Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Abstracts of essays; news; announcements; short takes.
About Me
- Yawning Bread Sampler
- This blog carries summary abstracts of Yawning Bread essays, with space for comments.
Here too are other tidbits that are too short for the main Yawning Bread site.
To email me, go to the main site.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(136)
-
▼
November
(13)
- Stem cell research in Singapore
- Hate speech law badly drafted
- What our non-crusading media avoids
- Our disgraceful trinity: littering, inconsideratio...
- The niqab and the freedom of religion
- All work, little pay
- Bad rep costs
- But if you can't rape your wife, who can you rape?
- Waylaid by rubbish
- Pseudo repeal under cover of smoke?
- An echoless ravine
- Quicksand conservatism
- A bit of Kenya in Singapore
-
▼
November
(13)
Posts
5 comments:
A well-written though-provoking post as usual.
It led me to wonder why politicians in the US want to flaunt their religiosity credentials. This also reminded me of the ROC President Chen Shui Bian who was reported by the ROC press to have tried to use his influence in the Presbyterian Church of Taiwan lately to persuade Former President Lee Teng Hui to throw his weight behind him in the recent crisis. It was related that a minister had attempted to convince Former President Lee that Chen is the choice of God. Can it be more ludicrous? Thankfully Lee did not accede.
It must not have occured to most people that religion could be used as a means to a less than moral end.
It is often argued by the devout that it is a bulwark against the rising tides of immoral modern culture, post-Enlightenment moral relativism and what not, thus it is important for people to be religious. But this also means not questioning the sacred and what others hold sacred. With critical discussion out of the way and driven by self-righteousness we are no better than a mob!
People should learn that one can be moral without having a religion and one may not be good even when professing one.
YB wrote: "If the Mark Foley and Ted Haggard cases are likely to affect the outcome, then it would be silly to keep Singaporeans ignorant of these factors. It's probably as simple as that."
I've no alternative theory to offer but I really doubt that. The Sg media esp ST has on occasions omitted certain key points in an article esp gay affirmative ones (think Brad Pitt who said he wouldn't get married until gays can) although its omission is likely to leave the reader "stranded" unless the ST is not their main source of news. YB wrote about this in "Why I was such a bitch on Tuesday."
- Sylvia
GAY BASHING. That is what the name of the game is.
The Singapore Newspapers, all state-owned, should be read ONLY for comic relief and lining the kitchen floor when cooking while stir-frying veggies in a wok, visiting the toilet.
Anything 'anti-gay', will go straight into their print, a 'real fake read' for the Singapore newspaper reader.
All Singapore Govt propanganda.
THESE ARE FACTS:
The Republican Party in America stands for 'moral, family values', n the very rich are taxed just a teeny bit.
Ex Pastor Haggard,represents the republican christian-faith base. well, Haggard has shown that he is a fake. As a PASTOR, Haggard was reaping in millions, all tax-free, as churches n religious orgs in America are NOT TAXED. That is how religion works?- "do u accept Jesus as your lord n savior?"- Dial the toll-free # below, 1-800-CON U, n give donations. We accept all major credit cards as well. "Jesus will set u free!"
yeah...it set Pastor Haggard free alright, right out of his church n org, with his meth buy n his phone call FROM A HOTEL ROOM ,for a massage from a gay guy.
Mark Foley was the ex- Republican Florida congressman, who the Republicans knew could hold the Republican seat. Apparently, everyone knew that Foley was gay.
But Foley is more than that...Foley is a sicko - he goes under the HEADING: Phedophile, since he likes young boys who work as 'pages'.
When the Singapore newspeople see this type of news, they print it in their papers, ' oh look, oh see yeah yeah...bad gay politicians...gay wot???'
Wrong, Singapore news editors, you are 'faking it' with the Singapore newsreaders.
You, the Singapore news editors n your authoritarian bosses are the problem.
So typical, as u take everything 'out of context'.
LHL hemmed and hawed too when I asked him the question publicly (in a closed door session) about the matter.
The question then was :why the review of S377 was then rumoured to be restricted to heterosexuals and that homosexuality was excluded in the amended law. (which has unfortunately, come to become fact in the actual proposed changes).
The hemmed/hawwed reply was that one should not rock the boat, one should respect the conservative majority...
(so why bother replacing LKY to LHL if he cannot rock the boat and bring about changes to stay relevant to the constantly evolving world?)
hmmmm... which branch of the conservative majority?
we're all self-serving self-interested individuals at the end of the day. Pithy some have more power than others.... unequal world we live in.
E.o.M.
Lesley,
I just tested both links. They work. Perhaps that moment, your server was too slow. Do try again.
Post a Comment