Gays : To all Singapore Religious Leaders
-
I'm gonna try some asian cuisine today. Hey, BTW do you know hotels here offer free apples for people going out for a jog in the park? Man, talk about hospitality. They even give you a map just in case you get lost!!! not like you will bring it with you anyhow.
Has anyone here visited frankfurt before? Any other places of interest and things to do?????????///////////////////////////////////////??????????????????
I was also thinking of organising an outing for this thread, I think if everyone here truly agrees and stand by their statements then they should not be afraid to show up for a face to face debate instead of trying to incite some kind of movement that will someday make our country seem like the setting of the movie V for Vendetta.
Who thinks its a good idea? I think its a jolly good idea. -
Yes, it's right to stop now..Originally posted by PRP:Yes,time to stop the debate.
Wish you a Merry Christmas!
everyone can choose their own favourite colour.. food .. etc .. and can have friends who don share their views.. interests .. and hobbies ..etc
no one can stop a gay being a gay ... no one can stop a straight to be a straight ..
all be friends .. and contribute to the society and celebrate the great season and move on ..
smiles and cheers .. -
Yoh, can everyone stop the Kill-The-Geys campaign and have a very merry season?
-
The busy weekend gave me a welcome break.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Yoh, can everyone stop the Kill-The-Geys campaign and have a very merry season?
This is not a Kill-The-Geys campaign.
I had hope that gays would contribute their experiences and thoughts, but sigh! they choose to stay out of the 'fray'.
Yes its time to stop, and strive to have a merry experience this year end-festive season. -
We should not discriminate Gays based on the religious belief. Gay is inborn,the wisest man in singapore said so,so leave them alone and if they want do do something privately, that is non of our business.
I am surprise and also glad that our government is so open minded unfortunately has to make the political correct decision.
Gays are human being, they can be our brothers, our good colleagues, don't look at them with the coloured grasses. -
Anyone who thinks that gay people can be changed to become straight or straight people can suddenly be sexually turned on by people of the same sex so easily are probably intrinsically bisexual.
-
You make a good point.Originally posted by Phorum Noob:Anyone who thinks that gay people can be changed to become straight or straight people can suddenly be sexually turned on by people of the same sex so easily are probably intrinsically bisexual. 
But one of the arguments is that even if the person is gay, he or she should not participate in homosexual activity because it is wrong. as for why it's wrong, you'll have to read PRP's many posts on this topic. -
Further, if marriage and sex is meant to produce a children, then should impotent people be allowed to marry? Should condoms be allowed?..etc..
-
DITTO!
======================================================Originally posted by stupidissmart:
It is important because we r discussing scientific facts and the best person to provide the answer is scientist.
[quote]I have already said it is easy to say PROVE IT, to anything that is said, and add nothing.I have also said I do not have my own studies, or experiments, or reports.
I agree it is inconclusive. But I have already mention a point 3 times which u refused to acknowledge or comment.
I presume it is links you want. Or others peoples findings. These are accepted as inconclusive.
11 December 2007 · 05:09 PM
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.
12 December 2007 · 02:03 PM
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.
13 December 2007 · 01:10 AM
I already told u. The result is inconclusive. And tat is why we should give them the benefit of the doubt. I have stated tis point many times and u simply ignore them.
Wat is your comment on it ? Why ignore my reply then repeat your old point again ? R u covering up your ears and eyes and just repeat wat u thought which is proven to be wrong before ?Why is homosexuality not a perversion?
Who r u to judge wat is sexuality
Sexual intercourse is a liason between male and female. That is the basis for sexuality. This developed into courtship, intimacies, romance, foreplay. And the basis is male/female relationship . Any deviation is a perversion, even when it is harmless.
Homosexuality, the second syllably denotes sex, and it deviates from the basic male/female liason to a same gender liason. Is is a hybrid? No conclusive proof. Who r u to define wat is perversion or not ? Sexuality, based on dictionary is simply sexual behavior in sexual organism. Homosexual is part of tis sexuality. Who r u to redefine the word and exclude it out ? Mother nature or god had made animals gay themself. Who r u to say they r wrong and tat tat is not wat sexuality is all about ?
Who r u to tell us how people should go about in their sexual intercourse ?Psychologist do not regard it as a perversion but u do. Wat give u the right to give such a conclusion ? Did u do any studies at all or u just tell us wat u think ? Wat do u think about chewing gums in singapore before ?IMO, homosexuality is buddy or sistership that went too far. A man can have a bossum buddy, and live with him, nothing wrong with that. But to screw his arse, kiss him, and the like, and marry him! that's the perversion.
I am glad u write the word "IMO" in the beginning. Well IMO, Homosexual r people who r born to like people of the same sex. They too can like someone and love someone. The difference is due to their physical body, they like someone of the same sex. U can imagine yourself liking men like a normal woman, but u have a man body. If u think liking someone is a perversion, then everybody is perverted.
Being buddies is not. Same with sistership. Just don't cross the line.Homosexuality is a perversion, whether you accept it or not.
I wanna say the old words again
Prove it. Otherwise u r just telling me wat u think which can be wrong.In my boyhood kampong, there were two men living together, whom I thought were brothers at that time. We did'nt think anything about them, were friends with them. Its only on hindsight that I realise they were gays. Now I don't know where they are, but if I meet them, I would greet them like any of my old kampong elderly.
Then why enforce a law making them illegal ? Why not just acknowledge such people exist and let the law die a nature death ?
At present, I personaly know of two women, who are like inseparable sisters, I and everyone else suspect they are lesbians. But we don't know, and don't care.I say again, what they do in the privacy of their bedrooms is their own business.
The law explicitly mention tat it is illegal whether it is done privately or not. I have mention tat in the previous statement before. If there is no complaints, u can do anything u want. A complaint only can make u go scotfree, but u still commit the offence. I can kill a vangabond with no families and friends and go away scot free because there is no complaints. But I still had committed the offence of murder.
And the law holds the same, unless there is a complaint.
Furthermore, who r u to say tat when the gays do it privately there won't have a complainant ? Maybe a busybody using a binoculars at their neighbour's window can spot the gay couple doing intimacy acts ? Maybe when gays r doing the act in their room, they forget to lock the door and a nun living at a next door in the hotel budge into the wrong room ? Maybe a burglar going into a room spotted the gay doing their act in their room ? U know I can go on and on... Who r u to say there won't be a complainant in all cases for the rest of time ? Just written in the law is already enough justification to show it is illegal to do it even in private.But the fact that higher percentage of geys infected with AIDS does indicate something unfavorable to homo sex
Indian have a worse case of obesity compared with other races. So does tat indicate something unfavourable about the indian race ?The govt doesn't ban geys. Section 377A is just a piece of legislation which says the majortiy of the members of parliament don't approve gey sex and geys can't publicly promote it because it is a crime.
So u expect them to live a life of calibracy for your... ehh.. wat reasons do u have to force them not to have sex ? Because u don't like it ? Because u do not like it u force them to remain a virgin forever ? Does tat sounds ridiculous to u ? It sounds ridiculous to me.1.The natural instinct of sex is heterrosexual.Homo goes against nature.
Nature shows animals r homosexual themselves. The nature instinct of sex is mixed.2.The natural purpose of sex is procreation.Homo sex can't achieve the purpose of sex.So it goes against the nature.
The purpose of sex is also enjoyment. And most, and I mean 99% of the world population people in tis world have sex some time in their life simply for enjoyment. If tat is the case everybody is guilty. And u should state a law banning all contraceptives too3.Higher percentage (than heterosexauals') of local geys are infected with AIDS.
So ? Higher percentage of car accidents r motorcyclists. So we should label it as dangerous and ban motorcycle ?1.It follows the nature (natural instinct & purpose of sex).
True, But u cannot prove nature does not allow homosexual2.It is a joy to have babies and bringing them up
Tell tat to the monks and catholic fathers.
3.The children can look after their old parrents.
[/quote] -
I find this a little offensive.Originally posted by Phorum Noob:Tell tat to the monks and catholic fathers. -
How does the law work?Originally posted by Phorum Noob:The law explicitly mention tat it is illegal whether it is done privately or not. I have mention tat in the previous statement before. If there is no complaints, u can do anything u want. A complaint only can make u go scotfree, but u still commit the offence. I can kill a vangabond with no families and friends and go away scot free because there is no complaints. But I still had committed the offence of murder.
Furthermore, who r u to say tat when the gays do it privately there won't have a complainant ? Maybe a busybody using a binoculars at their neighbour's window can spot the gay couple doing intimacy acts ? Maybe when gays r doing the act in their room, they forget to lock the door and a nun living at a next door in the hotel budge into the wrong room ? Maybe a burglar going into a room spotted the gay doing their act in their room ? U know I can go on and on... Who r u to say there won't be a complainant in all cases for the rest of time ? Just written in the law is already enough justification to show it is illegal to do it even in private.
You complain .. and the State has to prove indeed homosexual activities have taken place?
Digress a little, if I spot someone littering, I report to police. What is the chance that person is fined?
Edit: to add on, let's say I have video evidence of homosexual activities taking place. my video is already an infringement of privacy right? -
I find this a little offensive
My point is, PRP find people having children to be a lot of fun and a must have thing for life. Naturally the group of people above can't have children as well. So if not having children is a bad thing, they r in the same boat and same picture too.How does the law work?
U complain and u become the complainant and u r the witness to the activities.
You complain .. and the State has to prove indeed homosexual activities have taken place?Digress a little, if I spot someone littering, I report to police. What is the chance that person is fined?
There is a chance he is fined.Edit: to add on, let's say I have video evidence of homosexual activities taking place. my video is already an infringement of privacy right?
It depends on how u get it. If u get it through illegal methods, u r indeed guilty of privacy right. But u deserve it and my guess is it is just an act tat is a civilian suit and all u get is a fine. However u can pull the homosexual into the sh !t and still act as complainant against them where legally speaking it is not a civilian suit and the state do the prosecution as well as it being a jailable offence -
My point is, PRP find people having children to be a lot of fun and a must have thing for life. Naturally the group of people above can't have children as well. So if not having children is a bad thing, they r in the same boat and same picture too.
Different thing. Naturally that group of people can have children; but homosexuals naturally cannot have children. If you have no natural lust for the opposite gender, how to proceed to copulation? Furthermore if marriage and having children have religious roots, then celibacy also has religious justification.U complain and u become the complainant and u r the witness to the activities.
It depends on whether Prosecution wants to pursue or not.There is a chance he is fined.
You can try .. after all not difficult to find people violating littering laws.It depends on how u get it. If u get it through illegal methods, u r indeed guilty of privacy right. But u deserve it and my guess is it is just an act tat is a civilian suit and all u get is a fine. However u can pull the homosexual into the sh !t and still act as complainant against them where legally speaking it is not a civilian suit and the state do the prosecution as well as it being a jailable offence
If obtaining a video of heterosexual activities without the couple's permission is an offence, I guess it is true for homosexual activities too. -
Different thing. Naturally that group of people can have children; but homosexuals naturally cannot have children. If you have no natural lust for the opposite gender, how to proceed to copulation? Furthermore if marriage and having children have religious roots, then celibacy also has religious justification.
And your point being ? From your passage, I get the idea tat gay have more right to have no childen because they cannot do it even if they want to and their reason is nature reason which is better than religious justification.
Gays: Inability.
Monks & Fathers: self imposed.
If having no babies is a sin, I guess the gays r more rightIt depends on whether Prosecution wants to pursue or not
The keyword is they canYou can try .. after all not difficult to find people violating littering laws.
Then go and try lor. The keyword is they can get finedIf obtaining a video of heterosexual activities without the couple's permission is an offence, I guess it is true for homosexual activities too.
I think it is obvious it is an offence ba... otherwise peeping toms r legalised -
Then Indians should sign up for those slimming courses.Originally posted by Phorum Noob:Indian have a worse case of obesity compared with other races. So does tat indicate something unfavourable about the indian race ?So u expect them to live a life of calibracy for your... ehh.. wat reasons do u have to force them not to have sex ? Because u don't like it ? Because u do not like it u force them to remain a virgin forever ? Does tat sounds ridiculous to u ? It sounds ridiculous to me.
Your reasoning does not play out in real life. When oral sex between different gender was criminal, do you see couples refraining from oral sex? Do you know couples living in depression because backside poking is not allowed?Nature shows animals r homosexual themselves. The nature instinct of sex is mixed.
Those are basket cases, if the natural role of sex is to pass down your genes.The purpose of sex is also enjoyment. And most, and I mean 99% of the world population people in tis world have sex some time in their life simply for enjoyment.
Down with incest law! Why cannot have incest?So ? Higher percentage of car accidents r motorcyclists. So we should label it as dangerous and ban motorcycle ?
Actually shouldn't it be the other way? Seldom do motorcycles buang people. Most of the time motorcycles and pedestrians are buang by cars and bigger vehicles. Motorcycles are the victims.True, But u cannot prove nature does not allow homosexual
nature allows everything. hey .. when is incest law gonna be repealed? -
dont understand.Originally posted by stupidissmart:And your point being ? From your passage, I get the idea tat gay have more right to have no childen because they cannot do it even if they want to and their reason is nature reason which is better than religious justificationThe keyword is they can
This doesn' seem to bother couples engaged in oral sex and backside poking activities.
In fact, the main argument in repealing 377 is not that their [full] right of sex is being infringed, but that we should keep up with the times. -
Then Indians should sign up for those slimming courses
U r not getting to the point It is telling u tat these group of people more prone to dieseases doesn't mean anythingYour reasoning does not play out in real life. When oral sex between different gender was criminal, do you see couples refraining from oral sex? Do you know couples living in depression because backside poking is not allowed?
The keyword is, it is illegal. Tat is wat we r talking about. If we want to make something illegal, it must be with good reason and tat is why 377 is removed nowThose are basket cases, if the natural role of sex is to pass down your genes
Sex for human also play the role of being an enjoyment for it. If we want to go to the root of all being nature, then medicine is not natural. Dieseases, by nature should kill people to control the population which we can see is affecting the whole world nowDown with incest law! Why cannot have incest?
Because u will have defect babies I have replied your post last time if u fail to read it last time Actually shouldn't it be the other way? Seldom do motorcycles buang people. Most of the time motorcycles and pedestrians are buang by cars and bigger vehicles. Motorcycles are the victims
The bottomline is motorcyclists have the highest amount of casualties. (I felt tat some motorist do take more risky moves like travelling between the lanes, which is supposed to be discouraged) Tat is how PRP present his case isn't it ?nature allows everything. hey .. when is incest law gonna be repealed?
If u have read the post I made, u should ask when it the law making HIV carrier mandatory to inform the other party of his condition be enacted -
dont understand.
In short, in your reply u say gays cannot copulate. Then isn't tat a better reason why they cannot have babies compared with monks and catholic fathers ?This doesn' seem to bother couples engaged in oral sex and backside poking activities.
I have said liao, the keyword is the law can charged u for it and someone really did get charged. Who knows, someone may get discouraged by tis law then. Can u tell me 0 people have been affected after a cop get fired, charged and sent to jail ?
In fact, the main argument in repealing 377 is not that their [full] right of sex is being infringed, but that we should keep up with the times
The main argument is their right of sex is being infringed and tat is why it is repealed isn't it ? Otherwise why repealed ? -
It means they should watch their health more carefully.Originally posted by stupidissmart:U r not getting to the point It is telling u tat these group of people more prone to dieseases doesn't mean anythingThe keyword is, it is illegal. Tat is wat we r talking about. If we want to make something illegal, it must be with good reason and tat is why 377 is removed now
There are good reasons to make it illegal. IMHO, to legalise it may lead to a slippery slope.Sex for human also play the role of being an enjoyment for it. If we want to go to the root of all being nature, then medicine is not natural
Medicine also natural. Never heard of nature's cure?Because u will have defect babies I have replied your post last time if u fail to read it last time
I have also said sex does not lead to babies, especially in this day and age.
Edit: Genetically speaking, incest increases the chance of having defect babies and the effect may only be obvious after a few generations. -
It means they should watch their health more carefully
U r still not answering to the point. A group of people more prone to dieseases doesn't mean it should be bannedThere are good reasons to make it illegal. IMHO, to legalise it may lead to a slippery slope
Now people r allowed to have oral sex isn't it ? It is legalised. NOte 377A and 377 r differentMedicine also natural. Never heard of nature's cure?
Nope. Wat is nature cure ? Any animals practising tat ? Diesease should kill human to control its population isn't it ? Why defeat the purpose of deseases by inventing medicine ?I have also said sex does not lead to babies, especially in this day and age.
First lets get tis straight. PLease tell me wat is the offence code saying incest is wrong ?Genetically speaking, incest increases the chance of having defect babies and the effect may only be obvious after a few generations.
Incest can affect your immediate children -
Wait, now I think gays can copulate. The one who cannot copulate is the eunuch.Originally posted by stupidissmart:In short, in your reply u say gays cannot copulate. Then isn't tat a better reason why they cannot have babies compared with monks and catholic fathers ?
Dunno leh .. I am not in a gay position to comment. But I heard got some closet gays are married also, presumably they still have sex with their wives once in a while.I have said liao, the keyword is the law can charged u for it and someone really did get charged. Who knows, someone may get discouraged by tis law then. Can u tell me 0 people have been affected after a cop get fired, charged and sent to jail ?
Who got charged while making it out privately? If public then don't say lah.
The main argument is their right of sex is being infringed and tat is why it is repealed isn't it ? Otherwise why repealed ?
No leh .. the main argument put forward is we should keep up with the times. Other countries repeal liao so we should repeal. Sounds pragmatic to me. -
Wait, now I think gays can copulate. The one who cannot copulate is the eunuch.
If u can have sex with male and female, u r probably bisexual.
Dunno leh .. I am not in a gay position to comment. But I heard got some closet gays are married also, presumably they still have sex with their wives once in a while.Who got charged while making it out privately? If public then don't say lah.
Duh !
U know there is a policeman who get charged whil doing oral sex privately. His girlfriend is the one tat do the complaining. Read up on Anis Abdullah case first ba.
In November 2003, police constable Anis Abdullah was found guilty of oral sex with a 16-year-old girl and sentenced to 2 years' jail. Although it was consensual, he was charged under section 377.No leh .. the main argument put forward is we should keep up with the times. Other countries repeal liao so we should repeal. Sounds pragmatic to me.
Keep up with the times to allow sexual liberation ba -
Ban what? Ban their right to live?Originally posted by stupidissmart:U r still not answering to the point. A group of people more prone to dieseases doesn't mean it should be bannedNow people r allowed to have oral sex isn't it ? It is legalised. NOte 377A and 377 r different
Yup, I talking about 377A - there are good reasons to let it remain in our penal code.Nope. Wat is nature cure ? Any animals practising tat ? Diesease should kill human to control its population isn't it ? Why defeat the purpose of deseases by inventing medicine ?
Actually medicines are also natural in origins. Just that humans go one step further and combine the chemicals inside and manufacture pills and syrups.
If you want to quote something unnatural, at least quote ICSI. -
Ban what? Ban their right to live?
Ban them to have a right to have sex. Tat is already very serious itself isn't it ?Yup, I talking about 377A - there are good reasons to let it remain in our penal code
Like ?Actually medicines are also natural in origins. Just that humans go one step further and combine the chemicals inside and manufacture pills and syrups.
Then why is homosexual not nature when it is found in many species of animals unnature while manmade medicine combining manmade chemicals using manmade method tat cannot be found in nature, nature ? Is surgery nature ? Don't tell me men will develop arm inside his body and cut itself.
If you want to quote something unnatural, at least quote ICSI. -
Not sure about that. Maybe all gays are actually bisexuals.Originally posted by stupidissmart:If u can have sex with male and female, u r probably bisexual.Duh !
I forgotten the details liao .. can describe? That Malay policeman right? Why did gf complain?
U know there is a policeman who get charged whil doing oral sex privately. His girlfriend is the one tat do the complaining.
I suppose we should limit the discussion to acts between consenting adults. The law is ammo for the State. Unfortunately it is ammo for certain individuals as well. For example, we all applause when a rape offender is given maximum sentence (for that, prosecution can bring in rape law, incest law, even oral sex law). However we sympathesize with guys whose girlfriends shout rape or oral sex on them. Well, I don't think we should repeal rape law because of that, right?