Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Abstracts of essays; news; announcements; short takes.
About Me
- Yawning Bread Sampler
- This blog carries summary abstracts of Yawning Bread essays, with space for comments.
Here too are other tidbits that are too short for the main Yawning Bread site.
To email me, go to the main site.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(161)
-
▼
August
(22)
- The Good News Times strikes again
- Religious affiliation of MPs
- Teacher's termination still unaccounted for
- CPF and its creaky assumptions
- Cinema: Jesus camp
- Singapore second last in Asia democracy index
- Race, religion and Negarakuku
- 2 by 6
- Police declare joggers an "illegal assembly"
- Time travel via our roads
- Spirits from our past
- Pity the heliconias
- Death by numbers, part 2
- Death by numbers
- Picking on a picnic
- Public transport model needs a rethink
- Bark and crumble
- Letter to the people of Singapore
- My kissing project, part 4
- Lee Low Tar
- Where to draw the line on marriage?
- My kissing project, part 3
-
▼
August
(22)
Posts
4 comments:
heterosexual marriages exist as a tradition; it does not require a new legal endorsement; homosexual marriages not having such a status, requires this; this is what traditionalists meant
obviously, current laws do not treat heterosex and homosex equally; however, if officially homosexuality is still a crime, though usually unprosecuted, it is hard to see how homosexual marriages can be legally endorsed; you guys are fighting the wrong battle
sgsociety.com
Perhaps the bigots out there are realising that their arguments against decrimilisation are flimsy, so they are changing to a scare-mongering tactic by subtly shifting the debate to gay marriage, the prohibition of which enjoys more support. By the way, has he submitted his rebuttal to the assistant professor's comments to the Straits Times? Was it rejected for publication?
Lets say today we legalise homosexual marriage, tomorrow you will find triple saying they love each other, and we should legalise marriage to 3 persons. So where do we stop?
Erm, polygamy is already legal in many states.
Enough with the slippery slope argument already. I take it you were against inter-racial/inter-social caste marriages back when it was considered taboo?
Post a Comment