Gays : To all Singapore Religious Leaders
-
Originally posted by Zarks:
Well, isn't this the logic used here? If you are not for me, you are against me?
[/color]
a) Didnt you assume too much by stating that i stand on happieman's side and u even think it is inconvienient for me to state my feeling of standing by his side ? Did i ever said he's right that Icemoon is this and that ? What makes u jump into conclusion? You sure should chill out.[b]
Ok, if you are really not on his side, then perhaps you will like to tell the audience what you think of happieman and his recent replies?b) See all my replies toward PRP's view? Did i ever critic him this and that ? HE said Gay is naturally wrong in sex and other things. Yes indeed but that is his point and i pointed out my other view of point.
Well, I was only making a general statement about the treatment he got here. I never read all the replies targeted at him. But it is fair to tell him, if he's not getting the replies he wanted, then perhaps it is time to stop. I told him or at least hinted him to stop. He didn't heed my advice.
I even told him, if he wants to debate, just debate with me. I can be the devil advocate.
I apologise if you were indeed giving him sincere replies in a civilised manner.c) Lastly, why u jump into conclusion that all ppl here can meet up each other in sgf meeting or watsoever. IT depends on how u think bout getting so serious in sgf discussion. Sgf meeting are supposed to meet up new friends and do you mean if you know that person is the one whom u dun like here and you goin to show your black face and say "No" to yourself cuz they are a shyt ? Wow. (Shakes head)
Don't understand your point here.
I wrote - [b]Be more magnaminous, who knows next time all of us will meet in some SGF outing. I sure don't want the situation when you guys shake his hand and think, "so .. this is the farker".
I think my comment is justified. Who knows if next time all of us will meet in some outing and I sure don't want PRP to be discriminated 'cos of that. -
Originally posted by ms_ok:
well, at least i try to be civilised.
[b]you don't have any choice lor [/b] -
sorry, my fault. I was making a general statement against your group.Originally posted by Zarks:Gosh, i guess u really need to read up all pages again.
What really makes u think i never discuss if gays are wrong or right ?
DO you wan me to pile up all my replies to let you read again ? Gosh
Since happieman makes the most noise, I presume he is the voice of the group. -
Going thru all the previous pages, i think you and PRP made the most noise, not happieman la.Originally posted by Icemoon:sorry, my fault. I was making a general statement against your group.
Since happieman makes the most noise, I presume he is the voice of the group.
you are a hooligan lor. -
Actually to discuss whether gays are wrong or right is already heading into the wrong direction.Originally posted by Zarks:What really makes u think i never discuss if gays are wrong or right ?
DO you wan me to pile up all my replies to let you read again ? Gosh
You should know this. -
well, if that is your perception, so be it.Originally posted by ms_ok:Going thru all the previous pages, i think you and PRP made the most noise, not happieman la.
you are a hooligan lor.
chill it lah. like zarks say, those who are too serious need to chill it.
-
We all know that gay is inborn, so yes, we have the same agreement on this. No point discussing gay is right or wrong. This is not relevant at all.Originally posted by Icemoon:Actually to discuss whether gays are wrong or right is already heading into the wrong direction.
You should know this. -
Yup, at 42 pages and with no further progress on the topic, I think we should all stop and devote our energies to other things, be it offline or online.
Can we all agree on that?
-
Yup, so I told Zarks if he was replying in this direction, then he is wasting his time and effort.Originally posted by ms_ok:We all know that gay is inborn, so yes, we have the same agreement on this. No point discussing gay is right or wrong. This is not relevant at all. -
he was replying your message, since you heading in that direction vigorously.Originally posted by Icemoon:Yup, so I told Zarks if he was replying in this direction, then he is wasting his time and effort.
since you finally willing to stop leading this direction, there is no point the rest will carrying on. ok we shall stop if you stop restarting in this direction. -
Im not on anyone's side
Why are u indicatiing if im not on happieman's side that means i should tell audience how he might have critic you both to prove im not on his side? And this is the logic you're talking bout ?
Plus, i never really focus on how he might have critic you both, im more concerned of discussing the matter of gays is right or wrong with PRP in the beginning. What happened between you both i really dont care. It is your both matters and dun try to drag anyone into supporting whos right or wrong between you both.
When ppl commented bout you supporting PRP and u denied and even asking for proof, then only i joined in cuz the fact is you really supporting PRP. -
Zarks's views always neutral and fair. I beleive if you stop, he will stop replying you.Originally posted by Icemoon:Yup, so I told Zarks if he was replying in this direction, then he is wasting his time and effort.
Ms Ok -
Did you even read the TS post?Originally posted by Icemoon:Actually to discuss whether gays are wrong or right is already heading into the wrong direction.
You should know this.
TS post:
The dust over the homosexual drama may have seemed settled.
But believe me when I say that the homosexual lobby is indeed very powerful and they will plan another comeback.
But what is dissapointing is the fact that the people most in position to stop and educate the homosexuals, are not doing anything about it.
I'm talking about our religious leaders. Our pastors, imams, priests.
Why are our mosques, churches, temples not holding any programs when homosexuals is growing to be a big menace? They are in the best position!
Singapore has put importance on religion. It's time this sytem kicks in to salvage our youth and our future in Singapore.
I have joined the Open Entreaty to Singapore's Religious Leaders. It's time our mosques, churches temples start an education program to prevent more from suffering the homosexual mentality.
Sign the entreaty and make your voices heard.
Hello, do you think a discussion here is not important to point our our view if they wanted to use by religous way to minimize gays ?
What sense are you talking tat a discussion here is heading the wrong direction ?
I believe PRP said gays are wrong both naturally and religiously but hey, i agreed with that but we just need to see bigger picture.. they most probablly never or less commit any crime killing raping or anything. TO minimise their quantity by using religious way or using law is simply just unacceptable for me. My point of view here is that gays are humans too. Dont they deserve to live happily like other ppl? Why ppl need to minimise their quantity ? -
I am just making the point that there are people here who are not civilised towards PRP. If you are not on anyone's side, then I think you can see that.
Sad to say .. happieman's latest reply still reflects his prejudice towards me and PRP. I steered clear of the path of debating whether it is right or wrong. And I don't see why he has to insinuate me in the opposite direction. It is misconstruing other's position and personally this is one of the worst thing that can happen in a debate.
Yup, enough about him, I know you will say what happieman is doing has nothing to do with you.
Rightly so.
Well, what if does take into account it will not happen at all. Right? And when I raised that point, we were NO LONGER talking about this topic. The discussion has ended between me and SIS, and PRP is nowhere to be found. The point was raised because if you guys are truly baring your hearts out and discussing seriously, then I can't imagine how labels like extremist will be brought into real life. After all this is a sensitive topic and we sure are not discussing whether this joke is funny or that joke is funny (hey .. some of the jokes posted in SGF quite fun .. hehe)
And I have to disagree with what you said - a discussion here can be rough. You might be truly discussing with him, I can acknowledge this, but I don't think the same can be said for others. I don't think you need me to quote replies from certain forummers to prove that. -
I was asking everybody whether we can agree on that. A firm reply. I sure don't want to be accused of being a coward by somebody here.Originally posted by ms_ok:Zarks's views always neutral and fair. I beleive if you stop, he will stop replying you.
Ms Ok -
I appreciate your sincere intentions to have a discussion. But if you read PRP's replies, he wasn't heading in *that* direction.Originally posted by Zarks:Hello, do you think a discussion here is not important to point our our view if they wanted to use by religous way to minimize gays ?
What sense are you talking tat a discussion here is heading the wrong direction ?
I believe PRP said gays are wrong both naturally and religiously but hey, i agreed with that but we just need to see bigger picture.. they most probablly never or less commit any crime killing raping or anything. TO minimise their quantity by using religious way or using law is simply just unacceptable for me. My point of view here is that gays are humans too. Dont they deserve to live happily like other ppl? Why ppl need to minimise their quantity ?
This can be seen in other forummers' reply to him. They were talking about HIV, hetero sex, yada yada. -
so do you agree that Zarks views are always neutral and fair?Originally posted by Icemoon:I was asking everybody whether we can agree on that. A firm reply. I sure don't want to be accused of being a coward by somebody here. -
disagreeOriginally posted by Icemoon:I appreciate your sincere intentions to have a discussion. But if you read PRP's replies, he wasn't heading in *that* direction.
This can be seen in other forummers' reply to him. They were talking about HIV, hetero sex, yada yada.
trying to get friends again -
Haha, I cant guarantee the "always" part as I did not read his earlier repliesOriginally posted by ms_ok:so do you agree that Zarks views are always neutral and fair? -
This topic is a serious topic when TS pointed out that gays are to be minimised. WE should stick and discuss if this is the right way to do so. I already forgot everything that i typed b4, lazy to think back.
-
Well, it is the truth I guess, that PRP wasn't specifically discussing about what TS has said.Originally posted by ms_ok:disagree
trying to get friends again
From what I understand, PRP is still stuck at trying to get everybody to discuss homo is right or wrong. Ouch. Wrong direction in my opinion. -
sorry for keep asking you questions Icemoon.Originally posted by Zarks:This topic is a serious topic when TS pointed out that gays are to be minimised. WE should stick and discuss if this is the right way to do so. I already forgot everything that i typed b4, lazy to think back.
i just want to see your stand, as Zarks has pointed out several of your statements actually contradicting each other. refer back to previous page if you want to know which i meant.
do you agree of what Zarks trying to point in the above statement? -
yea one of them is the HIV thingy.Originally posted by Icemoon:I appreciate your sincere intentions to have a discussion. But if you read PRP's replies, he wasn't heading in *that* direction.
This can be seen in other forummers' reply to him. They were talking about HIV, hetero sex, yada yada.
others are more to natural way of men-to-men sex is not acceptable and why men to men cannot give birth to son
pardon me for saying he said gays are wrong in religious way -
Though I intend that we should all stop, I suppose it is ok if you want to continue in that direction. But must stick to topic and PRP should stop pursuing whether homo is right or wrong.Originally posted by Zarks:This topic is a serious topic when TS pointed out that gays are to be minimised. WE should stick and discuss if this is the right way to do so. I already forgot everything that i typed b4, lazy to think back. -
sp PRP is odd one out here, since you disagreeing his directionOriginally posted by Icemoon:Well, it is the truth I guess, that PRP wasn't specifically discussing about what TS has said.
From what I understand, PRP is still stuck at trying to get everybody to discuss homo is right or wrong. Ouch. Wrong direction in my opinion.