for child abuse, sexual exploitation, and trafficking.
Private behavior does not give someone the right to harm others, violate natural norms, or expect blanket legal immunity.
They Say:
“The existence of these laws violates fundamental human rights — dignity, equality, and freedom.”
We Say:
Every human has dignity — but rights must align with duties, and freedom must have boundaries. Sri Lanka’s Constitution also upholds public morality, national culture, and the rights of children — not just imported rights frameworks that overlook local context.
The law must balance individual liberty with collective responsibility.
They Say:
“These laws are selectively applied and weaponized against the LGBTQIA+ community.”
We Say:
If that is the case, call for legal reform to prevent misuse — not full repeal.
Repealing Section 365A or rewriting Section 365 would remove the only tools available to prosecute certain categories of sexual abuse and open legal loopholes that can be exploited by predators.
They Say:
“International bodies like the UN recommend repeal to align with global human rights standards.”
We Say:
Sri Lanka is not obligated to adopt Western liberal or UN-imposed moral ideologies outside of ratified treaties, especially when they conflict with the values, beliefs, and protections our society upholds, including the Buddhist Vinaya, Quran, Bible, and Hindu texts.
Our laws must reflect our own sovereignty, culture, and duty to protect children, not global time-to-time emerging trends or political pressure.
Shenali D Waduge
