What does Singapore need?
-
if your feelings are hurt, then i do apologise. and i have maintained since several posts ago, that my intent was not to insult u, or your boy.
to varying extents, feelings of disgust and abhorrence towards homosexuals, are not just rooted in the belief that such acts are unnatural, but rooted in the fears of hetrosexual males to be seen by homosexual men as sex objects.
if this does not apply to you, so be it. no need to get defensive. just as u posit a point, i do so too... not because i like to argue with u, but simply because i see this was an open minded discussion of enlightened minds. am i to be proven wrong on this point as well?
exposure and acknowledgement of the fact that such issues of sexuality exists will not irrevocably change one into a drag queen or a fag.
i've told u before, that your intentions are noble. but i find your approach potentially uncharitable and narrow minded.
its not my job to tell u how to groom your boy into a fine young gentleman, but this is what i have seen:
in a previous workplace, i encountered the most vicious, most bigoted, most barbaric discrimination against a collegue who was gay... and for no better reason than the fact that he was gay.
i knew him as a person, worked with him, trusted his work. he was intelligent, good-natured, helpful and if pple did not know of his sexuality, they would have actually liked him.
if he had chosen to hide it, nobody could have known. but he wanted to be in the open. he thought it bred trust. he was wrong... not because the principle of it was wrong, but simply because bigoted pple could not see beyond his sexuality.
female collegues pointed and gesticulated... male collegues looked at him like he was a freak... men left the washroom every time he went into it and made crude suggestions afterwards that his presence in the washroom was "uncomfortable" to them.
was he EVER going to just grab it and shove it up someone? no... but the mere fear of it brought out the worst of human behavior and emotions.
the innuendoes got so bad that he offered to resign... because he could see that he was clearly not being judged for who he is, but quite frankly, who he fùcks.
incidents like these have totally turned me off any kind of discriminatory behavior.
yes, society as u mentioned, is unforgiving... but i have decided to take a stand there and then to not howl with the wolves where this issue is concerned.
if anything at all, young people ought to see that though they do not agree with gay lifestyles, it is wrong to discriminate against anyone in such a crude, vicious and ignorant manner. when i saw those clowns, i wondered how they dared call themselves "educated individuals".
they behaved worse than animals in that respect.
we are not even talking about gay rights here. we are also not talking about political correctness.
we are just talking about recognising them as individuals and treating them just like anybody else... no better, no worse.
do u get the point beyond my bad analogy now?
by the way. but i do not appreciate your comments on the crude use of a candle-stick. is an apology forthcoming? -
if your feelings are hurt, then i do apologise. and i have maintained since several posts ago, that my intent was not to insult u, or your boy.
And for me to apologise for the bad eamples using dogs and candles or anything tat had offended u throughout tis thread. I do have my reasons for using tat bad example, however I do not see the point of discussing it.
About your bad analogy... I can understand how u feel from the behaviours of your colleague... however please do not lump me and your colleagues together. Although my stand is unfavourable to gays, it doesn't imply tat I will too feel "insecure" when gays r in the same toilet as me, mock them, avoid them or perform any actions tat is similar to your colleagues.
U guys carry on the thread... Enjoy yourself, I am out of here... -
Thank goodness... the last of my exams are done! I have been wanting to post but was a little busy.
I want to make one thing clear. Personally, I would not say sorry to Stupid Is Smart anyway. For one basic reason. I do not understand how can one just bash gays and lesbians without any concrete reason. The reasons Stupid Is Smart gave is baseless with no real deciding facts to back his opinion.
You (Stupid Is Smart) talk about being free to give out opinions. I agree everyone is free to give out opinions, conversations and dialogue is good to solve problems. However, opinion must come from facts, not just fear. I believe we are prone to discriminate and to judge without clear knowledge, and it is all due to being human. HOWEVER, after saying that, the education one recieve should help filter out these fears, and we should be able to notice and check ourselves for such behaviour.
Do you know that , in some countries, i.e. Canada, if your opinion stirs discrimination and is baseless, some people, like me, call it hate speech. That is also why in law, there is a slander clause.
I started this thread because I wanted to talk about how some people dislike gays and lesbians based on fear, and I think I have proven my point. Thanks so much Stupid Is Smart.
BTW your analogy of the boy f**king a dog and having a candle up his butt is purely out there man. That is rude and crude . The arguement there was to accept your son the way he is not who you want and dream him up to be. acceptance was the main point. How would you feel if you were not accepted in a country because of your skin colour? What do you think about this global fear of Islam and how do you think those believers of Islam feel when they are being pointed out and profiled based on their religion? And why and how did this racial profiling and religious condamnation start from? Lack of knowledge maybe? Fear?
Please give me a break, Stupid Is Smart, I suggest reading up about what sociologist mean by "othering" and while you are at it, read up about orientalism too. You might see yourself in a different light after.
CX,
I am sorry to hear about your friend. I had a friend too that was pretty much gay bashed for being 'soft'. And the funny thing was that he was straight. Your story just makes me want to scream and plow those bastards to the ground. But I know fighting is not the right way to settle these kind of situations. Peace man! -
i apologised not because i felt that i was wrong, but simply because someone else felt hurt by what i said...
pple react in different ways to different things and it is just so much easier to say "i apologise" than to keep flogging a dead horse for the sake of "face" ... i lose nothing by apologising and whether my points are really offensive or outlandish or insulting, is out there for all to see.
there is very obviously an "otherness" discourse with regards to how this society sees alternative sexuality.
they are "different", they are "sissies", they are a "threat to society", their existence should "never be tolerated"...
my point here? who the hell is "THEY" ?
why is there a "they" ? and how do we see this "they"...
frankly, as i illustrated before, we see them through a very skewed and ignorant lens. and the worse thing is, many pple are refusing to even admit the absurd nature of this skewed perception.
homophobia is a disease of ignorance. simple as that. the point is not the question of how we treat gay people, but how we treat PEOPLE in the first place.
as long as we see the "gay" before the "people", there will be an "other". -
I want to make one thing clear. Personally, I would not say sorry to Stupid Is Smart anyway. For one basic reason. I do not understand how can one just bash gays and lesbians without any concrete reason. The reasons Stupid Is Smart gave is baseless with no real deciding facts to back his opinion.
Is tat true ? I have "bashed" gays and lesbains without "any reasons" ? Please tell me wat bashing had I performed ? Please read back to the posts I had posted on the evidence of environment playing a part in being a gay. Have u come up with any proof yourself ? Have u try to refute my points ?You (Stupid Is Smart) talk about being free to give out opinions. I agree everyone is free to give out opinions, conversations and dialogue is good to solve problems. However, opinion must come from facts, not just fear. I believe we are prone to discriminate and to judge without clear knowledge, and it is all due to being human.
Again u have fail to read on the facts I have gathered previously. Please, for goodness sake, read before giving judgement.HOWEVER, after saying that, the education one recieve should help filter out these fears, and we should be able to notice and check ourselves for such behaviour.
Education ? Sorry man, there r scientists and religions tat do not take their likings of gays. Tis is not a problem of education but point of view. It doesn't mean the people tat do not like gays r CONFIRMED wrong and should be corrected. Is there only one right side to stand on ?
Lets talk about women rights. There r people tat support giving out more right to women and there r people tat want to restrict it. R u sure there can only be 1 "right" side to stand on ? If u support women right U R DEFINITELY WRONG ? There r people tat support Iraq war and people tat were against. Is there only one side to stand on ? Couldn't it be both sides have their reasons thus their stand remains ? Why need to "educate" people into your own beliefs ?Do you know that , in some countries, i.e. Canada, if your opinion stirs discrimination and is baseless, some people, like me, call it hate speech. That is also why in law, there is a slander clause.
I have given out my facts and points but u refuse to believe it. I have posed several question which u have clearly ignored. Did I give out hate speech ? From my point of view, u r the one tat is giving out hate speech by not providing any facts or points tat support your stand. Maybe your definition of hate speech is just "I hate your stand so yours is a hate speech".
BTW, wat have I said tat seems to be inappropriate or slanderous to gays ?I started this thread because I wanted to talk about how some people dislike gays and lesbians based on fear, and I think I have proven my point. Thanks so much Stupid Is Smart.
Don't mention it
Tis is a real fact of our society. Glad it open up your eyes.The arguement there was to accept your son the way he is not who you want and dream him up to be. acceptance was the main point.
Now tat is strange. I cannot feel dissappointment ? I must be happy no matter wat my son becomes ? Is just "education" and intellectual important while behaviours and characters r not important ? If my son is a genius but love to murder peeple and cut people up, I should still be happy ? Did I say I am going to disown him or kill him ? I just express my dissappointment and sadness on this fact. Is tat wrong ?
Lets use the example of the person "f**king dog and shoving candles up their arse (He is nobody's sons or have any relationship with anyone). If someday your son tells tis to u, can u smile and take as though nothing has gone wrong ? Won't u prefer him to be just normal ? So wat if he is a top RI student or president scholars ? If he is a sex maniac and love to inflict pain on himself, it is still something worth to be dissappointing about.How would you feel if you were not accepted in a country because of your skin colour? What do you think about this global fear of Islam and how do you think those believers of Islam feel when they are being pointed out and profiled based on their religion? And why and how did this racial profiling and religious condamnation start from? Lack of knowledge maybe? Fear?
Therefore u have to accept these facts of life. If u don't feel comfortable about racism or religions or sexual preferences, why pretend or be a hypocrite and says "There is no such things".
U complain here and there, will there be any changes ? Am I wrong to state out facts of society ?Please give me a break, Stupid Is Smart, I suggest reading up about what sociologist mean by "othering" and while you are at it, read up about orientalism too. You might see yourself in a different light after.
For one thing, please tell me wat had I said tat was deeply offending to gays ? The only point I had said is gays can be due to nature and environment. Why don't u tell me the things tat I had said which u cannot stand and let me reflect ? -
Sgglobal said: Hatred must be fought with love.
This is what Jesus teach us.But it is hard to practice.I think if one doesn't not response to hatred with hatred,I think it should be good enough. -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
the one thing that felt offensive to me was that u have tacitly endorsed society's rejection and discrimination of gay people and conveniently taken it as your own without any thought about how terribly absurd and repulsive these views are.
For one thing, please tell me wat had I said tat was deeply offending to gays ? The only point I had said is gays can be due to nature [b]and environment. Why don't u tell me the things tat I had said which u cannot stand and let me reflect ?
[/b]
"so what if u disagree? SOCIETY feels otherwise whether u like it or not..." the sheer arrogance and bigotry inherent in such a view is appalling.
it must feel empowering to have SOCIETY behind u... and conveniently state that u are entitled to the sanctity of your "personal views" ...
i certainly do not "like it" ... and i refuse to go with it because i find it repulsive to reject anyone for any narrow reasons.
there are often no absolute black / white, right / wrong answers. but there are strong and weak arguments and reasons that supports beliefs.
what i meant to say from the beginning, was that a lot of the reasons for homophobia, rests on a very weak basis and are the results of ignorance and fear.
u supposedly know better... u accept that there are multiple causations that might influence sexuality... but u conveniently jumps onto society's shallow prejudices.
what society should NOT degenerate into, is to become a parody of the movie "Quills"... makes me wonder who are the the Marquis de Sades and who are the Dr. Royer-Collards in our society today...
we need not agree, but we need not persecute and reject. -
the one thing that felt offensive to me was that u have tacitly endorsed society's rejection and discrimination of gay people and conveniently taken it as your own without any thought about how terribly absurd and repulsive these views are.
"so what if u disagree? SOCIETY feels otherwise whether u like it or not..." the sheer arrogance and bigotry inherent in such a view is appalling.
it must feel empowering to have SOCIETY behind u... and conveniently state that u are entitled to the sanctity of your "personal views" ...
i certainly do not "like it" ... and i refuse to go with it because i find it repulsive to reject anyone for any narrow reasons.
there are often no absolute black / white, right / wrong answers. but there are strong and weak arguments and reasons that supports beliefs.
what i meant to say from the beginning, was that a lot of the reasons for homophobia, rests on a very weak basis and are the results of ignorance and fear.
u supposedly know better... u accept that there are multiple causations that might influence sexuality... but u conveniently jumps onto society's shallow prejudices.
what society should NOT degenerate into, is to become a parody of the movie "Quills"... makes me wonder who are the the Marquis de Sades and who are the Dr. Royer-Collards in our society today...
we need not agree, but we need not persecute and reject.
If u feel tat I tacitly support society to reject or discriminate gays, then the only thing I can do now is to write more things on why society have a right to discriminate gays... The only way is for me to do is to convince u tat rejecting gays r not tat wrong. I hope tat I am not making things go worse and worse... SO here goes...
If u ask me, all else being equal, a person who is straight is more beneficial for society since they can give birth to children.
The oldest laws are targeted at sexuality, aiming to encourage people to reproduce and reproduce properly. Tat is why things such as incest, gays, animal sex etc are not endorsed by society then. Almost all proper religion or society encourage people to reproduce and reproduce correctly. Chinese have a saying tat "There are 3 ways of being unfilial. One who do not reproduce is the greatest unfilial act". U may argue tat all these r old laws and old views. However they r also fundamentals laws of human society. Without reproduction, a society will cease to exists. Naturally, this is fed into people thinking as they evolved. Naturally, some people will be repulsed by the actions of gays. Why ? Because these r unacceptable behaviours in the past and they do not have any beneficial effect on overall society. To decrease the number of people from going tis route, people r taught from the past to discourage gays behaviours.
Talking about science, homo supporters came out with examples of dolphins rubbing the sexual organs of the same sex. IMO, animals r not an accurate gauge since they r completely different from human. Animals can have incest too (cats and dogs can have sex with their parents and reproduce healthy kittens and puppies, should we encourage peopel to incest then), can human do tat ?
BTW, why do u support gay movement ? Why r u supporting people to become gays ? U can do the "right thing" (no discrimination) in the short run but ends up malignant to human society in the long run. Now society r facing the problems of population control. Developed countries r not reproducing enough people to replace the one tat had dies. In future more countries wil be considered as developed. R u really being noble or short sighted for the development of society ? R u really doing the right thing ?
My stand is I do not go around beating gays or shunning them. I do not think highly of people doing tat either. My stand is WE DO NOT ENCOURAGE OR PUBLICISED GAYS ACTIONS either. We do not reject the peopel who are gays, but we do not support any actions tat will encourage the number of gays to increase. Is tat wrong ? U want the proportion of gays to increase ? -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
it is not always true that homosexuals will engage in exclusively homosexual relations... did i not address that earlier?
If u ask me, all else being equal, a person who is straight is more beneficial for society since they can give birth to children. ....
To decrease the number of people from going tis route, people r taught from the past to discourage gays behaviours.Talking about science, homo supporters came out with examples of dolphins rubbing the sexual organs of the same sex. IMO, animals r not an accurate gauge since they r completely different from human. Animals can have incest too (cats and dogs can have sex with their parents and reproduce healthy kittens and puppies, should we encourage peopel to incest then), can human do tat ?
not to reduce humans to animal behavior, but humans are essentially mammals... if this behavior is naturally occurring in lower primates (not just dolphins), then it may be not that "unnatural" after all and the prejudices that society attach to them are essentially constructed and not self-evident...BTW, why do u support gay movement ? Why r u supporting people to become gays ? U can do the "right thing" (no discrimination) in the short run but ends up malignant to human society in the long run. Now society r facing the problems of population control. Developed countries r not reproducing enough people to replace the one tat had dies. In future more countries wil be considered as developed. R u really being noble or short sighted for the development of society ? R u really doing the right thing ?
i do not support the movement. and i do not "support pple becoming gay" ... they are pple who have made a choice and secure in their sexuality... they don't need my approval and they certainly do not deserve my judgement.
i just recognise their individuality and not judge them based on their sexuality. it is not that i "support" them, but that i do not see that part of people as being relevant in any way in my valuation of them.
and developed societies produce less children with or without gay people. it is misleading to lump this in. they are 2 different matters...
all in all, i don't see how it is the wrong thing to do to recognise pple as individuals and not subscribe to narrow prejudices.My stand is I do not go around beating gays or shunning them. I do not think highly of people doing tat either. My stand is WE DO NOT ENCOURAGE OR PUBLICISED GAYS ACTIONS either. We do not reject the peopel who are gays, but we do not support any actions tat will encourage the number of gays to increase. Is tat wrong ? U want the proportion of gays to increase ?
why would it increase? my personal opinion is that one's sexuality is, to a large extent, fixed. society might condition one to go one way or it may not.
you and i, secure in our masculinity, would not suddenly decide to go the other way... this argument is a weak one often used by pple insecure with their own sexuality.
i think there is a need to make information about gay people more available and let pple make their own decisions about it. -
it is not always true that homosexuals will engage in exclusively homosexual relations... did i not address that earlier?
Neither is it true tat homo goes for outside male flings outside their normal married lives. There r many gay couples planning for marriage between 2 men. Besides gays, after they get married to women, then get attached to a gay secretly is not healthy either... If I am the wife it will be a real shocker..not to reduce humans to animal behavior, but humans are essentially mammals... if this behavior is naturally occurring in lower primates (not just dolphins), then it may be not that "unnatural" after all and the prejudices that society attach to them are essentially constructed and not self-evident...
Actually most animals do practise incest, even lower primates.
I agree tat gays are sometimes born "gays". However before they change into it, they get influence by the environment before they take their stand. If all "gays" r born gays, then we expect twin brothers or sister to have the same sexuality since they have the same genetic link. However studies show tat if one of the brother is gay, the other brother being gay is only 50%. If "born gay" is true, then we should expect 100% or at least at high percentage such as 70% etc since they have the same bio data. Environment do play a part in determining one sexuality.i do not support the movement. and i do not "support pple becoming gay" ... they are pple who have made a choice and secure in their sexuality... they don't need my approval and they certainly do not deserve my judgement.
I do not shun or hate gays. I do not support people doing tat to gays either. They are pple who have made a choice and secure in their sexuality... they don't need my approval and they certainly do not deserve my judgement.
However I do not support publicity or promotion of their sexual behaviours such as giving speeches in speaker's corner (Not here but the physical speaker corner)i just recognise their individuality and not judge them based on their sexuality. it is not that i "support" them, but that i do not see that part of people as being relevant in any way in my valuation of them.
Please forgive me if I had misunderstood your intentions. It is just tat I do not encourage people to promote gays behaviours and I was attacked by it. Naturally I would have think the other party must be in favour of supporting or promoting gay behaviours.and developed societies produce less children with or without gay people. it is misleading to lump this in. they are 2 different matters...
I only can say tis is not a healthy behaviour for the totality of society. If they had decided to be one don't condemn. If they want to influence other, don't encourage. Which one is better for society, a population of 2% gays or a society with 20% ?all in all, i don't see how it is the wrong thing to do to recognise pple as individuals and not subscribe to narrow prejudices.
well... I have probably said many times tat we should not condemn gay people. We should not encourage them to "encourage" or influence more people toward being gays.
Anyway just another interesting phenmenon... In girl school there r a lot more cases of lesbian couple than in normal mixed schools. Most grew out of it after some time. I see tat as another example of environment changing the sexuality of people.why would it increase? my personal opinion is that one's sexuality is, to a large extent, fixed. society might condition one to go one way or it may not.
From wat I see, it is highly likely since we r dealing with psychology as well.you and i, secure in our masculinity, would not suddenly decide to go the other way... this argument is a weak one often used by pple insecure with their own sexuality.
If u r young and still "undecided", before we r fixed in our own sexuality, won't the environment affects you ?
Another interesting example is the case of a man, being taught and discipline as a girl, wearing skirts and blouse etc. HE grew out thinking himself as a girl and he has a preference to guys too.
Wat u had experienced will influence how u become. Nurture is important as welli think there is a need to make information about gay people more available and let pple make their own decisions about it.
The trouble is, it is split between 2 field now the reason is religions such as catholic and muslim and certain christian do not support gays and had come out with many arguments against them. The gays themselves formed the other field and they also fight hand and limb with these religion groups publishing facts tat gay is not cause by environment but caused by nature ONLY. If it is cause by nature than the only one tat can be blamed is God thus religion group shouldn't reject or complain about them too much 
-
CX thinks we shoudn't discriminate against gays.I believe nobody say we should.Would CX rest his case?
-
Originally posted by PRP:
its a little more complex than that... the point now is not to discriminate or not... as it is simply wrong to discriminate pple for such shallow reasons, like ignorance and fear...
CX thinks we shoudn't discriminate against gays.I believe nobody say we should.Would CX rest his case?
but now that we say "we will not discriminate", there is an added dimension... an unsaid one that screams "we will not acknowledge their legitimacy to exist and speak publicly of their lifestyles" ...
i agree that this is a little more tricky... being a hetro male, i don't think that i am the best spokesperson for their cause... and as Stupidissmart brought up, there are very strong religious lobbies out there that absolutely deny their right to exist.
i do not see an absolute link in this... if sexuality is ultimately a choice, then nobody should be forcing anybody into any of them.
Originally posted by Stupidissmart:
well... I have probably said many times tat we should not condemn gay people. We should not encourage them to "encourage" or influence more people toward being gays.
the situation was never such that gay people want the whole world to be gay like them... they merely seek acceptance for the choices they have made.If u r young and still "undecided", before we r fixed in our own sexuality, won't the environment affects you ?
if u are forced to wear a dress and act like a girl, probably yes. but not if all u do is listen to a few speeches and read a few books that talks about sexuality and alternative sexuality.
we have different ideas on just how much "influence" is needed here... its probably something that can never be proven at this point so lets just agree to disagree on this...The trouble is, it is split between 2 field now the reason is religions such as catholic and muslim and certain christian do not support gays and had come out with many arguments against them. The gays themselves formed the other field and they also fight hand and limb with these religion groups publishing facts tat gay is not cause by environment but caused by nature ONLY. If it is cause by nature than the only one tat can be blamed is God thus religion group shouldn't reject or complain about them too much
oh yes, i've heard those... but that's only one narrow view... as u may know by now, i do not buy ANY narrow, packaged view on this issue. the study of sexuality is very, very broad and multi-faceted and Sg has a LONG way to go in developing its own views and ideas on this issue.
i'm not ALL into queer theory... i'm more interested in investigating the broader picture of sexuality. not just queer, but masculinity and feminity as well.
so actually, we only differ on one main point: i believe we need to know more because the current state of ignorance is damaging and perpetuating shallow prejudices, while u would prefer that gay pple just keep to themselves and don't make waves.
but how to we dispel such misconceptions, fears, and ignorance if we shut them up?
maybe we ought to do what we always do with alternative views: institutionalise it, vet it and gradually desseminate the most balanced version of it.
i don't necessarily agree with this method, but it is better than not giving them a voice and letting random extreme views get screamed out in hong lim park. -
but now that we say "we will not discriminate";, there is an added dimension... an unsaid one that screams "we will not acknowledge their legitimacy to exist and speak publicly of their lifestyles" ...
I acknowledge their legitimacy to exist... I am only against them speaking publicly of their lifestyles...
If one want to speak publicly of your special lifestyle, wat do one hope to achieve ?i do not see an absolute link in this... if sexuality is ultimately a choice, then nobody should be forcing anybody into any of them.
I have said before, it is for the better of society. Committing crime is a choice too, shouldn't we try to discourage people from committing it ?the situation was never such that gay people want the whole world to be gay like them... they merely seek acceptance for the choices they have made.
I don't know man... I don't think u can say tat statement representing all the gays in the world.
Lets say I collect... well... stickers. I will like more people to collect stickers isn't it ? If I am a catholic, I will desire the whole world to be catholic too. I thought it is human nature to like to belong to a group with greater numbers.if u are forced to wear a dress and act like a girl, probably yes. but not if all u do is listen to a few speeches and read a few books that talks about sexuality and alternative sexuality.
Good
we have different ideas on just how much "influence" is needed here... its probably something that can never be proven at this point so lets just agree to disagree on this...but how to we dispel such misconceptions, fears, and ignorance if we shut them up?
Ok ok ok...
maybe we ought to do what we always do with alternative views: institutionalise it, vet it and gradually desseminate the most balanced version of it.
i don't necessarily agree with this method, but it is better than not giving them a voice and letting random extreme views get screamed out in hong lim park.
About fears, misconception and ignorance, it will get better with time. Although I personally never know any gays friends, my impression of our society now is already one having lesser fears misconception and ignorance towards them. 10 years ago gays r shunned more, rejected more and hated more. Society do not react tat fast to changes u see...
Actually I thought gays issues is already institutionalised, vetted and desseminated...
Talking about giving them a voice... it is again linked to influence... both of us have different views so lets forget about it okie
I really wanna exit from this thread....
can I go now.... -
nobody ever forced u to stay...
-
Actually,this topic is about homosex,but since some of u deviate from the topic,i join in.
Homosex is unnatural,illegal and so is wrong.So the gays want to advocate it is right.How can they justify their stand?Can gamblers advaocate gambling is right? (not a very close anology nevertheless)For gays,i've said they should seek help from councillor or psyhchologist.Some have successfuly changed their habits, so can others. -
why don't u read the previous posts before shooting your mouth off like a rabid homophobe.Originally posted by PRP:Actually,this topic is about homosex,but since some of u deviate from the topic,i join in.
Homosex is unnatural,illegal and so is wrong.So the gays want to advocate it is right.How can they justify their stand?Can gamblers advaocate gambling is right? (not a very close anology nevertheless)For gays,i've said they should seek help from councillor or psyhchologist.Some have successfuly changed their habits, so can others.
we hardly know enough about nature to call it "unnatural" and "illegal" is dictated through statutes which can be changed. once upon a time, pple were tied into bamboo baskets and thrown into rivers for engaging in premaritial sex...
do we still do that? and to think about it... was homosexuality always considered "unnatural" and "criminal" ??? it wasn't... but how did we come to this understanding?
and interests are often self-generated. if they do not state their case, do pple care what they feel? even now when some of them do, there are pple like u who continue to reject them and treat them like deviant beings.
so going by that theory, we cannot rightly say that endangered wildlife needs our protection because we're not dolphins, lions or giant pandas.
nobody takes seriously the assertion that homosexuality is a medical condition anymore. this view might have been popular a few decades ago, but the study and understanding of sexuality has grown beyond such shallow, narrow understandings.
u are saying nothing new here... u're just repeating narrow, homophobic prejudices. -
What does Singapore really need?
The answer eluded me for some time, but judging from experience, I'd say Singapore can do with a substantial reduction in the general costs of living, and in making a living.
This WILL indelibly enhance and improve the general discourteous attitudes of most Singaporeans, and puts a ready smile on everyone's face.
This is guaranteed. -
PRP Many people used to think that slavary is natural, laws were created to uphold that view. Do you think that is correct? When gamblers advocate gambling have you thought that they might be trying to state that they want the liberty to make their own decision as long as they are not hurting others? In the past, women were thought as "breeders", and were not allowed voice to vote, or a say in society, including raising their own children.Originally posted by PRP:Actually,this topic is about homosex,but since some of u deviate from the topic,i join in.
Homosex is unnatural,illegal and so is wrong.So the gays want to advocate it is right.How can they justify their stand?Can gamblers advaocate gambling is right? (not a very close anology nevertheless)For gays,i've said they should seek help from councillor or psyhchologist.Some have successfuly changed their habits, so can others.
If sexuality is constructed, being straight or gay makes no difference then. But the fact that gays/lesbians are discriminated and oppressed shows that there are no laws to stop this discrimination and to stop people from publically harming others. It places them in the same position as the women and slaves of the past. While I am at it, I think there should also be laws to stop age discrimination besides sexual orientation...
I have heard that so many people are out of work and the old and experienced, even though they are fully capable, are not getting jobs because of their age. I have also heard that companies are also preselecting interviews by asking for the person's age.
So,
homosexuality, unnatural as some might see it, does not allow them to make others feel like s*|t. If your child was disabled, you would still want to have a good education and a society that accepts your child wouldn't you? This old saying about putting yourself in someone elses shoe rings true here. Why can't people just understand that. It is mind boggling to me. -
Homosex is unnatural. This is a scientific fact and tradition understanding.Most ppl would agree with me.Of course,it one is gay,he would like to argue otherwise.
Why is there homosex? Because more and more ppl take sex as just enjoyment.Sex is actually meant for marriage & have children. -
Originally posted by PRP:
state them.
Homosex is unnatural. This is a scientific fact and tradition understanding.Most ppl would agree with me.
who is "most people" ? i know many who will find views like yours narrow-minded, bigoted and mis-guided.Of course,it one is gay,he would like to argue otherwise.
would he? if it is, like u say, a medical condition, would they not be better off seeking a "cure" ?
would someone with leprosy happily let all his fingers and toes fall off and say its a good thing?
the fact is, it is not. just because u do not see it doesn't mean that there is no valid point to be made.
when we talk about sexuality, we are not just talking about a physical / biological function. we are talking about a socially imposed state of understanding that may have no bearing on reality at all.Why is there homosex? Because more and more ppl take sex as just enjoyment.Sex is actually meant for marriage & have children.
victorian patriarchal discourse (aka. prude ) ... sex is sex... its not supposed to be "good" or "bad" ... and why shouldn't people enjoy it? u think being lousy in bed is actually a positive trait?
the idea of "marriage" as an institution is a construct. child-birth and procreation were not always associated with what we understand as "marriage" today.
if anything at all, the male-centred patriarchal order that definines relationships as male-dominated and hetrosexual is oppressive and unnatural. -
This question of hate v love is an unusual one. For one thing, i sense the reason violence is a result of hate is based on restraint, patience. This in turn requires education and a broad-based knowledge of human culture, characteristics and diplomacy.
I venture to believe that humankind will forever be plagued with wars and perpetual violence. Look at the present. Terrorism is really muslim fanatics answering a 'spiritual' call from one of their own. Was it any different when we examine the crusades? Back then, another 'spiritual' voice spoke and the attempted subjugation of the muslims began. It seems the course has run a full circle.
Arrogance no doubt plays a part in violence. The arrogance of the once mighty Roman empire that spanned most of Europe from Egypt to Germania crumbled to in-fighting and political squabbling. Even more arrogant was the misguided pride that the aryan race of 'perfect' beings could only be achieved by the slaughter of millions. Nazi culture spawned racism to levels beyond our worse nightmares.
To say combat hate with love is the way forward is to merely scrape the surface. Religion, colour of your skin, homosexuality, all these are basic examples that hate is fuelled by blind belief, bigotry and sheer ignorance in that order.
Love could not possibly burn through so venomous an assault. -
what have i started.
-
CX,
Homosex is unnatural. Unnatural sex is a crime in S'pore.Even oral sex is considered unnatural sex,so what can u expect for sodomy? -
i expect that the law was the result of a narrow, bigoted mind. if the law dictates everything that u do, then u are not an individual, but a robot.Originally posted by PRP:CX,
Homosex is unnatural. Unnatural sex is a crime in S'pore.Even oral sex is considered unnatural sex,so what can u expect for sodomy? -
Here's what I think Singapore REALLY needs:
More local citizens with jobs. Give jobs back to Singaporeans.