Ok tis topic have 2 areas
1) should gay be allowed
2) Should a religious group hijacked other secular group to
spread their propaganda about anti homosexual
Your focus is on (1).
From wat I see, your stand is really on the law of singapore.
Sure... u can say it banned homosexual and it is still in the
singapore statues. However it is also expressly mentioned tat the
law is not going to be enforced. In fact the reason why it is still
written in the penal code, accoding to my opinion, is simply
because a lot of religious people pushed for this. Is it right or
wrong or is tis inclusive or immoral, is already left out of the
picture. The government just want peace and I agree with them tat
it is a wise decision.
If u wanna look at the "law", why not look at it from a global
perspective ? Which countries actually ban homosexual ? If u look
at developed countries like Europe, america and australia,
homosexual is legal. Only in countries ltat is religious,
homosexual is illegal. So if u wanna talk about law and how
parliament debates etc, the fact is homosexual is viewed as human
right in these developed countries. Is singapore more developed
than them ? Obviously not
In fact if u ask me, wat is the sin homosexual did to society ?
The only problem they give is they will not produce children. Tat
is the same as nuns, monks and father of religious groups. A
classic question anti homosexual like to ask is "How will u feel if
your son told u u r gay". My answer is "I will feel sad. but if my
son told me he is gonna be a monk, i will feel more devastated.".
Gay can still be close to their family. A religious figure have
reduced ties with their family and their religion is in the first
place. So please tell me wat other harm have they done to
society.
Now lets talk about issue (2) Should a religious group hijacked
other secular group to spread their propaganda about anti
homosexual
If u ask me, obviously I find tat distasteful because not
everyone subscribes to the same religion. Your religion tell u to
do tis and tat but tat is your business, not mine. Do not let your
religious practices affect my lifestyle because I do not believe.
Why r religious people not keeping to themselves and try to
influence the secular world ? Tis group chose to include
homosexual. U can choose to form a group against it but trying to
use a system flaw and outrun it is regrettable. I find tat as
uncomfortable and wonder if one day my lifestyle have to
change becauase of other people's religion
As I can see a gradual softening up of your view on point (1), I
will not dwell any further on it, as I do not expect anyone to
readily accept anyone else's view, least of all in public.
So i will dwell on point (2), which you are attempting your best
to defend. I had tried to liberally come to your viewpoint, but i
cannot reconcile myself your fallacies.
a.) Hijack:- is a democratically held election and won
considered a 'hijack' as you claim? Is Obama a pirate/hijacker too
by your defination?
b.) Again, yet again, you succumbed to your
personal ingrown prejudices against the new exco and draw
inferences to their religious beliefs.
Aware is an inclusive organisation. At no time does it say it is
limited to only a certain racial group or claim any religious
affinity. The only drift is based on sex, which should be
rightfully so, so that it may without fear or favour or
interference from the opposite sex to present a view from our
fellow female citizens as a civil society organisation to our
community to discuss or act on, for the furtherment of our society
which is made up of female species as well.
It is with great sadness i felt, as well as many i know, when
the ex-co used the dirty trick of race/religious card to present
their disatisfaction, which many others foolishly fell for
it
As a child, i made the mistake many did and wondered why there
were so many chinese in my school, malays and indians were so few.
Only later did i found out majority of singaporeans were chinese,
as such, the ratio would be never be a 50/50 in all schools.
Similarly in working life, it would be impossible to fill an
entire organisation with such ratios, because ALL our races(ethnic
groups) has the freedom of choice to work anywhere they wish.
Similarly too in any civil society organisation. That the new
committee were of one particular religious affinity is never one of
specific intentions, but one of natural coincidence based on their
desire to serve society. At no time had this new committee claim it
is not an inclusive organisation.
There are other racially or religiously affiliated civil
society, but AWARE is most definately not one of them, as the ex-co
and other anarchists are attempting to make it out as a sure
thing.
That they had been single out as religious fundamentalists is
ludicrous and in our society's harmonious context, a dangerous
mischief and MUST CEASE!
Worse still are the immatured death threats. How are they going
to work on other issues to elevate the lives of our womenfolk if
nutheads continue to harp on lunacies?
I sincerly hope that you see my point. I do not seek that
you to agree with me, but please do spend some
time, consider and erase that 'religious' affiliation
link. It doesnt exists or compromise their attitudes towards
serving society, something we in Singapore sorely lacks.
