Serious ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marriages

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

The kid did not asked to be born. She still needs a roof over her head, food on the table, schooling. Why is she suffering for her parents' misdeeds?

This "kid did not asked to be born" is an emotive argument that is regularly trotted out in place of the harsh reality that parents, and not society, should be held, and are responsible for the enormous cost of producing and raising their own children. How much would you, as a taxpayer, be willing to pay in taxes, for the irresponsible lifestyle of others? If you allow this, what about for families who can't afford to raise 5-6 kids but yet produce such number of kids?

Why should I and others, as taxpayers, fund the cost of the woman who is unable to close her legs or to use a cheap condom?

Why should I and others, as taxpayers, fund the cost of the man who fucked her and who should be paying for the upkeep of his own child?

Both willingly fucked each other. Presumably, they enjoyed doing so. Why should I and other taxpayers then have to pay for, or bear the cost of their orgasms?

 

[MsPiggyy]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

If a single woman wants to live a lifestyle that includes opening up her legs for a one-night stand, or to a fuck buddy, or to whoever she sexually desires, and in the process, gets pregnant, she should not expect taxpayers to fund her lifestyle.

Otherwise, you will face an explosion of irresponsible men sowing their seeds without having to bear the financial consequences of doing so when their sown seeds results in kids; or single women breeding kids and then expecting society to pick up the cost of their wild and wanton fucking.

Learning to close her legs or using a cheap condom if she is unable to close them, could have solved that woman's problem.

So brilliant ah you! Then the illegitimate children should automatically be exempted from all kinds of taxes. I am going to inform all single mothers and illegitimate children to fight for their rights to be exempted from all kinds of taxes based on your brilliant logic. Sinkies are super brilliant!

 

[MsPiggyy]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Yeah brilliant hor! Then these illegitimate children should also not pay any taxes lor. Why enrich the govt's coffers when they and their single mothers are being discriminated from day one?

 

[MsPiggyy]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Oh that includes asking for refund for the gst tax!

 

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Going by your argument, a divorcee with kids (biological or otherwise) should also not be considered a family unit for purposes of HDB flat application. Irresponsible parents marry and divorce, leaving their kids in the lurch. Why should taxpayers fund such a irresponsible lifestyle?

A divorcee would have been married, indicating an intent to form a family unit when kids come along. The rules provide for this. A single, OTOH, is clearly fucking for the sake of sexual gratification and not to form a family unit. If unplanned kids come along, it doesn't change the fact that the kids are incidental to, and not the purpose of the fucking she engaged in.

There should be some consistency at least even if you want to discriminate.

There's zero discrimination. The rules are very clear right from the start before she willingly opened her legs.

By the way, the said woman was engaged to be married. She got pregnant, fiance got cold feet and dumped her.

That is really a private matter for her and her fiancee to resolve. Both clearly believe it is not anyone's nor everyone's business to interfere with their desire and "right" to fuck, whether as boyfriend, girlfriend or as an engaged couple. I have no doubts that if anyone tells them not to fuck before getting married, they will tell that person to fuck off and mind his/her own business.

Both now shouldn't have a sudden change of heart and now invite, expect or demand those "anyones" and "everyones" to now interfere in their "own business", i.e. in being forced to contribute to the financial cost of raising their own kid.

Again, a cheap condom, whether as a slut, girlfriend, fiancee, etc., could and would have solved the woman's problem.

 

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

So brilliant ah you! Then the illegitimate children should automatically be exempted from all kinds of taxes. I am going to inform all single mothers and illegitimate children to fight for their rights to be exempted from all kinds of taxes based on your brilliant logic. Sinkies are super brilliant!

Taxes are not only for a roof over one's head. If you want to live in a country where you use the pavements and roads instead of walking on sand and sludge; walk under sheltered walkways instead of under a downpour; go to public schools to be educated instead of tending to goats; access public transportation, medical treatment, live under the peace and security provided by the country's security forces, etc., you had jolly well pay your fair share of taxes.

Don't be a leech and expect others to pay the taxes for, or fund the lifestyle that you want to live, or to bear the cost of your orgasms.

 

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Yeah brilliant hor! Then these illegitimate children should also not pay any taxes lor. Why enrich the govt's coffers when they and their single mothers are being discriminated from day one?

What discrimination is there when the rules are very clear right from the start???

 

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

U are just a bias bigot. How do I know this? 2 men fucking each other is disgusting, but 2 women fucking each other is hot, right?

First and foremost, we need to get something right. Two women cannot possibly fuck each other. They lack complimentary organs to do so. I am appalled at the sight of sexual depravity of any kind, not excluding two women "fucking" each other.

People like you who enjoy doing so are not enjoying watching the women "fuck" each other. Rather, you are thrilled at looking at two sets of tits and pussies instead of the usual one.

 

[yellowarse]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

A divorcee would have been married, indicating an intent to form a family unit when kids come along. The rules provide for this. A single, OTOH, is clearly fucking for the sake of sexual gratification and not to form a family unit. If unplanned kids come along, it doesn't change the fact that the kids are incidental to, and not the purpose of the fucking she engaged in.

There's zero discrimination. The rules are very clear right from the start before she willingly opened her legs.

Your argument using 'intent to form a family unit' doesn't stick. There is only a semantic difference in intent between married, divorced and unmarried mums.

Most single mums did intend to form a family unit when they had kids, only to be dumped later by their mates. Or they'd have gone for an abortion, widely available here.

As for divorcees, the intent to form a family unit isn't in question. What is in question is the immorality in forming a family unit, and then disbanding the family unit usually through some immoral acts like spousal abuse and adultery. Should we the taxpayers fund such immorality, going by your argument?

A mum and her biological kids form a biological unit, with or without a spouse. This is understood in the entire animal kingdom. If you want to penalize a mum for being single, then penalize all single mums - unmarried, divorced, widowed.

Even bigoted discrimination needs to be consistent and logical, otherwise why have any legislation?

 

[Leongsam]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Even bigoted discrimination needs to be consistent and logical, otherwise why have any legislation?

Logic has nothing to do with it. The PAP has a template for all aspects of life.

Follow the template and all will be well. Deviate from the template and you will be penalised.

This is what makes society orderly and compliant and this is good for the country as a whole. It results in peace, prosperity and harmony.

 

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

No point in arguing with a homophobic bigot. He was probably raped by an adult male when he was young.

The usual and tiresome "homophobic bigot" gets trotted out in place of reasoned arguments.

As I indicated in Msg 12, I will fully support these faggots if they campaign for an end to all sorts of discrimination listed in the discriminatory First Schedule of the Woman's Charter which unfairly disallows various "consenting adults" from exercising their "right to love" by marrying who they want to.

Let's start with a true believer like you. Would you support all forms of discrimination to be removed to provide for a mother to marry her adult son, or a father to marry his adult daughter, or the various combinations shown below that are currently and unfairly forbidden by the bigots who came up with these discriminatory and utter nonsense in the Women's Charter?

***

FIRST SCHEDULE
Kindred and affinity
prohibited degrees of relationship

[TABLE="class: cms_table, width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]Mother.[/TD]
[TD]Father.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Daughter.[/TD]
[TD]Son.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Father’s mother.[/TD]
[TD]Father’s father.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mother’s mother.[/TD]
[TD]Mother’s father.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Son’s daughter.[/TD]
[TD]Son’s son.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Daughter’s daughter.[/TD]
[TD]Daughter’s son.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Sister.[/TD]
[TD]Brother.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Wife’s mother.[/TD]
[TD]Husband’s father.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Wife’s daughter.[/TD]
[TD]Husband’s son.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Father’s wife.[/TD]
[TD]Mother’s husband.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Son’s wife.[/TD]
[TD]Daughter’s husband.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Father’s father’s wife.[/TD]
[TD]Father’s mother’s husband.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mother’s father’s wife.[/TD]
[TD]Mother’s mother’s husband.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Wife’s father’s mother.[/TD]
[TD]Husband’s father’s father.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Wife’s mother’s mother.[/TD]
[TD]Husband’s mother’s father.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Wife’s son’s daughter.[/TD]
[TD]Husband’s son’s son.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Wife’s daughter’s daughter.[/TD]
[TD]Husband’s daughter’s son.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Son’s son’s wife.[/TD]
[TD]Son’s daughter’s husband.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Daughter’s son’s wife.[/TD]
[TD]Daughter’s daughter’s husband.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Father’s sister.[/TD]
[TD]Father’s brother.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mother’s sister.[/TD]
[TD]Mother’s brother.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Brother’s daughter.[/TD]
[TD]Brother’s son.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Sister’s daughter.[/TD]
[TD]Sister’s son.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[no_faith]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Then ask the woman change gender la

If a man change gender, will he be protected by woman charter? Or only born woman?

If a woman change gender, will she still be protected by woman charter?

If a human declare bi-sexual, how?

 

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Wrong. Scam marriages are one reason to annul a marriage, among a host of others like non-consummation, incest marriage, STD, pregnancy by another party, etc. These are all grounds for a voidable marriage, clearly laid out in Section 106 of the Women's Charter.

But annulment of a marriage a marriage can only be granted by a court after a writ is filed laying out the grounds for a voidable marriage. It is never the function of ROM.

A marriage annulment can only happen in a court of law. Stop inventing new rules like ROM. In order to get a marriage annuled, the the court has to issue a judgement of annulity. In this case, ROM should file in court to annul the marriage between these 2. The court has to look at all the evidence and make the decision.

In addition, if you read the article, the whole problem started when they applied to HDB for a flat as a "family unit". If HDB feels that it has been cheated by these 2 because they do not form an authentic family unit and got a flat under this false pretense, then again, its up to HDB to bring them to court. Its not ROM's business to be so kaypoh and fuck around the way they have. They have way overstepped their boundaries.

Whether intentionally or mistakenly, both of you are conflating two different legal terms, "annul" and "void", as being one and the same. Some definitions before we carry on:

Annulment - "An annulment is a judge's formal declaration that the marriage, in law, never existed. A marriage annulled stands, in law, as if never performed."

Void - "In law, void means of no legal effect. An action, document or transaction which is void is of no legal effect whatsoever: an absolute nullity — the law treats it as if it had never existed or happened."
​

ROM has zero rights to annul a marriage. But ROM has every right to void a marriage. That people are unaware that ROM has the powers to void a marriage does not make what it has done unlawful or wrong.

As an example, you signed a contract to get someone killed for 1,000,000 rupiahs. The assassin changes his mind when he suddenly realises that 1,000,00 rupiahs is not quite the same as one million dollars. He doesn't have to go to court to get the contract nullified. This is simply because it is void in the first place.

 

[yellowarse]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

ROM has zero rights to annul a marriage. But ROM has every right to void a marriage. That people are unaware that ROM has the powers to void a marriage does not make what it has done unlawful or wrong.

Wrong again.

The ROM has zero rights to both annul and void a marriage.

Under the women's charter, there's no reference to voiding a marriage per se, but there are clauses governing void marriages, i.e. marriages which are not contracted under Singapore law and not solemnized by the ROM. E.g. polygamous marriage, underaged marriage, homosexual marriage. These marriages usually occur outside Singapore under other jurisdictions, or in Singapore bypassing the ROM (customary rites).

In such cases, the question of voiding the marriage by ROM is moot, because a marriage licence would not have been granted and there would have been no solemnization at all. But the parties can still apply to the courts – not ROM – to get a statement of declaration confirming the non-status of the marriage.

For marriages which have been solemnized by the ROM and are later found to have voidable grounds for annulment, a writ has to be submitted to the court and the court has then to decide whether to grant nullity.

Go check out Chapter 353 of the Women's Charter: http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/sear...ed TransactionTime:20160613000000;rec=0#pr4-.

 

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Your argument using 'intent to form a family unit' doesn't stick. There is only a semantic difference in intent between married, divorced and unmarried mums.

Most single mums did intend to form a family unit when they had kids, only to be dumped later by their mates. Or they'd have gone for an abortion, widely available here.

They should use condoms before marriage to avoid situations that are clearly spelt out in the rules long before they opened their legs for their few minutes of fun and few seconds of orgasms.

As for divorcees, the intent to form a family unit isn't in question. What is in question is the immorality in forming a family unit, and then disbanding the family unit usually through some immoral acts like spousal abuse and adultery. Should we the taxpayers fund such immorality, going by your argument?

Again, the rules, which are clear right from the start, allow for this. Morality or immorality are nothing more than emotive arguments and attempts at holding taxpayers hostage to the lifestyle and life choices made by such women.

A mum and her biological kids form a biological unit, with or without a spouse. This is understood in the entire animal kingdom. If you want to penalize a mum for being single, then penalize all single mums - unmarried, divorced, widowed.

Once again, the rules are clearly stated. The way you put it is as though these women are all virgin Marys, conceiving without the need for a man. The simple rule is this. Man fucks, man pays. Not man fuck, other men pay.

The animal kingdom functions on the basis of "survival of the fittest". Unlike the self-entitled mentality of many human beings, these animals don't expect handouts. A bird does not expect another bird to build and feather its nest when she opens up her legs to a male bird.

Even bigoted discrimination needs to be consistent and logical, otherwise why have any legislation?

Without legislation, those who do pay for their own orgasms will end up paying half or more than half of their hard-earned salary in taxes for the irresponsible choices and orgasms of the self-entitled.

 

[yellowarse]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Once again, the rules are clearly stated.

You repeat ad nauseam 'the rules are clearly stated'. No one is arguing about the clarity of the rules. We're talking about the illogicality and the discriminatory nature of the rules which often punish the innocent victims and fail to engender the social rationale for such laws in the first place.

A law banning homosexuals from entering Parliament is discriminatory. A law banning only tall homosexuals from entering Parliament is both discriminatory and illogical.

Get it?

 

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Wrong again. The ROM has zero rights to both annul and void a marriage.

I have laid out the legal definition of "annul" and "void" for you and PS. Both of you can continue to stubbornly claim I am wrong and that ROM is wrong. There will be no end to it.

The simple solution now is for the faggots, if they truly and honestly believe they are right, to sue ROM. There should be enough faggots to support them. If they have no money, they can pass the hat around in the next Faggots Festival at Hong Lim.

 

[yellowarse]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

I have laid out the legal definition of "annul" and "void" for you and PS. Both of you can continue to stubbornly claim I am wrong and that ROM is wrong. There will be no end to it.

Stubborn? You're like the kid who covers his ears and shuts his eyes and screams repeatedly "I don't want to listen anymore!"

Maybe this page from a legal website for laymen will help. To recap, a void marriage is one that has not been solemnized by the ROM. A voidable marriage is one that has been solemnized but contains voidable grounds for nullity by the courts.

Don't be blinkered by your prejudices. The rule of law in Singapore is already crumbling; we don't need any stat board acting supra-judicially to further undermine it.

---

https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/void-and-voidable-marriages-in-singapore/

Void and voidable marriages in Singapore

Published on January 3, 2014

Marriages can be terminated in a number of ways, including divorce and separation. Marriages in Singapore can also be voided under certain circumstances. This is also known as an annulment. A marriage may either be void from the start, or voidable at the choosing of the parties.

A marriage is void in the following circumstances as defined by the Women’s Charter:
​

1. A polygamous marriage;​
2. A marriage between parties where one or both parties are below the ages of 18, and a special marriage license has not been granted to the parties;​
3. A marriage between close relatives – for a comprehensive list, click here;​
4. A homosexual marriage – as of December 2013, and the foreseeable future, gay marriages are not legal in Singapore;​

Void marriages are non-marriages, and the laws of Singapore deem the relevant parties to have not entered into a valid marriage at all. Parties are able to obtain a declaration from the courts declaring the non-status of the marriage. This is usually unnecessary as a marriage license would not be granted for marriages between the aforementioned parties, so much so that solemnisation cannot take place.

By section 111, the children of void marriages shall be deemed to be the legitimate child of his parents if, at the date of such void marriage, both or either of the parties reasonably believed that the marriage was valid.

Voidable marriages are marriages that continue to exist, despite a flaw in validity, until such time when a party chooses to terminate the marriage. Marriages may be voidable by a party (the plaintiff) under the following circumstances, by way of the Women’s Charter:
​

1. Non-consummation of marriage (which relates to ordinary sexual intercourse) owing to either physical or mental incapacity of the defendant;​
2. Non-consummation owing to willful refusal of the defendant;​
3. Lack of valid consent to enter into the marriage – perhaps because the plaintiff was coerced into the marriage or threatened with violence;​
4. The plaintiff was suffering from a mental illness when he or she entered into the marriage;​
5. The defendant was carrying a communicable venereal disease at the time of marriage; or​
6. The defendant was pregnant by some other person other than the plaintiff at the time of marriage.​

In order to elect to void the marriage, the party may need to obtain legal representation in order to file a writ for nullity. A plaintiff may be barred from relying on the grounds aforementioned under the specified circumstances in section 107 of the Women’s Charter.

​

 

[PTADER]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

You repeat ad nauseam 'the rules are clearly stated'. No one is arguing about the clarity of the rules. We're talking about the illogicality and the discriminatory nature of the rules which often punish the innocent victims and fail to engender the social rationale for such laws in the first place.

A law banning homosexuals from entering Parliament is discriminatory. A law banning only tall homosexuals from entering Parliament is both discriminatory and illogical.

Get it?

Then only thing I get is that you are resorting to emotive arguments, when reasoned analysis and consideration of the enormous costs and consequences, financial as well as social, of making decisions based on the pull of emotions, should and must be considered.

Everyone wants to play goody two shoes. When they are told that at least half of their salaries will go to paying for these goody two shoes feelings, they will whinge. Some want the best of both worlds - pay low taxes but have access to all sorts of generous social benefits, conveniently forgetting that money does not grow on trees and someone has to eventually pay. It's the "it's okay so long as others and not me are paying for it" mentality at work.

Don't believe me? Look out for the next big whinge when the next increase in GST is announced.

 

[yellowarse]

Re: ROM becomes laughing stock of the world, invent new laws to annul same sex marria

Then only thing I get is that you are resorting to emotive arguments, when reasoned analysis and consideration of the enormous costs and consequences, financial as well as social, of making decisions based on the pull of emotions, should and must be considered.

I'm resorting to reasoned analysis and logical arguments.

If it is so costly and also socially detrimental to provide public housing for a single women and her kids, why differentiate between a single unmarried mum and a single divorced mum?

Going by your standpoint of morality – no less valid even if bigoted – are you saying that the former is more immoral than the latter? Or that somehow more taxes are needed to support the single unmarried mum than the single divorced mum?

N.B. I hate to use words like 'immoral' and 'immorality' but these are words easily understood by bigots.