THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Funz:
Still efficient what. If husband 1 shoots blanks, still got husband 2, 3 & 4.[/quote]That is a medical situation.. not by design.limlim:
[quote=\"Nebbermind\"]Will AWARE lobby for one wife, multiple husbands??!! :evil:
Not very efficient to propagate the species..
It is not in the best interest of the species to pursue a system just to cater for exceptional situations as it would result in blatant waste of resources and sinful inefficiency. -
May I point out one thing, please? IMHO, besides respecting gender and sexual preference of the parents, a very important point to note is that they are trying to free the children from prejudice. Whether it is being prejudiced for having same-sex parents; or unknowingly having prejudice thoughts ingrained into their young minds (i.e. having their yound minds coloured of what is right or wrong). Don't we always maintain that children are the innocent party?
IMHO, sexual orientation is not always a choice. We do not know everyone, so we should not judge everyone based on our ideals. Everyone should have the right to happiness, so long as in doing so they do not inflict any harm on others. We do not need to agree with them. We just need to respect them.
p/s: don't shoot me! -
I am not against gay-marriages. Gays should have the right to live their own life.
However, I am a little concern of gay partners adopting a kid. -
The gay rights groups already have their own spaces in society. There are gay clubs, gay saunas and various kinky places you could think of. they are allowed to express their views on love in pinkdot. Try walk around Maxwell food market on Friday and Saturday nights. they are socialising freely, as any citizens could.
Spaces are given to them, as shown in the examples i hav given above. But if they are going to encroach our space and demanding that the norms to be addressed as \"Mum\" and \"Dad\" to be taken away from us, no way I am going to accept that. :mad: :mad:
i do not go around pressuring government to close down the gay saunas and gay pubs. because i respect their space, they should do the same.
The western society's voting system is not compulsory, AFAIK so it is not full representation of their citizens. R the western nation's society fully supportive of the gay rights groups to stop addressing parents as Mother and Father?
SAHM_TAN:
From my understanding after reading the article, the words mother and father are replaced with parents in forms and such. I don't think kids with
heterosexual parents cannot call them mummy and daddy or other variations.
I mean for same sex couples, it would not be possible to designate who's the father and who's the mother. I guess there can be 2 forms printed, 1 for heterosexual parents and same sex couples but then it might perceive as a form of discrimination.
The norm of a society is determined by the communities within the particular society. If some have accepted that same sex couples is the norm then just live and let live. I think it's good that they are able to accommodate.
It must be a relieve to live without discrimination, at least in the legal sense. -
well said!!! :rahrah: :rahrah:
chenwj:
Actually many things in life are \"discriminatory\". It's how u live with it
In their countries, LGBT are able to get married and gain state recognition. But I understand there's are differences between Civil Union and full Marriage in their context and they are pushing for their respective states to recognize a \"Full marriage\".
I think the issue here is about reaching a compromise and testing the limits on how far the society is able to accept diverse views from a seemingly \"minority\" group.
The gay sex law in this context of this discussion is 377A, which prohibits the sex between 2 consenting males. Yes it is discriminatory because sex between 2 consenting males is illegal but sex between 2 consenting females is not. :evil: :evil: So by that argument, gays here are perceived to be criminals due to 377A. I am not supporting the gays because if they argue they are perceived to be criminals due to 377A, then almost the whole of Singapore are criminals because I'm sure majority of Singaporeans regardless of sexual orientations bought pirated DVDs or downloaded movies from the net one way or another. Also, I guess some of us here watch porn with your wife or your husband? Technically we are all criminals. So the issue here is whether do the Police enforce these anti-piracy laws / copyright laws / anti-porn laws / anti-gay sex law. :? -
actually like a parent here who has pointed out - singles can adopt children. so a gay single can adopt a children if he meets the requirement, and he could stay with his gay partner. nothing wrong legally, but morally, it all depends on the acceptance of the society at that point of time.
what i also worry is that as certain groups become vocal (thanks to the internet), they will start to demand that the society kowtow to their values and ideals!
care to share wat r your concerns?AC_Power:
I am not against gay-marriages. Gays should have the right to live their own life.
However, I am a little concern of gay partners adopting a kid. -
agree. respect should go both ways.
if i were to respect their gender preference and their lifestyle, i would also hope they would respect our values of being a Mother or a Father. :please: straffan23:
May I point out one thing, please? IMHO, besides respecting gender and sexual preference of the parents, a very important point to note is that they are trying to free the children from prejudice. Whether it is being prejudiced for having same-sex parents; or unknowingly having prejudice thoughts ingrained into their young minds (i.e. having their yound minds coloured of what is right or wrong). Don't we always maintain that children are the innocent party?
IMHO, sexual orientation is not always a choice. We do not know everyone, so we should not judge everyone based on our ideals. Everyone should have the right to happiness, so long as in doing so they do not inflict any harm on others. We do not need to agree with them. We just need to respect them.
p/s: don't shoot me! -
HopeandSorrows:
Hmm, worried that the kid might be confused.
care to share wat r your concerns?
At school, when teacher teaches about father and mother, he will be wondering why both his parents are father. -
This is overboard already... i read the news i shake head...r they too sensitive?
but they are together for 15 years. In a way, i have to salute them. Some straight couples can't even last 1.5 years...
[quote]A gay couple on Friday filed a legal challenge in Singapore’s High Court against a law that criminalises sex between men.
Gary Lim and Kenneth Chee, who have been together for 15 years, are seeking the repeal of the country’s landmark Section 377A of its Penal Code.
In a statement sent to the media, Chee said he did not live in fear of being caught by the police for his relationship with Lim, but said he knows that \"s 377A labels me a criminal\".
Lim added that even though lawmakers have said that the law will not be \"pro-actively\" enforced, the fact that the law exists \"leaves the possibility of 'passive enforcement', should someone decide to make a complaint against us one day\".
Lim and Chee are represented by senior counsel Peter Low, assisted by Choo Zheng Xi and Indulekshmi Rajeswari.
Section 377A of the Penal Code, which is still in force, rules that acts of \"gross indecency\" between two men is punishable, carrying a jail term of up to two years.
A heated debate on the issue began in 2007, when then-Member of Parliament Siew Kum Hong filed a petition to repeal Section 377A, which he cited as discriminatory and a violation of constitutional safeguards on equal rights.
His petition was shot down by then-senior minister for law and home affairs Ho Peng Kee, who said at the time that \"repealing Section 377A will be contentious and may send a wrong signal that the government is encouraging and endorsing the homosexual lifestyle as part of our mainstream way of life\".
In August, Singapore's Court of Appeal overturned a High Court judge's decision to reject the challenge filed in 2010 by 49-year-old Tan Eng Hong, who was caught engaging in fellatio with another man at a shopping centre.
Tan was initially prosecuted under the section, but later had his charges reduced to committing an obscene act in public after his attorney M Ravi questioned the constitutionality of the law.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/gay-couple-files-377a-challenge-in-high-court-114540383.html[/quote] -
AC_Power:
:scared: sounds so salah lah!!
Hmm, worried that the kid might be confused.HopeandSorrows:
care to share wat r your concerns?
At school, when teacher teaches about father and mother, he will be wondering why both his parents are father.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login