NMP Thio Makes 2nd Police Report
-
Could thie PRP character actually be NMP THIO in disguise?
-
yeah it becomes argumentum ad nauseam after a while.Originally posted by LazerLordz:There is a limit that you can have a modicum of logical debate with certain individuals. -
double postOriginally posted by LazerLordz:There is a limit that you can have a modicum of logical debate with certain individuals. -
triple post
-
Cool down man.Originally posted by crosshairs:All they were asking is to be left alone to do what they want to do. You know what that means? That means they don't want to bother you. And you must Kay Poh. KAY POH!!! You have a day job? You got mouths to feed? I don't think so. Its people who do not have any meaning in their lives who try to interfere in how other people lead their lives. And that is you. If you so hate their kind, then don't watch their shows, don't buy their goods, I am sure you can do without them having a part in your meaningless existence.
I dunno what is the problem. Govt already say won't enforce liao and no Christian organization is lynching gays.
You are right that they have the right to lead their own life. Because the law does not discriminate against them (377A is ultimately a toothless tiger), I don't see why anyone should get so worked up.
And don't scold PRP lah. Talk to him nicely. The more you scold, the more he has something against gays.
-
NMP is a lawyer. The english could be better.Originally posted by crosshairs:Could thie PRP character actually be NMP THIO in disguise?
-
1) Lets come up with more laws that we won't enforce. Might as well.Originally posted by Icemoon:Cool down man.
I dunno what is the problem. Govt already say won't enforce liao and no Christian organization is lynching gays.
You are right that they have the right to lead their own life. Because the law does not discriminate against them (377A is ultimately a toothless tiger), I don't see why anyone should get so worked up.
And don't scold PRP lah. Talk to him nicely. The more you scold, the more he has something against gays.
When the topic of right and wrong gets tiring to argue about, most people just turn to the "aiya...mai kao beh lar....right or wrong also govt not going to send you to jail mah...."...k lar...lets outlaw drinking coffee on tuesdays....not right...not wrong....lets just put the law there....no need to enforce.
2)I agree about not scolding PRP. His words do have a way of getting me worked up...but we have to realise that when a person's view is so "focused" and relentlessly narrow, we the people who know better, should try to educate rather than reprimand. And if he refuses to listen to reason, we have to know when to stop trying to reason as well.
I went through the excruciating process of 'educating' my own parents to get them to see the side of homosexuality that isn't told to the general public. After 3 years of give and take, we've come to a comfortable situation where my parents now know that what they were taught about homosexuality in the past, and what is filtered through in the media today isn't adequate in helping people understand this lifestyle.
So just like my parents, i expect there are alot of people out there who have been 'nurtured' to view things in a narrow perspective, and cannot be helped unless special focus is given or a real life experience happens to them personally to help them uinderstand, like in the caseof my parents having a gay son. -
where is that gay son?Originally posted by Clandestine:So just like my parents, i expect there are alot of people out there who have been 'nurtured' to view things in a narrow perspective, and cannot be helped unless special focus is given or a real life experience happens to them personally to help them uinderstand, like in the caseof my parents having a gay son.
*prepares the muzzle*
*looks around* -
Actually the issue of enforcement puzzles me. How are you going to enforce whether it is drinking coffee or 377A?Originally posted by Clandestine:1) Lets come up with more laws that we won't enforce. Might as well.
When the topic of right and wrong gets tiring to argue about, most people just turn to the "aiya...mai kao beh lar....right or wrong also govt not going to send you to jail mah...."...k lar...lets outlaw drinking coffee on tuesdays....not right...not wrong....lets just put the law there....no need to enforce.
Assuming both are private acts, behind closed doors. -
Eh, you scared him away liao.Originally posted by Icemoon:where is that gay son?
*prepares the muzzle*
*looks around* -
Issit? Was asking him to put the muzzle on my mouth leh.Originally posted by iveco:Eh, you scared him away liao. 
too talkative nowadays. -
lol....muzzle also refers to a part of a hunting rifle right?Originally posted by Icemoon:where is that gay son?
*prepares the muzzle*
*looks around*
*hunting the wascally wabbit* -
I heard someone comment before on a what if scenario.Originally posted by Icemoon:Actually the issue of enforcement puzzles me. How are you going to enforce whether it is drinking coffee or 377A?
Assuming both are private acts, behind closed doors.
"What if the police raid a house that they got a tip off on regarding drug abuse...and when they get there they realise that there was no drugs, but find two men having sex. Would they be obligated to arrest them under the 377a act?"
another one i heard was...
"The recent case of the person who tried to charge a guy for walking around naked in the living room and someone looked into the home and saw. What if two guys were having sex in their room with the curtains drawn...and a wind blew the curtains apart revealing them to people who happened to be looking out their windows. Would they be able to lodge a case against these guys?"
So many "what ifs"....
I thought laws were meant to curb these "what if" situations...not promote them. -
I think they wouldn't be obligated lah .. just like those people who own "a few" porns and pirated DVDs. Or those who break the Copyright Act. Wah leow eh .. dunno how many pple break Copyright Act everyday man.Originally posted by Clandestine:I heard someone comment before on a what if scenario.
"What if the police raid a house that they got a tip off on regarding drug abuse...and when they get there they realise that there was no drugs, but find two men having sex. Would they be obligated to arrest them under the 377a act?"
another one i heard was...
"The recent case of the person who tried to charge a guy for walking around naked in the living room and someone looked into the home and saw. What if two guys were having sex in their room with the curtains drawn...and a wind blew the curtains apart revealing them to people who happened to be looking out their windows. Would they be able to lodge a case against these guys?"
So many "what ifs"....
I thought laws were meant to curb these "what if" situations...not promote them.
The government already say liao .. they will not actively prosecute gays. If the constable haul the two gays back to the station, what you expect the superintendant to say? Good job and well done? -
LOL!Originally posted by Icemoon:If the constable haul the two gays back to the station, what you expect the superintendant to say? Good job and well done? -
Superintendant will ask the constable, "Oei, did you kena youtube when you arrest them? You see lah, now my face kena slam left right center again."Originally posted by Icemoon:I think they wouldn't be obligated lah .. just like those people who own "a few" porns and pirated DVDs. Or those who break the Copyright Act. Wah leow eh .. dunno how many pple break Copyright Act everyday man.
The government already say liao .. they will not actively prosecute gays. If the constable haul the two gays back to the station, what you expect the superintendant to say? Good job and well done? -
Then constable will ask superintendant, "Then what the fark you want me to do, Sir?"Originally posted by LazerLordz:Superintendant will ask the constable, "Oei, did you kena youtube when you arrest them? You see lah, now my face kena slam left right center again."
Superintendant will reply, "Where is your muzzle again? I will make them pay for this!" -
Like what I said before this, one can only ask:
"Why is it that the gays are stirring up shit about section 377A, when no one has been prosecuted before?"
Have you ever asked this question and trying to look for an answer?
Just look at the US. They went through exactly what we are going through.
They want to dismantle 377A AS A PRECEDENT for other concessions. After this law does no longer exist, it opens the way for them to ask for marital rights, same sex marriage, apply for HDB flat for male-male couple etc.
Think. -
Politics and sanctimony aside, let's get back to the original point: the letter. It's anonymous, so what's to say that Thio didn't gin it up herself?
Reichstag 1933, anyone? -
Farouk......they don't have HDB in the US. Don't compare us with them. 377A should rightfully be dismantled because it cannot and should not be enforced. The only reason it is still around is to keep people like you happy so you will carry on with your daily activities and our society function without unecessary distruption having your need to see unjust discrimination written in black and white, nothing else.Originally posted by faroukalhadad:Like what I said before this, one can only ask:
"Why is it that the gays are stirring up shit about section 377A, when no one has been prosecuted before?"
Have you ever asked this question and trying to look for an answer?
Just look at the US. They went through exactly what we are going through.
They want to dismantle 377A AS A PRECEDENT for other concessions. After this law does no longer exist, it opens the way for them to ask for marital rights, same sex marriage, apply for HDB flat for male-male couple etc.
Think.
I hope you can see through the act. But again I don't think you are intelligent enough to. -
When retro folks like you die out in a few years......things will inprove.
Here farouk, have some ghee laden murtabak, and shut up. -
Eat up. Chew. Ok, have some milo dinosaur as well. Here's a jug.
-
Just out of curiosity, is it only Christian religion that oppose gay life style?Originally posted by Icemoon:Cool down man.
I dunno what is the problem. Govt already say won't enforce liao and no Christian organization is lynching gays.
You are right that they have the right to lead their own life. Because the law does not discriminate against them (377A is ultimately a toothless tiger), I don't see why anyone should get so worked up.
And don't scold PRP lah. Talk to him nicely. The more you scold, the more he has something against gays. -
No. Even some agnostics and atheists oppose.Originally posted by adetet:Just out of curiosity, is it only Christian religion that oppose gay life style?
It's just a personal choice. But you don't have to use a law to enforce your dislikes on others do you. -
Hi. Can i ask,Originally posted by Icemoon:Cool down man.
I dunno what is the problem. Govt already say won't enforce liao and no Christian organization is lynching gays.
Will you endorse a law that says
"The use of the Indian Language should be banned and any offender will be fined $1000" OR
"The eating of bread as a religious act is an offence liable to 5 weeks in jail"
if the government ASSURES you this law is a paper tiger and will never ever be enforced?
Since the law is not enforced, then it is not discriminatory to Indians/Christians, so going by the same argument you give for 377A, isn't it acceptable to make the above two statements laws?