Homosexuality in Singapore: what is permitted and not?

[leona123]

Just surfing around and I HAD to add something further...

I didn't say whether I was against or for anything thing. I was just giving you a logical government pov on the subject.

What an intellectually dishonest response! When you make a comment like "Gay marriage is NOT pragmatic when looking at it from a purely future perspective. ", your stance(that homosexuals shouldn't marry) is clearly evident especially since you ARE responding to my views which stand by same sex marriage. (The capitalized 'NOT' in your sentence adds to my point.)

I take back my apology. You ARE against homosexual marriages as you clearly stated in http://forum.singaporeexpats.com/ftopic45846.html.

I stand by what I said earlier, that...

It's very obvious that the reason you are against same sex marriage is simply because you have some prejudices against them. You are not fooling anyone by saying that the reason homosexuals shouldn't marry is because they can't produce children.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Good try, but trying to tie two different threads written several years apart after hunting for a rebuttal for two days just doesn't get it. Sorry.

I hope that it won’t be long before they allow homosexuals to marry as well. In my opinion and from what I have seen so far, the only adverse reactions to homosexuality are from the people who strongly feel that their religious views should dictate how an individual lives his life.

That ought to do a lot for Singapore's declining fertility rate don't you think? As has been said many, many times here and elsewhere, this is a pragmatic society (by their definition). Gay marriage is NOT pragmatic when looking at it from a purely future perspective.

Where did I say in this thread that "I" was against gay marriages? It took you to days to find a post to support your accusations. My statement pointed out that my comments were based purely on a gov POV. Not my personal views.

To add to my above point, people who are found to be medically unable to give birth should also be denied marriage . Also, people like myself and my husband, who do not wish to ever have children, should also not be allowed to marry.

Think you get the point, sundaymorningstaple. It's very obvious that the reason you are against same sex marriage (apologies if I've got this wrong) is simply because you have some prejudices against them. You are not fooling anyone by saying that the reason homosexuals shouldn't marry is because they can't produce children.

You were doing okay until you presumed to know what I or anybody else here actually thinks. There are times to expound and times to keep ones mouth shut and just read. This was one of those times. I will, however, accept your apology. You would do well to understand that I am not a Singaporean. I didn't say whether I was against or for anything thing. I was just giving you a logical government pov on the subject. I even stated as such. You might want to go back and re-read posts (in fact the entire thread) for context before replying to them so you don't look so foolish with your accusations.

At the time you made your accusations you did not know "my" position re gay marriages. Therefore you, again created a tempest in a teacup trying to reinforce your hastily formed conclusion that didn't agree with you. So now, again you make yourself look foolish.

The fact that I'm AM against gay marriages is, frankly, immaterial don't you think? Considering the thread is why "Singapore" not me, does not allow gay marriages. And now that you are attacking me personally, I find that maybe, just maybe, childless couples should also not be allowed to remain married. But unfortunately, the position that I put forth re: the government stance only, can easily be reversed in the case of childless couples who CAN procreate. This is definitely not the case with gay couples.

But I concede, you are much more adept at indignation that I am, so I will concede defeat. Happy? I'm on holiday and just can't be bothered to entertain you.....

[leona123]

Good try, but trying to tie two different threads written several years apart after hunting for a rebuttal for two days just doesn't get it. Sorry.

You obviously missed the point. And its ironic that YOU can come up with such presumptions when you clearly tell OTHERS that not to. Firstly, I'm not hunting FOR A REBUTTAL. Islam, evolution and homosexuality are topics of my passion and I hunt for them. This is not the only discussion board I participate in.

As for the second thread which I happened to find, it clearly shows that I WAS right when I made the comment, "It's very obvious that the reason you are against same sex marriage (apologies if I've got this wrong) is simply because you have some prejudices against them."

At the time you made your accusations you did not know "my" position re gay marriages.

strawman. When did I ever say that I did? Go read what I said again. I only said that it WAS OBVIOUS that you are prejudiced but I would still apologise if I were wrong. However, NOW, I KNOW your position and I AM right. You have prejudices against gay marriage. I'm not wrong and I take back my apology. You don't deserve it for your intellectually dishonest responses and red herrings.

And I'm not going to respond to the above childish issue anymore on "you said this, I said this, no you said that, no I said this" issues. Its for the readers to decide. I would be only interested to discuss homosexuality issues further. In the next post...to break it up for easier reading...

[leona123]

The fact that I'm AM against gay marriages is, frankly, immaterial don't you think?

Could you please write in context by reading my earlier post. I was writing about a future where Singapore,would not only accept homosexuality, but would also allow for gay marriages.
Mad Scientists post clearly shows that Singapore has decided to keep section 377a merely because "legislation has to reflect both the societal norms and the views of the majority"
So, looking at Singapore's stand, for that future to happen, more people need to stand up for it.

Considering the thread is why "Singapore" not me, does not allow gay marriages.

Yeah, you gave an unsubstantiated response about your so-called "logical government pov on the subject". As you know, a sex-changed person cannot give birth. Singapore allows a sex-changed person to marry. So, your argument about pragmatic society(in relation to giving birth) just fell flat.

And now that you are attacking me personally, I find that maybe, just maybe, childless couples should also not be allowed to remain married.

Firstly, up til this point, I've not made any personal attacks against you. It was NEVER my intention to put you down. Only your opinions. Secondly, because you assumed that I was attacking you personally, you feel that maybe, just maybe, childless couples should also not be allowed to remain married. This certainly reflects on your maturity level.

re: the government stance only, can easily be reversed in the case of childless couples who CAN procreate. This is definitely not the case with gay couples.

UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIM = OPINIONS. Please show me articles or any evidence which supports your above on the government stance?
Also, point noted that you missed out INFERTILE couples.
Now, to add, how about sex-changed person who are unable to give birth AND CANNOT BE REVERSED and yet are allowed to marry in Singapore?

But I concede, you are much more adept at indignation that I am, so I will concede defeat.

Sentences like the above reflect more on you than anybody else.

I'm on holiday and just can't be bothered to entertain you

Enjoy your holidays.

[sundaymorningstaple]

[sporewunder]

I am not gay but homosexuality in Singapore is ok as long as you are not too flamboyant in public. The govt has already stated that they will not proactively prosecute gays. There are many Singaporeans who are openly gay like Alex Au etc. Alex Au has even been interview on national TV umpteen times.

Singapore is not Malaysia where they jail you for 6 years for homosexual acts. Relax.

Listen to what the Prime Minister says. It comes at the 1 min mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC8KYm8B0z4

[JR8]

Haha SMS has got a stalker

Wonder if she wears a pair of falsies hehe...

[JR8]

My other choice-cut reply re: this thread got lost to the ether. Ah, another time.... lol...

[JR8]

I have to say though that as is common with Singaporean adults they are simply unable to participate in any kind of adult conversation, despite being into their 30's…Sadly I have had to pre-emptively de-Friend all but one of them from Facebook.

LOL. Your hasty generalization, as well as the hypocrisy in the above statement, definitely sounds very mature, JR8. Smart move in pre-emptively de-friending all but one friend from facebook rather than finding out first.

Hasty generalisation? Er, well, how many years does someone have to live in Singapore to be above what you suggest are hasty generalisations?

You completely missed my point... who ever you are. But that is only to be expected. A person dishing out 6th form debating tactics, and missing the elephants n the room - for example that the Lee family are reputed to be billionaires, is not quite all here after all.'

(I do not know the complete context which has driven you to make the above disparaging remarks about Singaporeans. I do apologise in advance if I have misunderstood.)

Piss off. You know nothing