Singapore parliament to debate gay sex and definition of marriage

Oct 20, 2022 | 🚀 Fathership AI

Debate on gay sex and the protection of the status quo position on marriage will commence on November 28 in the Singapore parliament, and put to a vote separately.

On Thursday (Oct 20), Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam tabled the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill to repeal Section 377A, while Minister for Social and Family Development Masagos Zulkifli introduced the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment No. 3) Bill to amend the Constitution.

Section 377A: Criminalising gay sex

In August, in announcing the government’s plan to repeal the law, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said the move would reflect “current social mores”.

“Most people accept that a person’s sexual orientation and behaviour is a private and personal matter, and that sex between men should not be a criminal offence,” he had said in the rally.

Section 377A was first introduced in the then colony in 1871. In 1938, the colonial government put in place Section 377A criminalising sex between men following reports of homosexual relations between European men and Asian male prostitutes.

Article 156: Protecting the definition of marriage

In order to maintain current family and social norms to appeal to the wider conservative Singaporeans, constitutional amendments will be made to protect the current definition of marriage.

The constitutional amendment, tabled by Minister for Social and Family Development Masagos Zulkifli, will introduce a new Article 156 (Institution of Marriage) clause to the Constitution.

Article 156 is drafted in two parts:

  • (1) that the Legislature, that is Parliament, may, by law, define, regulate, protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote the institution of marriage. 
     
  • (2) that the Legislature provides for the Government and public authorities to protect and promote the institution of marriage in the exercise of their functions.

How is marriage legally defined in Singapore?

The current legal definition of marriage is found in provisions in the Women’s Charter.

One of the aims of the Women’s Charter is “to provide for monogamous marriages”. The Interpretation Act defines a monogamous marriage as one “recognised by the law of the place where it is contracted as a voluntary union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others during the continuance of the marriage”.

The Women’s Charter adds further details. The most pertinent to the debate on Section 377A is Section 12(1): “A marriage solemnised in Singapore or elsewhere between persons who, at the date of the marriage, are not respectively male and female is void.”

Progressives vs traditionalists

Early this year, market research firm Ipsos polled 500 people on the topic of Section 377A of the Penal Code and found that 44 per cent of respondents support the law.

This is down from the 55 per cent who said so in 2018, when a similar survey was done.

In a widely circulated WhatsApp message addressed to church leaders, a pastor from a local Christian church said that a constitutional clause referencing the current definition of marriage was likely in order to “balance” a possible repeal of Section 377A.

People who attended an event billed as the Protect Singapore Townhall have also spoken out against Section 377A being repealed, unless and until there are “adequate safeguards” to protect marriages, which include enshrining man-woman marriages in the Constitution. More than 1,200 people showed up at the townhall, which was held on Jul 23.

Government moving on with the times while not leaving traditionalists behind

While there are growing support within the society to repeal 377A, the Government is cognizant of the fact that Singaporeans are by far and large still a conservative society that conforms to traditional, heterosexual family values.

“Most people accept that a person’s sexual orientation and behaviour is a private matter, and that sex between men should not be a criminal offence,” said the joint statement by the Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Social and Family Development.

“The government supports this view, and has affirmed that it will uphold the current heterosexual definition of marriage and the family structure that arises from it,” the statement said.

Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam had earlier said that political parties or groups who wanted to challenge the definition of marriage and fight for same-sex marriage could do so.

“They will have to put that in their manifesto, fight elections, get a majority and then change the definition of marriage,” he told local media.


➡️ Follow Fathership on Telegram

新加坡7人“换妻”迷奸案细节公布!妻子被下药,全程录像直播...

Nov 03, 2022 | 🚀 Fathership AI

几名新加坡男子,在网上论坛认识后,沉浸在性幻想中无法自拔。

为了满足他们心中变态的好奇心,他们开始筹划换妻,并下药迷倒自己的妻子,让其他男子强奸自己的妻子!

昨天(10月31日),这起轰动新加坡一时的罪案在新加坡法庭进行了审理,涉案的七人中,有四人认罪,其中一人当场被判刑。

因为情况太过恶劣,为了保护受害人法院并未透漏她们的任何资料。被告人的名字也全部用字母代替。

回顾这起案件,这些男子的行径着实震碎了正常人的三观……

新加坡这名男子迷倒妻子 邀请其他人强奸并直播录像!

新加坡本体媒体《8视界新闻网》报道,法庭文件透露这起案件的主犯,是一名化名为J的新加坡男子。

J今年52岁,有着一份正当的工作,犯案时是一名业务拓展经理。这些年他和妻子一共生下了三个孩子,一家人原本很和谐地生活在一起。

不过在平静的生活下,J内心里涌动着一些邪恶的想法。

终于,在2010年,他在一个网络论坛上遇到了很多和自己臭味相投的人。在这个虚拟的平台,J肆无忌惮表露出自己的变态性癖,并发表了想玩换妻游戏的言论。

在这里,他们一起分享了很多有关“换妻”的想法。

聊着聊着,有一天他再也忍不住自己内心的想法,问自己妻子是否愿意接受3p。不出所料的,J的妻子拒绝了这个“提议”。

不过,这并没有阻止J付诸行动。

在一开始,包括J在内的一些人纷纷在家中安装网络摄像头。之后,他们会挑选时间告知网友相关的账号和密码,让他们自行观看自己和妻子的性爱视频。

经过一段时间后,J还是不满足。

于是,在某一天他下药迷晕了自己的妻子,然后邀请其他网友来家中与其发生关系!

随着事态的发展,J越来越沉迷其中……2013年,趁着妻子身体不适的时候,J还偷偷换了药物,再次邀请朋友来家中迷奸妻子。

这次,J竟然还打开了网络直播!

沉迷于“换妻游戏”,J不仅仅是让别人和自己妻子发生关系,同时他也跟其中一名网友K“商量好了”,趁着K迷晕自己妻子的工夫和她发生了性关系。

在某种程度上,K的行为更加恶劣,他甚至自己充当了摄像师的角色,拍下了J和自己妻子发生关系时的整段性爱视频……

渐渐的,J的妻子在不知情的情况下跟多人发生了性行为,相关视频还被上传到网络。

在当时,引起了相当多人的关注。

换妻行为曝光报警 更多人牵涉其中受重罚

J本以为这件事可以一直继续下去,不料在今年,他的妻子无意中看见丈夫手机在播放视频。

在好奇心的驱使下,她看到视频内容,这才恍然发现:

在过去的几年里,丈夫在暗地里进行了多次换妻活动,而自己在不知情的状态下被多次迷晕,在和他人强行强行发生关系后还被拍照记录……

拿着证据,J的妻子当面质问K,而K也承认自己曾经和昏迷的她有过性行为,并将自己妻子迷晕交给J的事实。

在得知真相后,J的妻子立即选择报警。随着案件的调查,调查人员惊讶地发现,还有更多人参与其中。

其中,有一名参加了J“举办的”换妻活动的L,也对自己的妻子如法炮制。

在一次在作案时,L的妻子尽管被下药后蒙住眼睛,在中途清醒了过来。

但L居然并未因此感到害怕而终止犯罪活动,而是要求自己一名同事P直接强行跟自己妻子发生关系,幸而L的妻子及时挣脱逃离,才免遭摧残。

之后,P在一封信中交代了全部经过,并表示自己不知道受害人并不知情才犯下罪案。

但法律并不会因为他的解释而对他开恩,最总P被判处三年监禁。他是涉案七名男子中,第一个被判刑的男子。

还有四人也已认罪,等待下一轮审讯。相信在严明的法律下,他们肯定无法逃脱坐牢。

不过,涉案情节严重的K在落网后,一再向警方和法官说自己有心理疾病,并要求医生为其检测,意图逃脱刑罚。

新加坡心理卫生院诊断后,确认了K患有偷窥症。但在审理中法官认为K对自己的非法行为是知情的,依旧是犯罪行为。

K对法院的说法表示不服,并要求开庭申辩。

但K的犯罪事实已被揭露,并且为自己的行为供认不讳,加上此案件牵连甚广,性质过于恶劣,估计也是难逃法律制裁。


➡️ Follow Fathership on Telegram