Veteran SG diplomat calls on gays to challenge sex ban

[13177]

Gay said I don't have gay vibe despite being metrosexual.

 

Somemore I never kenna harass in Gym changing room.

You are not gay, thats why you dont have gay vibe ma. 

 

Maybe you did not meet any gay in the gym changing room yet or you are not their type? Maybe gay same like straight, you have to meet the type that you like de.

[inlinesix]

You are not gay, thats why you dont have gay vibe ma.

 

Maybe you did not meet any gay in the gym changing room yet or you are not their type? Maybe gay same like straight, you have to meet the type that you like de.

KNN of course you on hit ppl you like.

 

Otherwise it is call 濫交。

[13177]

KNN of course you on hit ppl you like.

 

Otherwise it is call 濫交。

Precisely. 

[Jamesc]

We shouldn't let these gay people enjoy themselves and change partner like they change underwear.

 

Make them get married and only have just one partner and suffer with the same MIL for life.

 

Why should gay people be happy with the single life many sex partners and no MIL?

 

[Jamesc]

Any gay men that disagree with me and think gay men should not be allowed to get married please don't bother to reply to me.

 

You are entitled to your own stupid opinions but I don't want to mass debate with you.

 

But any good looking young lesbians should pm me your name and phone number for a nice mass debate session or social intercourse if prefer that kind of thing.

 

[Jamesc]

 

I am all for same kind marriage.

 

Butch lesbians should only be allowed to marry other Butch lesbians and should leave the good looking fem lesbians alone.

 

This is my honest personal opinion and I do not speak for pink dot.

 

 

I dont want people to criticise me and say I am pushing the pink dot agenda and trying to make lesbians trapped in men's body straight. I am not.

 

[Volvobrick]

Is marriage so important to gays? Nobody cares what they do behind close doors. Remove the ban so they can do it in public?

 

If it's HDB, they can be joint singles buying it. No restriction with private anyway. If it's inheritance, just make a will to pass assets to the other. Am I missing something?

If legalising marriage, what if they want to adopt a kid? The kid would grow up either without father or mother, despite having 2 parents. Is it fair to the kid?

 

As a Conservative society the majority has to push back against a vocal minority, and against Prof Koh.

[Jamesc]

I am not against gay men or straight men. I just don't like it when gay or straight men go after good looking young ladies that only lesbians trapped in men's body should go for.

 

To me it's just not right.

 

 

Call me old fashioned call me conservative but I really just don't like it.

 

It's just the way I was brought up.

 

And I am not going to change.

Edited September 12, 2018 by Jamesc

[Jamesc]

If legalising marriage, what if they want to adopt a kid? The kid would grow up either without father or mother, despite having 2 parents. Is it fair to the kid?

 

As a Conservative society the majority has to push back against a vocal minority, and against Prof Koh.

Yes we should put a stop to all this now.

 

Women with short hair, men with long hair. Women that wear the pants and men that wear dresses.

 

Honestly I rather people don't wear clothes than to see this.

 

I just cannot accept men that wear make up and women that don't wear make up.

 

What next? Women doctors and men nurses?

 

Women pilots and men baking cakes? What kind of society is that?

 

Women shouldn't be allowed to go to school. Except make how to cook and clean the home.

 

The most important is women should be obscene and not heard.

 

Every kid should have a mother and a father.

 

We should only allow a lesbian trapped in a man's body to marry a gay man trapped in a women's body.

 

[Jamesc]

Gay men get married?

 

Should we even let them vote?

 

What if they secretly vote in a gay person and he has a secret agenda to make everyone gay?

 

What will happen to the lesbians trapped in men's bodies. Will they be forced to be gay too?

 

I am very worried about this.

 

[Jamesc]

Gay men get married?

 

Should we even let them vote?

 

What if they secretly vote in a gay person and he has a secret agenda to make everyone gay?

 

What will happen to the lesbians trapped in men's bodies. Will they be forced to be gay too?

 

I am very worried about this.

 

However I am all for free speech and we should welcome gay men to share their views on this subject.

 

I am very interested to see what position they take on this.

 

It would be nice if more good looking lesbians speak up too.

[Jamesc]

If cannot make gay sexy time legal then can repeal the law that say after oral sex must do full job.

 

Sometimes feel a bit tired and should make just oral sex legal.

 

Please support the change in law on this.

 

[Ysc3]

next on the menu ....

 

India's top court rules adultery no longer a crime

 

Adultery is no longer a crime, India's top court ruled Thursday, declaring a colonial-era law that punished the offence with jail time unconstitutional and discriminatory against women.

 

The more than century-old law prescribed that any man who slept with a married woman without her husband's permission had committed adultery, a crime carrying a five-year prison term in the conservative country.

 

A petitioner had challenged the court to strike down the law, describing it as arbitrary and discriminatory against women.

 

"Thinking of adultery from a point of view of criminality is a retrograde step," unanimously declared the five-judge bench of the Supreme Court.

 

Women could not file a complaint under the archaic law nor be held liable for adultery themselves, making it solely the realm of men.

 

The court said it deprived women of dignity and individual choice and "gives license to the husband to use women as a chattel".

 

"It disregards the sexual autonomy which every woman possesses and denies agency to a woman in a matrimonial tie," said Supreme Court Justice D. Y. Chandrachud.

 

"She is subjugated to the will of her spouse."

 

It was the second time this month the court overturned Victorian-era laws governing the sexual choices of India's 1.25 billion citizens.

 

Earlier this month, the court struck a ban on gay sex introduced by British rulers in 1861.

 

The bench argued that Section 377 had become "a weapon for harassment" of homosexuals and "history owes an apology to the members of this community and their families".

 

On adultery, government lawyers argued it should remain a crime as it threatens the institution of marriage, and caused harm to children and families.

 

But in its ruling, the court said extramarital affairs -- while still a valid ground for divorce -- were a private matter between adults.

 

Prashant Bhushan, a lawyer in the Supreme Court, said watershed decisions on gay sex and adultery had shown the judges' "adherence to liberal values and the constitution".

 

"Another fine judgement by the SC," he Tweeted after Thursday's ruling.

 

In 1954, the court upheld adultery as a crime arguing "it is commonly accepted that it is the man who is the seducer, and not the woman".

 

But in their ruling on Thursday, the judges said this narrative no longer applied, noting also that Britain did away with its own laws penalising adultery long ago.

 

"Man being the seducer and women being the victim no longer exits. Equality is the governing principle of a system. Husband is not the master of the wife," the verdict added.

[Shibadog]

i'm not sure if this is entirely relevant but I found it funny

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/gay-penguins-kidnap-chick-straight-parents-denmark-zoo-n913611

 

maybe people are worried such acts will become commonplace if 377a is repealed   

[Playtime]

Is a queasy feeling..I tell you..at the gym..lots of these folks.....

 

makes you feel uncomfortable..

You feel someone may be ogling you ? Desiring you?

If so..

 

Be happy you are still in shape.

 

Otherwise.

Ban yourself.. cos imagine ALLL the women you have oggled without permission.

Can't have double standard.

[Playtime]

 

next on the menu ....

 

India's top court rules adultery no longer a crime

 

Adultery is no longer a crime, India's top court ruled Thursday, declaring a colonial-era law that punished the offence with jail time unconstitutional and discriminatory against women.

 

The more than century-old law prescribed that any man who slept with a married woman without her husband's permission had committed adultery, a crime carrying a five-year prison term in the conservative country.

 

A petitioner had challenged the court to strike down the law, describing it as arbitrary and discriminatory against women.

 

"Thinking of adultery from a point of view of criminality is a retrograde step," unanimously declared the five-judge bench of the Supreme Court.

 

Women could not file a complaint under the archaic law nor be held liable for adultery themselves, making it solely the realm of men.

 

The court said it deprived women of dignity and individual choice and "gives license to the husband to use women as a chattel".

 

"It disregards the sexual autonomy which every woman possesses and denies agency to a woman in a matrimonial tie," said Supreme Court Justice D. Y. Chandrachud.

 

"She is subjugated to the will of her spouse."

 

It was the second time this month the court overturned Victorian-era laws governing the sexual choices of India's 1.25 billion citizens.

 

Earlier this month, the court struck a ban on gay sex introduced by British rulers in 1861.

 

The bench argued that Section 377 had become "a weapon for harassment" of homosexuals and "history owes an apology to the members of this community and their families".

 

On adultery, government lawyers argued it should remain a crime as it threatens the institution of marriage, and caused harm to children and families.

 

But in its ruling, the court said extramarital affairs -- while still a valid ground for divorce -- were a private matter between adults.

 

Prashant Bhushan, a lawyer in the Supreme Court, said watershed decisions on gay sex and adultery had shown the judges' "adherence to liberal values and the constitution".

 

"Another fine judgement by the SC," he Tweeted after Thursday's ruling.

 

In 1954, the court upheld adultery as a crime arguing "it is commonly accepted that it is the man who is the seducer, and not the woman".

 

But in their ruling on Thursday, the judges said this narrative no longer applied, noting also that Britain did away with its own laws penalising adultery long ago.

 

"Man being the seducer and women being the victim no longer exits. Equality is the governing principle of a system. Husband is not the master of the wife," the verdict added.

I wonder if hidus are more accepting .. like the Thais.

Cos this really is about imposing religion most of the times by self proclaim guardians of society.

 

Perhaps the Christian and Muslim pressure groups don't have the kind of outsized influence on state matters in india.

[Playtime]

If legalising marriage, what if they want to adopt a kid? The kid would grow up either without father or mother, despite having 2 parents. Is it fair to the kid?

 

As a Conservative society the majority has to push back against a vocal minority, and against Prof Koh.

I'm a actually for giving them same rights as married couples. Except adoption. Imo.. being gay rules out reproduction biologically... unless lesbians.. then the legal issues alone quite complicated.

[Chongster]

not sure why people are equating repealing s 377A to legalising gay marriages.  is the slippery slope argument really that persuasive? it's a scare tactic effective only against the unthinking.

 

s 377A penalises a consenting act between adults even in complete privacy.  that is what is wrong with it.   if two gays check into a hotel room, should the hotel staff report them to the police?  day in day out, how many people are committing a crime in their bedroom?  Perfectly normal humans that many are our friends.  Why do we need to label them criminal?