The Asian Commercial Sex Scene  

Go Back   The Asian Commercial Sex Scene > For stuff you can't discuss with your Facebook Account > Keong Saik/Desker /X-Dresser central

Notices

Keong Saik/Desker /X-Dresser central It's like Geylang on a budget!

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 01-11-2014, 08:34 PM
taxidriversg's Avatar
taxidriversg taxidriversg is offline
Samster
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My Reputation: Points: 248 / Power: 20
taxidriversg is a Helpful and Caring Samstertaxidriversg is a Helpful and Caring Samstertaxidriversg is a Helpful and Caring Samster
we are "greatly shocked and disappointed" by the Court of Appeal's decisi

the Court of Appeal's decision yesterday to reject the challenges to strike down Section 377A of the Penal Code

Section 377A criminalises acts of "gross indecency" between men, without distinctions on whether it is in a public or private space, and imposes a maximum jail term of two years


The highest court in Singapore has upheld Section 377A of the Penal Code, the law that criminalises sex between men, rejecting arguments that the provision contravenes the Constitution

In ruling that the provision is constitutional, the three-judge Court of Appeal yesterday rejected two separate challenges to strike down the law.

Yesterday, in a 101-page written judgment delivered by Judge of Appeal Andrew Phang, the court held that "personal liberty" in Article 9 refers only to the liberty of a person from unlawful incarceration. The court rejected the arguments of the couple's lawyer, Senior Counsel Deborah Barker, that the phrase should be interpreted to include the right to privacy and personal autonomy of an individual to express love towards another person.

As for Article 12, the court held that Section 377A passed a classification test used by the courts to determine whether a statute that differentiates between classes of persons is constitutional.

In fact, Section 377A fell outside the scope of Article 12, which specifically forbids discrimination of citizens on grounds of religion, race, descent and place of birth. The words "gender", "sex" and "sexual orientation" are absent, said the court. It stressed that while arguments mounted by each side of the divide involved "extra- legal considerations and matters of social policy", it can consider only legal arguments.

"Whilst we understand the deeply held personal feelings of the appellants, there is nothing that this court can do to assist them. Their remedy lies, if at all, in the legislative sphere," it said.

this mean we can be charge under Section 377A of the Penal Code "gross indecency" between two men having carnal intercourse against the order of nature

all bro here be carefull will having fun and good luck
  #2  
Old 02-11-2014, 11:11 PM
Don11 Don11 is offline
Samster
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My Reputation: Points: 126 / Power: 0
Don11 deserves two Tigers! - He's a Great GuyDon11 deserves two Tigers! - He's a Great Guy
Re: we are "greatly shocked and disappointed" by the Court of Appeal's decisi

Thanks bro sharing this
Advert Space Available
Bypass censorship with https://1.1.1.1

Cloudflare 1.1.1.1
Reply



Bookmarks
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +8. The time now is 10:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copywrong © Samuel Leong 2006 ~ 2023 ph