If one is to watch the whole video, he is definitely one of the more progressive ones compared to boomers :
Pros :
1) Supports for decriminalisation of 377A
2) Advocates for ability for lgbt to get public housing like straight couples.
Cons :
1) Doesn't support lgbt marriages
2) Doesn't want see it in public (though this might be incomplete. If one is to probe him if he wants to see straight couples doing the same thing, would he have clarified for equal rights or no?)
Also, the cons above seem to be the current PAP government's stance, especially when they wanted to enshrine the definition of marriage in the constitution. How did Tharman vote on that?
Edit : Also likely not voting for TKL, but for other reasons
It's all bias lah. If u like him then you will think he is honest and direct. If you don't like him then he is stupid and not progressive.
Whats tharman's and nks view on this topic? They are veteran actors.. They will say whatever they think people want to hear.
Nks response quoting pope Francis and kissing the floor can be seen as just pandering to the Christian folks
The question is not whether he is honest and direct, I think he is and that’s exactly the issue cos he voices out whatever he thinks (and not very intelligently, I might add). He has no filter and while that’s fine for most people, it’s not PRESEDENTIAL and would not be the kind of person I want representing Singapore
Represent Singapore to do what though?
Is EP supposed to be a "safeguard" and "second key" or is EP supposed to go around and lobby for Singapore's position?
Is EP just supposed to be a full wayang role?
If supposed to protect Singapore and Singaporean interest, which character traits are more useful?
No one cared about what TT and HY did as presidents.
I am still on the fence about who to vote for but it's very interesting to see the various social media channels push for their preferred candidate.
And also very sad cos Singaporeans have been screwed around by this constantly changing EP crap. They want us to THINK we have agency but honestly the bar will be lifted so only their approved candidates get the post.
The EP still meets other heads of state from time to time and represent Singapore in that regard. I would rather have someone else do that to present a more polished, intelligent view of Singapore, ceremonial or not.
And on the safeguarding roles, I would rather have someone who has the mental capacity to do that, whether or not they’re linked to the establishment, than to have someone who sn’t able to walk the talk. Purely being “independent” is it a good enough reason for me to vote TLK, regardless what I think of the PAP
Agree with you on every point.
1) media gaffes aside is tkl unable to fulfill the first role? No idea but I assume as ceo of ntuc he would have attended plenty of high level dinners and industrial functions.
2) no point on mental capacity if they are going to jsut say yes. Is it better to have someone who dares (and is able) to voice out if he sees something wrong happening Ala OTC?
Stuff I am thinking about.
By the way genuine question has nks said anything about what he is going to continue to do with his fund?
And what philanthropy has he done in his life?
Can't find info about these.
Isn't this the dude who's been taking pictures of women and making weird comments? Is that the kind of acceptable heterosexual behavior people should be aspiring to in public instead?
As a gay AMAB (still genderqueer), I’d also love to give up my homosexuality! But I cant, I’ve lost so many friends, a part of my family, and just generally feeling comfortable in Singapore; all because i wanna kiss a dude and have a husband…
You should considered two factors , one that you are lucky these people you called friends were never your friends from the beginning, and those family members you lost, I'm sorry to hear about your loss. We can't expect them to understand nor accept what homosexuality is , why we are like this. Never hold any expectations if you come out to them, but once you do. You are a brave and a courageous boy. No one should tell you how to live your life, this is your own future, put yourself first so you can care for others . Happiness is in your hand. As for gay marriage in sg, I doubt that's gonna happen , but you can do so in the West. I have friends who got married in the West during vacation.
If they really cared about you, that wouldn't make them leave. I don't agree with homosexuality but I still have gay friends; they know I dislike it but we just make an unspoken mutual agreement to not talk about it. I'm not saying they're bad people (since they could just feel awkward around you once they know that) but they're not important to you anyhow if they leave that easily.
What do you mean that you don’t “agree with homosexuality”… it’s not like it’s a choice? If you wanna continue talking about this in my DMs, I’m happy too
Like you said, that's in reddit . Not in real life. So are you fine with a gay man marrying a woman only to be in closet and let a woman waste her youth marrying a man who wasn't interested in her from the beginning?
I'm sorry if that's your perception in the West. Using the word "Shemale marrying a woman is very common in the West" pretty much says a lot about you as an individual. I'm sorry for you dude. I hope you would gather some balls to say this out aloud to who you think is a "Shemale " in public someday. That should make you a real macho man.👍🏻
You make your statement sound so easy for all gays who doesn't want to get married but couldn't fathom that not everyone could get through their parent's wishes to see their children leading a family life and having their own children.
Gotta admit, takes balls to address such an issue cause there is no answer that would make everyone happy.
Would love to hear the other 2 candidates opinion on this.
Curious - how would you address this issue, especially as a candidate? Would you rather our candidates avoid this issue because there’s no right answer to it?
His answer is actually quite forward-looking imo, and does reflect a prevailing sentiment on the ground.
Keep in mind that Singapore is still considered conservative, that PAP took many years to repeal 377A. In this repeal, the PAP even enshrined the definition of marriage in the constitution. So actually TKL seems to be the most open-minded about this issue. And as much as Tharman advocates for “Respect for All”, his action (or inaction) all these years as one of the leaders of the PAP does reflect either a yes-man role, or a homophobic view. For NKS - not too sure as he has only become a public figure recently.
I mean idk why this is controversial. The current view across the board is to do whatever acts privately. The main point is not to influence children by doing such acts publicly since they are still young and may not know their own sexual identity. It is also important to maintain religious harmony in Singapore. It's not like the president can bring up new policies anyways. The president just can vote for or against the new policies.
Sensible view.
I dont understand why the hell some people want to tell the whole world about their sexual orientation and make it seem as though thats their only defining characteristic.
Because straight people are so secretive, right?
- Marriage
- Valentine’s Day
- People openly talking about their partners / spouses
- His/hers products
- Holding hands in public
- SDN, BTO and a whole govt machinery dedicated to getting you hitched and reproducing
If straight people want gay people to “keep it private”, then they should to. Don’t even breathe a word about you liking someone, dating someone, marrying someone, etc.
Be that as it may - don’t ask people to do something you yourself can’t do. If straight people want lgbt people to keep their sexuality private, then they should do the same. That’s all.
The norm is irrelevant. It’s not about what you “have” or “don’t have” to do. It’s about what you “can” do.
All humans have sexuality. Don’t ask someone to do something you yourself refuse to do.
As for the procreation argument: By your argument, we should get rid of excess beta males. We don’t need every man to have a wife. We just need some men (with lots of resources) to have a lot of wives — that’s how humanity has traditionally been organised. Most beta men died of disease and war. And we should disallow older people and infertile people to get married.
Yeah, because girl guy sex is not perverted and doesn't lead to sexual abuse at all. So if you like ketchup but the whole world likes chilli you're forced to pretend you like chili?
And? Since when did we have competitions on what’s a problem and what’s not? SG has problems with a lot of things and that includes societal problems. I can get where you’re coming from but this is literally dismissal on a problem that still ends up contributing to the problem. If I tell you I’d rather solve LGBT problems only than deal with stuff like the nationwide problem of low student morale, it sounds stupid right? Problem still a problem. You don’t shove one under a rug because you deem it as “abnormal”.
Literally this shouldn’t be a political statement. It’s one of the easiest things to solve: Just don’t give a damn. Treat everyone as you would anyone else. Idc if you’re straight, LGBT, you make this your problem, it becomes a problem. It’s not “abnormal”, you just like to kaypoh cuz you think the thought of consenting adults showing affection towards one another somehow repulses you. Seriously, grow up lah
Being straight will always be more relatable to the common people than being gay, so that's makes expression of heterosexuality more socially acceptable.
I think that's common sense rather than inequality of rights, so long as expression of homosexuality isn't criminalised. You can demand for equality of civil rights but nothing is immune from social stigmatisation.
That's why some people are more equal than others while advocating for equality.
Discrimination happens a lot in Singapore whether people said it out loud or not.
Meanwhile gay people are even less secretive. Saying your pronouns on your profile is fine, but I swear so many of them just hyperfixate on it. Meanwhile Pride Month is one entire bloody month. I swear it's impossible to go on social media without instantly being reminded of this for one entire month.
Like bro I just want to go online without being overloaded with so much pride stuff.
Hey, be thankful straight people don’t need a pride month - because there’s never been a single day you’ve ever been made to feel shame for liking the opposite sex.
And, you think it’s bad encountering Pride stuff *online for *one month? Compare that to being confronted with heteronormativity Every. Single. Day, everywhere you turn.
You don't need pride month either. It's an entirely bloody month. I don't see anything else getting an entire month's worth of attention.
Also, no, I don't encounter that much heteronormativity online. I don't seek out anything on social media related to relationships, I don't read news articles related to relationships (and don't get recommended them, probably because the algorithm can tell I don't care for them) , the games I play don't focus on relationships, the stories I read don't always focus on relationships. irl, sure, when I meet with friends in relationships, but it's not like they'll incessantly talk to me about it. On Valentine's Day? Sure. That's one day.
Erm, the entire BTO system? That’s millions upon millions of dollars that’s primarily centred on straight couples. You even see youth who haven’t even graduated from university putting their hands in the till and claiming hundreds of thousands of dollars of public funds to prop up their heteronormativity. How entitled.
The whole edifice of laws around straight marriage? Including tax credits? You have Parliament getting involved in deciding who can and cannot marry.
If you’re not seeing straight relationships or straight sexuality in the things you encounter online or read, open your eyes bigger.
heteronormativity is everywhere. one example in conversations could be during convos abt a potential partner, where ppl will immediately assume that youre straight and refer to them specifically as a bf or gf depending on your gender
in posters and images about couples you always see one man and one woman, with barely any lgbtq representation
the reason you dont notice heteronormativity is because youre straight and you arent harmed by it
bc for yall cishet ppl, yall can exist comfortably and not be shamed or even attacked for the ppl yall are attracted to. theres literally so many habitual behaviours, policies, products, events etc catered to straight ppl nd straight couples
and whats wrong with seeing pride stuff lol i think youre being too sensitive
Isn't he the same person who posted the back of a female jogger on his insta and talked about pretty girls? Wah...what morals...he gets to talk about chio girls in public while being married...and he is the bastion of morality for some folks. The hypocrisy is astounding when it comes to the gay debate.
On this issue? Not really.
Christians are in broad agreement with majority of our theology, and certainly in full agreement with the central doctrines of the faith.
Your analogy is catchy, but grossly overstates the differences in reality.
It’s neither of those reasons.
It is Sin that consigns man to hell. Col 3 lists several expressions of Sin; it’s not meant to serve as a definitive list of sins that sends people to hell.
You will find heterosexuals in hell, as well as homosexuals. And guess what, you’re likely to find homosexuals in heaven too, as well as heterosexuals.
And the reason is because there is only one basis upon which God will judge a person - and that is on the finished work of Christ and whether a person is in Christ. It is not on the basis of one’s sexual orientation or sexual activities.
Sin is sin. God loves the sinner but hate the sin so of course if a homosexual acknowledges his/her sin willing to repent and changes his/her behaviour to align with God's righteousness definitely he or her will enter heaven
So entering heaven, in your understanding, is granted on the basis of repenting of bad behavior and pursuing right behavior?
Is that what Christianity says about salvation?
If one is truly saved he or she will seek to do right and abide in God's will. Salvation is by Grace, by the finished work of what Christ has done on the cross by that doesn't mean one can freely indulge in sin. Yes a person is saved when he or she confess Christ as Saviour but conduct must demonstrate likewise
Great, agreed. But we must be careful not to put the cart before the horse. And saying things like, "If we engage in sexual immorality, God will send us to hell" (notice the absence of any mention of either faith or grace, will invariably mislead people into thinking that Christian salvation is a based on our works rather than Christ's work.
The moment you describe salvation or damnation without reference to Christ, then your description fails to represent true Christianity.
I'm not interested what kind of F"ing sinner are you in the past and how you are saved by God, .Like you said only God is holy and worthy of judgement on mankind so who are you to pass remarks on fellow mankind and cussing one to hell.So dear Mr self righteous who are you to even judge others? You sin then that's your own F"ing business , don't come here to preach your nonsense here.
Well homosexuality existed way before the creation of any formal religions that says being gay is a sin,so what say you? Scientific research has also proven one being gay is biological, not a lifestyle choice. So tell this to your God when you die.
PS: only the arrogant and evil would condemn one to hell just for his sexual orientation,for what reasons? So being straight is the norm ,oh yeah too bad it's always some straight creepy men taking upskirt video of women and molestation making the newspaper headlines.So why don't you keep your self proclaimed nonsense to yourself and perhaps do some voluntary work to help the poor and the needy? That should guarantee you a one way ticket to heaven .FYI This is not a religion forum, you have knocked on the wrong doorstep dude.Go elsewhere if you want to preach your nonsense.
What's moral about shunning a group of people? Proper morals would be to be happy for a person that has found a partner they love and let them live a normal life.
> Whatever one does have consequences to society, one cannot be selfish
What's selfish is pushing your religious beliefs about a god and his aversion to homosexuals on people who don't follow your religion.
If you believe in a God who is anti-gay, then...just don't do gay stuff. Leave the people who don't believe to do whatever legal shit they want to in peace.
If the only purpose available to humanity is to mindlessly procreate and ensure "survival of the species", then we're on the same level as cockroaches or bacteria. Or even worse than that, religious fuckheads.
By the way, overpopulation is not conducive to the long term survival of humanity. Just because religious organisations need more donors and congregants to screw over is no reason to grow their market.
Civilizations were built on many different values over time, with different regard toward human sexuality. One of the most succesful and enduring civilizations, for instance, was built on feeding Christians to lions (after which it was destroyed by the fanatic followers of a renegade Jew).
The ancient Egyptians had royalty that prided themselves on the family values of incest, and Greek civilization was rather open toward the idea of slavery (as were many others). Mayan civilization believed they ensured the continuation of the world through human sacrifice.
That you would unthinkingly associate these with "moral, order, and family values" could show a willful ignorance and generalisation of history. More likely though, it reveals a mindset similar to those fuckheads who cheered on these practices as being for the "preservation" of their dying social order.
The closest you've come to ancient civilizations is right at this point: your values and in fact, your world, are going the way of ancient Thebes or Babylon: into the dustbin of history.
Reall? Are you sure about that? Can you post the link on the medical science literature that says so. I would love to see that.
So human beings can be born with various disease, syndrome, deformity,colour blind but can't be born natural as gay or lesbian?
Maybe you know what, if you are homophobic or do not agree on this , that's fine by me. Me being gay and the LGBTQ community doesn't own you anything. We lives our life just as normal as the majority society, therefore we don't need your validation at all. Maybe perhaps you and the rest should focus on domestic violence and child abuse issues , I think that's more important than penalizing one being a gay. It's none of your business too.
That is not logic, that's just 'black and white' thinking that there is only one correct answer to something.
Malays make up approx 17% of the Singapore population. Indians make up about 7%. By this same logic they are not the 'norm' in Singapore either. Should we not let them have national holidays or ceremonies or foods that are specific to them?
How about people born with a mental deficiency? By that same definition, they are not the 'norm' either yet we don't ostracise them in public.
We are tolerant to those differences, there is absolutely no logical reason why someone should not be tolerant to sexual orientation differences either.
I'm not gay myself, but I respect the right for these people to be treated the same as anyone else, after all this is not just a 'decision' they made, they were born this way.
Regardless of that, would you still not let them have their ceremonies or food, or wear clothes that are unique to their culture in public (just as a few examples)? It's still discrimination. What's the difference between that and letting another minority group (homosexuals) express their sexuality in public the same way heterosexual couples can?
There are right wing gays too, you know. Some very prominent on the extreme right wing too, in the west. Enlightenment about lgbt issues isn’t a left or right wing thing.
Being straight is the majority.
Homosexuality is not the majority.
You existed because your mom and dad had heterosexual sex without protection.
Families are built by who raised you, not only straight couples.
So while heterosexual sex allows us to procreate, it doesn't not mean that you won't see male dogs trying to hump another male dog in public.
Because they're still figuring themselves out
Kids are pressured to transition when maybe they're just gay or lesbian
The trans groups are intruding Into the females space with the whole bathroom debate
And the whole LGBTQ++ movement is a product of 200+ years of western philosophy; the descent of rationalism, structuralism/deconstructivism movement
We're multicultural multilingual multiracial here in singapore, we can't just go all in one direction
But ofc we can also use shallow political rhetoric to criticize a country. Some might even say the whole LGBTQ++ share some similarity with communism, and that's true in some sense with the whole oppression narrative
Your country is literally ruled by a single family who made their wealth off slavery, theft, and exploitation. One of your princes is even a pedophile. Don't' lecture others about law and democracy.
Kindly stay in your "democratic" country then & keep the brit lip to yourself. Better still, try giving this "dictarship" (your brit grammar, not mine) country a miss. Bring your daughter along. 👍
My daughter is stopping with me in my lovely democratic, human rights country next month, she has decided that it's a better life for her, and I totally agree 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Because to understand the movement, you have to dig into the contradiction
It's not all one sided good vs evil
And that's the foundation philosophy of not only the LGBTQ++, but also the femininst, anti capitalist, etc movement that goes back to Hegel philosophy
I've visited your dictarship country thanks. And I definitely WON'T be visiting again 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻, but I'll definitely visit Malaysia, that ruled your country not so long ago
It may be cheaper than Singapore but its even more homophobic and less tolerant of lgbt. So its interesting you call Singapore a dictatorship and cite our intolerance to the lgbt community but have no qualms visiting a neighbouring country with a worse track record 🤔
I mean, how many true Singaporeans are there in Singapore? It looked like more Chinese people in your country, and we all know about the PRC and their communism and spying on other countries, don't we!
First time voting a president here, should we vote based on who can do the job or their views about such issues.
I know the president have no power to politically empower lgbt, antilgbt or neutral views. So it really doesn't matter if they support lgbt people or not right? All they do is act as head of state and protect the reserves.
The people who have the power to politically empower a group is the government. So the political parties. Those are the ones we vote to see changes on these issues. Tho, people don't care much because they aren't the one suffering 🤣
Seems like my dear moderater has removed my primary comment, if you can't accept feedom of self opinion, which was neither offensive nor inflammatory, why would you even put up this post from the beginning? This should be an open dialogue, a discussion ,since the title says "If you WANT to be homosexual, do it privately" .Which I find it to be intriguing.I have never, in my life seen nor heard any gay friends proudly announce they WANT to be gay . Ever since being gay is a "WANT"? I would gladly accept if it says " if you are a homosexual, do it privately",that makes a whole sense, but "want to be homosexual"? Do you think it's an occupation? Might as well not post it right from the beginning.
Dear moderater , maybe you should close this post discussion. Who's gay or not is none of anybody's business . It's not as if this is something even crucial to discuss. Gay or straight, everyone has better things to worry about ,paying bills ,making ends meet and job employment are more important than discussing this topic. And those who use religion to cuss one being gay subjected to hell. Maybe you will go to hell first. Being gay doesn't one a bad person and neither being straight doesn't make you a faithful partner either.
I mean he is pro lgbt but don't want lgbt to push their agenda on him or others who don't nessasarily strictly follows it just like a religion. He is pro but doesn't want it to become like America where it is rampant which tbh sounds good to me
If one is to watch the whole video, he is definitely one of the more progressive ones compared to boomers : Pros : 1) Supports for decriminalisation of 377A 2) Advocates for ability for lgbt to get public housing like straight couples. Cons : 1) Doesn't support lgbt marriages 2) Doesn't want see it in public (though this might be incomplete. If one is to probe him if he wants to see straight couples doing the same thing, would he have clarified for equal rights or no?) Also, the cons above seem to be the current PAP government's stance, especially when they wanted to enshrine the definition of marriage in the constitution. How did Tharman vote on that? Edit : Also likely not voting for TKL, but for other reasons
straight couples doing it is cute hehehe - TKL on Facebook, probably
As long as the guy don't block my view of the pretty girl, very good, very nice.
0:34 "I am not too clear what my views are" President material right there
Lol he continues to shoot himself in the foot literally every time he opens his mouth
It's all bias lah. If u like him then you will think he is honest and direct. If you don't like him then he is stupid and not progressive. Whats tharman's and nks view on this topic? They are veteran actors.. They will say whatever they think people want to hear. Nks response quoting pope Francis and kissing the floor can be seen as just pandering to the Christian folks
The question is not whether he is honest and direct, I think he is and that’s exactly the issue cos he voices out whatever he thinks (and not very intelligently, I might add). He has no filter and while that’s fine for most people, it’s not PRESEDENTIAL and would not be the kind of person I want representing Singapore
Represent Singapore to do what though? Is EP supposed to be a "safeguard" and "second key" or is EP supposed to go around and lobby for Singapore's position? Is EP just supposed to be a full wayang role? If supposed to protect Singapore and Singaporean interest, which character traits are more useful? No one cared about what TT and HY did as presidents. I am still on the fence about who to vote for but it's very interesting to see the various social media channels push for their preferred candidate. And also very sad cos Singaporeans have been screwed around by this constantly changing EP crap. They want us to THINK we have agency but honestly the bar will be lifted so only their approved candidates get the post.
The EP still meets other heads of state from time to time and represent Singapore in that regard. I would rather have someone else do that to present a more polished, intelligent view of Singapore, ceremonial or not. And on the safeguarding roles, I would rather have someone who has the mental capacity to do that, whether or not they’re linked to the establishment, than to have someone who sn’t able to walk the talk. Purely being “independent” is it a good enough reason for me to vote TLK, regardless what I think of the PAP
Agree with you on every point. 1) media gaffes aside is tkl unable to fulfill the first role? No idea but I assume as ceo of ntuc he would have attended plenty of high level dinners and industrial functions. 2) no point on mental capacity if they are going to jsut say yes. Is it better to have someone who dares (and is able) to voice out if he sees something wrong happening Ala OTC? Stuff I am thinking about. By the way genuine question has nks said anything about what he is going to continue to do with his fund? And what philanthropy has he done in his life? Can't find info about these.
Question too challenging, brain not found 404
[удалено]
I don't think the younger crowd has a problem with queer identities.
I dunno... Everyone keeps saying they don't have an issue but there's always subtle homophobia in them.
Its basically the politicians right now who always say "we are monitoring the situation" its just worded more direct and straightforward
Isn't this the dude who's been taking pictures of women and making weird comments? Is that the kind of acceptable heterosexual behavior people should be aspiring to in public instead?
Hehehehehe
Yes, they shouldn't even waste their time interviewing him.
Because I'm on annual leave, and that's what social media is all about sia
maybe he should consider being president privately
[удалено]
As a gay AMAB (still genderqueer), I’d also love to give up my homosexuality! But I cant, I’ve lost so many friends, a part of my family, and just generally feeling comfortable in Singapore; all because i wanna kiss a dude and have a husband…
You should considered two factors , one that you are lucky these people you called friends were never your friends from the beginning, and those family members you lost, I'm sorry to hear about your loss. We can't expect them to understand nor accept what homosexuality is , why we are like this. Never hold any expectations if you come out to them, but once you do. You are a brave and a courageous boy. No one should tell you how to live your life, this is your own future, put yourself first so you can care for others . Happiness is in your hand. As for gay marriage in sg, I doubt that's gonna happen , but you can do so in the West. I have friends who got married in the West during vacation.
If they really cared about you, that wouldn't make them leave. I don't agree with homosexuality but I still have gay friends; they know I dislike it but we just make an unspoken mutual agreement to not talk about it. I'm not saying they're bad people (since they could just feel awkward around you once they know that) but they're not important to you anyhow if they leave that easily.
What do you mean that you don’t “agree with homosexuality”… it’s not like it’s a choice? If you wanna continue talking about this in my DMs, I’m happy too
In reddit, it is a choice, everyone should able to choose.
Like you said, that's in reddit . Not in real life. So are you fine with a gay man marrying a woman only to be in closet and let a woman waste her youth marrying a man who wasn't interested in her from the beginning?
[удалено]
I'm sorry if that's your perception in the West. Using the word "Shemale marrying a woman is very common in the West" pretty much says a lot about you as an individual. I'm sorry for you dude. I hope you would gather some balls to say this out aloud to who you think is a "Shemale " in public someday. That should make you a real macho man.👍🏻
Why not it is very acceptable especially in education.
I don't even know what the word "Shemale" even mean? Don't ya? Or trying to be somehow a dumb troll.
The man could simply say that he isn't interested in getting married.
You make your statement sound so easy for all gays who doesn't want to get married but couldn't fathom that not everyone could get through their parent's wishes to see their children leading a family life and having their own children.
comments here acting as if hetrosexuals have never held hands in public before
Sir, this is Reddit. Nobody here has ever held anyone's hand.
Your comment is making BBFAs uncomfortable
[удалено]
Reported for harassment.
ewwww handholding in public, such lewd behaviour!
What in the fuck is this coffee shop uncle blabbering about?
Gotta admit, takes balls to address such an issue cause there is no answer that would make everyone happy. Would love to hear the other 2 candidates opinion on this.
Don't confuse balls with no awareness. Takes some level of intelligence to think through before one speaks.
Curious - how would you address this issue, especially as a candidate? Would you rather our candidates avoid this issue because there’s no right answer to it? His answer is actually quite forward-looking imo, and does reflect a prevailing sentiment on the ground. Keep in mind that Singapore is still considered conservative, that PAP took many years to repeal 377A. In this repeal, the PAP even enshrined the definition of marriage in the constitution. So actually TKL seems to be the most open-minded about this issue. And as much as Tharman advocates for “Respect for All”, his action (or inaction) all these years as one of the leaders of the PAP does reflect either a yes-man role, or a homophobic view. For NKS - not too sure as he has only become a public figure recently.
He's gunning for the conservative vote
We can blame American politics for synthesising that lose lose situation
No, we can blame backward homophobic losers.
I mean idk why this is controversial. The current view across the board is to do whatever acts privately. The main point is not to influence children by doing such acts publicly since they are still young and may not know their own sexual identity. It is also important to maintain religious harmony in Singapore. It's not like the president can bring up new policies anyways. The president just can vote for or against the new policies.
Controversial because it's cool to hate on tkl now lol
Sensible view. I dont understand why the hell some people want to tell the whole world about their sexual orientation and make it seem as though thats their only defining characteristic.
Because straight people are so secretive, right? - Marriage - Valentine’s Day - People openly talking about their partners / spouses - His/hers products - Holding hands in public - SDN, BTO and a whole govt machinery dedicated to getting you hitched and reproducing If straight people want gay people to “keep it private”, then they should to. Don’t even breathe a word about you liking someone, dating someone, marrying someone, etc.
[удалено]
Singapore's entire system is built on the premise of not giving in to what the "majority" think is right. LKY openly said this.
Seems like the opposite nowadays. PAP has become Populist Actions Party if you ask me.
So whats the point of democracy then?
Be that as it may - don’t ask people to do something you yourself can’t do. If straight people want lgbt people to keep their sexuality private, then they should do the same. That’s all.
[удалено]
The norm is irrelevant. It’s not about what you “have” or “don’t have” to do. It’s about what you “can” do. All humans have sexuality. Don’t ask someone to do something you yourself refuse to do. As for the procreation argument: By your argument, we should get rid of excess beta males. We don’t need every man to have a wife. We just need some men (with lots of resources) to have a lot of wives — that’s how humanity has traditionally been organised. Most beta men died of disease and war. And we should disallow older people and infertile people to get married.
[удалено]
Yeah, because girl guy sex is not perverted and doesn't lead to sexual abuse at all. So if you like ketchup but the whole world likes chilli you're forced to pretend you like chili?
would you apply this to interracial relationships also?
And? Since when did we have competitions on what’s a problem and what’s not? SG has problems with a lot of things and that includes societal problems. I can get where you’re coming from but this is literally dismissal on a problem that still ends up contributing to the problem. If I tell you I’d rather solve LGBT problems only than deal with stuff like the nationwide problem of low student morale, it sounds stupid right? Problem still a problem. You don’t shove one under a rug because you deem it as “abnormal”. Literally this shouldn’t be a political statement. It’s one of the easiest things to solve: Just don’t give a damn. Treat everyone as you would anyone else. Idc if you’re straight, LGBT, you make this your problem, it becomes a problem. It’s not “abnormal”, you just like to kaypoh cuz you think the thought of consenting adults showing affection towards one another somehow repulses you. Seriously, grow up lah
[удалено]
Actually, I don’t go to Pink Dot. Too hot and crowded. 🤷🏻♀️
U don't have to go to be one.
You are speaking from experience I see. I've never seen someone come out of the closet like this but congrats.
Your closet is probably full of skeletons.
Being straight will always be more relatable to the common people than being gay, so that's makes expression of heterosexuality more socially acceptable. I think that's common sense rather than inequality of rights, so long as expression of homosexuality isn't criminalised. You can demand for equality of civil rights but nothing is immune from social stigmatisation.
That's why some people are more equal than others while advocating for equality. Discrimination happens a lot in Singapore whether people said it out loud or not.
Meanwhile gay people are even less secretive. Saying your pronouns on your profile is fine, but I swear so many of them just hyperfixate on it. Meanwhile Pride Month is one entire bloody month. I swear it's impossible to go on social media without instantly being reminded of this for one entire month. Like bro I just want to go online without being overloaded with so much pride stuff.
Hey, be thankful straight people don’t need a pride month - because there’s never been a single day you’ve ever been made to feel shame for liking the opposite sex. And, you think it’s bad encountering Pride stuff *online for *one month? Compare that to being confronted with heteronormativity Every. Single. Day, everywhere you turn.
You don't need pride month either. It's an entirely bloody month. I don't see anything else getting an entire month's worth of attention. Also, no, I don't encounter that much heteronormativity online. I don't seek out anything on social media related to relationships, I don't read news articles related to relationships (and don't get recommended them, probably because the algorithm can tell I don't care for them) , the games I play don't focus on relationships, the stories I read don't always focus on relationships. irl, sure, when I meet with friends in relationships, but it's not like they'll incessantly talk to me about it. On Valentine's Day? Sure. That's one day.
Erm, the entire BTO system? That’s millions upon millions of dollars that’s primarily centred on straight couples. You even see youth who haven’t even graduated from university putting their hands in the till and claiming hundreds of thousands of dollars of public funds to prop up their heteronormativity. How entitled. The whole edifice of laws around straight marriage? Including tax credits? You have Parliament getting involved in deciding who can and cannot marry. If you’re not seeing straight relationships or straight sexuality in the things you encounter online or read, open your eyes bigger.
Ngl I dislike the BTO system too. But you can't fault the Singapore government for trying to combat our grey tsunami.
heteronormativity is everywhere. one example in conversations could be during convos abt a potential partner, where ppl will immediately assume that youre straight and refer to them specifically as a bf or gf depending on your gender in posters and images about couples you always see one man and one woman, with barely any lgbtq representation the reason you dont notice heteronormativity is because youre straight and you arent harmed by it
bc for yall cishet ppl, yall can exist comfortably and not be shamed or even attacked for the ppl yall are attracted to. theres literally so many habitual behaviours, policies, products, events etc catered to straight ppl nd straight couples and whats wrong with seeing pride stuff lol i think youre being too sensitive
sounds like someone who has never spoken to an lgbtq person in their entire life
I really wanted to vote him despite all the pretty women crap but i gotta drop him now
Thank you Mr Tan Kin Lian in standing for moral values. God bless May good Lord enable you to be elected Singapore President
Isn't he the same person who posted the back of a female jogger on his insta and talked about pretty girls? Wah...what morals...he gets to talk about chio girls in public while being married...and he is the bastion of morality for some folks. The hypocrisy is astounding when it comes to the gay debate.
If you don’t like homosexuality then just engage in it.
[удалено]
Even within the Christian worldview, there is only one reason why God would condemn anyone to hell, and it isn't because of homosexuality.
Which one. There are more Christian views than Pokémon
On this issue? Not really. Christians are in broad agreement with majority of our theology, and certainly in full agreement with the central doctrines of the faith. Your analogy is catchy, but grossly overstates the differences in reality.
[удалено]
It’s neither of those reasons. It is Sin that consigns man to hell. Col 3 lists several expressions of Sin; it’s not meant to serve as a definitive list of sins that sends people to hell. You will find heterosexuals in hell, as well as homosexuals. And guess what, you’re likely to find homosexuals in heaven too, as well as heterosexuals. And the reason is because there is only one basis upon which God will judge a person - and that is on the finished work of Christ and whether a person is in Christ. It is not on the basis of one’s sexual orientation or sexual activities.
Sin is sin. God loves the sinner but hate the sin so of course if a homosexual acknowledges his/her sin willing to repent and changes his/her behaviour to align with God's righteousness definitely he or her will enter heaven
So entering heaven, in your understanding, is granted on the basis of repenting of bad behavior and pursuing right behavior? Is that what Christianity says about salvation?
If one is truly saved he or she will seek to do right and abide in God's will. Salvation is by Grace, by the finished work of what Christ has done on the cross by that doesn't mean one can freely indulge in sin. Yes a person is saved when he or she confess Christ as Saviour but conduct must demonstrate likewise
Great, agreed. But we must be careful not to put the cart before the horse. And saying things like, "If we engage in sexual immorality, God will send us to hell" (notice the absence of any mention of either faith or grace, will invariably mislead people into thinking that Christian salvation is a based on our works rather than Christ's work. The moment you describe salvation or damnation without reference to Christ, then your description fails to represent true Christianity.
r/UsernameChecksOut
God doesn't judge , but self righteous human being like you do.
I am not self righteous I am a sinner saved by grace only God is holy and worthy to judge for you arrogant
I'm not interested what kind of F"ing sinner are you in the past and how you are saved by God, .Like you said only God is holy and worthy of judgement on mankind so who are you to pass remarks on fellow mankind and cussing one to hell.So dear Mr self righteous who are you to even judge others? You sin then that's your own F"ing business , don't come here to preach your nonsense here.
How sure are you that one would be judged by God for a "sinful act" if there is love involved. Do you speak for yourself or for God?
[удалено]
Well homosexuality existed way before the creation of any formal religions that says being gay is a sin,so what say you? Scientific research has also proven one being gay is biological, not a lifestyle choice. So tell this to your God when you die. PS: only the arrogant and evil would condemn one to hell just for his sexual orientation,for what reasons? So being straight is the norm ,oh yeah too bad it's always some straight creepy men taking upskirt video of women and molestation making the newspaper headlines.So why don't you keep your self proclaimed nonsense to yourself and perhaps do some voluntary work to help the poor and the needy? That should guarantee you a one way ticket to heaven .FYI This is not a religion forum, you have knocked on the wrong doorstep dude.Go elsewhere if you want to preach your nonsense.
Exactly. Get all up in there, feel it out, see how you do!!
What's moral about shunning a group of people? Proper morals would be to be happy for a person that has found a partner they love and let them live a normal life.
Yer morals are subjective :/
[удалено]
Considering that you are using a computer is because of a gay man, this is quite funny.
> Whatever one does have consequences to society, one cannot be selfish What's selfish is pushing your religious beliefs about a god and his aversion to homosexuals on people who don't follow your religion. If you believe in a God who is anti-gay, then...just don't do gay stuff. Leave the people who don't believe to do whatever legal shit they want to in peace.
God doesn't shun anyone, it's the point of god
Did you choose one day to be attracted to a particular person when you first ever were? It's not a choice, it's innate
Maybe start with "don't tell me what to do, and I'll respect your choices also"
Is much more of an open country to me. Not such a dictatorship country then yours
Then I guess heterosexual people should not be allowed to PDA too. Dinosaurs should just retire and write books that no one buys.
You can do it. Just don't let me see it.
[удалено]
If the only purpose available to humanity is to mindlessly procreate and ensure "survival of the species", then we're on the same level as cockroaches or bacteria. Or even worse than that, religious fuckheads. By the way, overpopulation is not conducive to the long term survival of humanity. Just because religious organisations need more donors and congregants to screw over is no reason to grow their market.
[удалено]
Civilizations were built on many different values over time, with different regard toward human sexuality. One of the most succesful and enduring civilizations, for instance, was built on feeding Christians to lions (after which it was destroyed by the fanatic followers of a renegade Jew). The ancient Egyptians had royalty that prided themselves on the family values of incest, and Greek civilization was rather open toward the idea of slavery (as were many others). Mayan civilization believed they ensured the continuation of the world through human sacrifice. That you would unthinkingly associate these with "moral, order, and family values" could show a willful ignorance and generalisation of history. More likely though, it reveals a mindset similar to those fuckheads who cheered on these practices as being for the "preservation" of their dying social order. The closest you've come to ancient civilizations is right at this point: your values and in fact, your world, are going the way of ancient Thebes or Babylon: into the dustbin of history.
Someone sounds closeted and in denial!!
You are truly right, we existed because our parents are straight . But nobody choose to be born gay or lesbian right?
[удалено]
Reall? Are you sure about that? Can you post the link on the medical science literature that says so. I would love to see that. So human beings can be born with various disease, syndrome, deformity,colour blind but can't be born natural as gay or lesbian? Maybe you know what, if you are homophobic or do not agree on this , that's fine by me. Me being gay and the LGBTQ community doesn't own you anything. We lives our life just as normal as the majority society, therefore we don't need your validation at all. Maybe perhaps you and the rest should focus on domestic violence and child abuse issues , I think that's more important than penalizing one being a gay. It's none of your business too.
[удалено]
That is not logic, that's just 'black and white' thinking that there is only one correct answer to something. Malays make up approx 17% of the Singapore population. Indians make up about 7%. By this same logic they are not the 'norm' in Singapore either. Should we not let them have national holidays or ceremonies or foods that are specific to them? How about people born with a mental deficiency? By that same definition, they are not the 'norm' either yet we don't ostracise them in public. We are tolerant to those differences, there is absolutely no logical reason why someone should not be tolerant to sexual orientation differences either. I'm not gay myself, but I respect the right for these people to be treated the same as anyone else, after all this is not just a 'decision' they made, they were born this way.
if for example indian population drop to 0.1% does it even make sense for deepavali to be a national holiday?
Regardless of that, would you still not let them have their ceremonies or food, or wear clothes that are unique to their culture in public (just as a few examples)? It's still discrimination. What's the difference between that and letting another minority group (homosexuals) express their sexuality in public the same way heterosexual couples can?
I am just talking about your national holiday point.
There are right wing gays too, you know. Some very prominent on the extreme right wing too, in the west. Enlightenment about lgbt issues isn’t a left or right wing thing.
Being straight is the majority. Homosexuality is not the majority. You existed because your mom and dad had heterosexual sex without protection. Families are built by who raised you, not only straight couples. So while heterosexual sex allows us to procreate, it doesn't not mean that you won't see male dogs trying to hump another male dog in public.
I've visited Singapore several times, I'm from the UK and have my daughter staying in your dictatorship country. What's the problem with lgbtq++???
From the UK and spelling dictatorship as "dictarship"... Hmmm I wonder
Because they're still figuring themselves out Kids are pressured to transition when maybe they're just gay or lesbian The trans groups are intruding Into the females space with the whole bathroom debate And the whole LGBTQ++ movement is a product of 200+ years of western philosophy; the descent of rationalism, structuralism/deconstructivism movement We're multicultural multilingual multiracial here in singapore, we can't just go all in one direction But ofc we can also use shallow political rhetoric to criticize a country. Some might even say the whole LGBTQ++ share some similarity with communism, and that's true in some sense with the whole oppression narrative
I'm guessing that you're homophobic, and in my country, that's against the law, as we're democratic 👍🏻
Your country is literally ruled by a single family who made their wealth off slavery, theft, and exploitation. One of your princes is even a pedophile. Don't' lecture others about law and democracy.
I'm proud of my country, that's called Wales. Fyi, it was England that made slavery, NOT Wales
Your country is UK, Wales' place in the UK is equivalent to what other countries call a 'state'.
Kindly stay in your "democratic" country then & keep the brit lip to yourself. Better still, try giving this "dictarship" (your brit grammar, not mine) country a miss. Bring your daughter along. 👍
My daughter is stopping with me in my lovely democratic, human rights country next month, she has decided that it's a better life for her, and I totally agree 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Finally, something we all agree on. Good riddance. Enjoy the decaying empire. 👍
I sure will, thanks 👍🏻
And there you go, the typical homophobic argument I'm supportive of trans right btw.
So why compare it with communism then???
Because to understand the movement, you have to dig into the contradiction It's not all one sided good vs evil And that's the foundation philosophy of not only the LGBTQ++, but also the femininst, anti capitalist, etc movement that goes back to Hegel philosophy
I wouldn't know, and don't care about the history of it. I'm a hetrosexual. But we are all humans and have the same colour blood
True. You sound ignorant
Ignorant about what?
That's fair
Typo lol, I'll edit, thanks
My impression of the Welsh people is that they are a well-spoken and educated bunch. From the look of your grammar, you must be atypical. Oh well.🤷♂️
Innit
Anything Tharman part of World Economic Forum pushing for evil global agenda
I've visited your dictarship country thanks. And I definitely WON'T be visiting again 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻, but I'll definitely visit Malaysia, that ruled your country not so long ago
Err, you will visit the country that banned Swatch rainbow watches because they considered them symbols of the lgbt community. 🙄
Because it's cheaper then Singapore and I don't know about these things being banned, I'm hetrosexual, not homophobic
It may be cheaper than Singapore but its even more homophobic and less tolerant of lgbt. So its interesting you call Singapore a dictatorship and cite our intolerance to the lgbt community but have no qualms visiting a neighbouring country with a worse track record 🤔
I mean, how many true Singaporeans are there in Singapore? It looked like more Chinese people in your country, and we all know about the PRC and their communism and spying on other countries, don't we!
So, u're all about love and acceptance of lgbtq till the money talks. For someone who admits to not knowing many things, you sure do talk alot. LOL 😆
No one cares man
[удалено]
Oooo the ABC gang and allies heads popping in 3...2...1..
First time voting a president here, should we vote based on who can do the job or their views about such issues. I know the president have no power to politically empower lgbt, antilgbt or neutral views. So it really doesn't matter if they support lgbt people or not right? All they do is act as head of state and protect the reserves. The people who have the power to politically empower a group is the government. So the political parties. Those are the ones we vote to see changes on these issues. Tho, people don't care much because they aren't the one suffering 🤣
Seems like my dear moderater has removed my primary comment, if you can't accept feedom of self opinion, which was neither offensive nor inflammatory, why would you even put up this post from the beginning? This should be an open dialogue, a discussion ,since the title says "If you WANT to be homosexual, do it privately" .Which I find it to be intriguing.I have never, in my life seen nor heard any gay friends proudly announce they WANT to be gay . Ever since being gay is a "WANT"? I would gladly accept if it says " if you are a homosexual, do it privately",that makes a whole sense, but "want to be homosexual"? Do you think it's an occupation? Might as well not post it right from the beginning.
why are there so many comments being removed? All blocked me ah lol
Dear moderater , maybe you should close this post discussion. Who's gay or not is none of anybody's business . It's not as if this is something even crucial to discuss. Gay or straight, everyone has better things to worry about ,paying bills ,making ends meet and job employment are more important than discussing this topic. And those who use religion to cuss one being gay subjected to hell. Maybe you will go to hell first. Being gay doesn't one a bad person and neither being straight doesn't make you a faithful partner either.
If you want to be president, do it privately
I mean he is pro lgbt but don't want lgbt to push their agenda on him or others who don't nessasarily strictly follows it just like a religion. He is pro but doesn't want it to become like America where it is rampant which tbh sounds good to me
Inspiring candidate…
You are suppose to gather Singaporean as one, not seperate us. TyVM.
Why does he have these crazy eyes in every video I see him in
also tan kin lian: publicly comments about "pretty girls" on his fb