Can the "Human Spirit" experience any sense of
"nobility" when it is subjected to any controls in any
form or ways ?
The seemingly profound statements that you continue to
make belies the experience that you intend to portray of
yourself.
Do not mistaken that the "RIGHT" is "God's Given
Right" - but that which is clearly thought by Human Mind,
and clearly written by Human hands to form the
Constitution to define the Life that Singapore was meant to have -
a Life that equivalent to the ideals and ambitions of the First
World that Singapore aspire to achieve.
RESPONSIBILITY is itself a behaviourial act that the
Constitution is supposed to have encouraged by the Life that it has
intended for Singaporeans to have.
Responsibility is a consequence that is supposed to be
encouraged by the Constitutional Rights that Singaporeans are
supposed to have.
Why are there so much angst towards seemingly immature and
irresponsible acts of Singaporeans that require the Government to
enact more laws to ensure more responsible behaviour from 4.5
million people to live together ?
Is it not a fact that
the missing RESPONSIBILITY is due to the
MISSING Constitutional Rights from the Life of Singaporeans ?
Can LKY be pragmatic when he is not morally upright ?
Can there be pragmatism when there are no morals ?
Should it not be morals guiding pragmatic acts ?
Is this not part of the cause of the loss in the sense of
responsibility in those Singaporeans whom you have held such
disdain ?
This has resulted in morals being foresaken as
pragmatism becomes more convenient, and has resulted in
Singaporean's Constitutional Rights being forfeited for the
pragmatic ways that LKY has seen fit to govern in the ways he
has.
Your last comment is again the typical reaction of one that is
accustomed to being defensive in making false assumptions when
afraid to debate your position without hiding behind such
thinking.
Your kind of thinking - with your justification of
LKY's pragmatism - will be welcomed by Bush and Cheney, and it will
be a rough ride ahead for Obama and Biden to undo what their
predecessors have done.
Likewise, the arrogant ways that LKY had governed Singapore -
with the excuse of pragmatism has resulted in untold damages that
Singaporeans will continue to live with for the next few
generations.
When all the skeletons have emerged from the closet, you will
perhaps learn that pragmatism cannot take precendence over moral
correctness.
The text that has been written in the Singapore
Constitution are the ideals espoused by nations greater than ours,
and are also identical to the declared ideals of the United
Nations that LKY's government had committed to.
If others have achieve First World status after more then 100
years of history, are we anywhere near half of their progress
achieved in the 50 odd years since Self-Government in 1957, and
full independence in 1965 ?
Looking back over the last 20 years, Singapore is still hung-up
to the apron springs of larger economies, while we exposed
ourselves to the self-serving politics of LKY and his PAP at the
expense of Singapore real progress in Human Talent, Human
Achievements, and Human Creativity.
Nobility is a result of experience and proper upbringing.
Parents play a fair greater part in that than any governments.
What in the world does pragmatism have to do with morals?
There's no connection at all. Pragmatism recognises morals as a
tool to provide ground rules for a stable society, moral denies
pragmatism as a valid way of looking at things.
Pragmatism recognises physical and biological constraints,
morals does not. They are both radically different perspectives in
a given scenario. As long as we exist in the physical world,
pragmatism will always make more sense.
Because we live in a multi racial society surrounded by
countries whose politicians already like using us to score
political points. I enjoy talking with their citizens, but
politicans are never a reasonable bunch.
Because we are descended from lowly educated labourers and
required laws to make sure we don't resort to irresponsible
behaviour against people we disagree with. Violent culture is a far
harder thing to rid ourselves of when the other guy has a different
skin color and language.
Oh don't start playing the bloody victim here Atobe. I have
always been willing to parttake in meaningful debate with others
with different viewpoints. I recognise that i'm ignorant and
welcome new perspectives.You, however hide behind the ignorant
Singaporeans logic and lash out at anyone who disagrees.
What i dislike, is dealing with hysteria when i put forward a
viewpoint that is different. What i dislike, is having my posts
dissected to the extent that the original meaning is lost. What i
dislike most of all, is having to debate with people who refuses to
see any common ground with people who disagrees with them.
You are not even willing to respect a person with differing
viewpoints, so don't claim the moral highground.
About Bush and Cheney, incorrect. My pragmatism acknowledges
that wars cost more than they are worth and a policing action is
far more difficult to maintain than a military action.Yet they did
it, because they felt it was morally correct for America to remain
the dominant superpower in the world.
Moral correctness does far more damage than pragmatism.
Religious wars are fought over moral correctness, racial
discrimination comes from moral correctness. The constant
tendancies to demolish regimes because they're not pro American
gains its strength from moral correctness over no Democracy.
Terrorism, comes from people who wants moral correctness but has
neither the economic or miltary strength to do so.
You are assuming that i believe the PAP and LKY to be a morally
upright government, that they have no skeletons in their closets.
Incorrect, i have always regarded governments as no better than
gangs i do not believe that there are no backhanded dealings within
the PAP.
I work in the Creative industry, so don't pull out this Human
Creativity crap when you obviously have so little dealings with it.
Creativity comes from an actual formal education, not from this
vague "freedom" you talk about. Da Vinci is both a scientist and an
artist.
True masterpieces are not made by splashing pails of paint at a
canvas. They are made through hard research and experimentation
like all other fields.