Here Malaysia goes again - telling foreigners to butt out of our business for persecuting minority groups - this time, involving lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders and queers (LGBTQ).

The United Nation's decision to censure countries that do not extend universal human rights to LGBTQs has met with attacks from the Bar Council, the Young Buddhist Association of Malaysia, and even Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Dr Rais Yatim.

The crux of what they are saying is that persecuting LGBTQs may not conform to the UN's standards of human rights, but it sure conforms to 'ours'. What is even more shocking is that human rights commissioner Simon Sipaun, speaking on behalf of Suhakam, even conceded, "Despite wanting to respect the rights of minorities, the laws of the land need to be upheld as well."

By "laws of the land", I suppose he was referring to Sections 377(a), (b) and (c) of the Penal Code, which specifically prohibit, among other things, anal sex and oral sex.

To top it all, a New Straits Times editorial took a pot shot at the UN by telling it to focus on countries that "flagrantly kill", instead of countries like Malaysia, "where sexual relations between people of the same gender are illegal under secular law and forbidden by religion". This is because it is Malaysia's "sovereign prerogative to decide what is best for its people".

I am sorry, but if this is the response of various institutions - the government, religious authorities, media and even the blessed human rights commission - then I am truly the meat in an idiot sandwich.

Is it just me, or does it strike anyone else as ludicrous that anyone can, first of all, 'ban' homosexuality? Can we ban two people from feeling certain things towards each other? How do we ensure that, when two women are spending time together, their motives are entirely non-romantic and non-erotic?

Do we have to start policing people's thoughts? Do we make the wearing of chastity belts mandatory by law? Does the government propose to start reading people's diaries and find out what time we go to sleep at night and with whom?

True, the Penal Code criminalises certain behaviour, but not entire identities. Our laws are not written this way. See, I might be dropping a bomb on the Bar Council chairperson's head, but under the Federal Constitution, are we not all equal before the law?

And how on earth do we enforce the Penal Code when it comes to sexual behaviour? Do we need to now equip our courts with loading bays for the many stained mattresses we are going to admit as evidence in court? Do we only mandate bedroom doors with unobstructed keyholes for the religious affairs department to peep through for their own moral satisfaction (or hormonal dissatisfaction, depending on how you tafsir their motives)?

And what exactly is this rubbish about it being an 'Islamic' prerogative to outlaw homosexuality? Any Muslim worth his or her salt in Syariah scholarship will tell you that even in Islamic jurisprudence there has never been any ijma (consensus) on same-sex sex.

Some scholars have been of the opinion that same-sex sex is analogous to adultery and thus falls under the rubric of hudud punishment (and some other scholars will tell you that this is sloppy qisas), but some others feel that same-sex sex is fahisha (a transgression), nothing more and nothing less, and if punishable at all, is only punishable to extent of takzir laws.

So, even in Islam, there still is room for negotiation when we talk about same-sex sex. The great imams were clear about one thing, though - Allah's limitless love and compassion for all of creation. Call me crazy, but I'm guessing that this includes LGBTQs too.

And by golly, how much more illogical can an argument get than to dismiss human rights for LGBTQs by focusing instead on countries that "flagrantly kill"? Exactly what does that mean?

Migrant workers and refugees in this country have died mysteriously under detention - are we going to excuse that as "our business" as opposed to the US' violent invasion of Iraq? People in this country get imprisoned and tortured for holding dissenting political views - are we going to excuse this as "our sovereign prerogative" as opposed to the US's severely racist "security" measures?

Human rights are human rights, whether or not someone is straight, lesbian, Indian, Kadazan, man, woman or a minister in the Prime Minister's Department. With all due respect, the Bar Council chairperson, the minister in the Prime Minister's Department and the Ramli Burger sellers opposite my house have every right to condemn LGBTQs as immoral and sinful people - that is their personal opinion.

But how dare they suggest that people like them should be more favoured by the law compared to LGBTQs just because of whom they prefer to have sexual intercourse with?

I hope the United Nations resolution is successfully passed, and I hope Malaysia is one of the many countries that will be held accountable for its prejudicial and repressive laws. Because I am just as disgusted with a superpower that invades any country it pleases with impunity as I am with a country that irrationally polices the individual sexual choices of its citizens.