slmkhoo:

limlim:

Why can't they just accept the fact that they are abnormal but instead try ways and means to make others accept them as normal.... to the extend of causing distress to other normal pple in the process..

'Normal' and 'abnormal' are fairly emotive words and people get very worked-up when they are used. Maybe if the public discourse used the terms 'majority' or 'minority', people would get less worked-up?

limlim:

Why can't they just accept the fact that they are abnormal but instead try ways and means to make others accept them as normal.... to the extend of causing distress to other normal pple in the process..

sushi88:

kwcllf:

Do you want your children use public toilets with different definition of gender?


http://clashdaily.com/2014/08/wanna-uni ... FyF56Qh.99

Given this kind of scenario, I think all toilets should be made private, no more shared basis by gender.

kwcllf:

Do you want your children use public toilets with different definition of gender?


http://clashdaily.com/2014/08/wanna-uni ... FyF56Qh.99

minami:

sushi88:

Why do we need this kind of talk?
LGBT are NOT harassed in Singapore, get that right please. They actually exist peacefully amongst us but they choose to give us issues to think about. In fact, they are harassing us day and night with new issues popping out.

So far, the so-called anti-LGBT is a peitition of signatures not to indoctrinate our children. Is that anywhere near to harassment? Any gays denied a job or got beaten on the street for being gay? Please la....we are so civil that most of us are even friends with them. :roll: As I said, love them but not spoil them.

Agree, we coexist peacefully until they start to harass us with all these push for recognition. Most of us accept them for who they are, no discrimination here but please, bringing out the issues and trying to push for acknowledgement or even wanting to educate our next gen with the idea is a total different issue.

Constitution of the Republic of Singapore:

122.—(1) Subject to clauses (2) and (3), a person born outside Singapore after 16th September 1963 shall be a citizen of Singapore by descent if, at the time of his birth —

(a) where the person is born before the date of commencement of section 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2004, his father is a citizen of Singapore, by birth or registration; and

(b) where the person is born on or after the date of commencement of section 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2004, either his father or mother is a citizen of Singapore, by birth, registration or descent.

(2) A person born outside Singapore shall not be a citizen of Singapore by descent by virtue of clause (1) unless —

(a) his birth is registered in the prescribed manner at the Registry of Citizens or at a diplomatic or consular mission of Singapore within one year, or such longer period as the Government permits, after its occurrence; and

(b) he would not acquire the citizenship of the country in which he was born by reason of his birth in that country where —

(i) in the case of a person born before the date of commencement of section 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2004, his father is a citizen of Singapore by registration at the time of his birth; or

(ii) in the case of a person born on or after the date of commencement of section 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2004, either his father or mother is a citizen of Singapore by registration at the time of his birth.

(3) Without prejudice to clause (2), a person born outside Singapore of a father or mother who is a citizen by descent at the time of his birth shall not be a citizen of Singapore by descent by virtue of clause (1) unless the parent who is the citizen by descent has lawfully resided in Singapore —

(a) for a period of, or for periods amounting in the aggregate to, not less than 5 years before that person’s birth; or

(b) for a period of, or for periods amounting in the aggregate to, not less than 2 years during the period of 5 years immediately preceding that person’s birth.

pirate:

limlim:

no SG citizenship.

I think the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore may beg to differ.

limlim:

no SG citizenship.

limlim:

Not sure if they can adopt. But confirm the kid cannot get Sg citizenship.

ngl2010:

Did any of you read Saturday or Sunday newspaper? (sorry I can't remember which day). There is an agency in the USA that said each year there are a few of gay couples from Singapore engaging them to get baby from surrogate mother. Is it allowed for gay Singaporeans to have babies?

tutormum:

http://dailysignal.com/2014/07/25/ryan- ... -marriage/

pirate:

I also said this at page 21 of this thread.

http://www.kiasuparents.com/kiasu/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=76635&start=200

All the equal rights activists and supporters siam this one leh. :razz:

sushi88:

Ok, one can argue that the freedom of choice is limited to sex with human..


Fine, the next big discussion on rights and discriminations of incestuous relationships, are you read to support this too? Food for thought.

Incest Debate A Predicted Outcome of Redefining Marriage
Thursday, 27 February 2014, 9:37 am
Press Release: Family First

MEDIA RELEASE

27 February 2014

Incest Debate A Predicted Outcome of Redefining Marriage

Family First NZ says that nobody should be surprised that the debate to redefine marriage has now progressed to the status of incest between consenting adults.

“We predicted this would happen,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “And the ACT leader’s comments are not ‘academic’ answers. They are the reality of where this argument is headed now that we have redefined marriage.”

“As we argued in our submission on the gay marriage bill, “Allowing only same-sex marriage on the basis of love and commitment would discriminate against those seeking polygamous, group, and consensual adult incest-type marriages.” Why would discrimination against these loving adults be ok? They may be illegal now, but it wasn’t that long ago that same-sex marriage was illegal also.”

“At the time of our warning, the politicians acted horrified and offended – but anyone with logical thinking knew that this was the outcome, whether intended or not.”

“In passing the ‘shot-gun’ same-sex marriage bill, Parliament chose to reject the obvious cultural and natural character of marriage and the subsequent creation and care of children, and made marriage just about partnership,” says Mr McCoskrie.

“Ironically, marriage now has become meaningless. We are using the word to describe something else – not commonly or traditionally conceived, but conceived by politics and political correctness.”

“The argument for incestuous relationships between consenting adults is a natural progression of the flawed argument which led to redefining marriage.”

ENDS

Scoop Media

Nebbermind:

sushi88:

[quote=\"pirate\"]
Sotong also got a lot of \"ink\" in them, you know. :siam:

Orhhh...you die...put writers same level as sotong... but it is funny... at least it makes me laugh.

XXXX:

How does your acceptance or non-acceptance affect anyone else (i.e. why would they care what you feel)?