News Forum - Singapore still refuses to recognise same sex marriage

[Thaiger]

The Catholic Church in Singapore sent a strong message to the LGBTQ+ fraternity yesterday stating that while it respects the community it still won’t recognise gay marriages. The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Singapore yesterday issued a statement saying the LGBTQ+ community should respect the rights of the Catholic Church to maintain its position on marriage – that a family comprises a father, mother, and children – despite no immediate plans by the community to mount legal challenges to redefine marriage’s definition. “We applaud and support the government’s clear articulation of its position on marriage and are assured that it is looking at […]

The story Singapore still refuses to recognise same sex marriage as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[Chatogaster]

Civil marriages and religious marriages are different concepts and their definitions are governed by distinct authorities, so why does a church (which presides over religious marriages) feel compelled to make a statement about civil marriages? Is it really as banal as (the equivalent of) clicking on a "like"-button, possibly in the hope of swaying public opinion in a favored direction?

[ronnie666]

Another country in the ice age

[Fanta]

2 hours ago, Thaiger said:

despite no immediate plans by the community to mount legal challenges to redefine marriage’s definition

 But they will. It is only a matter of time. 

[Marc26]

Screw the Catholic Church, it should have been abolished and disbanded decades ago

[Artemis080]

Fortunately, the RC Church is in already steep decline. I hope that accelerates. Quite how an organisation steeped in its own hypocritical crisis of morality gets to claim ownership of marriage terms, an institution that predates Christianity by about 2000 years is beyond me. In Singapore, the RC is a fringe religion representing 7% of the population. 

[JohnsBKK]

Sad.  No other words.  You deny your citizens basic human rights that will protect them the same as other couples.  Save your religious bigotry.

[longwood50]

1 hour ago, JohnsBKK said:

basic human rights

So in your opinion the "rights" of the LGTBQ are superior to the "rights" of others who have a different opinion on same sex.  Let me ask you where do you draw your line on rights?   Should the Catholic church sanction marriages between a man and a 6 year old girl.  That is permitted in some cultures.  Should it sanction marriages between a man and lets say 8 women.  Again that is permitted in some cultures.  How about between "swinging couples" Should the foursome be considered a "marriage"  Perhaps we can have "group" marriages for those who believe in OPEN relationships.  

The fact is that no one has a right to dictate to another their belief system.  Your have rights so long as they don't trample mine. The reverse is also true.  In the U.S.A. there is no "right" provided for marriage but there is a codified right to freedom of religion.  Their right to follow their beliefs is no less important than those in the LGTBQ's right to their beliefs. 

[Marc26]

57 minutes ago, longwood50 said:

So in your opinion the "rights" of the LGTBQ are superior to the "rights" of others who have a different opinion on same sex.  Let me ask you where do you draw your line on rights?   Should the Catholic church sanction marriages between a man and a 6 year old girl.  That is permitted in some cultures.  Should it sanction marriages between a man and lets say 8 women.  Again that is permitted in some cultures.  How about between "swinging couples" Should the foursome be considered a "marriage"  Perhaps we can have "group" marriages for those who believe in OPEN relationships.  

The fact is that no one has a right to dictate to another their belief system.  Your have rights so long as they don't trample mine. The reverse is also true.  In the U.S.A. there is no "right" provided for marriage but there is a codified right to freedom of religion.  Their right to follow their beliefs is no less important than those in the LGTBQ's right to their beliefs. 

None of what you just posted is a "right" of yours

You have no "rights" to oppose a marriage

 

You can have an opinion, but I'm shocked a grown man doesn't understand the difference and would demand it's his "right" to oppose a marriage 

 

And since you are getting into laws and your freedom of religion 

There is also supposed to a be separation of church and state

So no church should be telling the state what it should do with its laws

 

[Augratin]

2 hours ago, longwood50 said:

So in your opinion the "rights" of the LGTBQ are superior to the "rights" of others who have a different opinion on same sex.  Let me ask you where do you draw your line on rights?

 

Slippery slope arguments are SO tiring.  Paraphrasing John Oliver, it's possible to let your child have some candy but not let them have black tar heroin.  

[longwood50]

22 hours ago, Augratin said:

Slippery slope arguments are SO tiring.  Paraphrasing John Oliver, it's possible to let your child have some candy but not let them have black tar heroin

It is not a slippery slope.  I am pointing out that different countries have different values.   The fact that the Netherlands has decriminalized drug use while Singapore has not is an example of two different cultures drawing the line differently. 

The same is true with same sex unions.  The fact that some favor LGBTQ does not confer on it a right greater than others that for whatever personal or religious reason do not favor it.  This entire LGBTG movement has migrated from asking for  "tolerence" to demanding "fealty"  So much for your "slipperly slope".   They have a right to live their lives as they see fit.  They do not have a right to demand others pledge their support for it. 

 

[Marc26]

1 minute ago, longwood50 said:

It is not a slippery slope.  I am pointing out that different countries have different values.   The fact that the Netherlands has decriminalized drug use while Singapore has not is an example of two different cultures drawing the line differently. 

The same is true with same sex unions.  The fact that some favor LGBTQ does not confer on it a right greater than others that for whatever personal or religious reason do not favor it.  This entire LGBTG movement has migrated from asking  "tolerence" to demanding "fealty"  So much for your "slipperly slope". 

Such ignorant views

 

No one should have ever had to "ask for tolerance "

 

You seem pleasant enough guy

But quite honestly, the world is going to be a much better place when all you old white guys ignorant views are gone 

[longwood50]

5 minutes ago, Marc26 said:

No one should have ever had to "ask for tolerance "

Perhaps they shouldn't but then again no one should demand that others favor their views on religion, abortion, gun control, legalization of drugs, climate change, capital punishment or any other issue. 

The LGTBQ started out asking for non-discrimination.  I am not sure exactly why that would even be necessary.  I know someone is African American by their appearance.  I do not know someone is gay unless they for some unexplained reason choose to divulge that information to me.  PS. I am 73, I have never had even one single person ever feel compelled to divulge to me that they were heterosexual and ask me to celebrate that. This idea that somehow others should not just accept without discrimination LGTBQ but further regail in it and pledge their approval of it is Orwellian.   No ones rights are superior to anothers.  They have a right to live their life as they see fit, but they have no right to expect others to bow to it in acceptance.  Tolerance Yes, Fealty No. 

 

[Guest1]

On 8/1/2022 at 6:58 PM, ronnie666 said:

Another country in the ice age

So you also see gay marriage the only way, to get out of overpopulation? It would help, but still, gay marriage isn't enough. They still working p.c. against nature, by wanting to have kids, still!

 

[ronnie666]

38 minutes ago, Guest1 said:

So you also see gay marriage the only way, to get out of overpopulation? It would help, but still, gay marriage isn't enough. They still working p.c. against nature, by wanting to have kids, still!

No I do not  I just think they should be able to marry us they want just like a man and a women.. is in a way racism, and I hate that. People gay are no different then not gay

[Marc26]

7 hours ago, longwood50 said:

Perhaps they shouldn't but then again no one should demand that others favor their views on religion, abortion, gun control, legalization of drugs, climate change, capital punishment or any other issue. 

The LGTBQ started out asking for non-discrimination.  I am not sure exactly why that would even be necessary.  I know someone is African American by their appearance.  I do not know someone is gay unless they for some unexplained reason choose to divulge that information to me.  PS. I am 73, I have never had even one single person ever feel compelled to divulge to me that they were heterosexual and ask me to celebrate that. This idea that somehow others should not just accept without discrimination LGTBQ but further regail in it and pledge their approval of it is Orwellian.   No ones rights are superior to anothers.  They have a right to live their life as they see fit, but they have no right to expect others to bow to it in acceptance.  Tolerance Yes, Fealty No. 

 

The need for approval is because of old white guy's like you and their ignorant views have made them discriminated against

 

Just in this thread you have said that you have "rights" to oppose same sex marriage(you don't)

Then you said they should/were asking for tolerance

 

Gee I wonder why they feel the need to be validated............

 

BUT, I do agree it has gone way overboard

Demanding people participate in Pride events when it should be at their own choice

Pushing drag queens on kids

[longwood50]

3 minutes ago, Marc26 said:

Gee I wonder why they feel the need to be validated.

You know as said, I have absolutely no idea why someone thinks others should care about who they chose to have sex with.  As mentioned in all my 73 years on earth I have never once had a straight person come up and want to share with me their heterosexuality.  And consider they comprise 97% of the people on this earth. 

The OP started with a piece critical of the Catholic Church won't reaffirmed its position that it won't recognize gay marriages.  Again I ask why is it that the gay community feels so pretentious to demand others advocate their lifestyle.  It is as if they need reassurance from the general public that what they are doing is ok.  If they are comfortable with it, fine.  However this expectation that all other groups have to bow in fealty to it, and pledge advocacy for the lifestyle is uncalled for. 

Let me ask you turn the situation around, if the Catholic Church demanded that the LGBTQ community follow one of its beliefs that Jesus was the Son of God and our Savior and they responded that they would not affirm that position.  Is that "discrimination" 

If the Planned Parenthood asociation demanded that the Catholic Church affirm its policy to perform abortions and the Catholic Church responded no, it would not, is that discriminatory? 

If the Catholic Church stated it would not condone the practice of cutting off a portion of female genitalia as is the practice followed by orthdox Shia Muslims which of these two groups is wrong?  The Catholic Church for not sanctioning it, or the Shia Muslims for practicing it. 

Finally, if the Catholic Church said it did not recognize the practice of multiple wives that is practiced by Islamic, Hindu and Mormons do those groups demand like the LGTBQ is doing with gay marriage that the Catholic Church is being discriminatory because it has a belief system that differs with the practice.

You see, I get so confused with liberal practioners of righteousness.  They will at one moment say my body my choice, and then when I don't wish to get a vaccine say that the government controls my body.  They will staunchly oppose taking the life of a person on death row, but then staunchly support the right to take the life of an unborn child.  So when the LGBTQ community demands equality what they are really asking for is superiority.  They are in fact insulted when others either do to personal or religious beliefs do not share their beliefs.  So should the 3.5 billion people who are either Christian, Islamic, or Hindu and have teachings antithetical to LGBTQ be insulted that the 3% of the world population does not agree with them. 

They have a right to live their lives as they see fit.  They do not have a right to demand that others share their advocation for the LGBTQ life.  No more than the NRA has a right to demand that everyone share it's view on gun control, or the Right to Life Group have a right to demand that all others share their views on abortion. 
 

[BigHewer]

34 minutes ago, longwood50 said:

They will staunchly oppose taking the life of a person on death row, but then staunchly support the right to take the life of an unborn child. 

For me, this is the key point. Bravo. Good post.

[Marc26]

24 minutes ago, longwood50 said:

You know as said, I have absolutely no idea why someone thinks others should care about who they chose to have sex with.  As mentioned in all my 73 years on earth I have never once had a straight person come up and want to share with me their heterosexuality.  And consider they comprise 97% of the people on this earth. 

The OP started with a piece critical of the Catholic Church won't reaffirmed its position that it won't recognize gay marriages.  Again I ask why is it that the gay community feels so pretentious to demand others advocate their lifestyle.  It is as if they need reassurance from the general public that what they are doing is ok.  If they are comfortable with it, fine.  However this expectation that all other groups have to bow in fealty to it, and pledge advocacy for the lifestyle is uncalled for. 

Let me ask you turn the situation around, if the Catholic Church demanded that the LGBTQ community follow one of its beliefs that Jesus was the Son of God and our Savior and they responded that they would not affirm that position.  Is that "discrimination" 

If the Planned Parenthood asociation demanded that the Catholic Church affirm its policy to perform abortions and the Catholic Church responded no, it would not, is that discriminatory? 

If the Catholic Church stated it would not condone the practice of cutting off a portion of female genitalia as is the practice followed by orthdox Shia Muslims which of these two groups is wrong?  The Catholic Church for not sanctioning it, or the Shia Muslims for practicing it. 

Finally, if the Catholic Church said it did not recognize the practice of multiple wives that is practiced by Islamic, Hindu and Mormons do those groups demand like the LGTBQ is doing with gay marriage that the Catholic Church is being discriminatory because it has a belief system that differs with the practice.

You see, I get so confused with liberal practioners of righteousness.  They will at one moment say my body my choice, and then when I don't wish to get a vaccine say that the government controls my body.  They will staunchly oppose taking the life of a person on death row, but then staunchly support the right to take the life of an unborn child.  So when the LGBTQ community demands equality what they are really asking for is superiority.  They are in fact insulted when others either do to personal or religious beliefs do not share their beliefs.  So should the 3.5 billion people who are either Christian, Islamic, or Hindu and have teachings antithetical to LGBTQ be insulted that the 3% of the world population does not agree with them. 

They have a right to live their lives as they see fit.  They do not have a right to demand that others share their advocation for the LGBTQ life.  No more than the NRA has a right to demand that everyone share it's view on gun control, or the Right to Life Group have a right to demand that all others share their views on abortion. 
 

You are obviously Christian/Catholic and adhere to all their beliefs

 

And obviously pro-life

 

Which is funny to me..............You are so worried about an "unborn child" but still follow a Church that raped 1000's of kids

 

Just as you throw around "typical liberal"

That is "typical conservative" thinking

Let's worry about the "unborn child" but raping that kid 8-10 years later................that's not an issue

Let's keep following the beliefs and practices of that Church

[astro]

48 minutes ago, Marc26 said:

And obviously pro-life

Not when drug offences are committed.... typical conservative hypocricy.

[Khunmark]

9 hours ago, longwood50 said:

You know as said, I have absolutely no idea why someone thinks others should care about who they chose to have sex with.  As mentioned in all my 73 years on earth I have never once had a straight person come up and want to share with me their heterosexuality.  And consider they comprise 97% of the people on this earth. 

The OP started with a piece critical of the Catholic Church won't reaffirmed its position that it won't recognize gay marriages.  Again I ask why is it that the gay community feels so pretentious to demand others advocate their lifestyle.  It is as if they need reassurance from the general public that what they are doing is ok.  If they are comfortable with it, fine.  However this expectation that all other groups have to bow in fealty to it, and pledge advocacy for the lifestyle is uncalled for. 

Let me ask you turn the situation around, if the Catholic Church demanded that the LGBTQ community follow one of its beliefs that Jesus was the Son of God and our Savior and they responded that they would not affirm that position.  Is that "discrimination" 

If the Planned Parenthood asociation demanded that the Catholic Church affirm its policy to perform abortions and the Catholic Church responded no, it would not, is that discriminatory? 

If the Catholic Church stated it would not condone the practice of cutting off a portion of female genitalia as is the practice followed by orthdox Shia Muslims which of these two groups is wrong?  The Catholic Church for not sanctioning it, or the Shia Muslims for practicing it. 

Finally, if the Catholic Church said it did not recognize the practice of multiple wives that is practiced by Islamic, Hindu and Mormons do those groups demand like the LGTBQ is doing with gay marriage that the Catholic Church is being discriminatory because it has a belief system that differs with the practice.

You see, I get so confused with liberal practioners of righteousness.  They will at one moment say my body my choice, and then when I don't wish to get a vaccine say that the government controls my body.  They will staunchly oppose taking the life of a person on death row, but then staunchly support the right to take the life of an unborn child.  So when the LGBTQ community demands equality what they are really asking for is superiority.  They are in fact insulted when others either do to personal or religious beliefs do not share their beliefs.  So should the 3.5 billion people who are either Christian, Islamic, or Hindu and have teachings antithetical to LGBTQ be insulted that the 3% of the world population does not agree with them. 

They have a right to live their lives as they see fit.  They do not have a right to demand that others share their advocation for the LGBTQ life.  No more than the NRA has a right to demand that everyone share it's view on gun control, or the Right to Life Group have a right to demand that all others share their views on abortion. 
 

To be fair, I don’t think you read the article. No where in the article does it state ANY demands by the LGBTQ community, as much as I’m sure you’d like that to be the case. 

[longwood50]

On 8/4/2022 at 6:10 AM, Khunmark said:

To be fair, I don’t think you read the article. No where in the article does it state ANY demands by the LGBTQ community, as much as I’m sure you’d like that to be the case. 

Yes I did read the article.  However the point remains that the LGBTQ community is an activist group. Their efforts are not merely to live their lives as they see fit in peace but rather indoctrinate others.  You see that in the USA where legislation has to be passed to prohibit teachers from engaging young children into the LGBTQ lifestyle.  I was just on a cruise where each and every day for the month of June special attention was drawn to Pride including daily pool parties and hoisting the Pride Flag gathering.  

The fact is the world is made up of myriad of people with differing beliefs.  To attempt to impose your beliefs and/or endorse your lifestyle is no more than discriminating against their beliefs that are different. The OP was obviosly trying to portray the decision of the Catholic Church as somehow discriminatory.  Lets face it 97% of the world is not gay.  This idea that the vast majority of people should somehow recognize and advocate the beliefs and lifestyle of a very small minority is ludicrous.   The fact is that "grievance groups" have found that acting like spoiled children and ranting about being discriminated against has paid off.  They have received special benefits not afforded to the majority and in some instances resulted in millions of dollars being thrown in their direction to placate them.  So long as that encouragement exists the behavior or claiming discrimination will continue not end.  You keep encouraging claims of discrimination the more you reward the behavior of claiming discrimination.  I recently saw a woman filed a $25 million dollar lawsuit against Chuck E Cheese claiming discrimination.  She said the Chuck E mascot "ignored" her child who is black.  This constant demand that others must  recognize and "celebrate" the views or lifestyles of others does not bring harmony.  It brings polarization since it focuses on the things that as humans make us different and not on the things that we have in common. 





I don't know if you are familiar with Thomas Sowell he is a renowned economist at Stanford University and a fellow in their Hoover Institute.  He said it best which I have attached.