Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/377a-attorney-general-singapore-law-prosecute-10783436
(Updated: )
Ricky Lim
The Attorney-General gave the example of a case in 2008 where someone had been charged under Section 377A after a police report was lodged by a 16-year old male who had oral sex with the suspect.
Citing then-Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs Wong Kan Seng, Mr Wong said the case was referred to the Public Prosecutor, who "decided to charge the accused under Section 377A after taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, including the complainant's age and the fact that the offence had taken place in a public toilet".
--
This case demonstrate that Section 377A still need to be kept - to prevent innocent from being subjected to abuse by gays.
Posted on :-
(1) The Explicit lens - will deter normal human of man and woman from committing abnormal sexual activities.
This will prevent heterosexual male and female from experimenting homosexual and lesbian activities - moving into deviant anti-nature behavior.
This will be in line with other sexual deviant behavior - by preventing moral decadence that go against Nature.
Citing then-Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs Wong Kan Seng, Mr Wong said the case was referred to the Public Prosecutor, who "decided to charge the accused under Section 377A after taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, including the complainant's age and the fact that the offence had taken place in a public toilet".
--
This case demonstrate that Section 377A still need to be kept - to prevent innocent from being subjected to abuse by gays.
Posted on :-
(1) The Explicit lens - will deter normal human of man and woman from committing abnormal sexual activities.
This will prevent heterosexual male and female from experimenting homosexual and lesbian activities - moving into deviant anti-nature behavior.
This will be in line with other sexual deviant behavior - by preventing moral decadence that go against Nature.
Ricky Lim
He added: "In the case of Section 377A, where the conduct in question was between two consenting adults in a private place, the Public Prosecutor had, absent other factors, taken the position that prosecution would not be in the public interest.
"This remains the position today."
--
Posted on :-
Implicit lens - is to recognise that certain people suffered from illness and cannot behave like normal humans of a man or a woman to engage in normal sexual activity for the reproduction of offsprings.
And thus should not enforce Section 377A on them if they carried out their activity quietly in private.
"This remains the position today."
--
Posted on :-
Implicit lens - is to recognise that certain people suffered from illness and cannot behave like normal humans of a man or a woman to engage in normal sexual activity for the reproduction of offsprings.
And thus should not enforce Section 377A on them if they carried out their activity quietly in private.
Like · Reply · 1m
Chrysta Loh
To Ricky Lim
"This case demonstrate that Section 377A still need to be kept - to prevent innocent from being subjected to abuse by gays." What about not distinguishing between gays and heteros? After all, abuse is abuse whether gay or het. Replace 377A with something that protects these "innocents" from sexual abuse in general and we'd all be safer.
Homosexuality does occur in nature so "anti-nature" and "go against Nature" is misleading. Heteronormativity is the one perpetuating heterosexuality as a social norm. Also, I find your implication that gays are not "normal" rather offensive actually.
To Pwince George
Okay but uh, maybe chill a bit?
"This case demonstrate that Section 377A still need to be kept - to prevent innocent from being subjected to abuse by gays." What about not distinguishing between gays and heteros? After all, abuse is abuse whether gay or het. Replace 377A with something that protects these "innocents" from sexual abuse in general and we'd all be safer.
Homosexuality does occur in nature so "anti-nature" and "go against Nature" is misleading. Heteronormativity is the one perpetuating heterosexuality as a social norm. Also, I find your implication that gays are not "normal" rather offensive actually.
To Pwince George
Okay but uh, maybe chill a bit?
Jack Sparroww
Chrysta Loh lol that homo exists in nature card. Fkin BS. These fkin gays say because animals also display homo behavior, it's alrite for humans too. Lol the cats in your neighborhood everyday incest, so we incest too? Fkin BS mentally ill group.
Ghee Phua
Ricky Lim, 377A criminalizes sexual activity between two men, even in pirvate. The example given in the article when it was applied, I feel, is a gross abuse of the law. Firstly, homsexuality has never been the same as pediophillia. Phediophillia can also occur in a heterosexual context. So let's take sexual orientation out of this. Second when 377A was applied in that case, which I feel it should not have been done so, as it was between a man and a minor. Rather the offender should have been charged under sexual abuse of a minor. Not only was the law misused here, it also shows that 377A can be misused.
Furthermore, if the public prosecutor does retain full prosecutorial discretion, it makes what the prime minster had said before moot, that the law should exist but the government will not seek to enforce. Thus 377A can be enforced, and it has been misenforced, more so the reason that this colonial and unjust law must go!
Furthermore, if the public prosecutor does retain full prosecutorial discretion, it makes what the prime minster had said before moot, that the law should exist but the government will not seek to enforce. Thus 377A can be enforced, and it has been misenforced, more so the reason that this colonial and unjust law must go!
Jack Sparroww
Ghee Phua dumbfk i could have made my account as 'real' as yours such that you would not have the chance to open your big fat mouth talking about fake. Be glad that I let my intention (to stay anon) be known to you.
Wu Jian Hao
Chrysta Loh
Extreme storms, earthquakes are also nature but detrimental kind of nature.
Birth defects are also natural.
Human has brain to make the best of nature to their survival and benefits, not succumbed to negative forces of nature.
Extreme storms, earthquakes are also nature but detrimental kind of nature.
Birth defects are also natural.
Human has brain to make the best of nature to their survival and benefits, not succumbed to negative forces of nature.
Wu Jian Hao
Chrysta Loh
On the contrary, removing 377A would mean that gays can do such acts!
And yes, there should be something more deterrant when it comes to man, that is the reason why caning is only for men.
Public toilet cubicles, fitting rooms, warehouses or corners of many places hidden from crowd or public eyes will be favourite places.
On the contrary, removing 377A would mean that gays can do such acts!
And yes, there should be something more deterrant when it comes to man, that is the reason why caning is only for men.
Public toilet cubicles, fitting rooms, warehouses or corners of many places hidden from crowd or public eyes will be favourite places.
Ricky Lim
Pwince George , Chrysta Loh, Ghee Phua --- I believe you people hope that 377A is repealed so that this particular case where the 16 years old "force" by the gay to oral him will get away.
All the more 377A should be kept to prevent gays from abusing others.
The majority already voice their views to keep 377A - you minority can continue to shout and moan.
Look at the offences committed by gays :-
(1) Man commits 27 sexual offences on five primary school boys - 14 OCTOBER, 2014
(2) A 63-year-old retiree who performed oral sex on a 12-year-old boy in the toilet of a park had his jail term raised from the minimum eight years to 11 years yesterday, after an appeal by prosecutors for harsher punishment. - 27, 2018, 5:00 AM SGT
(3) Man performed oral sex on 10 boys and paid them $100 each - December 21, 2017
(4) Man who paid boys for sexual services jailed 15 years - January 3, 2018
(5) Badminton coach took boy, 14, to male prostitute - Oct 29, 2015
(6) 8 years jail for retiree who had oral sex with 12-year-old boy - July 22, 2017
(7) MUSIC TEACHER JAILED FOR ORAL SEX WITH UNDERAGED BOY - Tue, 25/07/2017
(8) Masseur jailed for underage sex with boys, sex trafficking - 08 May 2017
(9) Singapore boys sexually preyed on by man through Facebook - The offences were committed from mid 2015 to March this year.
(10) Gay Abang Paid Preteen Boys to Give Him Oral Sex - April 21, 2017
(11) MNC CEO sexually assault young boy - Sep 2015
All the more 377A should be kept to prevent gays from abusing others.
The majority already voice their views to keep 377A - you minority can continue to shout and moan.
Look at the offences committed by gays :-
(1) Man commits 27 sexual offences on five primary school boys - 14 OCTOBER, 2014
(2) A 63-year-old retiree who performed oral sex on a 12-year-old boy in the toilet of a park had his jail term raised from the minimum eight years to 11 years yesterday, after an appeal by prosecutors for harsher punishment. - 27, 2018, 5:00 AM SGT
(3) Man performed oral sex on 10 boys and paid them $100 each - December 21, 2017
(4) Man who paid boys for sexual services jailed 15 years - January 3, 2018
(5) Badminton coach took boy, 14, to male prostitute - Oct 29, 2015
(6) 8 years jail for retiree who had oral sex with 12-year-old boy - July 22, 2017
(7) MUSIC TEACHER JAILED FOR ORAL SEX WITH UNDERAGED BOY - Tue, 25/07/2017
(8) Masseur jailed for underage sex with boys, sex trafficking - 08 May 2017
(9) Singapore boys sexually preyed on by man through Facebook - The offences were committed from mid 2015 to March this year.
(10) Gay Abang Paid Preteen Boys to Give Him Oral Sex - April 21, 2017
(11) MNC CEO sexually assault young boy - Sep 2015
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
Ricky Lim
Some of the gay group make it as though gays are Saints and will not commit crime.
The above cases whereby gays committed sexual crimes on boys - are not exhaustive and the number of cases are huge.
Thus all the more, Section 377A must be kept to protect innocents from being abused by some gays.
Hence, as posted on :-
Ricky Lim
Guess Singapore should see Section 377A with 2 lens :-
(1) Explicit lens
(2) Implicit lens
Explicit lens - is to keep Section 377A - to give a sense of what is morally right - Nature that provide for creation of humans is through sexual union of a male and a female to produce offsprings and sustain the human civilisation.
Implicit lens - is to recognise that certain people suffered from illness and cannot behave like normal humans of a man or a woman to engage in normal sexual activity for the reproduction of offsprings.
And thus should not enforce Section 377A on them if they carried out their activity quietly in private.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
(1) The Explicit lens (is the Wisdom lens) - to prevent the invocation of Universal Law of Karma - to instill what is morally, nature right.
(2) The Implicit lens (is the Compassion lens) - to sympathise with the illness that some man and women inherit - and not prosecute them for which they have no control of.
But if treatment has become available, help must be granted to coax them to get treatment to heal the deviant tendency and get well
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
(1) The Explicit lens - will deter normal human of man and woman from committing abnormal sexual activities.
This will prevent heterosexual male and female from experimenting homosexual and lesbian activities - moving into deviant anti-nature behavior.
This will be in line with other sexual deviant behavior - by preventing moral decadence that go against Nature.
(2) The Implicit lens - certify that certain individual man and woman indeed has illness in sexual orientation by medical profession.
Regular treatment is also implied to help such individual in mental and physical healing - that hopefully one day, they will be able to get well.
Like · Reply · 1m
The above cases whereby gays committed sexual crimes on boys - are not exhaustive and the number of cases are huge.
Thus all the more, Section 377A must be kept to protect innocents from being abused by some gays.
Hence, as posted on :-
Ricky Lim
Guess Singapore should see Section 377A with 2 lens :-
(1) Explicit lens
(2) Implicit lens
Explicit lens - is to keep Section 377A - to give a sense of what is morally right - Nature that provide for creation of humans is through sexual union of a male and a female to produce offsprings and sustain the human civilisation.
Implicit lens - is to recognise that certain people suffered from illness and cannot behave like normal humans of a man or a woman to engage in normal sexual activity for the reproduction of offsprings.
And thus should not enforce Section 377A on them if they carried out their activity quietly in private.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
(1) The Explicit lens (is the Wisdom lens) - to prevent the invocation of Universal Law of Karma - to instill what is morally, nature right.
(2) The Implicit lens (is the Compassion lens) - to sympathise with the illness that some man and women inherit - and not prosecute them for which they have no control of.
But if treatment has become available, help must be granted to coax them to get treatment to heal the deviant tendency and get well
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
(1) The Explicit lens - will deter normal human of man and woman from committing abnormal sexual activities.
This will prevent heterosexual male and female from experimenting homosexual and lesbian activities - moving into deviant anti-nature behavior.
This will be in line with other sexual deviant behavior - by preventing moral decadence that go against Nature.
(2) The Implicit lens - certify that certain individual man and woman indeed has illness in sexual orientation by medical profession.
Regular treatment is also implied to help such individual in mental and physical healing - that hopefully one day, they will be able to get well.
Like · Reply · 1m
Wu Jian Hao
Jack Sparroww
Ghee Phua is deploying his LGBT training skill, which is: "if you lost the argument, go after other things, call them bigots, homophobes, inhuman, etc..whatever.. so to cover up your weak fake arguments".
That is always in LGBT handbook to shut people up.
Ghee Phua is deploying his LGBT training skill, which is: "if you lost the argument, go after other things, call them bigots, homophobes, inhuman, etc..whatever.. so to cover up your weak fake arguments".
That is always in LGBT handbook to shut people up.
Wu Jian Hao
So that shows us now that 377A is more important to keep than we thought it was. Have we been deceived by tommy koh that the law is useless??
It's clearly needed especially now when there is a big movement strongly promoting the unethical, unhealthy and unscientific misuse of non-sexual organs as sexual organ.
It's clearly needed especially now when there is a big movement strongly promoting the unethical, unhealthy and unscientific misuse of non-sexual organs as sexual organ.
Chandrasekhar Chelseabluesforlife
Should the official decision on 377A be made by Parliament (which will compromise by keeping 377A but not enforcing it) or the Courts (in response to the legal challenge by Johnson Ong)? The ongoing public debate over 377A is merely fanning conflict and polarisation in Singaporean society. Wish the debate could just be forcibly shut down to preserve the racial and religious harmony in Singapore, letting us focus on more important issues like income inequality!
Georgie Lee
Lucien, I would advise you to go to the car park of Changi Village at around midnight and see for yourselves shadows moving inside the cars.
Like · Reply · 5m
Tan Zhiwei Dylan
decided to charge the accused under S377A seems to imply that there are other law provisions that a. could be potentially charged for.
Ricky Lim
(1) The boy is 16 years old (not under 16) - so law that protect minor cannot apply.
(2) The boy did the oral act with that man in a public toilet - but since no one caught them in the act - indecency in public place cannot be filed - as no one sees it.
(3) As the boy did not resist or shout during the act - it does not seems to be force - and it seen to be given consent.
So the only choice is to charge the gay under Section 377A - forcing the boy (who could be a heterosexual) to commit gay act.
Thus there is a compelling need to keep Section 377A - instead of repealing it --- to protect non-gays from being abused by gays.
(2) The boy did the oral act with that man in a public toilet - but since no one caught them in the act - indecency in public place cannot be filed - as no one sees it.
(3) As the boy did not resist or shout during the act - it does not seems to be force - and it seen to be given consent.
So the only choice is to charge the gay under Section 377A - forcing the boy (who could be a heterosexual) to commit gay act.
Thus there is a compelling need to keep Section 377A - instead of repealing it --- to protect non-gays from being abused by gays.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Wu Jian Hao
Yes, apparently for those with more extreme tendencies for unethical and immoral gay culprits, general law is not enough. More deterrant law like 377A is so much needed.
Reply · 56m
Sh Li
For gays and lesbians, if you became one as a result of being groomed during your growing-up years, it is time to take those groomers to courts today. #MeToo movement is not only for ladies, it’s also for men as well as for you. If you feel you are a victim and you are you today as someone in the past may have corrupted your mind in the past, go to court to expose those groomers in order to protect others. In this aspect, I am with you.
Like · Reply · 32m
Like · Reply · 18m Plugin
Goh Jon Hin
Indeed.
Such appeal should not only to those who were groomed but those who had been sexually abused by gays over times during their childhood days. They were threatened, too afraid and too ashamed to report such abuses. After having suffered such trauma, most of them somehow grew up to become gays. Now, it's time these victims to come out to report and to expose those abusers in order to protect other youthful victims.
Such appeal should not only to those who were groomed but those who had been sexually abused by gays over times during their childhood days. They were threatened, too afraid and too ashamed to report such abuses. After having suffered such trauma, most of them somehow grew up to become gays. Now, it's time these victims to come out to report and to expose those abusers in order to protect other youthful victims.
Reply · 49m
Wu Jian Hao
Agree. They always spreading lies that non gay cannot become gay, while they are actively seeking to groom children to gay.
Normal children can turn gay. Take many cases from prostitution grooming. The innocent girls were raped repeatedly until their self-worth to become a decent woman is trashed and psychologically-damaged enough to think that they worth as prostitute and thus succumbed to enjoy the perverted acts they first hated so much.
Grooming gays is similar. The boys are seducted (if not harassed) frequently until their self-worth to grow up and become a decent man is trashed and psychologically-damaged enough to think that they worth as a gay and thus succumbed to force their mind and body to enjoy the perverted acts they first hated so much.
Normal children can turn gay. Take many cases from prostitution grooming. The innocent girls were raped repeatedly until their self-worth to become a decent woman is trashed and psychologically-damaged enough to think that they worth as prostitute and thus succumbed to enjoy the perverted acts they first hated so much.
Grooming gays is similar. The boys are seducted (if not harassed) frequently until their self-worth to grow up and become a decent man is trashed and psychologically-damaged enough to think that they worth as a gay and thus succumbed to force their mind and body to enjoy the perverted acts they first hated so much.
Reply · 2h
Alvin Leong
The 2008 case is a good example of how gays operate to turn normal people into gays, by brainwashing and misleading young people, not different from pedos child groaming.
No one was born gay, there had to be some point in their life that they got mislead to the gay lifestyle. What had been proven is some people may get a bit gay curious sometime in their teens, but if they had no contacts with gays to lead them astray, they will develop into normal healthy adults.
No one was born gay, there had to be some point in their life that they got mislead to the gay lifestyle. What had been proven is some people may get a bit gay curious sometime in their teens, but if they had no contacts with gays to lead them astray, they will develop into normal healthy adults.
Eddie Lim
Dear powerful ppl in sg who r gay n bisexual who pratice sodomy, u may not end up punished by the law like Anwar in his sodomy conviction after removing 377a, don't forget still got divine law aka karma.... gays n bisexuals are OK ppl as long as they don't engage in gay sex especially sodomy which is very disgusting as the hole is only meant for shitting. ..not for penetration... get it?
Chua Lee Kheng
"He added: "In the case of Section 377A, where the conduct in question was between two consenting adults in a private place, the Public Prosecutor had, absent other factors, taken the position that prosecution would not be in the public interest."
Homosexuals who are consenting adults can now relax that their conduct in private place will not be prosecuted.
Homosexuals who are consenting adults can now relax that their conduct in private place will not be prosecuted.
Wu Jian Hao
Apparently for those culprits with more extreme tendencies for unethical and immoral gay conducts, who may cause various society problems, general law is not enough. More deterrant law like 377A is so much needed.
Spidy Sparrow
More to add on definition and expounding with respect to anyone(he, she, man, woman, IT,dead or alive, etc) and technology(AI robotic, doll) with relationship "sexual activity" under sub sections s377++++ such as orgy, AI sexdoll, bodily surgical construction, sexual reassigned of man, woman, vice versa, doll, IT, ......... Martian 
👽
👽
Like · Reply · 2m
Spidy Sparrow
Foresight hindsight farsighted critical thinking of what is creeping silently slowly unknowingly stupidity crawliingly zombily into Singapore under guised as students, academic lecturer, human right group(s), NGO, registering as facilitators in the names of advocating good cause of humanity or 
👉 👉 
👈 👈 below private parts or confused gender identities.
👉 👉 👈 👈 below private parts or confused gender identities.
Like · Reply · 7m
Wu Jian Hao
So you mean there is selfish reason from some people to remove 377A so that they can be open and do their things, while they are aware that there is clearly a hidden agenda from the LGBT movement to increase their kind's population from 1% to 10% by grooming children thru social environment, psychology, and education system protected by law?
Reply · 49m
Eddie Lim
Wu Jian Hao bro, maybe u r right..u had thought further than me.... I was just more concern removal of 377a will be detrimental to our society..and powerful ppl can actually remove it anytime..
Reply · 35m
Wu Jian Hao
And most people cannot remember what happened in their childhood before age 5. Take example: many orphans may not remember if they had parents.
So if there is any biological changes before they turn 5, they think they were born like that.
Thus, even if there are exceptional cases that a few people are born gay, that makes the percentage no longer 1% of the world population, much lower I should say.
So if there is any biological changes before they turn 5, they think they were born like that.
Thus, even if there are exceptional cases that a few people are born gay, that makes the percentage no longer 1% of the world population, much lower I should say.
Reply · 4h
Chrysta Loh
Ricky Lim
"Some of the gay group make it as though gays are Saints and will not commit crime". If people are saying that, they have to stop. But at the same time, you also have to stop seeing it as gays did this, heteros did that. Because if you want to do that then I can assure you hets do commit sexual abuse too, and they commit a lot of it.
I do not condone any form of sexual abuse. What I am advocating for, is human rights. That means the ability two consenting adults to love each other and have sex with each other. This also means that I believe people who commit sexual acts without consent or with someone who is underaged should be prosecuted. But not under 377A, which only applies to a handful of these cases.
"Some of the gay group make it as though gays are Saints and will not commit crime". If people are saying that, they have to stop. But at the same time, you also have to stop seeing it as gays did this, heteros did that. Because if you want to do that then I can assure you hets do commit sexual abuse too, and they commit a lot of it.
I do not condone any form of sexual abuse. What I am advocating for, is human rights. That means the ability two consenting adults to love each other and have sex with each other. This also means that I believe people who commit sexual acts without consent or with someone who is underaged should be prosecuted. But not under 377A, which only applies to a handful of these cases.
Chrysta Loh
Wu Jian Hao and Jack Sparrow:
I merely stated the fact that homosexuality occurs in nature. Whether it is a "moral" thing to do, is up for debate. Personally, I believe that yes, it is moral, if it is between 2 consenting adults - same judgement I'd pass for a heterosexual relationship. But I also understand that you guys grew up in a heteronormative environment which makes you believe it is immoral. And thus the debate.
After all, a lot of aspects of sexuality just social constructs.
Okay, now for the comparisons. Unfortunately for your argument, homosexuality is not incest. It is also not pedophillia. Neither is it a natural disaster (although I appreciate the sentiment; we are a pretty big force hahaha) I feel like comparisons like these distract from the actual topic at hand, which is homosexuality; sexual attraction between persons of the same sex. 377A is not going to affect those comparisons.
Now moving to the topic of open discourse. "deploying his LGBT training skill,..., That is always in LGBT handbook to shut people up." Sorry but I do believe this isn't an LGBT specific thing. A lot of people behave this way especially on the internet. Which is bad, btw, because it has nothing to do with the debate at hand. I also believe that the aggressive language you guys used is uncalled for.
Honestly I see why people lash out. Controversial topic + opinionated people = a lot of frstration from both sides. For years I have been frustrated with homophobia in the country. The stigmatization and discrimination is not the worst in the world but it is there and it is harmful.
Maybe you guys don't feel it as much because the current state of the social norm leans towards anti-LGBT views. But the LGBT community can and do feel the that oppression all the time. Let that frustration build and something will give eventually. And it gave, just a little, in the form of this push for repeal of 377A.
Wow I feel like I just wrote an essay. Uh if you're still here, thanks for reading? Haha
I merely stated the fact that homosexuality occurs in nature. Whether it is a "moral" thing to do, is up for debate. Personally, I believe that yes, it is moral, if it is between 2 consenting adults - same judgement I'd pass for a heterosexual relationship. But I also understand that you guys grew up in a heteronormative environment which makes you believe it is immoral. And thus the debate.
After all, a lot of aspects of sexuality just social constructs.
Okay, now for the comparisons. Unfortunately for your argument, homosexuality is not incest. It is also not pedophillia. Neither is it a natural disaster (although I appreciate the sentiment; we are a pretty big force hahaha) I feel like comparisons like these distract from the actual topic at hand, which is homosexuality; sexual attraction between persons of the same sex. 377A is not going to affect those comparisons.
Now moving to the topic of open discourse. "deploying his LGBT training skill,..., That is always in LGBT handbook to shut people up." Sorry but I do believe this isn't an LGBT specific thing. A lot of people behave this way especially on the internet. Which is bad, btw, because it has nothing to do with the debate at hand. I also believe that the aggressive language you guys used is uncalled for.
Honestly I see why people lash out. Controversial topic + opinionated people = a lot of frstration from both sides. For years I have been frustrated with homophobia in the country. The stigmatization and discrimination is not the worst in the world but it is there and it is harmful.
Maybe you guys don't feel it as much because the current state of the social norm leans towards anti-LGBT views. But the LGBT community can and do feel the that oppression all the time. Let that frustration build and something will give eventually. And it gave, just a little, in the form of this push for repeal of 377A.
Wow I feel like I just wrote an essay. Uh if you're still here, thanks for reading? Haha
Ricky Lim
Chrysta Loh - there are law to prosecute sexual abuse by heterosexual.
And there are Section 377A to prosecute sexual abuse by homosexual. So if the person is 16 years old as in the above case - shouldn't that gay not prosecuted as 16 years old is not a minor.
Then there is an issue on the definition of "Adults" - is 16 years old, 17 years old, 18 years old, 19 years old, 20 years old - "Adult"? What happen it they are "seduced", "trick", "misled" and other manipulative ways to get into gay acts - but regret later.
Shouldn't they be protected under 377A? - If not which law to protect them from gay abuse?
So what is the argument?
And there are Section 377A to prosecute sexual abuse by homosexual. So if the person is 16 years old as in the above case - shouldn't that gay not prosecuted as 16 years old is not a minor.
Then there is an issue on the definition of "Adults" - is 16 years old, 17 years old, 18 years old, 19 years old, 20 years old - "Adult"? What happen it they are "seduced", "trick", "misled" and other manipulative ways to get into gay acts - but regret later.
Shouldn't they be protected under 377A? - If not which law to protect them from gay abuse?
So what is the argument?
Like · Reply · 1m
Chrysta Loh
Ricky Lim Sorry, I'm not too familiar with the law, but I was wondering what about something to protect against these, but also does not distinguish between hetersexual abuse and homosexual abuse. That way it'll be more thorough and equal. Something that clearly defines "adults" and what to do in the scenario of manipulation. (Which btw is subjective and may sometimes be considered non-consent)
To narrow it down, I just think there shouldn't be distinguish between abuse by heterosexuals or homosexuals.
Idk, is something like that possible? Prosecution regardless of sexual orientation?
To narrow it down, I just think there shouldn't be distinguish between abuse by heterosexuals or homosexuals.
Idk, is something like that possible? Prosecution regardless of sexual orientation?
Chrysta Loh - Me too, i am not familiar with the law.
But to me, i know is not right - and should not let such sexual abuse manifest.
I have written to the Government via REACH - and let them deal with it.
For me, I will prefer the Society to be orderly, and dignified - not morally corrupt - for the sake of our future generation.
Too much so call "human rights" have been liberally forming pressure group - to make the Society deviant and morally corrupt - in which i feel compelling to speak what is morally right.
But to me, i know is not right - and should not let such sexual abuse manifest.
I have written to the Government via REACH - and let them deal with it.
For me, I will prefer the Society to be orderly, and dignified - not morally corrupt - for the sake of our future generation.
Too much so call "human rights" have been liberally forming pressure group - to make the Society deviant and morally corrupt - in which i feel compelling to speak what is morally right.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Chrysta Loh
Chrysta Loh
Ricky Lim I really appreciate you being civil! And oh I never considered "human rights" as a possible cover for liberal views. Good point, but very subjective. I'll think about it.
I guess this begs the loaded question of deviancy and morals because I expect we have very differing opinions on that too. That's one heck of a debate right there. :')
I guess this begs the loaded question of deviancy and morals because I expect we have very differing opinions on that too. That's one heck of a debate right there. :')
Ricky Lim
Chrysta Loh - any act that go against Nature is deviant.
Any act that elicit negative karma is deviant.
Legalising an act that is against nature or deviant - will not negate negative karma - in fact it will elicit collective karma.
Eg. legalising by declaring war - will not negate the effects of death, and destruction - because an act of war of killing - go against Nature of Preservation of Life.
Any act that elicit negative karma is deviant.
Legalising an act that is against nature or deviant - will not negate negative karma - in fact it will elicit collective karma.
Eg. legalising by declaring war - will not negate the effects of death, and destruction - because an act of war of killing - go against Nature of Preservation of Life.
Eg legalising addicted drugs like opium, majuriana, heroin et - will not negate the negative effects of addiction and the miseries that cause a person who consume it, the effects on his/her family and the Society ---- karma will take its course.
Eg. legalising homo marriage - will not cause them to produce offsprings or AIDs will not come - because it is against nature - and karma will take its course.
Eg. legalising the possession of guns - will not prevent from firing their guns on people - as karma will take its course.
Collective karma will come - and the whole Society will suffer along with it - this is the Universal Law of Karma ...................
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Eg. legalising homo marriage - will not cause them to produce offsprings or AIDs will not come - because it is against nature - and karma will take its course.
Eg. legalising the possession of guns - will not prevent from firing their guns on people - as karma will take its course.
Collective karma will come - and the whole Society will suffer along with it - this is the Universal Law of Karma ...................
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Chrysta Loh
Ricky Lim Well I suppose that's your belief. Personally I have never heard of the Universal Law of Karma until now and I don't think I'll be subscribing to it. Seems a bit too rigid..
Like · Reply · 2h
Ricky Lim
Chrysta Loh - You mention "I suppose that's your belief. Personally I have never heard of the Universal Law of Karma until now and I don't think I'll be subscribing to it. Seems a bit too rigid.."
I am not here to preach to you :- What is Universal Law of Karma.
I am here to explain "What is Universal Law of Karma" - in case you say that it does not apply to you and you are not subscribing to it.
Whether anyone who want or do not want to subscribe to it - are in effect every second, every minutes, every single moment - live in the Universal Law of Karma.
In Science, physics that apply to matter (physical material of matter, air, temperature or liquid) - Universal Law of Karma is explain by Newton Law :- Newton's third law: If an object A exerts a force on object B, then object B must exert a force of equal magnitude and opposite direction back on object A.
So whether you want to believe or not in Newton 3rd Law - of a force of action - is responded by the same force of reaction ---- it will apply to you.
In every human there are 2 apects :-
(1) Physical - which is matter - where I explain in Newton 3rd Law - this is verifiable by Science Physics.
(2) Mental Aggregates (which is psychological - comprising 5-sense consciousness, feelings, perception, judgement, mental formation) --- that governs our thoughts - that will result in speeches and actions - that will elicit the corresponding reaction of thoughts, speechess and actions ---- are known as Universal Law of Karma --- which is verifiable by Meta Physics.
I am not sure whether this is too profound to you.
I am not here to preach to you :- What is Universal Law of Karma.
I am here to explain "What is Universal Law of Karma" - in case you say that it does not apply to you and you are not subscribing to it.
Whether anyone who want or do not want to subscribe to it - are in effect every second, every minutes, every single moment - live in the Universal Law of Karma.
In Science, physics that apply to matter (physical material of matter, air, temperature or liquid) - Universal Law of Karma is explain by Newton Law :- Newton's third law: If an object A exerts a force on object B, then object B must exert a force of equal magnitude and opposite direction back on object A.
So whether you want to believe or not in Newton 3rd Law - of a force of action - is responded by the same force of reaction ---- it will apply to you.
In every human there are 2 apects :-
(1) Physical - which is matter - where I explain in Newton 3rd Law - this is verifiable by Science Physics.
(2) Mental Aggregates (which is psychological - comprising 5-sense consciousness, feelings, perception, judgement, mental formation) --- that governs our thoughts - that will result in speeches and actions - that will elicit the corresponding reaction of thoughts, speechess and actions ---- are known as Universal Law of Karma --- which is verifiable by Meta Physics.
I am not sure whether this is too profound to you.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Ricky Lim
For eg.
(1) If we scold someone - someone will scold back. (This is negative karma - a bad speech - elicit a bad reaction).
(2) If we slap someone - someone may slap back or report to police to punish you for hurting someone. (This is negative karma - a violent action - elicit a violent or bad reaction).
All this are Universal Law of Karma --- which means "You reap what you sow" === similar to Newton 3rd Law of "An action will elicit an equal force of reaction".
Karma can be :-
(1) Individual
(2) Collective - where a group of people did something collectively - it will elicit the collective response of reaction.
So all living things on Earth, in the Universe --- are subject to :-
(1) Newton 3rd Law - for physical matter
(2) Universal Law of Karma - for mental aggregates.
Without Karma - all living things cease to exist on Earth or in Universe.
(1) If we scold someone - someone will scold back. (This is negative karma - a bad speech - elicit a bad reaction).
(2) If we slap someone - someone may slap back or report to police to punish you for hurting someone. (This is negative karma - a violent action - elicit a violent or bad reaction).
All this are Universal Law of Karma --- which means "You reap what you sow" === similar to Newton 3rd Law of "An action will elicit an equal force of reaction".
Karma can be :-
(1) Individual
(2) Collective - where a group of people did something collectively - it will elicit the collective response of reaction.
So all living things on Earth, in the Universe --- are subject to :-
(1) Newton 3rd Law - for physical matter
(2) Universal Law of Karma - for mental aggregates.
Without Karma - all living things cease to exist on Earth or in Universe.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Ricky Lim
Karma are of 3 types :-
(1) Negative or bad karma
(2) Positive or good karma
(3) Neutral karma
Karma duration are of :-
(1) Karma manifest from previous life
(2) Immediate karma - karma manifest immediately
(3) Karma manifest in current lifetime but not immediate
(4) Karma manifest in next life or a few lifetimes
(5) Karma seed planted but will not manifest unless the condition that will cause its manifestation ripen.
All Human beings and living things -- are subjected to Universal Law of Karma (you reap what you sow).
All matter on Earth and in Universe - are subjected to Newton 3rd law of action and reaction.
(1) Negative or bad karma
(2) Positive or good karma
(3) Neutral karma
Karma duration are of :-
(1) Karma manifest from previous life
(2) Immediate karma - karma manifest immediately
(3) Karma manifest in current lifetime but not immediate
(4) Karma manifest in next life or a few lifetimes
(5) Karma seed planted but will not manifest unless the condition that will cause its manifestation ripen.
All Human beings and living things -- are subjected to Universal Law of Karma (you reap what you sow).
All matter on Earth and in Universe - are subjected to Newton 3rd law of action and reaction.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Wu Jian Hao
Ricky Lim
Chrysta must agree that you're right, or you are wrong, or both... I don't know.. because her principal is "there is no right or wrong" but I believe she still thinks she is right, thus denying her own principle she wants people to believe.
Chrysta must agree that you're right, or you are wrong, or both... I don't know.. because her principal is "there is no right or wrong" but I believe she still thinks she is right, thus denying her own principle she wants people to believe.
Ricky Lim
Wu Jian Hao - Well everyone is entitle to their own opinion.
I only need to state the facts.
Those who read, experience, understand - will believe.
Those who read, experience, don't understand or understand but refuse to acknowledge -- is ok to me. Because one day they will believe and acknowledge.
Fact is fact - even though whether one choose to believe it now or not.
In fact, karma is a very complex math permutation and computation - that calculate all the way to infinite boundary of Universe - where the complex, compounded action (thoughts, speeches, actions) - can be computed to derive its reaction up to the end of Universal times (and receive the outcome of karma in terms of thoughts, speeches, actions) - taking into account physical matter and mental aggregates.
Universal Law of Karma is the final dispensement of Justice - as it is computed up to the end of Universal time of infinity - where all past, present and future lifetimes that are compounded are computed terminally with no residue.
(Thus if human law does not dispense justice fairly or adequately - Universal Law of Karma will compensate justice - and Universal Law of Karma of Justice is final with no residue).
So Human cannot assume if gun is legalise, drugs is legalise, unnatural sexual union is legalise, war is legalise etc - Society is ok - and collectively will not suffer - because karma will take over when human law is not adequate or flaw.
I only need to state the facts.
Those who read, experience, understand - will believe.
Those who read, experience, don't understand or understand but refuse to acknowledge -- is ok to me. Because one day they will believe and acknowledge.
Fact is fact - even though whether one choose to believe it now or not.
In fact, karma is a very complex math permutation and computation - that calculate all the way to infinite boundary of Universe - where the complex, compounded action (thoughts, speeches, actions) - can be computed to derive its reaction up to the end of Universal times (and receive the outcome of karma in terms of thoughts, speeches, actions) - taking into account physical matter and mental aggregates.
Universal Law of Karma is the final dispensement of Justice - as it is computed up to the end of Universal time of infinity - where all past, present and future lifetimes that are compounded are computed terminally with no residue.
(Thus if human law does not dispense justice fairly or adequately - Universal Law of Karma will compensate justice - and Universal Law of Karma of Justice is final with no residue).
So Human cannot assume if gun is legalise, drugs is legalise, unnatural sexual union is legalise, war is legalise etc - Society is ok - and collectively will not suffer - because karma will take over when human law is not adequate or flaw.
Wu Jian Hao
Chrysta Loh
Sexuality is not social construct.
It is scientific, biology.
"Social Construct" is the words used for political purpose.
Thus, there is no need to say we think the way we think because we are raised in heteronormative families.
Just think and see objectively that by biological design, rectum is not sexual organ.
Sexuality is not social construct.
It is scientific, biology.
"Social Construct" is the words used for political purpose.
Thus, there is no need to say we think the way we think because we are raised in heteronormative families.
Just think and see objectively that by biological design, rectum is not sexual organ.
Wu Jian Hao
And how you came to think the way you think is the real "Social Construct". Our view is based on objective science and biology on sexuality. You just find any objective and factual biology and science book, they will support our views.
If, upon being given that biology facts, you still insist that gay sex is normal, then it is a view that we should call "social construct".
Birth defects, objectively, is the nature's abnormality. When you say that as nature's normality, then it is a "social contruct" view.
If, upon being given that biology facts, you still insist that gay sex is normal, then it is a view that we should call "social construct".
Birth defects, objectively, is the nature's abnormality. When you say that as nature's normality, then it is a "social contruct" view.
Wu Jian Hao
Chrysta Loh
I am not comparing natural disaster with 377A.
I brought up natural disaster as my reply on your view that gay is work of nature that has to be accepted positively.
I am not comparing natural disaster with 377A.
I brought up natural disaster as my reply on your view that gay is work of nature that has to be accepted positively.
Wu Jian Hao
Chrysta Loh
People's comments becomes aggressive towards LGBT because of the way LGBT movement portray people who disagree with LGBT sexual ideology and throw lots of negative perception against them, moulding the society to condemn people disagreeing with them, as if LGBT view on sexuality is the only one correct and has to be embraced by all and even change the law to opress opposing views.
You also have to understand LGBT psychology, they are very sensitive that when people disagree with them on anything, they may think that it is because of their sexuality and then feel discriminated. So, oftenly they bring the feeling of oppression to themselves yet accusing other people causing that.
People's comments becomes aggressive towards LGBT because of the way LGBT movement portray people who disagree with LGBT sexual ideology and throw lots of negative perception against them, moulding the society to condemn people disagreeing with them, as if LGBT view on sexuality is the only one correct and has to be embraced by all and even change the law to opress opposing views.
You also have to understand LGBT psychology, they are very sensitive that when people disagree with them on anything, they may think that it is because of their sexuality and then feel discriminated. So, oftenly they bring the feeling of oppression to themselves yet accusing other people causing that.
Chrysta Loh
Wu Jian Hao Sexuality is far more complicated than just procreation through sex. And society's views do affect it greatly. The reason I disagree with you on the subject of homosexuality is because I was raised on pro-LGBT values, and you probably weren't.
If you want to scrutinize the issue through a biology lens, then you may consider homosexuality abnormal. But so will birth defects (as you've mentioned) and infertility in women and anything that hinders procreation. But yet you don't see people prosecuting these groups.
I feel this goes beyond just biological objectivity. That's why we have social norms. Opinions on homosexuality, whether for or against, is shaped by the social construct.
If you want to scrutinize the issue through a biology lens, then you may consider homosexuality abnormal. But so will birth defects (as you've mentioned) and infertility in women and anything that hinders procreation. But yet you don't see people prosecuting these groups.
I feel this goes beyond just biological objectivity. That's why we have social norms. Opinions on homosexuality, whether for or against, is shaped by the social construct.
Chrysta Loh
Wu Jian Hao I think I get what you mean. However I think the LGBT are sensitive because of homophobia. Spend your life around a society that discriminates against you and you'll learn to become defensive.
I suppose the condemnation of anti-LGBT views would be imposiong, but the flip side of that is the condemnation of pro-LGBT, which is already rampant. And we are so tired of being condemned. I myself have felt the effects of stigma, discrimination and micro-aggressions from people who weren't doing it in response to my pro-LGBT views. It seems to be instilled in the social culture here. What else am I to call that, if not homophobic? I can't just sit back and endure that.
I suppose the condemnation of anti-LGBT views would be imposiong, but the flip side of that is the condemnation of pro-LGBT, which is already rampant. And we are so tired of being condemned. I myself have felt the effects of stigma, discrimination and micro-aggressions from people who weren't doing it in response to my pro-LGBT views. It seems to be instilled in the social culture here. What else am I to call that, if not homophobic? I can't just sit back and endure that.
Wu Jian Hao
Chrysta Loh
Looks like your views are product of social construct created by your camp so the very important component of reality and objectivity is absent. When the reality confronts your views then you dismiss it as social construct.
Who is prosecuting the gays? They feel prosecuted themselves.
Do we try to correct birth defects? Yes. Because we honestly admit it is abnormal
Do we try to cure infertility? Yes. Same reason.
Do we try to cure homosexuality? Yes. But the gays dont want it, yet forcing people to accept their condition as normal and paint people who disagree with them as jerks.
And how LGBT feel oppressed? In singapore not because people prosecuting them but because they can't change people's objective reasoning.
Take an example a married man fall in love with 2 other women yet cant live together with them because he cant have 3 wives at the same time. He feels frustrated and depressed. Do we blame the law and society for "prosecuting" him?
Looks like your views are product of social construct created by your camp so the very important component of reality and objectivity is absent. When the reality confronts your views then you dismiss it as social construct.
Who is prosecuting the gays? They feel prosecuted themselves.
Do we try to correct birth defects? Yes. Because we honestly admit it is abnormal
Do we try to cure infertility? Yes. Same reason.
Do we try to cure homosexuality? Yes. But the gays dont want it, yet forcing people to accept their condition as normal and paint people who disagree with them as jerks.
And how LGBT feel oppressed? In singapore not because people prosecuting them but because they can't change people's objective reasoning.
Take an example a married man fall in love with 2 other women yet cant live together with them because he cant have 3 wives at the same time. He feels frustrated and depressed. Do we blame the law and society for "prosecuting" him?
Chrysta Loh
Wu Jian Hao Nah I think both camps are social constructs and you have every right to "dismiss" either as such. What I want to point at is that social constructs have no inherently right or wrong, and they can change over time. However, the effects of these constructs are very real. My reality is that I feel discriminated against, because of the dominant social construct. (I'm sensing you feel the same threat if pro-LGBT were to be the social norm)
It's not like the gays want to feel prosecuted. Maybe they feel that way because there is literally a law criminalising gay sex between men.
We cannot force "cure" on people who do not want it. We "cure" birth defects and infertility because that's what they want. And we do not criminalise them if (for whatever reason) they don't want that "cure".
It's not like the gays want to feel prosecuted. Maybe they feel that way because there is literally a law criminalising gay sex between men.
We cannot force "cure" on people who do not want it. We "cure" birth defects and infertility because that's what they want. And we do not criminalise them if (for whatever reason) they don't want that "cure".
Like · Reply · 23m
Wrongp Ersonified
Wrongp Ersonified
Wu Jian Hao There is, if I remember correctly, a law pertaining to banning sex and indecent exposure in public. This encompasses everyone including straight people.
If section 377A should not be repealed, it should be changed to outlaw men having sex with men in public (but that would be pretty superfluous and redundant, given that we have other laws already covering that).
Why 377A is unfair and not a law we should keep is because the offence applies even in the private homes of two consenting adult males. Smoking at home already kena banned, now even when it comes to sexy time, the gahmen also need to have a say? Ridiculous! If one or both are underage, the sex act is already an offence under the laws we have for paedophilia and abuse.
The AG and PP has the duty to exercise discretion and charge any offenders as long as any one law has been violated. Not just 377A. It is his/her freaking job. He chose not to prosecute the second case of two consenting adults for the sake of “public interest” shows that he also feels it is not good for the public to even put the two men in jail. So what does this mean? Even the PP feels this law should not apply to two consenting legal age males!
Hence all the more 377A should be repealed. And please lah those who are pro 377A, you can’t stop gay people from doing what they want with or without the law. It didn’t stop gays from existing when the British made this law and it would not stop anyone today. And if it’s about preventing AIDS please lah, don’t tell me straight people never ever get HIV or AIDS. #itstime #enough #toomanyillogicalreasonstokeep377A
If section 377A should not be repealed, it should be changed to outlaw men having sex with men in public (but that would be pretty superfluous and redundant, given that we have other laws already covering that).
Why 377A is unfair and not a law we should keep is because the offence applies even in the private homes of two consenting adult males. Smoking at home already kena banned, now even when it comes to sexy time, the gahmen also need to have a say? Ridiculous! If one or both are underage, the sex act is already an offence under the laws we have for paedophilia and abuse.
The AG and PP has the duty to exercise discretion and charge any offenders as long as any one law has been violated. Not just 377A. It is his/her freaking job. He chose not to prosecute the second case of two consenting adults for the sake of “public interest” shows that he also feels it is not good for the public to even put the two men in jail. So what does this mean? Even the PP feels this law should not apply to two consenting legal age males!
Hence all the more 377A should be repealed. And please lah those who are pro 377A, you can’t stop gay people from doing what they want with or without the law. It didn’t stop gays from existing when the British made this law and it would not stop anyone today. And if it’s about preventing AIDS please lah, don’t tell me straight people never ever get HIV or AIDS. #itstime #enough #toomanyillogicalreasonstokeep377A
Wrongp Ersonified - 2 consenting adult males allowed?
Why polygamy with consenting male and 2 wives not allowed?
Why man with consenting animals not allowed?
Why incest with 2 consenting adults not allowed?
Why sex with corpse - pre-consent not allowed?
Why sex with consenting minors not allowed?
--- simply because it is morally wrong. It is against Nature. It is not helping to regenerate human civilisation morally with proper family values.
Homosexual are birth defect - and they need help.
People born with handicapped - are handicapped - and they need help.
Why polygamy with consenting male and 2 wives not allowed?
Why man with consenting animals not allowed?
Why incest with 2 consenting adults not allowed?
Why sex with corpse - pre-consent not allowed?
Why sex with consenting minors not allowed?
--- simply because it is morally wrong. It is against Nature. It is not helping to regenerate human civilisation morally with proper family values.
Homosexual are birth defect - and they need help.
People born with handicapped - are handicapped - and they need help.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Wrongp Ersonified
Ricky Lim What has karma got to do with anything? Straight people denying the rights of the minority who are LGBT, that’s one big karma bomb I won’t wait with bated breath to implode.
Cause and effect has no good Nor evil. (Ok I’m going a bit into Taoism here).
Let’s go to Diepsloot South Africa for an example, where men raping women and girls are so rampant (straight people, mind you) that the villagers have formed a kangaroo court to bypass police forces and as a mob, they will arrest and lynch (public beating and hanging to the death) anyone accused of rape. A journalist Golden Mtika, believes in proper due process and saved his neighbour from being lynched by the mob when he was accused of rape. That should be good karma, right? He was doing what was morally right, no?
Two months later, he contacted the man’s ex-Girlfriend who had sheltered him for awhile before he skipped town. Turned out he raped her in her own home and she now has contracted HIV. So who had the karma? Was the girl asking for it? Who was the bad guy in the end? What kind of retribution does Golden deserve for defying the will of the people to do what he feels is morally just?
Universal laws of karma is blind to the moral and social mores of the people. It is all opportunity costs - even the best choices you make for your life comes at a cost. Causality does not concern itself with making anyone’s life a good or bad or funny or tragic story. Karma does not concern itself with helping either villain or hero.
Be that as it may, the universal law of karma is not relevant to the law we are discussing now. If what you say about karma is true, families with children bearing genetic defects or with family members going through serious illness are going to be very very hurt reading what you have wrote. Ditto people afflicted with mental illness, accidents, miscarriages, etc. Your view of morals only applies to you personally and to stop others from gaining respect and dignity because of your own personal reasons is pretty selfish.
I may be a converting vegetarian (still in the middle of converting) but I wouldn’t want to support any vegan friend who goes on a hissy fit banning every other non vegetarians at the party from eating meat because he or she feels it’s morally wrong even though it’s legal in this country to eat meat. Smoking, which is legal, is just as bad and maybe worse than drugs imo. Drugs are equally addictive but don’t give out carcinogenicn second hand smoke to other people. It is morally wrong to smoke imo. But do I support the recent ban on smoking at home? No. Not at all. Because if that’s the case, a home is no longer a home in Singapore. {And the implications of the powers of the government is very disturbing. What can come next - no sex during day time? Cannot cook pork if more than 2 neighbours on the same floor is Muslim cos the air we share will be haram? All kids below 16 must be asleep by 11pm? Drinking at 2am at home is outlawed?} Same for private dalliances between two adult consenting men in their own (now so-called) homes.
In short, I believe it is not fair and justifiable that we use personal beliefs and personal moral systems and our own preferences to invalidate a minority when they are not doing anything harmful to society as a whole (robbery, gangsterism, sell drugs, scammers, terrorism, paedophilia, murder and rape, abuse, trafficking, arson, etc). Protecting public decency (sex in public and indecent exposure) is one thing, but to control what consenting adults do in their bedrooms is one ballpark off the circumference of a rational government.
I respect the PP and AG for doing their job, but to keep such unfair laws only for the sake of emotional public sentiments that are based on personal belief systems isn’t how and what SECULAR LAW should be about.
Cause and effect has no good Nor evil. (Ok I’m going a bit into Taoism here).
Let’s go to Diepsloot South Africa for an example, where men raping women and girls are so rampant (straight people, mind you) that the villagers have formed a kangaroo court to bypass police forces and as a mob, they will arrest and lynch (public beating and hanging to the death) anyone accused of rape. A journalist Golden Mtika, believes in proper due process and saved his neighbour from being lynched by the mob when he was accused of rape. That should be good karma, right? He was doing what was morally right, no?
Two months later, he contacted the man’s ex-Girlfriend who had sheltered him for awhile before he skipped town. Turned out he raped her in her own home and she now has contracted HIV. So who had the karma? Was the girl asking for it? Who was the bad guy in the end? What kind of retribution does Golden deserve for defying the will of the people to do what he feels is morally just?
Universal laws of karma is blind to the moral and social mores of the people. It is all opportunity costs - even the best choices you make for your life comes at a cost. Causality does not concern itself with making anyone’s life a good or bad or funny or tragic story. Karma does not concern itself with helping either villain or hero.
Be that as it may, the universal law of karma is not relevant to the law we are discussing now. If what you say about karma is true, families with children bearing genetic defects or with family members going through serious illness are going to be very very hurt reading what you have wrote. Ditto people afflicted with mental illness, accidents, miscarriages, etc. Your view of morals only applies to you personally and to stop others from gaining respect and dignity because of your own personal reasons is pretty selfish.
I may be a converting vegetarian (still in the middle of converting) but I wouldn’t want to support any vegan friend who goes on a hissy fit banning every other non vegetarians at the party from eating meat because he or she feels it’s morally wrong even though it’s legal in this country to eat meat. Smoking, which is legal, is just as bad and maybe worse than drugs imo. Drugs are equally addictive but don’t give out carcinogenicn second hand smoke to other people. It is morally wrong to smoke imo. But do I support the recent ban on smoking at home? No. Not at all. Because if that’s the case, a home is no longer a home in Singapore. {And the implications of the powers of the government is very disturbing. What can come next - no sex during day time? Cannot cook pork if more than 2 neighbours on the same floor is Muslim cos the air we share will be haram? All kids below 16 must be asleep by 11pm? Drinking at 2am at home is outlawed?} Same for private dalliances between two adult consenting men in their own (now so-called) homes.
In short, I believe it is not fair and justifiable that we use personal beliefs and personal moral systems and our own preferences to invalidate a minority when they are not doing anything harmful to society as a whole (robbery, gangsterism, sell drugs, scammers, terrorism, paedophilia, murder and rape, abuse, trafficking, arson, etc). Protecting public decency (sex in public and indecent exposure) is one thing, but to control what consenting adults do in their bedrooms is one ballpark off the circumference of a rational government.
I respect the PP and AG for doing their job, but to keep such unfair laws only for the sake of emotional public sentiments that are based on personal belief systems isn’t how and what SECULAR LAW should be about.
Wrongp Ersonified
You are far far away from Tao.
Sexual indulgence is a distraction from Tao.
Tao talk about ying yang. You advocate yang yang.
If you are not influence by karma why are you reacting with fluster mind?
You are far far away from Tao.
Sexual indulgence is a distraction from Tao.
Tao talk about ying yang. You advocate yang yang.
If you are not influence by karma why are you reacting with fluster mind?
Ricky Lim
Wrongp Ersonified -
清心寡欲 - 是大道。
礼仪廉耻 - 是人道。
色欲攻心 - 是魔道。
歪理迷心 - 是邪道。
(Serene Mind, Few sensual desires - is the Way of Tao.
Knowing what is shameful, the proper conduct of life, honest - is Human Way.
Fill with deviant sexual desire - is the Path of Devil.
Crooked arguments and false truth - is the Evil Way.)
道，道，道 - 非常道。
修心，养身，寡欲，悟道 - 才是道。
(Bodhi Heart, Right conduct, Free of sensual desires, Attain Enlightenment - is the Right Path of Tao)
欲知前世因,今生受者是;欲知来世果,今生作者是！
What they are now - is because of the past they do.
What they do now - will be what they are in their next life.
不知三世因 - 学人讲因果 - 迷者当觉者 - 误人又误己。
No insight of past, present, future karma - act like a teacher of karma - a lost soul pretend to be the Enlightened One - misled others misled self.
Go learn and practise from a True Master of Tao - before you talk Tao.
不要学艺不精，走入旁门左道 - 误人，误己 - 误人子弟。
清心寡欲 - 是大道。
礼仪廉耻 - 是人道。
色欲攻心 - 是魔道。
歪理迷心 - 是邪道。
(Serene Mind, Few sensual desires - is the Way of Tao.
Knowing what is shameful, the proper conduct of life, honest - is Human Way.
Fill with deviant sexual desire - is the Path of Devil.
Crooked arguments and false truth - is the Evil Way.)
道，道，道 - 非常道。
修心，养身，寡欲，悟道 - 才是道。
(Bodhi Heart, Right conduct, Free of sensual desires, Attain Enlightenment - is the Right Path of Tao)
欲知前世因,今生受者是;欲知来世果,今生作者是！
What they are now - is because of the past they do.
What they do now - will be what they are in their next life.
不知三世因 - 学人讲因果 - 迷者当觉者 - 误人又误己。
No insight of past, present, future karma - act like a teacher of karma - a lost soul pretend to be the Enlightened One - misled others misled self.
Go learn and practise from a True Master of Tao - before you talk Tao.
不要学艺不精，走入旁门左道 - 误人，误己 - 误人子弟。
Wrongp Ersonified
Chrysta Loh It seems straight people believe gayness is like the SARS virus - something infectious, something any Ah Mao Ah Kau can just get regardless of age and race and genetics, something you can catch when you forget to wash your hands in the toilet. They believe being gay is a religion - you can spread it like the gospel, proselytise and make people worship it. For every article about gay men preying on young boys, they ignore a plethora of those perpetrated by adults of opposite gender to the children (ie straight men targeting very young girls).
Every facet of society has a bad egg. Bad people are everywhere. Straight people can be evil too. For every famous serial killer one can think of as gay, there are many who are straight. But straight people using these cases of predatory gay men to argue about retaining 377A really don’t make sense. It’s like women should campaign against marrying men because quite a lot of men are sexually grooming and abusing young women for sex. All happily married women are probably somehow groomed to think being a wife to a man is their life goal. Really utter bullshit.
Every facet of society has a bad egg. Bad people are everywhere. Straight people can be evil too. For every famous serial killer one can think of as gay, there are many who are straight. But straight people using these cases of predatory gay men to argue about retaining 377A really don’t make sense. It’s like women should campaign against marrying men because quite a lot of men are sexually grooming and abusing young women for sex. All happily married women are probably somehow groomed to think being a wife to a man is their life goal. Really utter bullshit.
Wrongp Ersonified
Wei Ren The ones obsessed with anal sex isn’t me, it is the homophobic people who are petulant and adamnant at keeping a law that is unfair and unjustifiable and has a lot of legal implications on the bedroom lives of law abiding ordinary Singaporeans. Maybe I’m not too well versed with Tao philosophy but I was trying to point out that causality (karma) has no direct link to morality.
Ah I forgot to address the retort on why consenting underage person cannot fornicate with an adult. Again, another digression unrelated to 377A. The age of consent in many countries varies. In Singapore it’s 16. In certain US states, it is 13. Malaysia... maybe 14 next year. The consent of an underage person cannot be determined if it truly comes from free rational will without undue influence of adults (ie sexual grooming). If the law was to legalise sex with underage persons, the word “underage” would not exist anymore and then criminals who are underage will have to be tried as adults too since they are now deemed equally culpable and fully responsible for their own actions. And then we have to grapple with what age of “underage” is OK for consensual sex? What are the legal definitions and parameters and criteria of a consent? A 4 year old who can hardly form a full sentence but can at least pronounce Yes and No?
In the case of 377A, repealing 377A does not mean paedophilia, sexual abuse and rape of boys are suddenly legally OK. And why keep a law that the AG and PP would only act upon their whims and fancies, oops I mean, discretion? Since the PP and AG are not willing to use 377A to punish male adults who both consent to something done in the bedroom in their own privacy, it is time for 377A to go and we create a more defined and updated Penal Code reflective of the Parliament and the people’s sentiments of today (which is sex between two male adults is OK, but kids and underage boys definitely not OK).
Ah I forgot to address the retort on why consenting underage person cannot fornicate with an adult. Again, another digression unrelated to 377A. The age of consent in many countries varies. In Singapore it’s 16. In certain US states, it is 13. Malaysia... maybe 14 next year. The consent of an underage person cannot be determined if it truly comes from free rational will without undue influence of adults (ie sexual grooming). If the law was to legalise sex with underage persons, the word “underage” would not exist anymore and then criminals who are underage will have to be tried as adults too since they are now deemed equally culpable and fully responsible for their own actions. And then we have to grapple with what age of “underage” is OK for consensual sex? What are the legal definitions and parameters and criteria of a consent? A 4 year old who can hardly form a full sentence but can at least pronounce Yes and No?
In the case of 377A, repealing 377A does not mean paedophilia, sexual abuse and rape of boys are suddenly legally OK. And why keep a law that the AG and PP would only act upon their whims and fancies, oops I mean, discretion? Since the PP and AG are not willing to use 377A to punish male adults who both consent to something done in the bedroom in their own privacy, it is time for 377A to go and we create a more defined and updated Penal Code reflective of the Parliament and the people’s sentiments of today (which is sex between two male adults is OK, but kids and underage boys definitely not OK).
Wu Jian Hao
Wrongp Ersonified
You forget that law functions and carries capacity to deter unethical practices too, and it is an aspect more important than the feeling of fair/unfair. Tell me how ethical, healthy and scientific it is for the law to acknowledge the use of rectum as sexual organ? What kind of meesage it sends to the public by repealing the law? It all goes to that particular point, despite your effort to wrap your reason under nice politically correct words.
And your accusation that straight people like anal sex is ignorant and judgmental. Because gays like it, they should not think straight people like it too. And I can say that straight people don't like to mess around with sh*t in their romantic moment. And straight people have much better, ethical and healthier options. Unlike gays.
So in law, public interest is considered. Yes, that is why it is not in public interest to repeal 377A. The PP's statement on that implies all the more that 377A is needed.
It is in public interest to maintain 377A in the midst of strong, foreign-backed, politically motivated propaganda to normalise unethical sexual practices.
You forget that law functions and carries capacity to deter unethical practices too, and it is an aspect more important than the feeling of fair/unfair. Tell me how ethical, healthy and scientific it is for the law to acknowledge the use of rectum as sexual organ? What kind of meesage it sends to the public by repealing the law? It all goes to that particular point, despite your effort to wrap your reason under nice politically correct words.
And your accusation that straight people like anal sex is ignorant and judgmental. Because gays like it, they should not think straight people like it too. And I can say that straight people don't like to mess around with sh*t in their romantic moment. And straight people have much better, ethical and healthier options. Unlike gays.
So in law, public interest is considered. Yes, that is why it is not in public interest to repeal 377A. The PP's statement on that implies all the more that 377A is needed.
It is in public interest to maintain 377A in the midst of strong, foreign-backed, politically motivated propaganda to normalise unethical sexual practices.
Wu Jian Hao
Wrongp Ersonified
Your arguments about 377A should be repealed because straight people do bad things is like you demand to be justified doing robbery because other people do thefts.
Your arguments about 377A should be repealed because straight people do bad things is like you demand to be justified doing robbery because other people do thefts.
Wu Jian Hao
Wrongp Ersonified
And of course gay ideology spread like religion. Minister Shanmugam said that it is a "growing minority".
If you look into LGBTQ+++ sexual ideology of course you wouldn't be so hypocritical to say that gay doesn't spread like religion.
Just a bit about LGBTQ+++ ideology, they believe that there is no such thing as man or woman, all are just social construct, so there are limitles number of gender, called gender fluidity. Gay people being part of LGBTQ+++ movement believe that there is no difference between man and woman. They also believe that every child has no determined sexuality or orientation so parents should not guide the child's sexuality. And the children in school (in the west) are being told to check if they really are their gender or they maybe trapped in wrong body. Even adults (in the west) do not want to buy pink or blue coloured clothes fir their babies, for worrying that they impose certain sexuality on their babies.
You tell me if that is not ideology (religion) then what is it???
Please lah... dont cover this up. You know this. Those ProLGBT people know and believe this ideology. They are pretending not to know this because they are strategizing their moves, one at a time, starting from the very law they see as a primary obstacle.
So 377A, for the public interest, all the more should be maintained.
And of course gay ideology spread like religion. Minister Shanmugam said that it is a "growing minority".
If you look into LGBTQ+++ sexual ideology of course you wouldn't be so hypocritical to say that gay doesn't spread like religion.
Just a bit about LGBTQ+++ ideology, they believe that there is no such thing as man or woman, all are just social construct, so there are limitles number of gender, called gender fluidity. Gay people being part of LGBTQ+++ movement believe that there is no difference between man and woman. They also believe that every child has no determined sexuality or orientation so parents should not guide the child's sexuality. And the children in school (in the west) are being told to check if they really are their gender or they maybe trapped in wrong body. Even adults (in the west) do not want to buy pink or blue coloured clothes fir their babies, for worrying that they impose certain sexuality on their babies.
You tell me if that is not ideology (religion) then what is it???
Please lah... dont cover this up. You know this. Those ProLGBT people know and believe this ideology. They are pretending not to know this because they are strategizing their moves, one at a time, starting from the very law they see as a primary obstacle.
So 377A, for the public interest, all the more should be maintained.
Wu Jian Hao
Wrongp Ersonified
Again, the law has to decide whether it is ethical to tell the society that by repealing 377A the law recognize and endorse the use of rectum as sexual organ.
Again, the law has to decide whether it is ethical to tell the society that by repealing 377A the law recognize and endorse the use of rectum as sexual organ.
Like · Reply · 2h
Wu Jian Hao
Wrongp Ersonified
You forget that law functions and carries capacity to deter unethical practices too, and it is an aspect more important than the feeling of fair/unfair. Tell me how ethical, healthy and scientific it is for the law to acknowledge the use of rectum as sexual organ? What kind of meesage it sends to the public by repealing the law? It all goes to that particular point, despite your effort to wrap your reason under nice politically correct words.
And your accusation that straight people like anal sex is ignorant and judgmental. Because gays like it, they should not think straight people like it too. And I can say that straight people don't like to mess around with sh*t in their romantic moment. And straight people have much better, ethical and healthier option. Unlike gays.
So in law, public interest is considered. Yes, that is why it is not in public interest to repeal 377A. The PP's statement on that implies all the more that 377A is needed.
It is in public interest to maintain 377A in the midst of strong, foreign-backed, politically motivated propaganda to normalise unethical sexual practices.
You forget that law functions and carries capacity to deter unethical practices too, and it is an aspect more important than the feeling of fair/unfair. Tell me how ethical, healthy and scientific it is for the law to acknowledge the use of rectum as sexual organ? What kind of meesage it sends to the public by repealing the law? It all goes to that particular point, despite your effort to wrap your reason under nice politically correct words.
And your accusation that straight people like anal sex is ignorant and judgmental. Because gays like it, they should not think straight people like it too. And I can say that straight people don't like to mess around with sh*t in their romantic moment. And straight people have much better, ethical and healthier option. Unlike gays.
So in law, public interest is considered. Yes, that is why it is not in public interest to repeal 377A. The PP's statement on that implies all the more that 377A is needed.
It is in public interest to maintain 377A in the midst of strong, foreign-backed, politically motivated propaganda to normalise unethical sexual practices.
No comments:
Post a Comment