the government argued that buggery should not be seen or recognised in the same way as sexual intercourse; and thus, the court should not compare section 118c, forbidding gay men from engaging buggery under 21, with the law forbidding heterosexual couples having sex under 16. also, the government believed the court should hold section 118c valid under the basic law because section 118d, similar to section 118c, equally applied onto and prohibited heterosexuals from engaging buggery under 21: