Gays : To all Singapore Religious Leaders
-
Ppl whose opinion is differnt fron yours are mobs,hypocrites.So this is the way u debate an issue.Why won't u quit from here?Originally posted by crosshairs:To all the sane people in this thread who are aware of the concept of individual rights, just stop posting here and leave these moral police (mobs) to themseves to suckle on each others misguided ideas and leave them to find joy and comfort in each others embrace.
Let's see how long these hypocrites can keep this thread going. -
This debate is not about whether geys can have homo sex or not.No one care or can stop them from doing hom sex in their private.The police does not send private eyes to check ppl what they do in their bedroom.
This debate is about whether gey sex is good or not.My oponents say it is neither good nor bad.I believe when one doesn't know about the morality of an action,he just say no right or wrong.Then they say it is a personal choice.Is the choice of gey sex good or bad?I don't know their answer.If gey sex is bad,geys may choose it too.(Enjoy first,die also never mind!)We are saying it is bad,that's all.They can still do it.It is is their lives. -
To prove that gays are banned in Singapore:Originally posted by stupidissmart:We r talking about law, and it is written in the penal code in black and white. There is not clearer evidence than tis. If tat is not proof then wat is proof ?
Give examples like:
At the airport "Sir, you are a gay, you cannot enter Singapore."
Policeman; "You are a registered homosexual, I am detaining you for quarantine."
BTW, Chewing gum is not banned in Singapore.
You must think carefully over what you believe. -
Pope is not a medical doc,how can he prove such kind of thing?This is the kind of flaw in argument u often make.Originally posted by stupidissmart:How can u conclude homo is not inborn
Prove it. I have been issuing tis challenge for many times. EVen the pope cannot prove it, U can ?
U say it is "objective" standard. Then tell me based on wat grounds u say it is wrong ? If this homosexual become happy with his partner, then it is consider good. Why force them to lead lonely and unfulfilling life ?
I've explained why homo sex is wrong,but u still don't understand it.Want me to explain again?
Why can't geys have heterosex?Don't they love any woman at all?
If a gey want to live with another man,nobody can stop them.So they can live happily ever after! -
This debate is about whether gey sex is good or not.My oponents say it is neither good nor bad.I believe when one doesn't know about the morality of an action,he just say no right or wrong.Then they say it is a personal choice.Is the choice of gey sex good or bad?I don't know their answer.If gey sex is bad,geys may choose it too.(Enjoy first,die also never mind!)
U knw wat is the problem with your argument, u say gay sex is bad. Then u fail to say why is homosexual bad, u fail to say why heterosexual is good, u fail to explain anything. The only thing u did is simply repeat "homosexual is bad" "homosexual is wrong" and then did not do any elaboration at all. On my siude, I explain my points many times and answer all the questions u asked. But wat about u ? If u want to play tis game, then I can play like u too.
Gay discrimination is bad. Gay discrimination is wrong.We are saying it is bad,that's all.They can still do it.It is is their lives.
The whole argument of tis topic is effecting legislation to ban gay It is their lives, then why retain 377A ?To prove that gays are banned in Singapore:
I have already stated tat 377A is already proof tat legally speaking gays r prohibited. Technicaly, I am not wrong. The whole argument of the thread is on why is tis law retained.
Give examples like:
At the airport "Sir, you are a gay, you cannot enter Singapore."
Policeman; "You are a registered homosexual, I am detaining you for quarantine."
BTW, Chewing gum is not banned in Singapore.
You must think carefully over what you believe.
From the gov and legal point of view, chewing gum (not the one on therapy) is banned. Why don't u read wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewing_gum_ban_in_Singapore
The chewing gum ban in Singapore was enacted in 1992 and revised in 2004. It bans the import and sale of chewing gum in Singapore.
...
Chewing gum is banned in Singapore under the "Regulation of Imports and Exports (Chewing Gum) Regulations." Except for chewing gum of therapeutic value, the "importing" of chewing gum into Singapore is absolutely banned.Pope is not a medical doc,how can he prove such kind of thing?This is the kind of flaw in argument u often make.
The pope is the religious head of a large percentage of the human population. He had made statements regarding to scientific field such as age of the earth or evolution and even homosexual. He prove it not by himself doing experiments, but by citing works and research from other people. Thus far, he cannot make an absolute statement regarding homosexual not being inborn.I've explained why homo sex is wrong
List every single point and word u have mentioned on why u think homosexual is wrong. I have seen no points tat is not rebuked before. -
Be patient, I'm working on it. I'm trying to destroy this thread, if you have noticed. Give me some time so that I may succeed.Originally posted by PRP:Ppl whose opinion is differnt fron yours are mobs,hypocrites.So this is the way u debate an issue.Why won't u quit from here? -
Just a digression first.
You see, an untruth that is repeated often, and not corrected, will then be taken as the truth. Such as the '"chewing gum is banned"
The law on chewing gum clearly states that the sale or importation of chewing gum without a permit is prohibited.
The sale or importation, without a permit, does not equal to a ban. In fact it is saying that sale or importation is allowed, but with a permit. Nvm that is only another way of looking at it. But is there a ban? Is the word ban correctly used by the sources you cited.
They say ban, and you swallow it wholesale.
Is liquor (alcoholic drinks) banned in Singapore?
The sale or importation of alcohol without a permit is also prohibited.
Does that mean alcohol is banned. Or it is banned only when Wikipedia says so.
Shops cannot sell, without a permit.
Traders cannot import, without a permit.
Similarly
You cannot sell.
You cannot import.
That is all, but mischieve prefers the word ban.
You can drink whiskey, beer, wine, champagne etc. buy them from a licenced outlet.
You can also chew gum. If you can find a shop with licence selling them.
BTW, licence for sale of gum can be issued, to exclusive, members only, outlets, subject to conditions. That why the nicotine gum is available.
You can chew gum in Singapore, there is no ban on chewing gum. Buy from JB, or overseas and consume here. Only don't buy so much that it is considered importation. I have chewing gum in my refrigerator.
This phrase "ban on chewing gum in Singapore" have been going around for so long that it is now an accepted fact, when in fact there is no ban at all.
Sale or importation is allowed only with a permit.
Now on Section 377A.
What has that got to do with gays being banned in Singapore. And I am saying gays are not banned in Singapore. Furthermore you don't have to be gay to run foul of Sect. 377A. It is not an anti-gay legislation, it is against lewdness between men. Therefore men and gays are not banned, they are only not allowed to..
That why I cay think carefully.
Gays are not banned in Singapore.
Terrorists are banned in Singapore.
Go around telling everyone, including the police, that you are gay, you will be left alone.
Go around shouting that you are a terrorist, I tell you, you will definitely be arrested.
What is it that gays are pushing for?
Equality? All that is bull.
When a paedophile claims that his sexual orientation is such, or he is genitically predisposed as such, will you be sympathetic.
They all want gratification for their sexual fetish.
The modus operandi, harp on genetics, freedom, human rights, repeatedly, until bull is accepted as fact. -
You see, an untruth that is repeated often, and not corrected, will then be taken as the truth. Such as the '"chewing gum is banned"
U r just talking rubbish. It is already explicitly mentioned tat it is banned and u beging to play with words and say it is not ban and u say u can import it with a permit. Says who ??
The law on chewing gum clearly states that the sale or importation of chewing gum without a permit is prohibited.
The sale or importation, without a permit, does not equal to a ban. In fact it is saying that sale or importation is allowed, but with a permit. Nvm that is only another way of looking at it. But is there a ban? Is the word ban correctly used by the sources you cited.
They say ban, and you swallow it wholesale.
Is liquor (alcoholic drinks) banned in Singapore?
The sale or importation of alcohol without a permit is also prohibited.
Does that mean alcohol is banned. Or it is banned only when Wikipedia says so.
Shops cannot sell, without a permit.
http://www.customs.gov.sg/topNav/leg/act/Regulation+of+Imports+and+Exports+Act.htm
Tis is from the custom office. Read the pdf on chewing gums. In citation 3
Except as provided in regulation 3A, the importation into singapore of any chewing gums is prohibited.
If u want to talk about the word "ban", from dictionary.com
Ban:
to prohibit, forbid, or bar; interdict: to ban nuclear weapons; The dictator banned all newspapers and books that criticized his regime.
Now u say u can import into singapore chewing gums (not therapeutic gums)with a permit. PROVE IT.
R u sure u r not swallowing things wholesale yourself ? U r the one tat claim gays r not inborn. Prove to me homosexual r not inborn la. Otherwise u swallow everythign wholesale. BTW, show me a scientific website tat state gays r not inbor, not religious website because we r talking about science, not religion here.What has that got to do with gays being banned in Singapore. And I am saying gays are not banned in Singapore. Furthermore you don't have to be gay to run foul of Sect. 377A. It is not an anti-gay legislation, it is against lewdness between men. Therefore men and gays are not banned, they are only not allowed to..
Why r they not allowed to ? SO u expect them to live a life of calibracy to fulfil your wishes ? Wat will u feel if u r forced not to have sex forever ? If they did not do the act, why r they considered as gay ? Once u did it, then u r gay and it is banned. I don't see any difference in the magnitude
No discrimination
What is it that gays are pushing for?
Equality? All that is bull. Is tat bull ? I think the one tat pushes discrimination r the antagoniser. And so far, there is no evidence to prove homosexual is a mental illness. If not, why r u considering it as a fetish ? -
This is a stupid thread, let's all just quit trying to talk to these bigotted homophobic numbskulls cos the day will come when the ban is lifted and hey, maybe they will turn gay?
Maybe some of them were under the right winger's ex-gay programs. Who knows? Closet homosexuals love to be vocal about such things, just look at Rev Ted Haggard. -
I think the same too ..Originally posted by crosshairs:This is a stupid thread, let's all just quit trying to talk to these bigotted homophobic numbskulls cos the day will come when the ban is lifted and hey, maybe they will turn gay?
Maybe some of them were under the right winger's ex-gay programs. Who knows? Closet homosexuals love to be vocal about such things, just look at Rev Ted Haggard.
Maybe the law change .. hehe .. quite possible .. (a matter of time ..)
Maybe they become gays ... not quite possible.. ugly men are normally not gays ..
Maybe their sons.. daughters .. oops .. u never know .. -
Well said indeed!Originally posted by mancha:What is it that gays are pushing for?
Equality? All that is bull.
When a paedophile claims that his sexual orientation is such, or he is genitically predisposed as such, will you be sympathetic.
They all want gratification for their sexual fetish.
The modus operandi, harp on genetics, freedom, human rights, repeatedly, until bull is accepted as fact. -
The below msg is not meant for Happie & Crosshair to read.
The natural instinct of sex is heterosexual.If a man is attracted to another man, probably the man he is attracted to look more feminine.As a parent,surely one should expalain to his child that attraction to the same sex person is not for sex.He should tell his child to look for opposite sex partner.So that is a reason why homo is wrong.
Yes,a person can be attracted by a same sex person.But it doesn't mean one should engage in sexual relationship with him.This is a sex education msg for young ppl only! -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
OK, You got me there with the chewing gum ban.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R u sure u r not swallowing things wholesale yourself ? U r the one tat claim gays r not inborn. Prove to me homosexual r not inborn la. Otherwise u swallow everythign wholesale. BTW, show me a scientific website tat state gays r not inbor, not religious website because we r talking about science, not religion here.
Why r they not allowed to ? SO u expect them to live a life of calibracy to fulfil your wishes ? Wat will u feel if u r forced not to have sex forever ? If they did not do the act, why r they considered as gay ? Once u did it, then u r gay and it is banned. I don't see any difference in the magnitude
No discrimination Is tat bull ? I think the one tat pushes discrimination r the antagoniser. And so far, there is no evidence to prove homosexual is a mental illness. If not, why r u considering it as a fetish ?
Why r they not allowed to ? SO u expect them to live a life of calibracy to fulfil your wishes ? Wat will u feel if u r forced not to have sex forever ? If they did not do the act, why r they considered as gay ? Once u did it, then u r gay and it is banned. I don't see any difference in the magnitude
No discrimination Is tat bull ? I think the one tat pushes discrimination r the antagoniser. And so far, there is no evidence to prove homosexual is a mental illness. If not, why r u considering it as a fetish ?
[/b]
The original restriction was that a permit was needed, I did not realised that that was removed. I regularly bring in chewing gum when I return from my over seas trip, together with my other soveniours, and not hidden under a false panel. And I consume them openly.
The very fact that hold that chewing is not banned show that I do not swallow information wholesale. I arrive at my stand by my own reasonings.
Therefore I think.
I think over matters and come to my own conclusions, rightly or wrong.
I see you have a preoccupation with PROVE IT.
And prove it with what?
Scientific report found in the internet. Which are not conclusive, and are probably, may, most likely, many other factors, tend to etc. They report what is seen, and do not say definitely: " Gays will be left handed."
Doctors examining the cells of a foetus and find an extra chromosone, can conclude that the child will have Down Syndrome, but no such certainity for gays.
Do you have your own experiments, your own study? I don't.
I don't swallow information wholesale, and you have proof of that.
You again present you errorneous view of Sect. 337A. That, as I have said it is not a piece of legislation banning gays in Singapore.
If you run foul of that law, you will be punished because you run foul of the law. Whether you are gay or not the question does not arise..
No such thing, you do it, you will be labled gay. The issue will be the law, and not to categorise you.
I have also said up in the thread that what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom is their own business. That means they can wank, they can sodomnise, they can give blowjobs as long as there is no complaint.
Who's asking them to be celibate?
I am saying that they are lobbying to indulge in their fetish.
A person has sexual urges, and will seek gratification. Some with shoes, some by voyeurism, animals, children, self, panties, and what not. So it is not surprising that some can only get their kicks with the same sex. This as with the rest, I say is a perversion.
This is all repetition of what I have said earlier.
Discrimination?
I said homosexuals having same sex weddings with white gowns and wedding marches, are a sign that they want normalcy, which inturn shows that they know that they are queers. Same for the human rights issues, and sexual orientation explanation. They know that they are abnormal.
I have my stand, and unless you come up with your own understanding, and own reasoning, your own explanation, your own why and wherefor, this debate will go on like a stuck record. And stop that PROVE IT thing.
That "Prove it" thingy only shows you are a swallower and not a thinker. -
To repeat..Originally posted by happieman:I think the same too ..
Maybe the law change .. hehe .. quite possible .. (a matter of time ..)
Maybe they become gays ... not quite possible.. ugly men are normally not gays ..
Maybe their sons.. daughters .. oops .. u never know ..
Maybe the law change .. hehe .. quite possible .. (a matter of time ..)
Maybe they become gays ... not quite possible.. ugly men are normally not gays ..
Maybe their sons.. daughters .. oops .. u never know .. -
Originally posted by PRP:
May I know how old are you? male or female? Any children ?
The below msg is not meant for Happie & Crosshair to read.
[b]The natural instinct of sex is heterosexual.If a man is attracted to another man, probably the man he is attracted to look more feminine.As a parent,surely one should expalain to his child that attraction to the same sex person is not for sex.He should tell his child to look for opposite sex partner.So that is a reason why homo is wrong.
Yes,a person can be attracted by a same sex person.But it doesn't mean one should engage in sexual relationship with him.This is a sex education msg for young ppl only![/b] -
The natural instinct of sex is heterosexual.If a man is attracted to another man, probably the man he is attracted to look more feminine.As a parent,surely one should expalain to his child that attraction to the same sex person is not for sex.He should tell his child to look for opposite sex partner.So that is a reason why homo is wrong.
Tat just means u don't understand them at all U r a guy right ? U like girls right ? Now imagine u r a girl and u like girls as much as u now.
Furthermore, u r accusing all homosexuals' parents give poor upbringing and poor parenting and they end up as homosexual. I think tat is a baseless senseless accusation.
Homosexual, according to many studies, r inborn. I think u need to read tat statement again. Homosexual, according to many studies, r inborn. They r born to like people of the same sex. Nothing to do with parents or watsoeverThe very fact that hold that chewing is not banned show that I do not swallow information wholesale. I arrive at my stand by my own reasonings.
U mean u arrive at the wrong conclusion using your own reasoning. How do u know u r not wrong on the homosexual issue ?Scientific report found in the internet. Which are not conclusive, and are probably, may, most likely, many other factors, tend to etc. They report what is seen, and do not say definitely: " Gays will be left handed."
Ok, lets say the studies r not conclusive. Tat means gays maybe inborn. Since u cannot prove it to be wrong, then why r u punishing them by forcing them to remain single and lonely ? Given the benefit of doubt, we should practise tolerance and not discrimination. A person is innocent unless proven guilty. Why is tis good ? Because we rather jail 100 less criminals than jail one innocent person.
Doctors examining the cells of a foetus and find an extra chromosone, can conclude that the child will have Down Syndrome, but no such certainity for gays.
Do you have your own experiments, your own study? I don't.
I don't swallow information wholesale, and you have proof of that.You again present you errorneous view of Sect. 337A. That, as I have said it is not a piece of legislation banning gays in Singapore.
So u expect gays to remain single and not have sex for their whole life for your sake ? If they did the act, whether private or public,they commit the offence 377A. Isn't tat wat 377A is about ?
If you run foul of that law, you will be punished because you run foul of the law. Whether you are gay or not the question does not arise..person has sexual urges, and will seek gratification. Some with shoes, some by voyeurism, animals, children, self, panties, and what not. So it is not surprising that some can only get their kicks with the same sex. This as with the rest, I say is a perversion
Prove it. I have been challenging u for many occasions on tis. Otherwise u r just using your own reasoning and looking at history, it can be wrong. Remember... U r wrong before. Why should everybody believe in the wrong thing or something someone thought ? U think I thought who confirm. How credible is tat ?I said homosexuals having same sex weddings with white gowns and wedding marches, are a sign that they want normalcy, which inturn shows that they know that they are queers. Same for the human rights issues, and sexual orientation explanation. They know that they are abnormal.
Why does wanting to be normal = u r queer ? U mean u wanna marry wearing singlet and slipper ? If u wanna marry with a suit and tie and gowns, tat means u want to be normal too and tat = u r queer ? Sorry man, people in society follow the norm now and then and following it does not means u r queer, but rather normal. -
Geys like men.I think they like men who look feminine.It is natural instinct of sex at work.Is it true that geys don't like any lady at all?Are geys all female 'hater'?
I know 2 geys. One has divorced with his wife.The other has sexual relationships with his girl friend.Don't know why they become gey.I think they have sexual problems.
Where to find the 'inborn' geys?Pls show up! -
A person can have sex or abstain from sex.He can have protected sex or unprotected sex.He can have different kind of sex with man or woman.All sexual acts are conscious one.Unless he is addicted to certain form of sex,then he can't control himself.How can homo sex be born?
-
What u want to know is irrelevant to your understanding of my msg.Originally posted by happieman:May I know how old are you? male or female? Any children ? -
What PRP is saying is that a parent should tell the child that it is alright to have a buddy of the same sex, and for sexual matters hetero is the way.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Tat just means u don't understand them at all U r a guy right ? U like girls right ? Now imagine u r a girl and u like girls as much as u now.
Furthermore, u r accusing all homosexuals' parents give poor upbringing and poor parenting and they end up as homosexual. I think tat is a baseless senseless accusation.
Homosexual, according to many studies, r inborn. I think u need to read tat statement again. Homosexual, according to many studies, r inborn. They r born to like people of the same sex. Nothing to do with parents or watsoever
U mean u arrive at the wrong conclusion using your own reasoning. How do u know u r not wrong on the homosexual issue ?
Ok, lets say the studies r not conclusive. Tat means gays maybe inborn. Since u cannot prove it to be wrong, then why r u punishing them by forcing them to remain single and lonely ? Given the benefit of doubt, we should practise tolerance and not discrimination. A person is innocent unless proven guilty. Why is tis good ? Because we rather jail 100 less criminals than jail one innocent person.
So u expect gays to remain single and not have sex for their whole life for your sake ? If they did the act, whether private or public,they commit the offence 377A. Isn't tat wat 377A is about ?
Prove it. I have been challenging u for many occasions on tis. Otherwise u r just using your own reasoning and looking at history, it can be wrong. Remember... U r wrong before. Why should everybody believe in the wrong thing or something someone thought ? U think I thought who confirm. How credible is tat ?
Why does wanting to be normal = u r queer ? U mean u wanna marry wearing singlet and slipper ? If u wanna marry with a suit and tie and gowns, tat means u want to be normal too and tat = u r queer ? Sorry man, people in society follow the norm now and then and following it does not means u r queer, but rather normal.
Seems you like to put word into peoples mouth.
This usually results in the same points being revisited, like a stuck record.
I made a blooper on the chewing gum part, but does not mean everything about me is suspect.
Don't assume I did not google on the subject, there is no conclusive results on the many studies done on homosexuality. Its all probabilities one way or another. So is homosexuality inborn or a birth defect? No one can say for sure. Is it developed after birth? Still a maybe. Since human sexuality is complex, and each individual is unique, the conclusion is that there probably various causes of homosexuality. Go google the whole gamut on the subject.
What homosexuals do in the privacy of their bed room is their business. I will not again explain this again. The same with your understanding of Sect. 377A.
Again you missed the point on wedding marches. The point I am putting is that homosexuals know that they are queer. Therefore they are lobbying for acceptance, and nupital ceremonies are a highly visble form. Gays and lesbians can remain as they are, people don't care, but when they start to invade hetero institutions and make a mockery of them, that when the hate start pouring out. Homosexuality is a perversion.
Gays can go about their lives as they wish. They can make private contrats with regards to their assets. They can be buddies and inseparable sisters. But to shout out "Hey we are doing it, there's nothing wrong with it, you should let us" When met with resistence, they start the lobbying with sexual orientation...blah blah.. Haiz, I'll be repeating my self again. -
Originally posted by PRP:
This is a repeat call for all sane people of logical minds to stop babysitting these poor people with intellectual disabilities. Please let them off. Please forgive their poor educational backgrounds, and please, don't give them a wall to bang their heads on, cos they are very hollow and very loud.
The below msg is not meant for Happie & Crosshair to read.
[b]The natural instinct of sex is heterosexual.If a man is attracted to another man, probably the man he is attracted to look more feminine.As a parent,surely one should expalain to his child that attraction to the same sex person is not for sex.He should tell his child to look for opposite sex partner.So that is a reason why homo is wrong.
Yes,a person can be attracted by a same sex person.But it doesn't mean one should engage in sexual relationship with him.This is a sex education msg for young ppl only![/b] -
Let's talk about somethind we can all relate to, like food.
I like prata, kosong. With veg curry. I usually wash it down with a cup of kopitiam coffee. DOes anyone share my taste for prata?
I cannot stand prata with eggs. I think prata with eggs, is wrong. Prata was not meant to be stuffed with eggs, cannot absorb curry. Eggs will also cover the taste of the dough, defeats the purpose of having prata. I thing people who eat prata with eggs, need to change. -
It is relevant and it is important ..Originally posted by PRP:What u want to know is irrelevant to your understanding of my msg.
i m trying to do a study on different types of extremist .. and how this relates to his/her educational and family background, etc..
hope you can help .. -
RPR..
What is your religious belief ? -
Geys like men.I think they like men who look feminine.It is natural instinct of sex at work.Is it true that geys don't like any lady at all?Are geys all female 'hater'?
I think u know very little about homosexual. Lets look from the definition of the word
homosexual: Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex
However u mix up with another type of people, which r ambisexual/bisexual
ambisexual: Having a sexual orientation to persons of either sex; bisexual
The people u know, r ambisexual. They can like female and male. But they r not really homosexual as define in dictionary or in tis threadA person can have sex or abstain from sex.He can have protected sex or unprotected sex.He can have different kind of sex with man or woman.All sexual acts are conscious one.Unless he is addicted to certain form of sex,then he can't control himself.How can homo sex be born?
Homosexual means they r attracted to people of the same sex. According to many studies it is inborn. Wer not talking about the action, but the orientation, as defined in the dictionary.What PRP is saying is that a parent should tell the child that it is alright to have a buddy of the same sex, and for sexual matters hetero is the way.
SO lets say there is a homosexual named A. According to PRP, the problem why he is homosexual is because their parent teach him to like people of the same sex. He felt tat tis teaching is wrong. So my conclusion is tat PRP think homosexual have parents tat teach them the wrong thing, and tat equate to poor upbringing. Wat is wrong with my conclusion ?
Seems you like to put word into peoples mouth.I made a blooper on the chewing gum part, but does not mean everything about me is suspect.
So u agree with me tat for scientific issue, we look at studies and evidence and not wat u think or I thought isn't it ?Don't assume I did not google on the subject, there is no conclusive results on the many studies done on homosexuality. Its all probabilities one way or another. So is homosexuality inborn or a birth defect? No one can say for sure. Is it developed after birth? Still a maybe. Since human sexuality is complex, and each individual is unique, the conclusion is that there probably various causes of homosexuality. Go google the whole gamut on the subject.
Tat is right. I never say tat the studies r conclusive. However there r studies, reason and ground to say tat gays r inborn. U cannot prove it wrong as well. And there r more studies showing homosexual is not a illness. Since we cannot say for certain, then why condemn them ? Shouldn't we give them the benefit of the doubt and let them live as normal people because it can very well mean they r inborn to be homosexual.What homosexuals do in the privacy of their bed room is their business. I will not again explain this again. The same with your understanding of Sect. 377A.
Please explain the word in bold below.
377A: Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years.
Something u think wrongly again ?Again you missed the point on wedding marches. The point I am putting is that homosexuals know that they are queer. Therefore they are lobbying for acceptance, and nupital ceremonies are a highly visble form. Gays and lesbians can remain as they are, people don't care, but when they start to invade hetero institutions and make a mockery of them, that when the hate start pouring out. Homosexuality is a perversion.
First, u cannot prove homosexual as a perversion. U only think, and your thinking is proven to be wrong sometimes.
Second, how they marry is really none of your business. Some marry in the sea, some drink all day, some go for traditional churches and some even have mass orgy. It has nothing to do with u.
Third, normal people have wedding dress in gowns and suits. They dress in gowns and suit. Wat do u expect them to wear then ? Clown suits with red polka dot underwear outside ?
Lastly, the thread is not about allowing gay marriages. It is about acknowledging there is such a thing as homosexual.