This month Singapore passed a bill that would give legal teeth to themoral

游客2023-11-26  9

问题     This month Singapore passed a bill that would give legal teeth to the
moral obligation to support one’s parents. Called as the Maintenance of Par- 【M1】______
ents Bill, it received the backing of the Singapore Government.
    That does not mean it hasn’t generated discussion. Several members of the
Parliament opposed the measure as un-Asian. Others acknowledged the【M2】______
problem of the elderly poor believed it a disproportionate response.
    More others believed it would subvert relations within the family: cyn- 【M3】______
ics dubbed it the ""Sue Your Son"" law.
    Those who say that the bill does not improve filial responsibility, of 【M4】______
course, are right. It has nothing to do with filial responsibility. It kicks in
what filial responsibility fails. The law cannot legislate filial responsibility 【M5】______
any less than it can legislate love. All the law can do is to provide a safety 【M6】______
net where this morality proves insufficiently. Singapore needs this bill not to 【M7】______
replace morality, but providing incentives to shore it up. 【M8】______
    Traditionally, a person’s insurance for poverty in his old age was his 【M9】______
family. The problem in Singapore is that the moral obligation to look after
one’s parents is unenforceable. A father can be compelled by law to main
tain his children. A husband can be forced to support his wife. But, until
now, a son or daughter has no legal obligation to support his or her parents. 【M10】______ [br] 【M10】

选项

答案 has∧ — had或has — had

解析 此处用“has”显然与事实不符,因为此法律已生效,且规定了子女对父母的赡养义务,所以应使用过去式“had”或现在完成式“has had”,另要注意这句话实际上使用了“not…until now”的结构。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3220105.html
最新回复(0)