Monday, March 19, 2007
I have take these articles from the online thingy from ask n learn. I am truly sorry for the trouble i have caused you Miss Chew *sob* PLEASE FORGIVE ME! I am unable to just link you the source so i have copied and pasted it.
FIRST ARTICLE
Pub Date: 18/02/2007 Pub: ST Page: 10Day: SundayEdition: FIRSTHeadline: Fine for using phone while crossing the road?By: VINCENT LEOWPage Heading: newsSource: SPH
New York is considering a penalty for crossing roads while using electronicdevices. Should Singapore follow?MOST people know that the dangerous habit of talking on a mobile phone whiledriving is against the law. But should the same ban apply to pedestrianscrossing the road?In New York City, three pedestrians plugged into their iPods have been killedin the past few months after they stepped off kerbs and into the path ofoncoming vehicles.New York senator Carl Kruger last month even proposed a Bill that would seepeople fined US$100 (S$153) for using any kind of electronic device whilecrossing a road.Should the same ban be considered for gadget-obsessed Singapore?The Sunday Times took a stroll down Orchard Road on Wednesday and, in the spaceof 30 minutes, spotted six people crossing the road – jaywalking even –opposite Lucky Plaza, while blithely chatting on their mobile phones.The law here is only hard on motorists, who can be fined up to $1,000 andjailed up to six months for driving and talking at the same time. They also get12 demerit points and risk losing their licence altogether.Repeat offenders can be fined up to $2,000 and jailed up to a year.Of 10 drivers polled by The Sunday Times, three of them thought it was abouttime some of the responsibility for road safety was shifted to pedestrians.Operations manager Sheree Loh, 40, said she once almost ploughed into a youngman who was too busy listening to his MP3 player and reading his book to noticeher car.“He did not even hear me when I sounded the horn and continued walking likenothing had happened,” she said. “People like him are road hazards. A finemight actually make them take road safety more seriously...It’s for their owngood.”Pedestrians, not surprisingly, want to be left –literally – to their own devices.All 10 pedestrians The Sunday Times spoke to dissed the idea of fines.Junior college student Tan Wee Kiat, 17, who was sending an SMS while using azebra crossing, said: “I believe I have enough common sense to take note oftraffic when I’m crossing the road, even though I may be distracted by myphone.”Secretary Mindy Tan, 29, said it would be too troublesome to unplug herearphones just to cross the road.“Besides, people can also be distracted by other things, like eating,” shesaid. “Where do you draw the line?”Accounts manager Eddie Foo, 30, meanwhile, doubted that a fine would solveanything. “We have fines for jaywalking, but people still jaywalk. If thatcannot be enforced effectively, what more this?”While there are no figures on the number of accidents involving distractedpedestrians, some feel there should at least be some public education on theissue.President of the National Safety Council Tan Jin Thong said: “We should startby adding this element in our next road safety campaign to make the public moreaware.”leowmc@sph.com.sgFine them or leave them be? Join our online poll at www.stomp.com.sg or sendyour views to
75557@stomp.com.sgSECOND ARTICLE
Pub Date: 04/03/2007 Pub: NP Page: 16,17Day: SundayHeadline: Why forbid our love?Notes:Picture
Defiant brother and sister go to German court to continue living as man & wife,with their 4 kidsPage 16***** Headline: Forbidden LovePage Heading: NewsPicture Caption:Love is blind : Shafie (above) and Hamisah (right, with their kids) fell inlove not knowing they're siblings.Love child : An illustration of Patrick and Susan with their baby. They havefour children together.Notes:Picture German man falls in love with sister & they have 4 kids. They now ask Germancourt to legalise incestAS a 3-year-old, Patrick Stuebing was given up for adoption. When the German, living in the city of Leipzig, reached the age of 18, hestarted to search for his biological parents. Four years later, his search ended. But it was also the begining of adisturbing story. When he tracked down his mother, Ana Marie, he also found that he had ayounger sister named Susan Karolewski who was living with her. He moved in withthem. His mother allowed him to share her young daughter's bedroom. She was only15 then. 'We stayed up late into the night to talk to each other about our hopes anddreams,' he told the Daily Mail. Six months after his visit, his mother died and Susan began to depend moreon her brother. He said: 'I became head of the family and I had to protect my sister. 'She is very sensitive, but we helped each other during this very difficultperiod and eventually that relationship became physical.' In 2001, their son, Erik, was born. He was taken into foster care. The pair was then tried for incest. The district court in Leipzig heard how from January 2001 until August 2001,Stuebing 'had sexual intercourse with his sister 16 times'. He was given a year's suspended jail term after being found guilty on allcounts. Susan, then 17, was treated as a juvenile and placed into the care ofyouth services. But after the birth of two more children, the court was not so lenient. Stuebing was eventually sentenced to 10 months in prison. The brother and sister had one more child and found themselves in courtagain in 2005. Stuebing was sentenced to 2 1/2 years for re-committing incest. According to Spiegel online, while her brother was in prison, Susan had afifth child with another man. But the moment her brother was released, she told German reporters: 'I'm sohappy Patrick is here and that I have him again. I need him.' Stuebing reaction: 'I am doing well. I will always be there for Susan andthe children.' After his release, the unemployed mechanic continued to live with hissister. Although he has had himself sterilised to avoid fathering morechildren, he could be sent back to jail for persistently re-offending. In the meantime, the couple appealed to the German high court, challengingthe country's law against incest. On Friday, the court ordered a delay in punishing Stuebing. Court officialssaid an injunction temporarily protecting him from jail would be issued andwould apply till the Federal Constitutional Court has ruled on his claim thathe has a right to commit incest.ROMANTICAccording to the German news agency DPA, the brother and sister have posed inthe German media for romantic photos together and some Berlin politicians havesupported them, contending that incest may be immoral, but should not bepunished by law. German newspapers mockingly call them the 'forbidden lovers of theFatherland', but Susan says: 'We didn't know each other in childhood. We fellin love as adults and our love is real.' According to the Daily Mail, Stuebing was the third of eight children borninto a poor, uneducated and dysfunctional family. His violent father, now dead, attacked him with a knife when he was 3 and hewas made a ward of court and then adopted. Susan was born on the same day her parents' divorce was finalised. She had atroublesome childhood. Her chain-smoking, unemployed mother often left her at home alone, orentertained lovers while she was there. Poorly educated and barely able to write, even today, Susan remembers beingunloved and a burden to her mother. Six other brothers and sisters, some ofwhom were born with disabilities, died in childhood. One was run over andkilled age 7. Another mentally handicapped sister died at the age of 8. Susan was close to one of her disabled brothers, Andre, but he died in thesame year as her mother. That was when Stuebing came into her life. The two visit their son Erik often. The couple's other children are Sarah, now 4, Nancy, 3, and Sofia, 1. Two ofthe children are known to have disabilities. All the children except Sofia havebeen taken into foster care. Brother-sister relationships have been reported closer home too. In 1995, abrother and sister who lived as husband and wife for 10 years in Johor Baruwere sentenced to jail for 30 days by the Syariah Court. Their relationshipresulted in three children. The couple, who are natural siblings, had been separated when they wereyoung. Hamisah Salleh (who was 32 in 1995) was adopted by a family in JB. Shafie Salleh (then 29) grew up with his parents in Perak. In 1985, he went to work in JB. The two met and fell in love, not knowing that they were siblings. Theshocking truth came to light only when they wanted to get married. Shafie and Hamisah were forbidden by the court to live together afterserving their jail sentences. On the day they were jailed, not one of their closest relatives wantedanything to do with the kids. Finally, a neighbour was allowed by the religious authorities to take thechildren in.
i'm emo @ 5:40 AM
Sunday, March 04, 2007
I REFER to the article "Forbidden Love" (The New Paper Mar 4 2007, page 16-17)
This article has greatly sparked my interest, as it tells about a brother and sister defiantly commiting incest. Firstly, in this article it is mentioned that Patrick Stuebing was given up for adoption, and through a twist of events he had met up with his biological sister. They stayed in the same room nad were close to each other, and eventually had their son. Erik. Patrick did not stop there, he continued with more children and was severely punished by the law. The article also touched on another Malaysian couple who met and fell in love withou knowing they were siblings, and only found out the truth when they were to be married.
I strongly believe that incest is immoral and I find it utterly disgusting for one to commit incest. Patrick and his sister, even after knowing of their relationship as siblings continued to commit this crime. In my opinion he is not only showing disrespect to himself but also to his sister, if i were in his shoes i would have avoided coming into close contact with her, and i would definitely do my best to maintain a brother sister relationship, it seems that Patrick gave in to his human instincts and denied himself his morality. Thus, he deserves to be punished by the law.
On the other hand, the Malaysian couple, though having comitted incest, should not have been punished by the law. As this is an exception, they were unaware of the fact that they were siblings and thus cannot be blamed for the incident, I feel that it is unfair to them. Personally if i were to judge them, I would have issued them a warning, only then if they continue to commit the crime, shall they be punished accordingly.
The article also questioned us on wether we should lighten up on incest. I strongly believe we should not, though committing incest may not directly harm anyone, it would indirectly cause trouble to our society. Problems such as children of incest couples having a higher risk of developing severe mental and physical disabilities, may lead to these couples throwing away their children, and if everyone does that, there will be many homeless children and it will be a burden on the government to house this children. It would be inhumane to let them die, but if left with no choice, I am afraid they would have to face that destiny. We must not let the selfish love of people cause more trouble to innoccent lives. We do not identify our siblings for nothing, and incest should not have a place in society.
i'm emo @ 3:22 AM
