Gays : To all Singapore Religious Leaders
-
Do need to explain ...Originally posted by Icemoon:If I am against homo just by what i wrote, then you people are surely anti anti gay in the extreme position with the kind of replies in this thread.
This SIS is the worst. In his attempt to make sure all opposing viewpoints [to his] are crushed, he spares no effort in knocking down ALL of his opponent's points, without even reading the points that are put across.
IMHO this thread is not about uplifitng the ban against gay sex. You are not a parliament member, neither am I and I don't think the govt will consult our view in reaching a decision whether to repeal the whole 377. Heck, why is there an urgency to uplift the ban since gays are not prosecuted anyway? We should be more concerned about rising costs and foreign competition.
IMHO again, this thread is about idealism. The idealism that people holding minority views and practising minority habits should not be criminalised. So gays practising sodomy should not be criminalised. Neither should you guys be so harsh on PRP, who is obviously holding a minority view here. I suppose if you guys go to a fundamentalist xtian forum, you guys will be the minority .. hehe.
The topic of incest has everything to do with this idealism. Contrary to what SIS thinks, incest law is there not mainly because it will bring about defect children. If my guess is correct, incest law exists everywhere (except Japan and France from what I read) because it is a societal taboo. Just like homosexuality in the past, in Christian nations.
If it is a societal taboo, we can challenge it. I don't think it is too much to state incestuous acts can be seen as consensual acts between adults privately, which is not so much different from adults practising sodomy, if you ask me.
Till now, SIS has avoided my question of why sex with HIV patient is not criminalised, considering the rate at which it is spreading. His reply that there should be mandatory divulging of condition is nothing more than a red herring.
You are a anti-gay la .. -
Originally posted by happieman:
There was a debate in a Gay Christian Church on the topic - Incest ..
NOTE: This is not my personal view ...
What's wrong with brother and sister with protected sex ?
What's wrong with brother and brother with protected sex ?There was a debate in a Gay Christian Church on the topic - Incest ..
NOTE: This is not my personal view ...
What's wrong with brother and sister with protected sex ?
What's wrong with brother and brother with protected sex ? -
Icemoon ... you see this .. told you already ..
http://members.aol.com/gaygene/pages/discuss.htm -
Hey I think the cat downstairs of my block is gay and is having homosexual relations with some dog. Should I alert the authorities?
-
Why need to stop homosexual..
i dun think homosexual ever did anything or harm other ppl.. plus, its their choice to like the same kind. I see nothing wrong..
Why not try to stop other immoral act like raping ? that is more urgent and needed compared to homosexual case. -
ICEmoon ---> Please read this 3 timesOriginally posted by Zarks:Why need to stop homosexual..
i dun think homosexual ever did anything or harm other ppl.. plus, its their choice to like the same kind. I see nothing wrong..
Why not try to stop other immoral act like raping ? that is more urgent and needed compared to homosexual case. -
Beware of the temptation to indulge in side effects like using threats and insults to browbeat another into submission or attempting to prove the superiority of one view over the other or making fun of the other person or "educating" the other person into adopting a common view are regrettable or being a comedian or making the other person so angry they end up making fools of themselves or derailing the subject to another or throwing lots of questions to distract people or using emotional triggers.
Thank you for your comments. About incest, I and (i believe) the mass majority of the people will feel something about it and therefore i try to delink it with homosexual. On trying to use insults and other methods, I always try to keep it to a minimum but sometimes the comments made by other people r too provocative.This SIS is the worst. In his attempt to make sure all opposing viewpoints [to his] are crushed, he spares no effort in knocking down ALL of his opponent's points, without even reading the points that are put across.
If I do not read their points, how can I cursh it
Neither should you guys be so harsh on PRP, who is obviously holding a minority view here.
He is not condemned because he is a minority. He is condemned because his arguments and attitude suck. I used to be minority in this thread before and it is not about minorityContrary to what SIS thinks, incest law is there not mainly because it will bring about defect children.
I have given my reasonings on the previous replies. It is not just 1 reason but 3Till now, SIS has avoided my question of why sex with HIV patient is not criminalised, considering the rate at which it is spreading. His reply that there should be mandatory divulging of condition is nothing more than a red herring.
If both party consent to having sex even if one of them has AIDs, I don't see why we should ban them from having sexNotice SIS has not really answered my question. If homo is a choice, should gays be criminalised? Using his logic, they should, because they can choose not to do it, just like incest!
I have answer tis many times before. My answer is NO. U can read back the replies I made before
And u r giving a totally hypothetical situation. We should look at the present and the facts of the situation and not talk about "if" cases. I can also ask a hypothetical question such as "if religion is found to be the cause of most conflicts and eliminating religion bring about great peace and prosperity to the world, should we ban religion ?" Do u think u r asking a fair question ? -
Is this the only reason why incest is considered as a BIG no no ?Originally posted by stupidissmart:Contrary to what SIS thinks, incest law is there not mainly because it will bring about defect children.
If so, then brother and brother can have protected sex ? -
Totally agree ! PRP's arguments sucks !! even himself agree he got low IQ.Originally posted by stupidissmart:quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither should you guys be so harsh on PRP, who is obviously holding a minority view here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He is not condemned because he is a minority. He is condemned because his arguments and attitude suck. I used to be minority in this thread before and it is not about minority -
Good! A fair comment!Originally posted by phil30k:Dear Stupid,
I was impressed up to the point where incest was introduced.
You fell into the trap of discussing a subject you had strong emotions about (incest) and that you (obviously) hadn't spent much time thinking about and it showed in your arguments.
Debates are primarily intended to broaden our minds by allowing us to see the world through another person's eyes. Secondly that we learn something about ourselves and the world in the process.
Beware of the temptation to indulge in side effects like using threats and insults to browbeat another into submission or attempting to prove the superiority of one view over the other or making fun of the other person or "educating" the other person into adopting a common view are regrettable or being a comedian or making the other person so angry they end up making fools of themselves or derailing the subject to another or throwing lots of questions to distract people or using emotional triggers.
-
The forum is used for many purposes ... debate is one of them.. another one is voice out logical personal views .. or even to educate the ignorance ..Originally posted by PRP:Originally posted by phil30k:
Dear Stupid,
I was impressed up to the point where incest was introduced.
You fell into the trap of discussing a subject you had strong emotions about (incest) and that you (obviously) hadn't spent much time thinking about and it showed in your arguments.
Debates are primarily intended to broaden our minds by allowing us to see the world through another person's eyes. Secondly that we learn something about ourselves and the world in the process.
Beware of the temptation to indulge in side effects like using threats and insults to browbeat another into submission or attempting to prove the superiority of one view over the other or making fun of the other person or "educating" the other person into adopting a common view are regrettable or being a comedian or making the other person so angry they end up making fools of themselves or derailing the subject to another or throwing lots of questions to distract people or using emotional triggers.
Good! A fair comment!
phil30k has smart comments above .. if it is relevant to a debate !
however, when a hooligan appears, a hooligan approach has to be used!! -
Wah,u insult me like that!What standard?Objective standard!Natural law!Originally posted by Icemoon:What a big basket of worms.
It is tricky because precisely on whose standards do you define right and wrong? -
Happie is a verbal 'terroist'!Happie is a puppy!
-
PRP is not equal to Objective standard.Originally posted by PRP:Wah,u insult me like that!What standard?Objective standard!Natural law!
PRP is not equal to Natural law.
PRP is the least qualified person to debate in this thread. -
Honestly, theres much more better things to do than stopping homosexual by using laws or watever by political way.
THis is madness !! -
YES !Originally posted by PRP:Happie is a verbal 'terroist'!Happie is a puppy!
a verbal terrorist is effective to a verbal virus ! and yes, puppy is happy and many like a happy puppy ! -
PRP --> please read this three times.Originally posted by Zarks:Honestly, theres much more better things to do than stopping homosexual by using laws or watever by political way.
THis is madness !! -
I say homosex is wrong but i accept geys as any human being.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Let the other readers read and give their own judgement la. Wat is the general comment of them on your writing and "debating" skill ? They way u spell "gey" is already a sign tat u r biased, insulting and an idiot.
Geys want to be accepted by all.I thot they are very open-minded and accomadating ppl -- unlike me
But when i create a new word "gey" to mean "male homo",they can't accept it and want me to use the word "gay". Double standards ppl! -
Originally posted by PRP:
dumb and dump
I say homosex is wrong but i accept geys as any human being.
Geys want to be accepted by all.I thot they are very open-minded and accomadating ppl--now like me .But when i create a new word "gey" to mean "male homo",they can't accept it and want me to use the word "gay". [b]Double standards ppl![/b] -
No one stop homo!They can have homosex in private and police don't peep at them.But surely one has the right to say homosex is wrong.Originally posted by Zarks:Honestly, theres much more better things to do than stopping homosexual by using laws or watever by political way.
THis is madness !! -
You have said that many times ... so what is your purpose here no leh ?Originally posted by PRP:No one stop homo!They can have homosex in private and police don't peep at them.But surely one has the right to say homosex is wrong.
he he .. -
Terrosists also say they are justified to use terrorOriginally posted by happieman:YES !
a verbal terrorist is effective to a verbal virus ! and yes, puppy is happy and many like a happy puppy ! -
Go back and read books ..Originally posted by PRP:Terrosists also say they are justified to use terror
you got a lot of errors (including spelling errors) .. right from the beginning -
as long as it doesnt harm anyone around them, it is not wrong what..Originally posted by PRP:No one stop homo!They can have homosex in private and police don't peep at them.But surely one has the right to say homosex is wrong.
plus it doesnt involve you or whoever... they alone like this homosex type, then its their problem.. whats so wrong bout this ? sigh..
unless they naked or do some shameful act in the public then its a different story.. the same goes to heterosex also.
watever it is. its nothin wrong with ppl who wan to be homo. Police would rather do more important stuff than sneaking this kind of ppl which hardly cause harm to ppl..
sigghhhhh -
agreed... It's their own choice....Originally posted by Zarks:Why need to stop homosexual..
i dun think homosexual ever did anything or harm other ppl.. plus, its their choice to like the same kind. I see nothing wrong..
Why not try to stop other immoral act like raping ? that is more urgent and needed compared to homosexual case.
If homosexuality is wrong, then who was the one that said it was wrong? god? Then it is between them and god. ppl can't force ppl to stop being homosexuals. It's a choice for ppl. They choose to be homosexuals then so be it. As long as they do not harm innocence then it shouldnt be anybody else's concerns.