I Seriously Approve Same-Sex Relationship

The recent amendment issue of Domestic Violence Ordinance (DVO) in Hong Kong is not only the issue of acceptability strife of same-sex relationship, but also the core conflict between the adherent cluster of orthodoxy and post-modernism behind the statute. Such controversy is a classic phenomenon within the subject social policy dealt with the value analysis. Whether to uphold the heterosexual tradition of family or recognize the fact of same-sex minority among human nature can be a philosophical thinking in depth, in which I do not have my confidence for the conciliation to the extent of rationalism, or, the extent of not superficiality, in the public hearing situation of Hong Kong at present.

The opposition from the orthodoxy and Christian is mainly for the reason of subjectively confining same-sex relationship to "freak" under the description and credendum of bible and this is mainly from the subjective faith and social framework rather than psychological fact and reality, which is not under the rule of ethics. However, should such "freak" be considered as "freak" has its illogical pre-assumption and it raises aggressive oppression against sexual minority. The latter one holds their anti-oppression attitude to guard the mere room for subsistence, from which provides the root of same-sex cluster always related to post-modernism.

Only material can define the nature of material itself. Who can artifically overturn the change of human sexual nature, if the change is the kind of nature. I seriously approve the same-sex behaviour and relationship, and the amendment of the related ordinance from the government, if there is a safe line necessary for the violence existed realistically whatever the relationship the families are. This is the answer from a dialectic materialism beholder of the conflict of DVO.