In response to TS first post.
I agree, MEN are being discriminated, BUT FOR GOOD REASONS.
Originally posted by jojobeach:In that case, it just means that they have settled/agreed about the divisions amicably prior to filing divorce papers.
That would be the best way to go about a divorce.
Unfortunately, people are vindictive, and couples going through divorce are usually at a very unstable emotional phase. And the law does allow for each party to use it against the other until each exhausted their own resources.
Couples who are as reasonable and has the ability to be amicable during a divorce, are not likely to be divorced with each other.
"And the law does allow for each party to use it against the other until each exhausted their own resources."
What do u mean "use it" here?
"Couples who are as reasonable and has the ability to be amicable during a divorce, are not likely to be divorced with each other."
Can be rejected if both wan!?
Originally posted by 787180:Jojobeach and Vicious kitty stop behaving like the grand old dame,the fact that U two did not even get the chance to be married but yet think highly of youselves as though U are the chief magistrates or top sage who rule the world…empty vessels make the most noises-go and get to know .men and widen yr social contact and increases yr chances of getting married lah
Thank you for your concern Mr.787180.
Just making sure I don't marry a vile man like you. Don't want to have to rely on the Woman's charter to protect me and my babies rights.. would be an unfortunate failure on my part.
Send my regards to your equally vile wife. May both of you live a long and lasting marriage together.
Originally posted by jojobeach:"How would extending the charter be pulling the carpet and allowing more loopholes?
PS. I thought "bitches" goes with "bastard"?"
Ahbeo, Have you read through the Woman's charter yet ? Tell me, which part of the charter do you think needs to change, and change to what ?
If you have not even read through the charter yet, how can you claim that is unfair ?
Like I said, everyone who goes into the court will claim innocent and the other party at a bigger fault. SO ALWAYS listen to two side of the coin first.
It is not just Singapore court that usually wards the child care to the mother, even the western courts do the same. WHY ?
Just because the father knows how to change a diaper and push a stroller, does not means he is doing a better job than the mother.
Raising children are not as simple as you think.
Fathers are not hard wired to multi task in a child care situation..and are typically not as sensitive to the children's emotional needs as the mother.
Fathers do not have mother's instinct. That is a hard fact.
As we human beings begins our defiant role against what nature has decided for us, are we doing a better job ? I'm not convinced. Are you ?
To ascertain the effects of that charter, you would probably need a lawyer, a psychiatrist and a sociologist. It does not only have legal implications. It affects the actions of people and wider sociological issues. I did not say change the charter, i said it might be a good idea to extend it so that both parties are protected.
With references to the thread would be section 69), 113), 114). Probably can read the Part XI too.
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_retrieve.pl?&actno=Reved-353&date=latest&method=part
Nowadays, with the maid/childcare centres playing a much more prominent role in the upbringing of a child, the idea that the wife is doing all the work is debatable. And if you talk about a housewife, clearly the man, working to bring home the bread, provides a roof over the head, light for the child to read in, his role is unappreciated.
Originally posted by jojobeach:In response to TS first post.
I agree, MEN are being discriminated, BUT FOR GOOD REASONS.
By this statement, are u agreeing that the charter is unfair and subjects men to discrimination?
Originally posted by ahbeo:To ascertain the effects of that charter, you would probably need a lawyer, a psychiatrist and a sociologist. It does not only have legal implications. It affects the actions of people and wider sociological issues. I did not say change the charter, i said it might be a good idea to extend it so that both parties are protected.
With references to the thread would be section 69), 113), 114). Probably can read the Part XI too.
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_retrieve.pl?&actno=Reved-353&date=latest&method=part
Nowadays, with the maid/childcare centres playing a much more prominent role in the upbringing of a child, the idea that the wife is doing all the work is debatable. And if you talk about a housewife, clearly the man, working to bring home the bread, provides a roof over the head, light for the child to read in, his role is unappreciated.
By this statement, are u agreeing that the charter is unfair and subjects men to discrimination?
So your main concern are all monetary related. And according to what is written, it does not say the judge MUST award maintenance. The words are clear in that it gives the judge flexibility to award based on many considerations.
May I also remind you that maid and child care centers does not replace the role of a parent. They are merely there to support the role of busy working parents.
Infact, any parent who leaves 100% child care to a outsider/third party , is guilty of neglect.
Even the selection of the type of maids and child care institutions require much due diligence from the parent.
To a man, a maid is a maid.. a child care is a child care center.
To a woman, a maid is the extension of herself and needs to meet her standard of requirements, and a child care center needs to be clean, safe, teachers must be very involved..,etc.
When it comes to providing services to a family, the WIFE is the harder customer to please. Because she usually have higher standards of requirements than the hushand. And that's already part of her nature.
Let me ask you, when you have a child, and you need one of your parent to care for your child, which will you prefer ? Your mother or father ? When you make a preference, arn't you in effect exercising discrimination ?
On Part XI, what's there to change ? Is it not the purpose of the charter to protect women and girls ?
And when you say extend.. can you be more specific ?
Originally posted by jojobeach:So your main concern are all monetary related. And according to what is written, it does not say the judge MUST award maintenance. The words are clear in that it gives the judge flexibility to award based on many considerations.
I give examples that i think applies to this thread. What else do you expect the parties in a divorce to fight for other than money and custody? the cockroach in the kitchen? Having many considerations is one thing but it is stated by law that it is something you can fight for. That in itself is a very big advantage that can be exploited.
May I also remind you that maid and child care centers does not replace the role of a parent. They are merely there to support the role of busy working parents.
Infact, any parent who leaves 100% child care to a outsider/third party , is guilty of neglect.
Even the selection of the type of maids and child care institutions require much due diligence from the parent.
To a man, a maid is a maid.. a child care is a child care center.
To a woman, a maid is the extension of herself and needs to meet her standard of requirements, and a child care center needs to be clean, safe, teachers must be very involved..,etc.
Maybe i did not make myself clear, my point is that the modern child spends more time in a childcare center or with a maid, the parents plays less of a role. So to the view that mothers are spending as much time with the child might need some revision.
When it comes to providing services to a family, the WIFE is the harder customer to please. Because she usually have higher standards of requirements than the hushand. And that's already part of her nature.
Let me ask you, when you have a child, and you need one of your parent to care for your child, which will you prefer ? Your mother or father ? When you make a preference, arn't you in effect exercising discrimination ?
Providing services to the family? There are some very dedicated mothers and fathers around. There are also many fathers who simply bring home the bread, as well as mothers who cant/dont cook, maid does the housework, take the child to school etc. When i have a child, i would prefer both to play a prominent role in my child's upbringing. No preference. Because I do not want my child to have no impression of his/her grandparents. I want him/her to have a solid family experience. (sadly my dad passed away so thats not really possible).
On Part XI, what's there to change ? Is it not the purpose of the charter to protect women and girls ?
Why must it change? It doesnt need to. Of cos i am not very supportive of the statutory rape regulations when both parties are in consent. Since it only punished one party when both parties knowingly did that act.
And when you say extend.. can you be more specific ?
Simply means the recognition than men are also vulnerable to abuse and level the playing field by extending the protection afforded to women to men. You know, women can beat up men too. There are such cases. As in gender should not have an influence in the verdict. The parties should be judged based on their actions and circumstances.
Originally posted by ahbeo:
So what do you suggest ? Remove that maintenance part altogether ?
Why are you guys so afraid of the ability of your wife to "claim". Claiming doesn't do anything.. it's the JUDGE who AWARDS. You should be afraid of the JUDGE.. not your wife claiming your balls.
Why do you equate the amount of time spent with the children as QUALITY parenting ? It's not how much time you take to do your job.. it's HOW you get the job done.
So a woman who cannot cook and do house chores is a bad wife ???
And a man who cannot bring home the bread is also a bad husband ?????
Then like that TS is a bad husband lor ????? Then the TS wife is a bad wife lah.. then like that how you think the judge will award the dispute ??? Both of them are just as bad. (chuckle).
Ofcors, in a desirable situation.. you would have both your parents take care of your child. But in a divorce situation.. the judge needs to make a CHOICE. The child cannot be SPLIT in HALF and awarded accordingly to EACH parent.
There will ALWAYS be a preference.. or you guys like to call it discrimination.. because it's not about fairness when it comes to child custody.. it's about WHO IS BETTER at getting the job done.
On Part XI, what's there to change ? Is it not the purpose of the charter to protect women and girls ?
Why must it change? It doesnt need to. Of cos i am not very supportive of the statutory rape regulations when both parties are in consent. Since it only punished one party when both parties knowingly did that act.
My dear friend.. a man can always claim the girl gave him the consent even though he raped her. There are usually NO witness when such act are perpetuated.
My suggestion to you.. is DON'T GO THERE.
Who do you punish, example... a thief who goes into a store with very lax security serveilance... or the owner of the shop who does not take due diligence to protect his store ?
Ofcors I can hear you screaming "not fair".. but as long as our culture emphasise on the virtue of virginity... it will remain so.
And some laws like this statutory rape between two minors is part of a social conditioning framework. Ofcors I hear you screaming unfair again.. but like I said.. the purpose is to tell you " DON"T GO THERE".
Simply means the recognition than men are also vulnerable to abuse and level the playing field by extending the protection afforded to women to men. You know, women can beat up men too. There are such cases. As in gender should not have an influence in the verdict. The parties should be judged based on their actions and circumstances.
Yes, I agree, men can be vulnerable to spousal abuse. And if the husband can proof that the wife is violent in nature.. it will affect the judgement in favor of the husband.
When it comes to child custody.. a judge will not award to the violent party. The behavioral considerations does affect the equity part of the divorce.
But monetary and asset division has nothing to do with behaviors of each party. It has to do with the contribution of each party .
Try not to roll everything into one big conclusion , Ok ? Good.
Originally posted by 787180:Jojobeach and Vicious kitty stop behaving like the grand old dame,the fact that U two did not even get the chance to be married but yet think highly of youselves as though U are the chief magistrates or top sage who rule the world…empty vessels make the most noises-go and get to know .men and widen yr social contact and increases yr chances of getting married lah
And I will remind your daughter and wife about what you posted when I see you ehh.
So how? Are you seriously contemplating to be responsible for your sentences that has so not yet been proven right in so many instances?
Old dame or now. Your daughter no matter how. Has to acknowledge that I am older then her and one that is willing to teach her about the right and wrong about her father.
Wanna bet whether your wife and daughter will listen to me or to you in this situation?
Or like always, do keep pretending that you are safe from behind the pc. I am sure your wife and children will understand why you did what you did.
Originally posted by jgho83:"And the law does allow for each party to use it against the other until each exhausted their own resources."
What do u mean "use it" here?
"Couples who are as reasonable and has the ability to be amicable during a divorce, are not likely to be divorced with each other."
Can be rejected if both wan!?
Have you not heard of divorce cases which was dragged out for many years and costly ?
Can reject..But they woulda rejected the relationship BEFORE they get married.
Originally posted by ahbeo:To ascertain the effects of that charter, you would probably need a lawyer, a psychiatrist and a sociologist. It does not only have legal implications. It affects the actions of people and wider sociological issues. I did not say change the charter, i said it might be a good idea to extend it so that both parties are protected.
With references to the thread would be section 69), 113), 114). Probably can read the Part XI too.
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_retrieve.pl?&actno=Reved-353&date=latest&method=part
Nowadays, with the maid/childcare centres playing a much more prominent role in the upbringing of a child, the idea that the wife is doing all the work is debatable. And if you talk about a housewife, clearly the man, working to bring home the bread, provides a roof over the head, light for the child to read in, his role is unappreciated.
By this statement, are u agreeing that the charter is unfair and subjects men to discrimination?
I also believe that the charter is not doing enough.
It should also include a chapter about abortion.
That the father of the embryo should also be accountable for his aborted baby.
Made to pay for the medical cost and go for mandatory counselling or face jail term.
I've seen so many women go to the abortion clinics alone.. and have to pay for the extraction costs.. and I wonder.. where's the man who made her pregnant in the first place ??
So many painful cases I see..young girls walking away from the clinic crying.. after getting dumped by her boyfriend who refuses to acknowledge the baby was his....
With current DNA technology.. it is possible to determine the paternity of the father. We should put that to good use.
While the woman has to endure the invasive extraction and emotional damage..the man should be put behind bars.
Originally posted by jojobeach:So what do you suggest ? Remove that maintenance part altogether ?
erm i am getting abit sick of repeating the same thing. I do not question the existence of it. I am of the opinion that it is biased thats all.
Why are you guys so afraid of the ability of your wife to "claim". Claiming doesn't do anything.. it's the JUDGE who AWARDS. You should be afraid of the JUDGE.. not your wife claiming your balls.
Guns dont kill people, people kill people. Please take into consideration that whilst it is the judge awards the claim, the existence of the possibility of the claim is in itself a massive advantage. The case is against your ex-spouse. In essence it is a your interests vs his/her interests. Of cos everybody is afraid of having to give out payoffs. It directly affects your quality of life.
Why do you equate the amount of time spent with the children as QUALITY parenting ? It's not how much time you take to do your job.. it's HOW you get the job done.
Time spent with the family is an important indicator of the quality of parenting. Quite frankly, IMO, spending 15 mins per day of top quality time with the kids is not what i would call a good parent. Of cos this is subjective.
So a woman who cannot cook and do house chores is a bad wife ???
No. It is to illustrate the role women plays in the family have changed. They play a less prominent role in taking care of the household.
And a man who cannot bring home the bread is also a bad husband ?????
I guess the conventional thinking is yes. But that is not my point. My point is that i am acknowledging that there are men who simply brings home the bread and does little else for the family.
Then like that TS is a bad husband lor ????? Then the TS wife is a bad wife lah.. then like that how you think the judge will award the dispute ??? Both of them are just as bad. (chuckle).
I will not comment on this since 1) i am not a judge (This is actually a silly argument cos while ppl like to say "who are you to judge me", actually we are all judging people all our lives both consciously and subconciously), 2) i did not hear his wife's side of the story, 3) There is not enough details in his description.
Ofcors, in a desirable situation.. you would have both your parents take care of your child. But in a divorce situation.. the judge needs to make a CHOICE. The child cannot be SPLIT in HALF and awarded accordingly to EACH parent.
There will ALWAYS be a preference.. or you guys like to call it discrimination.. because it's not about fairness when it comes to child custody.. it's about WHO IS BETTER at getting the job done.
And some divine power stated that women by default should be the prefered party PROBABLY due to age old social systems where
1) In ancient times, men go hunting girls make the home
2) In medieval times, men go farm/work, takes care of the home
so by default women is prefered because they have a few millenium headstart?
(note the probably because like i said in a previous post, such decisions shld not take gender into consideration but by virtue)
y dear friend.. a man can always claim the girl gave him the consent even though he raped her. There are usually NO witness when such act are perpetuated.
My suggestion to you.. is DON'T GO THERE.
Who do you punish, example... a thief who goes into a store with very lax security serveilance... or the owner of the shop who does not take due diligence to protect his store ?
Ofcors I can hear you screaming "not fair".. but as long as our culture emphasise on the virtue of virginity... it will remain so.
And some laws like this statutory rape between two minors is part of a social conditioning framework. Ofcors I hear you screaming unfair again.. but like I said.. the purpose is to tell you " DON"T GO THERE".
Similarly, the girl can cry rape even if she agreed to the act. I believe the question is on statutory rape. Not rape. Statutory rape means the act is agreed by both parties and yet only the guy is punished for it or at the very least, take a heaver punishment. Come on, both of them consented to it knowing the full consequences. Both are equally responsible.
Yes, I agree, men can be vulnerable to spousal abuse. And if the husband can proof that the wife is violent in nature.. it will affect the judgement in favor of the husband.
When it comes to child custody.. a judge will not award to the violent party. The behavioral considerations does affect the equity part of the divorce.
This much i agree. But having to proof something might not be that easy. As compared to something that is a SOP consideration.
But monetary and asset division has nothing to do with behaviors of each party. It has to do with the contribution of each party .
Yes, but the maintenance is another issue altogether. I dont exactly know how it works but looking at 114C, I wonder what would happen if a woman said i am accustomed to this, i am accustomed to that etc etc.
Try not to roll everything into one big conclusion , Ok ? Good.
When i did give a conclusion? The only conclusion that i gave is that virtue should be the sole consideration in such cases.
Originally posted by jojobeach:I also believe that the charter is not doing enough.
It should also include a chapter about abortion.
That the father of the embryo should also be accountable for his aborted baby.
Made to pay for the medical cost and go for mandatory counselling or face jail term.
Medical cost part I agree, counselling probably wont be of much use, jail probably not. That would be like a permanent criminal record for not using contraceptives.
(eh i know contraceptives are not 100% but well its the best alternative to absistence, or ban pre-marital sex?) xDI've seen so many women go to the abortion clinics alone.. and have to pay for the extraction costs.. and I wonder.. where's the man who made her pregnant in the first place ??
So many painful cases I see..young girls walking away from the clinic crying.. after getting dumped by her boyfriend who refuses to acknowledge the baby was his....
Just wondering, are you a nurse? a doctor? a clinical worker? or your circle of friends have really active hormones and are careless.
With current DNA technology.. it is possible to determine the paternity of the father. We should put that to good use.
While the woman has to endure the invasive extraction and emotional damage..the man should be put behind bars.
There are also risks involved in the abortion process. I sympathise with the ladies. This is a tricky issue. because it is not a rape, it becomes an intercourse between 2 consenting adults, which assumes that the parties knows what they are doing and the consequences of it.
From what i see in the charter, the protections in the charter assumed one thing, that the females do not want that event to happen to them. In this case, how do we explain? The woman do not want to have sex or do not want to get pregnant? Probably is want to have sex dont want to get pregnant and in the case where i get pregnant dont want to get dumped. In this case it is contradicting with the previous paragraph in that the woman rationally made the choice and accepted the risks associated with it.
hmmmz tricky indeed.
*edit*
On second thought, a jail term for abandonment of a child probably exists. But a fetus? its not a legal entity yet. (assuming that all other factors are normal like the parties dont sleep around etc etc.) complex complex
Abheo,
So what do you suggest ? Remove that maintenance part altogether ?
erm i am getting abit sick of repeating the same thing. I do not question the existence of it. I am of the opinion that it is biased thats all.
Well, you're being vague about your expectations in the first place.
Infact.. I do agree that claiming part is rather redundant. I'd rather the court just AWARD base on whatever considerations the case presents.
It doesn't matter if it's 10%, 50%, 100% or 200%. Just leave it to the judge to decide.
Why are you guys so afraid of the ability of your wife to "claim". Claiming doesn't do anything.. it's the JUDGE who AWARDS. You should be afraid of the JUDGE.. not your wife claiming your balls.
Guns dont kill people, people kill people. Please take into consideration that whilst it is the judge awards the claim, the existence of the possibility of the claim is in itself a massive advantage. The case is against your ex-spouse. In essence it is a your interests vs his/her interests. Of cos everybody is afraid of having to give out payoffs. It directly affects your quality of life.
Ofcors it affects your quality of life, are you suggesting that only the man's quality of life post divorce is utmost important while the wife and children's should be cast to oblivion ?
Why do you equate the amount of time spent with the children as QUALITY parenting ? It's not how much time you take to do your job.. it's HOW you get the job done.
Time spent with the family is an important indicator of the quality of parenting. Quite frankly, IMO, spending 15 mins per day of top quality time with the kids is not what i would call a good parent. Of cos this is subjective.
So a woman who cannot cook and do house chores is a bad wife ???
No. It is to illustrate the role women plays in the family have changed. They play a less prominent role in taking care of the household.
Less prominent role ? So you're saying as long as she no longer gets her hands dirty with cleaning agents and washing poopy diapers.. her importance has effectively been diminished ? Not so my dear. If doing house chores is a means of establishing prominence, then why are we still paying meagre wages to our maids ? Shouldn't the maid too deserves a cut of the family wealth during a divorce ?
The determinant here is the amount of EFFORT each contributes in establishing the well being of the family and accumulation of family wealth , that is what truly matters.
And a man who cannot bring home the bread is also a bad husband ?????
I guess the conventional thinking is yes. But that is not my point. My point is that i am acknowledging that there are men who simply brings home the bread and does little else for the family.
Then like that TS is a bad husband lor ????? Then the TS wife is a bad wife lah.. then like that how you think the judge will award the dispute ??? Both of them are just as bad. (chuckle).
I will not comment on this since 1) i am not a judge (This is actually a silly argument cos while ppl like to say "who are you to judge me", actually we are all judging people all our lives both consciously and subconciously), 2) i did not hear his wife's side of the story, 3) There is not enough details in his description.
Agree.
Ofcors, in a desirable situation.. you would have both your parents take care of your child. But in a divorce situation.. the judge needs to make a CHOICE. The child cannot be SPLIT in HALF and awarded accordingly to EACH parent.
There will ALWAYS be a preference.. or you guys like to call it discrimination.. because it's not about fairness when it comes to child custody.. it's about WHO IS BETTER at getting the job done.
And some divine power stated that women by default should be the prefered party PROBABLY due to age old social systems where
1) In ancient times, men go hunting girls make the home
2) In medieval times, men go farm/work, takes care of the home
so by default women is prefered because they have a few millenium headstart?
(note the probably because like i said in a previous post, such decisions shld not take gender into consideration but by virtue)
Well, lets put it this way.. GOD didn't make men and women equal. Not physically, not emotionally nor psychologically.
y dear friend.. a man can always claim the girl gave him the consent even though he raped her. There are usually NO witness when such act are perpetuated.
My suggestion to you.. is DON'T GO THERE.
Who do you punish, example... a thief who goes into a store with very lax security serveilance... or the owner of the shop who does not take due diligence to protect his store ?
Ofcors I can hear you screaming "not fair".. but as long as our culture emphasise on the virtue of virginity... it will remain so.
And some laws like this statutory rape between two minors is part of a social conditioning framework. Ofcors I hear you screaming unfair again.. but like I said.. the purpose is to tell you " DON"T GO THERE".
Similarly, the girl can cry rape even if she agreed to the act. I believe the question is on statutory rape. Not rape. Statutory rape means the act is agreed by both parties and yet only the guy is punished for it or at the very least, take a heaver punishment. Come on, both of them consented to it knowing the full consequences. Both are equally responsible.
Social conditioning.. heard of that ? The idea is to deter. As long as you don;t do it.. you don;t have to worry.
Like porn.. , many can argue it is an unfair act against freedom of choice. But the fundamental reason is not about fairness. it is about deterrence.
Yes, I agree, men can be vulnerable to spousal abuse. And if the husband can proof that the wife is violent in nature.. it will affect the judgement in favor of the husband.
When it comes to child custody.. a judge will not award to the violent party. The behavioral considerations does affect the equity part of the divorce.
This much i agree. But having to proof something might not be that easy. As compared to something that is a SOP consideration.
How is this difficult to proof? Abuses can be reported and documented. Ofcors if you are merely crying wolf.. then it is very difficult to prove lah.
But monetary and asset division has nothing to do with behaviors of each party. It has to do with the contribution of each party .
Yes, but the maintenance is another issue altogether. I dont exactly know how it works but looking at 114C, I wonder what would happen if a woman said i am accustomed to this, i am accustomed to that etc etc.
She is required to back up her claims.
Try not to roll everything into one big conclusion , Ok ? Good.
When i did give a conclusion? The only conclusion that i gave is that virtue should be the sole consideration in such cases.
Virtue ? If both party got virtue.. they wouldn't be in such a bind :P
Lets just say.. try to stay married.. as long as you can. A divorce only means everyone gets to lose.
Originally posted by jojobeach:I also believe that the charter is not doing enough.
It should also include a chapter about abortion.
That the father of the embryo should also be accountable for his aborted baby.
Made to pay for the medical cost and go for mandatory counselling or face jail term.
Medical cost part I agree, counselling probably wont be of much use, jail probably not. That would be like a permanent criminal record for not using contraceptives.
(eh i know contraceptives are not 100% but well its the best alternative to absistence, or ban pre-marital sex?) xDSo you think by throwing money at the problem it should just go away ? Wow. Such non-chalant attitude.. tsk tsk. And who do you think would be paying for it ? Not likely the young man.. it's probably his parents who has to pay the fine.
I've seen so many women go to the abortion clinics alone.. and have to pay for the extraction costs.. and I wonder.. where's the man who made her pregnant in the first place ??
So many painful cases I see..young girls walking away from the clinic crying.. after getting dumped by her boyfriend who refuses to acknowledge the baby was his....
Just wondering, are you a nurse? a doctor? a clinical worker? or your circle of friends have really active hormones and are careless.
It doesn;t take a medical worker to see the heartaches playing out in family planning clinics across the nations. Lets say I do have personal friends whom are involved in such organizations.
With current DNA technology.. it is possible to determine the paternity of the father. We should put that to good use.
While the woman has to endure the invasive extraction and emotional damage..the man should be put behind bars.
There are also risks involved in the abortion process. I sympathise with the ladies. This is a tricky issue. because it is not a rape, it becomes an intercourse between 2 consenting adults, which assumes that the parties knows what they are doing and the consequences of it.
From what i see in the charter, the protections in the charter assumed one thing, that the females do not want that event to happen to them. In this case, how do we explain? The woman do not want to have sex or do not want to get pregnant? Probably is want to have sex dont want to get pregnant and in the case where i get pregnant dont want to get dumped. In this case it is contradicting with the previous paragraph in that the woman rationally made the choice and accepted the risks associated with it.
hmmmz tricky indeed.
*edit*
On second thought, a jail term for abandonment of a child probably exists. But a fetus? its not a legal entity yet. (assuming that all other factors are normal like the parties dont sleep around etc etc.) complex complex
While I agree.. that women who puts themselves in such situations are partly to be blamed.. and so they pay the price with the shame, emotional and physical pain to kill an innocent life. Yet, the male party.. goes around like nothing has happened. While it is an easy option for a male to say " I don;t want this baby.. just abort it".. is that fair ?
A person is a person, no matter how small- Dr Suess.
Women are stupid to have those irresponsible men entering their love hole. WHO TO BLAME? WOMEN. GET LOST. JOJOBEach
Originally posted by bcloud23b:Women are stupid to have those irresponsible men entering their love hole. WHO TO BLAME? WOMEN. GET LOST. JOJOBEach
Thank you for your most valuable input . Men are so intelligent.......
But you are right... that's why we need the woman's charter to protect us mah... don't you get it ?
Originally posted by jojobeach:Thank you for your most valuable input . Men are so intelligent.......
But you are right... that's why we need the woman's charter to protect us mah... don't you get it ?
hmm... wadeva happened to male/female equality and no gender discrimination?
Originally posted by 787180:Jojobeach and vicious kitty..U two are behaving like nuns but yet watch pornography tapes…never experienced divorce personally yet stubbornly defend the Women’s Charter where discrimination definitely exists although the judges are fairer now in considering the husband’s position.U’re just 2 single women and yet profess to speak as though U’ve experienced the trials and tribulations of a long divorce..wake up lah
Either you dont know how to read or really think that just because you believe, so it must be truth.
How about we do this. If we are proven to be married or have been married. You and your wife have to put a advertisement in the newspaper to apologise for your remarks on this forum. I trust a S$1.5k advertisement wouldnt be too difficult for you to pay in this event.
It does not require any police action to dig you out to face me in person in court. You really want and dare to take responsibilty or not?
Originally posted by bcloud23b:Women are stupid to have those irresponsible men entering their love hole. WHO TO BLAME? WOMEN. GET LOST. JOJOBEach
You guys need some music...
Guys have their caring ways, and ladies have their cuteness too.
It's your own responsibility to find the right person for yourself.
Originally posted by 787180:Jojobeach and vicious kitty..U two are behaving like nuns but yet watch pornography tapes…never experienced divorce personally yet stubbornly defend the Women’s Charter where discrimination definitely exists although the judges are fairer now in considering the husband’s position.U’re just 2 single women and yet profess to speak as though U’ve experienced the trials and tribulations of a long divorce..wake up lah
So now you turn around and say the judges are fairer ???? Wow... if that is the case.. you come here and kao peh what ?
And YOU experienced divorce ? I thought you are happily married as you claimed ?? Weird...
Oh sure.. you are so noble... what do you teach at school ? Home Economics ? hehehehehhe...
Donch worry about us lah. You better go worry about your little pretend daughter... better teach her not to marry vile Singaporean men.
Originally posted by 787180:
..U are absolutely right..Jojobeach and Vicious kitty are only here to apout nonsense...man haters most likley...sigh sigh...no wonder SG prefer the charming,demure Vietnamese virgins...not these aggressive,no manners creatures...sigh...sigh..sigh
Hoo hoo hooo.. har har har... poor vietnamese girls.. the smart and prettier ones are flocking to western countries to marry those western men.
You don't worry.. your son will have plenty of Vietnamese leftovers to choose from.
Originally posted by kilfer:
hmm... wadeva happened to male/female equality and no gender discrimination?
harlow... as long as there's still men like bcloud23 and 787180 around.. the women's charter is here to stay.
With the vietnamese bride issue.. I'm glad the womans' charter is already in place. At least they get some form of protection from disgusting SG men.
They're being treated like cattle , sold like pigs.. just to leave their poverty striken family in Vietnam.
DO you really think they are here to look for LOVE ? Get real ok ? Right now.. the only way for them to stay out of Vietnam is to get married to a foreign man.
If our government relaxed the immigration rules and give them girls a PR and a job now.. I can betcha , not many of them would want to marry our disgusting SG MEN.