belated support

 

 

(source)

 

Yesterday – May 17 (Singapore time) – was International Day against Homophobia. This is a belated support for the fight against the civil discrimination against the LGBTQ community as well as the criminalisation of homosexual activity in certain parts of the world.

 

Singapore is one such nation who should repent for its societal apathy towards religious discrimination of the LGBTQ community. Most if not all in the christian and muslim communities in this country view homosexuality as a “sin” and do not accept practising LGBTQ people into their communities.

 

The government is also responsible for keeping an outdated law which makes any form of homosexual activity a crime.

 

Shame on Singapore.

 

*******

survivor: workplace

 

Pre-adult testosteronians and estrogenians may sneer at the prospect of playing kabuki in the workplace, but the nine to five gloomy upper-lipper simply yawns. He knows better than to be shish kebab in an Eli Roth straight-to-video bleeder. The priests of shrink at the University of Greenwich are now preaching the results of their latest study that people who express their authentic selves at the workplace might just be excommunicating themselves from the Jacobian ladder.

 

This is neither novel nor revolutionary. Singaporean employees are traditionally stiff upper-lippers in the workplace who do not mix the professional with the personal. Swing and punt if you must, fuck that underaged call girl if you so wish, but do not get caught! It becomes anathema if you happen to be a government official, a headmaster or a member of a prominent business family. Recreation sucks for people in high society.

 

It is not only about escaping the omniscience of Big Brother and CCTV. It is also about workplace politicking. While many of us try to get our assignments and tasks done well and on time, there are others whose job scopes seem to be more than just their area of expertise. They suck smelly cocks and lick stinky pussies. It is not only the superior’s genitalia that are vulnerable – I know. I’ve been there.

 

They may go down on you, but don’t be scammed – they will sodomise you the moment you are not looking, and leave your arse torn and scorched. I know. I’ve been there.

 

All because of that promotion. That salary raise. That overseas opportunity.

 

While my mates tolerate and are able to accommodate to the realities of workplace hypocrisy, I cannot. The neurons in my brain misfire every time I play Survivor: Workplace and the personality disassociation somehow squeezes my emotions desert-dry. I remember an incident in which I had no choice but to be double agent to two colleagues so as to twister the charcoals of conflict between them. That was the only way I could tai chi their oncoming collaborated assault on me (the walls have ears, you know). I could pull it off because I have one of those forever-young, sometimes blur-like-sotong faces that could only mean boyscout naivete. Many people do not realise that beneath the naive boyscout facade lies a potential misanthropic serial killer.

 

It is no wonder I favour Professor X over Wolverine, Sherlock Holmes over Captain America and the shrewd geek over the dim-witted college hunk.

 

Still…I prefer not to play mind games. It can be addictive and egotistically empowering, especially when one witnesses the efficacy of such conniving. And it monsters you to view people not as human beings who should be treated with dignity and respect, but as pawns on the chessboard to be used and manipulated.

 

That is NOT right.

 

 

*******

bloody friday

 

 

Yesterday. I shivered out of bed at 8am and yawned to the realisation that the sixteen odd hours to follow belonged to what is vulgarly known to the Singaporean Ah Seng and Ah Beng as Good Friday. It also happens to be a public holiday, and the feverish Singaporean worker seems wretched to thank the gods for this chance to sleep in, waterboard some Tiger, fuck a buddy, crystal-ball some chick flicks or just play Angry Birds with the darlings. It is Good Friday, anyhow.

 

For others, it is more like Bloody Friday. They trumpet to church, ogle at either Mel Gibson’s torture-porn classic, The Passion of the Christ, or some campy stage act with titles as B-graded as The Hour of Darkness or as cheesecaked as The Rolling Stone. They then rock-n-roll to some Rowlingian ramblings on magic blood, invisible hands and shaking earths. In world-class Singapore, the crackpot rambler is more often some Jesus wannabe with Brad Pittish aspirations.

 

Worse, it culminates tomorrow when the butchered lump of Jesus is supposed to come back to life. Literally. I don’t suppose it is cause for a Juche celebration to a limping zombie of porked flesh.

 

The home affairs ministry report, in my case, is a bit confused. We – my wife and three kids – trolled to church in the evening, nibbled the potluck (the groupies insist on baptising it potbless), banged chests with the blokes and gossiped with the chicks. The whole rabble then filed into the main hall to watch adolescent bikinis bugger the Hawaiian waves in a film entitled Soul Surfer.

 

The film, although not the usual Bloody Friday fare, is Walking Dead propaganda. It shows the true story of a teenage surfing enthusiast who depended on the zombied Jesus to soldier on even when her left arm got castrated by one definitely drunk Tiger Shark. Many netizens have reviewed the film, so it is superfluous to replay the nail-pullers and the head-bangers.

 

 

I yawned out the hall some two-odd hours later even though the Blu-Ray disc mentions an hour and forty-some minutes. Professional and technical precision is just not a small church’s priority.

 

*******

shame on singapore

 

The Chijmes landlords has morally cowered to the self-censorship of the lunatic public by forcing Creative Insurgence to cancel the Escape Chapel Party.

 

Chijmes Chapel Party called off

 

There is nothing more to be said.

 

*******

escape chapel party

 

Singapore continues to anally rape its nonreligious citizens with its syphillic brand of multireligious “tolerance”, one that strangles our civil freedom to opinion and expression. Singaporeans are brain freezed into glazing only at the Disney channel when it comes to religion (and politics) while nonreligion is open market and can be AXNed by anyone at any time.

 

Many of us are now frostbited to be self-censoring and hypocritically respectful, tickling the scrotums of religious “sensibilities” even if some of us would rather be fingering the heathen. It is just not right. It is immoral.

 

Advertiser Creative Insurgence has for more than a week red-carpeted its campaign for the coming Escape Chapel Party to be held at the Chijmes Chapel this Saturday at 9pm onwards. The party is a spur to promote UK-based “Escape” nightclub brand to the region.

 

(source)

 

 

Even this one is as benign as my cheeky daughter playing peekaboo under the bed covers. It is as holy as stupid sheep. But many Singaporeans seem to disagree, most of them, I reckon, bleeting among the local roman catholic community. They claim these visuals of beautiful nuns are “offensive” and “in bad taste”. Many even filed reports to the police (!!??) and the various local ministries.

 

Creative Insurgence is perhaps trying to give a tongue-in-cheeky humour to the party, since it is held in a former religious convent and that coincidentally, this week is the fucking holy week. The organisers originally wanted the party to be held over the Spring Festival weekend in January but due to circumstances postponed to the next public holiday, namely the coming Bloody Friday cum Walking Dead weekend.

 

As expected, the organisers promptly apologised to the phallus-crowned supremo of the catholic diocese in Singapore, a Mr Nicholas Chia, whose office is devilishly located a few nun-jiggle steps away at the Cathedral of the Good Shepherd. They also recycle-binned the nuns from their main website.

 

This is Singapore, and this is how the pasteurised version of the blasphemy law is enforced in this peaceful and loving multireligious country. The absence of criminalisation does not make it any less vile. What if vice versa? Can freethinkers and atheists file reports to the police if we find posters about evangelistic meetings and christian outreach programme to the non-christians offensive? We have a right to be offended, don’t we? Can the LGBTQ community squeal their offence over schools that promote anti-gay agendas in their sex education programmes?

 

The above pictures are already so mild. I think I shall leave you with these:

 

(source)

 

(source)

 

There are more fucking nuns, literally, out there, but I shall have the christian virtue of self-control and just stop here.

 

*******

my apologies…

 

Parental hormones must have egg-yolked my cerebral cortex yesterday as I threw the Bush-ian shoe at the Singapore Police Force. It turns out that the supposed successful childnap in Tampines was a cruel boyish wolf cry. I am not feeling very bright now.

 

Tampines Child Kidnap rumour a Hoax

 

It may or may not be one of those societal mythologies we call urban legends on the urge of evolving. And at my age, I did not realise that yesterday was the first of April.

 

Still, the Ang Mo Kio incident rattles on, with the police currently investigating. We also do well if we can be vigilant with our children at all times. Singapore is getting a bit too tight around the collar these days.

 

*******

email to some friends

 

Hey guys,

 

The recent revival in chinese nationals attempting to steal our sweet young darlings in Singapore is as fist-clenching as they are testicle-squeezing. One woodpeckers the head at the apparent dimwittedness of our particularly and uniquely Singaporean,which is to say, world-class, numero uno, the incredible and fabuluso Singapore Police Force – in allowing these 21st century genghis apes into our peaceful, low crime-rated, pseudo-democratic shopping heaven of a country.

 

Big Brother, to use the deliciously orwellian phrase, has only begun to nod to the will of the common Singaporean by blabbering bull about immigration policies, which in the first place, is supposed to be the One Ring that rules our wonderfully manpowerless economy. It seems that the highbrow-loving People Action Party is now bedevilled to fling this Ring into the ashes of Mount Doom.

 

It will be, to use a theological term, one hell uva effort to hold back the chinese barbarians as they invite themselves into our country. Sinophiles, or the self-proclaimed butt-kissers of chinese culture, often pontificate, albeit very wrongly, of China’s very ancient and thus must be good, historical legacy. Any discerning bloke can tell these racial fanatics that countries like Greece or Egypt too have very antiquated histories – but look at them today. The goodness or rightness of a thing is never determined by the mould on its history books. A country that imprisons its own people for simply opening their mouths against its government, or worshipping in house churches, or participating in activist art; a country that murders its own for the most peculiar of “crimes”; is not a country I will want to associate with. Let us remember how its power-lustful leaders arrested every and any journalist or writer it could locate around Beijing during the day s prior to the 2008 Olympics, just so that they can silence any investigative reporting and deceive the world into kowtowing to China’s olympian spectacle. More like a chimera.

 

Animal lovers too, cringe at how the monsters cull the more than a few thousand doggies and kitties just so that the Beijing streets could be childcare, disneyland-clean for the world to see.

 

It fools no one that its people who are trying to wring a living in sardine-canned Singapore is now trying to steal our sweet young things for money. There was an attempt in Ang Mo Kio several weeks ago. Thank goodness the mother pinched a glancc in time to behold a strange woman walking her son away.

 

There was another, reported in Simei. And probably a couple more of which I am clueless.

 

And recently, a chinese thug grabbed a malay darling off the bench and dump the lass into the back of a van. This took place in Tampines Street 20-something. There were even police roadblocks in the area.

 

It does not take an einsteinian brain to realise there is something amiss on our clean-and-green low-crime streets – yet the Singaporean police is shutting its orifices and playing dumb. Concerned parents receive no answer from the PAP-puppet. Singaporeans have the right to know so that young parents can take the necessary precautions. It is flamboyantly stupid for Singapore to play the nanny all the time by censoring truth so that it can be more palatable to the public. Singaporeans are brighter than that. Besides, since we cannot hold strikes or protests in democratic Singapore, don’t worry – we will be goody goody and not create a ruckus if the police just come out and make the childnappings prime time news.

 

Anyhow, just remember to hold your young darlings close to you at all times.

 

Oh dear, I am getting paranoid again.

 

*******

do the loving ourselves

 

“IT IS ironic that with the days off for maids, employers with young children and the elderly must now have to work even harder (‘Weekly day off for maids a must from next year’; Tuesday).

Otherwise, who will do the chores and look after the children and the elderly when the maids are enjoying their days off?

My annual leave allocation will not increase, so if no one does the chores, it will only mean that the maid will have to do double the amount of work the day after her day off.”

- Chew Kum Chung (source)

 

Many foreign domestic workers are abused by Singaporeans. In order to ensure their nuts’ worth every month, the job scope of a foreign maid, more like slave, reads somewhat like this:

 

• Lick the house clean, until it is dust-free, every day. We have young children in the house.
• Prepare breakfast for, bathe and clothe the children for school. Put on their shoes too. We have to prepare and rush to the office.
• Prepare dinner for, bathe and clothe the children when they come home. Help them with their pyjamas, please.
• Fetch the children to and from school every day. Please carry the outrageously heavy school bags for them – they are only kids.
• When the son reaches the age to fulfil his military obligations, please help him carry his field bag too – poor child has a tender back.
• Sorry, we have no vacant rooms or beds for you. You have to sleep in the store room.
• Please have your meals only after the WHOLE family has finished so that you can serve us when we are having ours.
• You are not welcome to join us for trips to the cinema. When we dine in restaurants, you are welcome to feast on the leftovers. Help us feed the baby and please, keep the children in order. You know we are incompetent in looking after our own children.
• We also go for weekly dates as a couple – so please keep the children in order! Get them to do their homework! We love our weekly pleasures and do not want the parental responsibilities to get in the way.
• Oh for goodness’ sake, no mobile phones please. We will confiscate them if we catch you using it when you are supposed to do the chores.
• By the way, there is no day’s off for you. We don’t want you to have a break so that you can go shopping with your friends and maybe even hook a boyfriend. We don’t want to pay for your syphillis treatment, or your abortion.
• Remember, we are your boss. We paid peanuts for your work and we expect no monkey business!

 

Shame on Singaporeans and the very system that violates the UN Declaration of Human Rights by detaining people without trial, its fabulously totalitarian defamation laws and its maniacal tendency to criminalise people for publishing books and opinions that criticises the autocracy. Shame on the great Yale University for collaborating with the National University of Singapore to start the shamelessly named Yale-NUS liberal arts college. Liberal Arts? Are the academics and students allowed to discuss and criticise any subject under the sun, which includes the ruling regime of PAP and religion?

 

Shame on Singaporean parents. I have three very young children – and I do not employ a domestic helper. I clean my youngest boy when he poops. I bathe my two darlings every night and adore my eldest five-year-old for showering himself. All three put on their own shoes before I fetch them to the childcare. When we eat out, all three will eat by themselves, including the two-year-old who uses the spoon relatively well.

 

We enjoy company with our friends regularly. We bring our children along, yes, we DO NOT conveniently discard them at our parents’. Besides, we are simple hedonists who delight in conversation, coffee and the occasional wine at the verandah or the coffeeclub with our friends. We read, talk with each other (and with friends) and watch films instead of shopping, swinging and dancing insanely to noise for therapy. We fuck like rabbits before the children come back and have quickies after they are asleep.

 

She is my best friend and mate.

 

We, and not someone else, mother our own children, feeding, showering, clothing and loving them. Parents do not just coin up the family coffers. We are also not Clausian incarnates who conjure up iPads and iPhones at the winter solstice and then disappear until the next year. We are not PAP-taught pragmatists who pay and blame others to do the loving.

 

We do the loving ourselves.

 

Besides, Singaporeans are working their domestic workers like lonely and starved bitches on spiked leashes while they themselves whine like castrated swine about being overworked and underpaid.

 

A rabble of hypocrites and hooligans are what these middle-incomed, middle-kingdomed scrooges really are.

 

*******

 

is this the way to go?

 

“Our long-term goal is to prohibit smoking in all public places except in designated smoking areas…our aim, in collaboration with the Health Promotion Board, is to work towards a future where Singaporeans consider smoking not only detrimental to health, but also socially unacceptable.”

- Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State, Singapore

 

I am scared. Urinating-in-my-trousers scared.

 

I am fearful that a time will come in Singapore when not only the subjects of religion and the People’s Action Party are exempt from intellectual criticism (in the name of religious harmony and autocratic pseudo-democracy respectively); but also civil and social morality, which would be force-fed to the man on the street through devious propaganda and emotionalistic advertising.

 

The State cannot and should not behave like the orwellian Big Brother, dictating to its citizens what is right and wrong, moral or immoral, socially acceptable or not. To play the health card on smoking is one thing, to enforce its abstinence is another. It no longer takes the highbrow, in 21st century Singapore, to know of smoking’s deleterious health effects. Nor does it take a President’s Scholar to know the bad effects of massive caffeine consumption on the nervous system, or alcohol on the liver, or bad cholesterol on the heart.

 

It is hypocrisy to demonise tobacco while there are more Singaporeans under the addiction of Char Kway Teow, Roti Prata, Laksa and Nasi Lemak, not to mention KFC, McDonald’s and Burger King. What about alcohol, which many supposedly mature adults consume, to their mental and emotional demise?

 

Some might argue that while alcohol, caffeine and cholesterol-laden foods might harm the addicted glutton, cigarette smoke harms not only the smoker but the innocent angel who happens to be close by. It appears idiotic to notice passive smoking while blind to the numerous incidents of domestic violence, exacerbated by alcohol abuse? Or the emotional abuse of family members due to a loved one’s poor health caused by gluttony? Or for that matter – the addicted gambler who now has more opportunities to commit his dirty deed in Singapore?

 

Or even the Taoist practice of burning “hell money” incessantly during the yearly “ghost” month, which pollutes the environment (and we still talk about going eco-friendly) as well as irritates the respirary systems of many? We choose to keep silent because it is “religion” – and religion somehow escapes any form of criticism even if it harms the environment.

 

Singapore might as well ban alcohol and casinoes and all forms of fatty dishes and fast food from its shores. And even the nose-tickling and lung-churning practice of burning fake money for imaginary dead people.

 

I do not smoke. I dislike gambling. But I am addicted to coffee, and a self-professed lover of sinful Singaporean cuisine. I love lots of sex too – and fantasize about fucking multiple women in multiple exotic positions. But since I love children, and got married as a result, decadent orgies and wanton adultery will never be my portion. Sexual faithfulness to my wife was part of our marriage vows, anyhow.

 

And I reckon many Singaporeans are guilty of the same vices, and would do well not to cast the first stone by demonising smoking into something more than just an unhealthy habit.

 

*******

 

mediacorp’s pathetic version

 

 

Ignore the fancy name Mediacorp. As a state-controlled broadcaster, it does better if it retains its original Singapore Broadcasting Corporation (SBC) – the propaganda arm of the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP). It is governed not only by its fear of the ruling regime, impotent to offer any feature film, drama series or documentary which appears to be remotely criticising anything from the pseudo-democracy of Singapore, the founding members of its old guard (think of Lee Kuan Yew, Toh Chin Chye and Goh Keng Swee, etc) or the death penalty; but the puritanism of its religious public as well.

 

As one of the more exciting programmes shown on free-to-air Channel 5, Spartacus: Blood and Sand is a pathetic offering that pales in contrast to its original version shown in other countries. Mediacorp scissors away scenes like the above and below, apparently censoring much of the gore, brutality and sex. The general plot notwithstanding, it is the barbarism, gratuitous gore and amoral sexuality which gives the series its power. It aims to depict the society as it was in ancient Rome, and it scores by showing the viewer a very sinister side to a seemingly civilised ancient world, where citizens delight in watching fellow human beings kill one another for entertainment and have views on sex that has nothing to do with a morality that stems from prudish christianity more than civilised humanism.

 

 

Its people indulge themselves in group and homosexual sex as much as they enjoy their food and blood sport. Sex was recreation instead of marital and procreative responsibility. Nudity was common. Such was the moral fabric of ancient Roman society – but you don’t see that in Singapore’s pussy-licking version.

 

 

Many Singaporeans will wince in disgust at how romans love to watch slaves copulating with one another (above: a gladiator was made to fuck a fellow slave for the viewing pleasure of roman nobles) as well as fucking one themselves (below: a gladiator owner fucking his slave).

 

 

But that is what the series is about! It displays, in almost gratuitous fashion, roman society. Disgusting for some, lecherous delight for others, and simply apathy for the enlightened few.

 

Blood and Sand airs in Singapore at the 10 p.m slot, probably to capitalise viewership ratings. That is probably the reason why the meddlesome scissors of the censors had to come in.

 

Then again, maybe it is time to rethink censorship and morality as a whole.

 

If societal mores are anything to go by, Singapore is still far from being a first world country. 

 

 

*******

 

his simple life

 

While ninety-five per cent, if not hundred, of Singapore’s ruling regime live in relative luxury and own at least one private property, the freedom prize-winning Dr Chee Soon Juan lives in a three-room flat in one of the oldest housing estates in the country and drives a nineteen-year-old Nissan sedan car.

 

(source)

 

Dr Chee, given his circumstances as an embattled activist for democracy in a country that is ruled by a vicious empire which is no different, in principle, to any contemporary autocracy in the Middle East; does not draw any salary, apart from the earnings he gets from selling his books to individuals and bookshops as well as the occasional foreign university research fellowship. One wonders how he manages to keep his house in order with his homemaker wife and three young children.

 

I used to be one of the many Singaporeans who find him profoundly odd and a nutcase. But not anymore. If ever there was a cause worth fighting for, it is the cause of freedom.

 

REAL FREEDOM.

 

I salute you, Dr Chee.

 

And thanks to Yahoo News for this piece of precious reporting.

 

*******

 

when will the singapore government (PAP) stop its bullying??

 

Our Great Leader, the Holy Prime Minister, successor to the Holy Father of our beloved Lee Dynasty – all praise and honour to Him – exposes his real nature last Sunday when he issued a legal letter to the editors of sociopolitical website, TR Emeritus (TRE), commanding them to withdraw an article which apparently accused the government of partiality (cronyism), when it appointed Our Great First Lady as head of the Asian investment firm, Temasek Holdings.

 

PM Lee sends lawyer’s letter to editors of TR Emeritus

 

The Great Leader, in the letter, reminded TRE of the government’s (the People’s Action Party) terrible and awesome powers, as was demonstrated by the numerous defamation suits it waged against international newspapers and periodicals, such as the Far Eastern Economic Review, and won.

 

And so our Great Leader warned TRE that a similar fate would await them unless they withdraw the article and post an apology on the website.

 

This is Singapore, my motherland and my home. An autocracy which masquerades as a democracy only in theory. Our people has no power at all in deciding how the country is run. Isn’t this what democracy is all about – power of the people? Although I do not suspect any foul play during vote counts, it does not take a rocket scientist to realise how disparate the arena is during election campaigns, with the ruling regime having an obvious advantage over the opposition by constantly fiddling with electoral boundaries as well as having more press and media coverage.

 

TRE has withdrawn the article although it has yet to post an apology, as our Alex Au had done in his blog, Yawning Bread, when a very insecure Minister decided to play the defamation game on him over some rumours about his moral indiscretions. Competent and intelligent as he is, the minister does not realise he is digging his own grave, at least in the eyes of netizens, by using the law to bully Yawning Bread into silence.

 

Dear PAP, if you are innocent, just say so – and debunk the allegations once and for all by speaking the truth. There is no need to emotionally and psychologically abuse and bully Singaporeans into withdrawing their comments. Where is civil discourse in all of this? Why the need to use the law to threaten and frighten us?

 

WHEN WILL THE RULING REGIME STOP ITS BULLYING TACTICS?? When will the PAP stop its thuggish ways on its people like a hysterical parent brandishing a chopper over mischievous children?

 

The Holy Father, peace be upon Him, claimed in the past that any political accusation against the government taints their reputation and as such a legal victory, via defamation suit, would always be the right thing to do as it vindicates the ruling regime. Besides, this is politics. Shouldn’t we be unscrupulous against our political “enemies”?

 

Our Holy Father thinks he is Cao Cao living in ancient China.

 

On the contrary, the megalomaniacal antics of the PAP has time and again allows itself to be exposed to the world as a strangely first world country with third world ethics.

 

Mature individuals pay attention to constructive criticism and simply ignore unwarranted and unjustified ones. One does not see the governments in the US or UK lash out against all the rude and critical comments made of them by the many newspapers and tabloids.

 

Human beings have the right to say anything they want, even if such speech is irresponsible and rude. This is life.

 

And it takes a mature and self-secure government to accept it.

 

*******

 

this IS christianity in singapore…

 

(source)

Thailand. The land of the free. The constitutional monarchy with a very well-loved and respected King. The country of smiles.

But did you know? Thailand is a place of little true joy. Buddhism is so much a part of the Thai national identity and permeates into every level of society and culture that only about one hundred Thais accept Christ each year in the country of over 68 million people.

Do you share the burden of being that one small change agent, bringing the gospel to the Thais, one at a time?

With its many temples and monks, it is hard to ignore the fact that Buddhism is Thailand’s national religion. With only 16% christians, most Thai students see christianity only as a foreign religion. The land of smiles needs to hear the gospel message. Come and share with Khonkaen University students that Jesus is the way, the true and the life!

Go Change. World.  

 

For someone who lives under the christian subculture in Singapore, it is easy for me to mock the online cacophony over the poster above as white noise. In fact, I invite any practising christian in Singapore, to challenge me on this – that the above IS REPRESENTATIVE, very accurately indeed, of grassroots christianity as subscribed (orthodoxy) and practised (orthopraxy) in this country.

 

NUS student group says sorry for insensitive remarks

 

For anyone blissfully ignorant of Campus Crusade for Christ (CCC), of which the NUS (National University of Singapore) campus branch is responsible for the above advertisement (which caused much noise in the online community), it is an evangelical parachurch organisation founded by an already deceased William (Bill) Bright. Its main purpose is to spread (really, to proselytise) the christian religion all over the world. It has many branches, with sub “ministries” in tertiary campuses, all over the world. The main polytechnics in Singapore, namely Singapore, Ngee Ann, Temasek and Nanyang, have CCC ministries (I am not sure about the newest polytechnic, Republic) along with the two main universities, NUS and NTU (Nanyang Technological University).

 

I was a member in one of those branches during my school days.

 

And so let anyone accuse, dishonestly and deceptively, that I have no credibility to assert what I am asserting now. In fact, in the deluded madness of my youth, I wanted to enter the seminary to become a pastor. This led me to years of personal study and research (and anguish) into christian theology, biblical studies and historical criticism (which eventually led me to my free-thinking secular humanism). I suppose that is one of the reasons why I am still earnestly interested in the academic study of the bible.

 

Now, contrary to what CCC Singapore as well as the rest of the christian community who want to distance themselves from CCC claim; the theological premise which undergirds the alleged poster has always been constant in christianity, at least as practised and believed in this country; which is namely, that the person of Jesus Christ, as the Son of God (jews and muslims would disagree), is the ONLY way to personal salvation (of the soul) and thus upon death, the ONLY way to an eternity in heaven. This means that in the perception of christians, buddhists, muslims, hindus and free thinkers are all DAMNED to an eternity in hell. Full stop.

 

Now, a conniving dishonesty comes when a non-christian confronts the christian in a media or national capacity.  It is common for the christian to make the non-sensical statement that it is not up to him to judge anyone – only god knows – the destiny of all men. No streetwise christian would be so daft as to state the truth point blank that the poor interviewer will be damned to hellfire. But this is a red herring which distracts the public from the real issue – what does christian theology teach?

 

Classical christian theology has always been religiously exclusive – there is only ONE TRUE religion – and ONE TRUE scripture. It is precisely this very deluded view that compels practitioners to proselytise non-christians as much as possible – they are really sincere about it – they want you to go to heaven!

 

So let me be clear. Any christian who claims that CCC is not representative of christianity is being deliberately dishonest.

 

In making this assertion, I am not claiming that no christian in Singapore disagrees with the bigoted exclusivity of classical christianity; there are perhaps many who do privately. But as an institution and a social movement in Singapore, christianity is religiously exclusive, and theoretically unaccepting towards other religious or nonreligious traditions.

 

There is no point in interviewing, let’s say, a spokesperson for the National Council of Churches in Singapore. Or some lecturer in Trinity Theological College Singapore. Folks like these do not represent the average church pastor, let alone the christian person on the street. In classic Singaporean style, bishops and theologians would offer politically correct and nuanced views on the matter, deflecting any potential conflict.

 

Politically correct spin are nothing but half-truths and testicle-licking lies.

 

Anyhow, the alleged poster is very tame by my book. Just drop by any of the tongue-speaking, hand-raising, demon-casting and chriss angel-like magic mumbo-jumbo charismatic megachurches in Singapore and you will see that Jesus Camp and Teen Mania is more closer to the truth than meets the eye.

 

*******

 

a shrewd political move?

 

Some have lauded the recent expulsion of the Hougang MP by the Workers’ Party (WP) as a brave and shrewd political move. They have “taken, boldy, the moral high ground”, to quote Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Eugene Tan, the assistant professor of law at the Singapore Management University.

 

The expulsion was carried out in response to a very immature Singaporean society which still holds on to very quaint ideas of public civil service and its supposed moral standards. The media cannot seem to keep their partisan hands off the poor gentleman and his personal life. It was also his mistake to remain silent amid the media silliness…he should either reaffirm his innocence, if he is, or come out in the open and confess to his indiscretions and apologise to the residents of Hougang.

 

The latter would indeed place him on the moral high ground. I will applaud him for the moral courage and the strength in humility to be transparent to the people.

 

UNLIKE the schemes of the ruling regime…which only “appears” CLEAN because they are craftier and more skilled in covering up their tracks. I always believe in the adage that there can be no senseless smoke without fire…and the disparity is so obvious for any discerning individual – the media is so quick to pick up on any rumour of moral indiscretion on the part of the political opposition but if it comes to the ruling party, ALL IS SILENT.

 

Of course, the testicle-squeezing silence can be attributed to the classic Singaporean fear of being legally sued by the ruling regime if there is any sign of criticism (think of Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, Chee Soon Juan and Alan Shadrake). The capacity to sue has nothing to do with moral innocence but with resources and power, full stop.

 

We are not fooled, though. Until the day when the Internet is cruelly and senselessly censored and squashed (thank goodness for twinkles of humanity in our current PM) by the powers that be, netizens in Singapore would always be the watchdog against a government that is constantly suppressing our civil rights to free speech and expression.

 

Are Singaporeans so naive as to think that the PAP (People’s Action Party) is really that CLEAN and FREE of moral indiscretions? Have you ever wonder why the people of Singapore are in the dark when it comes to the families of the ruling regime, apart from the Lees? We are hardly acquainted with the kin of most of our parliamentarians, let alone MPs and those on the ground.

 

A very good strategy, if you ask me. If the public knows next to nothing about the personal life of their leaders, there is no way we could hold them to account for any moral indiscretion, if they exist.

 

Contrary to propaganda, the truth is really out there. In the worldwide web.

 

While there is still hope for a liberal society, and a fairly liberal internet, please traverse far and wide for the truth.

 

Before even the Internet is unjustly censored.

 

*******

 

brouhaha over the wrong things

 

It is disturbingly contrary to human decency when the recent public brouhaha over a police investigation of an online prostitution syndicate lingers on the ballooned fact that many of the clients were high-level professionals and civil servants instead of the more pressing problem of human trafficking and “illegal” prostitution practices, at least in the case of self-righteous Singapore.

 

Commercial sex is a crime in Singapore, if the pimps and sex workers practise their trade in places other than the designated legal zones, namely the redlight district of Geylang and some parts of Desker Road, I think.  Wanna-be sex workers have to be “registered” and assigned to the appropriate brothels. This makes freelance sex workers criminal. This makes social escorts who offer sexual services criminal. This makes offering sex services in massage parlours illegal. This makes sex workers roaming around the casinos in Marina Bay Sands criminal. As such, internet-savvy sex workers become criminal too.

 

All of the above are rampant in Singapore, despite all the moralising masquerading as laws.

 

My views on commercial sex (think of Amsterdam) notwithstanding, I personally find it to be grossly immoral to shine the spotlight on the clients instead of the perpetrators, as is the case of the online syndicate that was recently busted by the police. What crime has the clients committed, apart from yielding to their libidos and physical lusts which are but biological?

 

A husband who pays to have sex with a professional lover betrays the conjugal trust of his wife, if she has such a deal with him in the first place. I know of some wives who don’t mind. But this is a private problem between husband and wife and should be viewed as such.

 

Why the loud-mouthed pontificating if he happens to be a school principal? Does that makes the waiter or nightclub owner paying for sex any more moral?

 

A teacher is salaried to teach. Why must he or she account to the institution for recreation he or she does on the bed? Why must a high-ranking lawyer, for that matter, account for his lunchtime trysts when his area of competence and training lies in the interpretation and application of the law?

 

Civil servants, teachers and doctors are not priests or monks. Sexual fidelity or abstinence is not part of the job description. Does it matter if a female teacher happens to moonlight as an exotic dancer or social escort? What is it to you if a managing director of a statutory board pays to be spanked and whipped by a beautiful naked woman every weekend?

 

Really, it is none of your fucking business.

 

Such concerns are misplaced. What of the poor women who might have been deceived into coming to Singapore for better prospects but baited to be hookers instead? What about the potential abuse these women may have encountered by their pimps?

 

Come on Singapore. Quit pretending. 

 

“Illegal” forms of prostitution are rife in Singapore for decades and would continue to be so as long as the human race has the itch to propagate and procreate.

 

Stop pretending that our ministers and civil servants are holy men and women with no vices.

 

Stop pretending that our lawyers, doctors and accountants are boring automatons with no social or sex lives. Yes, they may be married and thus have faithfulness issues. But that is a personal vice or character flaw.

 

Give them a break and let them reconcile with themselves and their families. Life is too short to throw stones at our fellow homo sapiens.

 

*******

 

 

naive & shallow

 

It is episode seven of Singapore Talking Season Three. Host Jagdish offers four guests on the platter to discuss our country’s procreative problems and why the modern Singaporean (and most cosmopolitans for that matter) is marrying less and divorcing more.

 

It is amusing that this programme resorts to being so lowbrow in inviting four very singular individuals whereas a more intelligent approach would be to include at least one steadily married parent. In contrast, individuals whom one would expect the least to get hitched are offered, including one “charisma coach” (what in the name of heaven is that?) and one very young and very naive “dating coach”.

 

Yes, very naive. I thought the chap, looking sharp in his dinner jacket and slim-cut trousers, would at least set the moral example, especially if his trade is anything to go by, by being in a serious relationship. On the contrary, dating coach supremo Xavier See, in all of his twenty-five years of life on earth, presents himself as an immature, fickle-minded (at least in his views on the opposite sex) flirt. It is all a game to him – he used the word himself – a calculated gamble in which one puts on a show in order to lure the bait. The other three panelists, all of whom are definitely older than he is, could probably see through his youthful naivete and it was summed up quite politely in Jagdish’s remark that he is probably very “not ready” for a serious relationship, let alone marriage.

 

He later made a fool of himself in commenting that ladies probably find men who are “leaders” attractive, and that men “should” be the ones leading the women, offering biology as a reason, of which Jagdish claimed was a rather sexist quip. It isn’t biology, dear boy, but probably a darwinian legacy from our hunter-gatherer days. Anyhow, times have changed and as a dating “expert” he should know better.

 

The poor bloke was then schooled at his own game, being told off that in fact, ladies do find men who allow their women to lead rather “sexy” as it often implied that the men have to be very self-assured and self-secure to do so.

 

Very true indeed.

 

Really. If the government wants its people to procreate and have more children, dating coaches and sex experts should be the least of their concerns. It is time to school these youngsters in FAMILY VALUES and the good old virtues of COMMITMENT and LOVE…in sickness and in health, in good times and bad. One does not find a life partner in the bar or pub at Clarke Quay. In Singapore, it is probably a bad idea to expect someone who frequents these places to be epitomes of marital fidelity, let alone parent material.

 

My advice? Make friends, real friends. And be real. Be genuine. Your spouse should neither be a trophy nor a sex toy. He or she should be your best friend and confidante, your lover and your life companion. It is rubbish to believe that one can use the pseudo-science of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) or some other pop psychology system to lure a potential partner.

 

I should know. At thirty-one, I am not only married but have three children.

 

*******

 

discuss disgust

It numbs the intelligent mind and chills the human conscience to conceive a 21st century world that still comprises societies that imprison individuals for simply expressing themselves.

 

It is sickening to read, over the past decade, of numerous individuals in countries such as Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia who had their heads chopped off or their bodies hung to dry for simply expressing critical opinions on the established religion. Similarly, it is commonplace for authorities in places like North Korea and China to imprison and even execute, in the case of the former, citizens who criticise the government. Singapore is no different, however cosmopolitan our tourism ministry would like to paint the lion city to be.

 

In a modern economy like China, it is INCREDULOUS to hear news of citizens being put behind bars for writing poetry. And the Middle Kingdom did just that – one man was recently sentenced to seven years in jail for writing a poem that allegedly “incites subversion” by exhorting the Chinese people to support freedom.

 

This brings to mind the shameless way in which Singapore sought to clamp down the distribution of a book written by a British journalist, Alan Shadrake, which criticises the Singapore judicial system, in 2010. Not only did the authorities confiscated all known copies of the book then, it imprisoned the poor author for the supposed crime of “contempt of court” by scandalising the justice system with his book.

 

It is almost oxymoronic to say that no one in the state-controlled news media made any attempt in offering any criticism of the sentence, let alone fight against it. It is against all human decency to use legal force against contrary views just because the authorities that be are insecure about them. We are not talking about suicide bombers, kamikaze pilots or terrorist groups. We are talking about decent human beings who express their disapproval via civil discourse. It is beyond belief that individuals can be imprisoned just for writing and publishing books that criticise the government or our courts.

 

Do the authorities really believe that the more they behave like tyrants, political or religious dissidence will be kept in check? Do the authorities believe that they will get away with decades of such leadership?

 

I used to admire our justice system, believing it to be one of the best in the world, sheesh, like anything that is Singaporean, I suppose. But with the case of the poor bloke Shadrake, I am having serious doubts.

 

In fact, I am disgusted. We may not be able to stage a protest, but we can do the one thing any decent human being has the right to do.

 

We can vote. And we will bring this war against our right to free speech and expression to the ballot box. I am a human being. I can express myself. And if a government wishes to suppress and repress so fundamental and basic as individual free expression in the name of an illusory “peace and prosperity”, I don’t want that kind of government. It disgusts me to think that in the 21st century, there are still governments which repress their people from speaking and expressing their minds.

 

I am so ashamed.

 

*******

 

can we really look toward a multi-party government?

 

Singapore is as small a nation as it is young, a 46-year-old full stop on a world map, not counting the years between its official founding in 1819 by a Sir Stamford Raffles of the East India Company and its separation from the Malayan Peninsula in August 1965.

 

The first generation of Singaporeans lived through the labour pains of a seedling nation to the turbulent years of its adolescence and has since appreciated the competence in which the founding men of the PAP wield their iron fists adorned in velvet gloves.

 

They knew it would take the cunning genius of a Lee Kuan Yew to reign in a diverse immigrant country and lead it to where it is today – a multinational corporation with over seven million workers.

 

The younger generations, with me among them, will never understand the complexities our ancestors faced and thus may never see beyond the bias we already have of a perceived one-party autocracy. We blame the PAP for its control of the media and the press. We bemoan our legal system which still uses an archaic and barbarous form of criminal punishment. We wonder when will our society stop stigmatising the LGBT community. We wish we could have more liberties in expressing ourselves and speaking our minds.

 

And so we root for the political opposition like the Workers’ Party, the Singapore Democratic Party, the Reform Party and the Singapore People’s Party. We cheer for our champions in the likes of Chen Sao Mao, Low Thia Kiang, Chiam See Tong, Kenneth Jeyaratnam, and even the Freedom Prize-winning self-professed liberal democrat, Chee Soon Juan.

 

They loom large before us as our patron saints of political and civil liberty, and we listened, enraptured, by their rhetoric. We get drunk over the preachers who scream the loudest, we shriek alongside some of them when they conquered Aljunied GRC last year. But the chimera of the reel world aside, when the banal and mundane sets in, we start to witness how the scraps start to fall from the rusty junkyard that they really are.

 

If these blokes cannot even keep their houses in order and their respective parties united, can we trust them to lead the country? Tsk, tsk. If you want to play with fire, you should prepare the extinguishers. Will democracy – the power of the people – be nothing but a dream we erect like sandcastles on the beach?

 

The lesser of two evils will get my vote. And it is no surprise who the devil would be.

 

*******

 

what is wrong with incest?

 

Really. Admittedly, I would certainly not wish to have intercourse with either my mother nor my sister (in-laws included) due to perhaps cultural and societal reasons, but I do not find any convincing justification for criminalising incestual intercourse between consenting adults.

 

Let us put aside the issue of child abuse in the case of intercourse between a parent and a young child, or rape in the case of a forced penetration. These acts would properly be classified as crimes of child abuse and rape respectively.

 

But the very act of sexual intercourse between consenting adult kin or siblings, apart from the cultural stigma, do not cause harm or injury to anyone, let alone becoming a civil crime.

 

Yes, given the knowledge we now have of biology and genetics, it would be immoral if incest was the medium used to produce offspring as there is a higher probability of the offspring having congenital birth defects. It would be inhumane to deliberately procreate despite the knowledge we now have. But what if birth control was used, or for that matter, a guarantee that procreation would not occur, such as the sterility of one partner?

 

Would that be a CRIME?

 

Sibling marriages were very common in certain ancient societies, despite the biological consequences, especially among royalty. This makes the current disdain for incestual relationships nothing but a result of cultural and societal conditioning, not some innate moral code in the human psyche.

 

Often than not, when morality is used as a reason, it would be the religious foolishness of applying an ancient religious text to a modern situation. And it does not take a genius to realise the folly of such a practice, with so many evils against humanity done in the name of religious texts and creeds.

 

Anyhow, there is this recent case of a 24-year-old Singaporean woman being sentenced to a year’s probation because of incest with her 48-year-old biological father.

 

It was a consensual act between father and daughter. While any intelligent individual would expect a similar sentence (at least in draconian and conservative Singapore) for the father, it comes as a shock, to put it mildly, that the father was put behind bars for three years since last January.

 

This is a case of sexual discrimination, full stop. While perceived sexual crimes are often attributed to the folly of the male species, that is not always the case. Why put the blame on the man when many a time the woman is also at fault, if not more so, by purposeful seduction?

 

What if the perpetrator is an underaged (in the eyes of our local law, that is) girl who lies about her age so as to effectively prostitute herself to men? Why convict the man with having sex with a minor when the fact was that he thought otherwise and that he was deceived??

 

Times have changed. And so should the Woman’s Charter. Women in Singapore enjoy the same liberties, if not more so, as their men and are as likely to indulge in the same carnal pleasures, with the same prerogatives. Many also make commercial sex, albeit part time and discreetly, a lucrative trade of choice. Does that still make the men more guilty than the women??

 

Then again, life is not fair. And for the life of me, it has always been so.

 

*******

 

another military-related death

 

There is this irrational and somewhat lunatic belief among national servicemen in Singapore, especially the NSFs (National Service Full-time), that because of some ill-conceived notion of camaraderie or ridiculous notions of male bravado, one has to constantly push oneself mentally in order to achieve feats of prime physical fitness.

 

In some quarters, especially among the type As who have this obsession to “win at all costs” or to “be the best” at every opportunity, and in their pursuit of Officer Cadet School (OCS) glory – they psyche one another by preaching the virtues of perseverence and mental strength – as though by the very act of mental perseverence one is able to accomplish anything.

 

Rubbish.

 

And before anyone accuse me of playing the hypothetical game or caricaturing the unwritten cultural codes of Singapore National Service (NS) life in the armed forces, let me say first and foremost that as an able-bodied Singaporean male who could perform more than thirty pull-ups (chin-ups) at one go in my prime, I was an NSF before, and an ever willing participant in the silly game of male bravado.

 

Let me also mention the fact that I was able to perform chin-ups effortlessly and for that matter most feats of upper-body strength – I climb up ropes using only my arms while adorning full battle order (FBO) with webbing, backpack, helmet and rifle – whereas most of my fellow blokes would be using their legs as well. And such a feat was never achieved because of sheer mental willpower or perseverence – I already had the physiological capacity and general propensity towards upper-body fitness and strength – and hence it was just a matter of mild practice before I could handle all those rope and wall climbings.

 

And there were many who were simply not made for such feats of strength as despite all the torturous and gruelling attempts at beefing up their upper bodies, they could only manage the passing grade of six pull-ups in the eventual tests. There were significant others who could not even manage three pulls after all that torture.

 

Come on – there are some people who are just not physically strong enough – and that is that. It is nonsensical to push them beyond what they can offer.

 

The “mind over body” mantra is nothing but a fallacy and a lie.

 

Admittedly, I have NEVER made the passing grade for the 2.4km run in my two and half years in the military. In fact, the one occasion which I mustered all of my perceived inner resolve to pass, along with the verbal “encouragement” (more like verbal abuse) from my then Officer Commanding (OC), I managed to finish the run with a few seconds short of the passing grade.

 

And still…there were idiots who accuse me of “not trying my best” and “not pushing hard enough”. There were even some schizophrenics who thought I was malingering.

 

This is male silliness for you.

 

And although such silliness had indeed “pushed” many to OCS “glory” (which does not prove the “mind over body” fallacy at all but simply demonstrates the fact that these blokes have it in them all along to make it), it had CAUSED MANY DEATHS as well.

 

For the past few years, it has become commonplace to read about this soldier and that soldier collapsing and dying after a run. The demographics have become mixed recently, with deaths coming from both NSFs as well as Regulars (the “professionals”). The most recent case was that of a 28-year-old NSman (reservist) who fainted after completing his 2.4km run as part of his annual Individual Physical Proficiency Test (IPPT), which one has to undergo every year until he consummates his national service obligations at the age of from 35 to 40.

 

He may have completed his run and made a passing grade. But at what price??

 

He lost his life, FOR GOODNESS’ SAKE! And many men like me are wondering if the Remedial Training (RT) for NSmen are anything good after all. For fear of being attached to a RT scheme which distracts many from professional and family commitments, many men choose to push themselves to make the passing grade. There are many who can. But there are also those who simply can’t.

 

And all those senseless deaths in the Singapore Armed Forces are evidence of the simple fact that not everyone is made for physical competence, let alone the soldier’s life of irrational obedience and ridiculous discipline.

 

My managing to “graduate” from national service unscathed has nothing to do with my physical competence or skill. I am just one of those who refuse to be like sheep in blind irrational obedience to authority. As a free-thinking individual, I have always treasured my individualism and independence from any form of autocracy, be it religious or military.

 

As such, I never pushed myself physically beyond what I could manage. When my arms ached from doing too many push-ups, I simply stopped – to the consternation of my platoon sergeants who “punished” me with more push-ups, of which I simply tell them politely that I could not do anymore.

 

Unless they want to pay for my medical bills.

 

Similarly, if my feet ached or I was feeling the strain, I would simply stop the running and started walking – whether or not that would result in my failing the grade. That is my inalienable human right.

 

And no one can force me – unless they want to see another dead man.

 

Of which they did and still are, at the expense of the poor parents who had no choice but to allow the government to torture their young sons.

 

If I have a choice, I would rather my son NOT go through national service. Does national service really make boys into men? Does national service really mature our young men? I don’t think so – there are many countries without military conscription and their men are still…just men.

 

Besides, I know of many friends who were decent gentlemen who, after entering the armed forces, became foul-mouthed and sex-crazed perverts who cannot stop talking about sex and using the f*ck word in their speech.

 

And one calls that “maturity”?

 

Bah!

 

*******

 

the “super league” and all that hype

 

(source)

 

Although an argumentum ad hominem can always be utilised for my not being a soccerphile in general as I would never conceive the sin of ever losing my sleep for a three or four a.m. football match on the telly, one cannot be forgiven for accusing me of treason.

 

Singapore is the beautiful city state in which I was born and raised, educated and plied my trade, a peaceful oasis of calm and prosperity amid the chaotic mess that often reads as the description of our tumultuous geographical region. It is thus utter lunacy and a crime against the state for the ridiculous clobbering of all that is our own.

 

When our table tennis team emerged runners-up in the 2008 Olympics and world champions in a subsequent tournament, idiots all over the country grumble about the fact that we were but a neo-chinese team, devoid of pure Singapore stock. Some lunatics even cry foul when our very own swimming champion Tao Li obliterated the opposition in the 2011 Southeast Asian Games – she was after all, born in China.

 

And it becomes criminal when many good-for-nothing, booze-gurgling blokes become fanatical devotees of foreign football clubs like the useless outfit from Anfield and the devilish thugs from Old Trafford – which still brought back nightmarish visions of cantona-esque violence – while rolling their eyes over our country’s sincere attempts at psyching up support for our national football team as well as our domestic league.

 

What is the warped reason for worshipping a group of thugs so unlike our ethos while trying to desecrate our own? What is the foolishness of going drunk-mad over a group of English hooligans chasing after a ball when the same time could be spent investing in conjugal or emotional bonds with one’s spouse? Or the love of one’s family? Or the support of one’s own national aspirations?

 

And so…it is OUTRAGEOUS to read of the reactions of Singaporean netizens who constantly take potshots at anything Singaporean – our public transport system, the flooding situation in certain parts of Singapore, the PAP, our attempts at brushing up our spoken English, etc. – and now our forays back into the Malaysian football league.

 

The match was aired live on the telly last evening, and of course, rather than cheering a foreign rabble of thugs, it is more reasonable to be behind a SINGAPOREAN team instead. Of course, please forgive my insolence, as I often find it infuriatingly odd as to the belligerent antics of foreign football fans (including that of Malaysia and Indonesia). Football seems to attract hooligans.

 

Still, I admit it did nothing to revive the past age of Malaysia Cup fever in the late 1980s and early 1990s, of which memories of Fandi Ahmad, Abbas Saad, Alistair Edwards and V. Sundramoorthy still linger. Perhaps I’ve grown older and hence the zealous naivete of youth eludes me. Perhaps the fever has indeed been revived last night, but somehow my interpretations of the past-present continuum has been twisted.

 

Yet the experience of last night might well prophesy of better things to come in our hopes of having something of a football culture. The marketing spin on the twelfth “player” in the Singapore Lions is interesting as it is deliciously patriotic. But somehow as mild as we are, as tame as we are, we are too civilised and courteous a lot to become the monstrous horde as our Indonesian or even Malaysian neighbours are.

 

In fact, I would rather believe that for our fans to be able to become virtually the twelfth player on the field – we have to be as barbarous as the Indonesians who use foul language at rival teams and behave riotously when their own team loses.

 

But somehow, I reckon, that we Singaporeans are too civilised and polite for that.

 

We have better things to do and live for.

 

*******

 

 

thank the gods for singapore

 

The significant number of Singaporeans who are dissatisfied with our current government, which is really just the People’s Action Party (PAP), should ask themselves what they are really disgruntled about.

 

Many rant about the inefficient public transport (think of the recent Singapore Mass Rapid Transit fracas) and healthcare systems in our country but do not have the relevant experiences overseas to make such value judgements. Many grumble about the high costs of living but never stop to think how much costlier it is to live in Japan, London and New York. It is erroneous to make comparisons with “cheaper” places like some of our neighbours in Southeast Asia as costs of living are rather relative to the quality of living as well. Many nag on and on about the salaries of our public ministers, even after the proposed paycuts, when they do not realise how morally upright and efficient our government is when compared to governments all over the world. And why is that so? We do not believe in having a populist leadership where any joe blow can run for the top post in the land (think of the US) – political leadership has to be from among the best of the best, the cream of the crop – and such can only be acquired by good salaries.

 

Of course, service and loyalty to the country is paramount – but one has to be pragmatic about it – if a highly competent and intelligent individual can make more money and have the social privacy for his family along with it by being a CEO of a multinational company, why not? There is so much at stake by being a public servant and if the lure of a high salary compensates, why not?

 

Others murmur about the lack of social welfare but do not know how much taxation welfare countries impose on their citizens. Some moan about the prices of cars in Singapore but seem to be ignorant about the social consequences of having highly congested streets (it is already relatively crowded) in a very tiny city as Singapore.

 

And the list goes on and on.

 

Human beings can be very colour-blind, often assuming a greener pasture on the other side, when they do not have all the facts. And Singaporeans especially so, with our notorious “kiasu” and “kiasee” mentalities that make us a very selfish people.

 

It is time we stop throwing stones at our government and wonder where all this resentment comes from in the first place.

 

Besides, I cannot fathom, for the life of me, how an uncouth individual like Low Thia Kiang can be a prime minister of Singapore.

 

Eeeehh.

 

*******

 

it is new year’s eve again…

 

I am afraid of new years and new beginnings. As a person who thrives on ritual and routine, sameness and habit, newness is a word that spawns within me hotpits of fear and dread, probably of uncertainties, perhaps more of unknowns and the primal flight from the dark.

 

Although recorded time is a human construct and that the new year can in fact be any time of the “year” (lunar, solar, chinese, muslim or otherwise), whatever the word year really means; as a human being I subscribe to the universally accepted gregorian timeline. As such, contrary to perhaps ninety per cent of my ethnic kin, I do not see the point in celebrating the chinese “lunar” new year which will begin on the 23rd of January 2012 since in all practicality we live and work by the “real” calendar, the gregorian one.

 

And for goodness’ sake I am not trying to reject my chinese ancestral roots or attempting to be an “ang moh” (a Singaporean slang for “caucasian”), of which I am definitely NOT. My reasons are pragmatic to say the least – unless the chinese lunar timescale is adopted universally – there is no point in celebrating a defunct timescale.

 

I know, I know…many chinese Singaporeans would disagree – prefering to celebrate the lunar new year due to the ill-conceived moral notions of ancestral respect and ethnic identity. As a cultural melting pot which is cosmopolitan Singapore, one wonders if a white American with scandinavian ancestry would be commiting a grievous sin against his ethnicity if he/she does not celebrate the scandinavian new year (if there’s any) or for that matter, speaks a scandinavian tongue (which is his/her “mother tongue”, as defined by the Singapore bilingual system). Similarly, an American with african roots.

 

No one will accuse an american of committing such a sin, if there is any in the first place.

 

Casting the chains of a pre-Enlightenment barbaric age aside, I should at least now focus on enjoying my new year’s eve – the end of a rather stormy year, politically speaking. And would the new chapter bring sweeter tales of pleasantries and peace, or more bloodshed caused by religious strife?

 

I cannot digest the fact that numerous communities in the modern world would soon be lost in drunken revelry and silly shenanigans of the foolish, all in the name of ushering in the new year. Shouldn’t we spend minutes of silent contemplation, remembering the countless numbers who suffered in the barbarous Middle East in the name of religion? Shouldn’t we reflect on what could have been done to prevent the injustices of capital punishment in societies like China and Saudi Arabia? Shouldn’t we contemplate on the stoic dignity of the Japanese in the face of pain and suffering? Shouldn’t we start to rethink our notions of ethnic identity and perhaps move forward to embrace our universal humanity instead of a primitive racial and religious identity that only divides?

 

I suppose the world is just being pragmatic – why not earn more revenue from the foolishness of the masses? Why not sell more booze to idiots who love their bitter concoctions that do nothing but render them intellectually hapless and physiologically unstable? Why not sell more tickets to daft teenagers who love to get deceived by blinding lights, irritating noise masquerading as music and a whole advertising industry that thrives on deception and greed?

 

Really, I am getting very distressed and irritated, pugnaciously so, by the incessant advertisements on the telly and the radio, persuading the Singaporean people to participate in hedonistic craziness. Yes, people have a right to do what they want.

 

I just hope the more discerning and intelligent of our species would refrain from the rubbish and spend more time with their families instead. Such parties are for the irresponsible singles and the foolish young – many would soon grow up when they have families of their own.

 

*******

 

evangelical inconsistency

 

We attended a birthday celebration last afternoon, held at a unique eatery in Marine Parade Community Centre called “Scoop of Art”, an interesting combination of children’s art and gelato ice-cream. We left the party at about 4pm, after which we made our way to the multi-storey carpark a few blocks away.

 

We met some youths (we assumed they were youths, by their silly hairstyles and smooth faces) along the way who were gathered at the bottom of a flight of stairs in a HDB flat, smoking away. That somehow got a friend of mine going about his pet peeve and he remarked how smoking should be BANNED in Singapore for good. He mentioned of certain individuals who wrote to the Straits Times forum who made the same suggestion.

 

He also mentioned some statistics, the accuracy of which I am uncertain, that suggested the non-smoking state of the majority of Singaporeans. If my friend is correct, almost 80 per cent of Singaporeans do not smoke, and for the majority of adults who do – they do it out of adolescent addiction and guilt.

 

Anyhow – I do not think that a total ban would be solving the real issue, which is coping with life’s problems. Substance abuse reflects, to a certain extent, our infantile past of getting comfort through the suckle of mother’s breasts. A significant number of homo sapiens can’t seem to wean out of it and even though the physical act of suckling our mother’s breasts are long gone, the emotional and psychological need for such comforts still linger. We hence learn to go to the bottle, to the cigarette, to marijuana, to glue, to caffeine, and perhaps even to the opium of religion.

 

Besides, wanting to ban smoking is like wanting to ban prostitution and all forms of nightlife entertainment – one might assume that non-marital commercial sex is morally wrong and damaging to the soul and thus wish for all such industries to be banned – but is this the right thing to do for society?

 

One might be against abortion and even contraception, but does that give a government the moral authority to ban these things?

 

Those in favour of theocracy might think so, as would certain muslims in certain sects as well as the Christian Right in the US. However, thinking about where my friend was coming from – he would agree that God himself is a gentleman of sorts – giving us the free will to choose our own paths and making our own decisions. He would agree that God does not force human beings to do His will. But if that is the case, why do we, as christians, yearn to control other people by forcing society to adhere to “biblical principles” when our very own God does not? If God does not force people to do things, do we as worshippers of this God allowed to do otherwise??

 

My personal opinion would be the softer approach of education – the continual push via the media – to educate Singaporeans of the harms of tobacco and nicotine addiction. Yes, there would still be teenagers who choose to do their own thing (and many would regret when they come of age) – but like God, we should be ever-patient in tolerating these behaviours.

 

Yes, it would be much easier if the government simply bans smoking. Yes, it would be easier if we just force people to follow our bidding. Yes, it would be easier if God simply forces human beings to do His will.

 

But the road less travelled is often the road to righteousness.

 

*******

 

a disgrace of a show

 

I have a fancy for the horror genre, either literary or cinematic, the former probably influenced by my love for Stephen King’s novels and the latter by my psychopathic fascination with the notion of the forbidden fruit. As such, not many would appreciate my depraved tastes for gore, torture, cannibalism, necrophilia, the serial killer motif and other similar hellish delights.

 

I do enjoy the occasional vampire (definitely NOT “Twilight” which disgusts me) or paranormal film, but unlike some fans, I do NOT believe in any of such fictions. They are products of the human imagination and nothing more. Films or programmes that claim some form of correspondence to reality are not my cup of tea.

 

And then there is Incredible Tales, a Singaporean telly series that is now in its sixth season. It is a disgrace of a programme that pretends to be “factual” in its fraudulent depictions of “interviews” with people who apparently are the ones divulging these “true” accounts of the paranormal. Stories in this series range from the absurd to the ridiculous – peppered with southeast asian superstitions and folklore, such as the orang minyak (“oily man”), pontianak (malay female vampire), Indonesian curses, evil ghosts, witch doctors, etc.

 

It would be a fine watch if there is no pretence to factuality – like the US counterparts The Twilight Zone or Fear Itself – but to depict falsehoods as having the possibility of truth is appalling.

 

The episode that breaks the camel’s back for me was Episode 12 of Season 6 that was aired just last Saturday, 19th of November 2011 on Channel 5.

 

It featured a group of Malaysian nature researchers who ventured into a forest for research work when they met a reclusive malay man who warned them of the evil which dwelled therein. Although the group ignored his remarks, the two women in the group of four appeared to be more susceptible to such nonsense whereas the two men were nonchalant and apathetic. One of the blokes, which is the male protagonist of the episode – a tubby bespectacled chap of Eurasian ethnicity, appeared to be rather dismissive and more mocking than apathetic, often ridiculing the two women for believing in such nonsense.

 

Silly ghosts and the “third eye” aside, the issue which hit a raw nerve was the response from the two women. One of them reprimanded the chap for mocking the ghosts, saying that “even if you don’t believe, you shouldn’t make fun of things like that.”

 

Although it is just a show, the comment is very representative of a very common mindset among southeast asians, especially the superstitious chinese and malays in the region. In the first place – if ghosts do not exist, what does it matter if one “makes fun” of the fiction? Would it matter if I made fun of werewolves and zombies? Will a werewolf come hunting me down at night because I mocked his existence?

 

Yawn…

 

One of the women also made a remark to the effect that something need not be false just because one cannot see, feel, taste, hear or smell it. That is utterly FALSE. Although a young child is not expected to watch the programme, are the producers trying to send a false message to even a teenager that one can believe something DESPITE the absence of evidence??

 

Anecdotal evidence and spurious claims of experience cannot be accepted at face value, let alone even with a pinch of salt. Anecdotes by their very nature are interpretations of raw data, filtered through the psychological, intellectual and emotional grid of a particular individual. Persons who are ignorant of certain fields of science might misinterpret certain data as apparitions or demonic possession whereas someone else might understand those same data as hallucinatory, illusory or psychiatric, etc.

 

There are many ways to interpret a given set of data, and history has taught us that the natural explanation is often the most reliable one. Most claims to supernatural events are often unverified or have been proven false. The most ridiculous of all are claims to paranormal activities like ghost sightings, UFOs, strange monsters, poltergeists, curses, etc.

 

Some might sarcastically ask why I attempted to watch the show in the first place since I dislike it so much?

 

I have semi-insomniac problems.

 

*******

 

singapore in the eyes of a brit

by Michael Simkins (The Telegraph UK)

 

“Oh, Marmiteland,” said a friend when I announced I was going to Singapore. “You’ll either love it or hate it. It’s really just a huge shopping mall with an airport attached.” Her remark was fairly typical of many who have not visited the tiny tropical city-state in the past five years or so. They still tend to dismiss it as just a safe, clean place for shoppers, a retail utopia where litter louts are arrested and chewing gum is banned. It is, they say, the Far East without the rough edges: perfect for a one-night stopover, and just as soon forgotten.

 

Yet Singapore is booming – and the new-found energy of the place is palpable everywhere, as is its conspicuous wealth. Despite being geographically smaller than the Isle of Wight, Singapore has more millionaires per capita of its five million population than anywhere else on the planet. The World Economic Forum’s latest Global Competitiveness Report places Singapore second only to Switzerland, based largely on an entrepôt trade in which raw materials are imported, then refined for re-export. Despite having no oil, for instance, Singapore operates the third-largest oil refinery in the world.

 

The fruits of all this are apparent in the landmark buildings that have sprung up since the late 1990s, strengthening Singapore’s brand identity, if you like, and attracting overseas visitors. One of the most grandiose is the Marina Bay Sands development, featuring the world’s most expensive casino, a vast shopping mall, a 2,561-room hotel, 14 fine-dining restaurants including Wolfgang Puck’s CUT , and the extraordinary SkyPark, with its infinity pool the length of a football pitch plonked on top of the world’s largest public cantilevered platform, which straddles the three-tower contruction.

 

Other architectural show-stoppers include the Supreme Court building (Foster and Partners’ near-transparent temple of glass atria, skylights and lift shafts, some parts of it clad in translucent Portuguese pink marble); the National Library (two 16-storey blocks linked by dramatic skybridges); and Esplanade – Theatres on the Bay (a waterfront complex with a curved glass roof studded with aluminium sunshades, which has drawn comparison with a durian, the thorny-skinned Asian fruit).

 

Then there are the attention-grabbing world sporting events, notably the annual Singapore Grand Prix, held at night in the city’s streets and followed by a 10-day round of parties, music concerts, exhibitions and gourmet dinners. This, and such crowd-pullers as the World Gourmet Summit – a two-week gastronomic festival attracting Michelin-starred chefs from around the world – swelled tourist numbers to nearly 12 million in 2010, bringing in an estimated S$18.5 billion (£9.2 billion ) in revenue. And with the burgeoning middle classes from India and China beginning to flex their tourist muscles, Singapore has been busily re-minting itself as a destination rather than a mere stopover.

 

Mind you, it makes an agreeable stopover, too. Changi may once have been synonymous with a notorious Japanese prisoner of war camp, but nowadays it is claimed by many to be the finest airline terminal in the world. The icing on the cake is a Balinese-style swimming pool in the transit area of Terminal 1, where weary travellers can refresh themselves with a swim before continuing their long-haul journey.

 

Some believe this rampant redevelopment has gouged out Singapore’s soul, replacing its rackety charms with anodyne efficiency, but there is no doubt that Singapore works. Standards of education are among the highest in the developed world, the various ethnic and racial groups (principally Chinese, Malay and assorted foreigners) co-exist in seeming harmony, the transport system runs like a dream, free Wi-Fi is available in all public spaces, there is virtually no crime, and as for Singapore’s health service — well, as one local said to me, “Tell your friends it’s the best place in the world in which to have a heart attack”.

 

I arrived at Changi for a long weekend just as Singapore was about to stage its fourth Grand Prix – the ultimate civic status symbol, and one that cost the government millions of dollars to secure. Even before I had joined the queue at the airport taxi rank I had been given a taste of the legendary efficiency of the place. The concept of an enjoyable arrival at any international airport seemed implausible to my jaded sensibilities; yet the whole process, from disembarking the plane to climbing into my taxi, took a mere 15 minutes. Even the baggage carousel had fresh orchids in the middle of it – not that I had time to savour them, for as I approached my suitcase was already lumbering out on to the conveyor belt.

 

On the way into town from the airport, my taxi driver, Chang, pointed out how the central reservation of the freeway could be removed within an hour should the road be needed as an emergency runway. “You see? This is the best place to live,” he concluded with disarming certainty.

 

The Shangri-La hotel is typical of the sort of five-star hospitality on offer in this brave new world. Even at midnight, checking in was conducted in the comfort of my ninth-floor room – overlooking a magnificent floodlit swimming pool – rather than at the front desk. Despite the lateness of the hour, the restaurant rustled up a freshly prepared mee goreng (fried noodles) and a chilled Tiger beer with which to soothe my jet lag. The room itself was spacious, opulent and comfortable, offering everything from champagne to a “tropical rain” shower in the bathroom. Not that I would need it: Singapore is virtually on the equator and it rains at least every other day throughout the year.

 

As an antidote to all this unbridled modernity, the next day I headed for Raffles hotel, acme of the old colonial centre and, despite the new generation of architectural interlopers, the city’s most famous landmark. Raffles trades on its old-fashioned charms, with marbled courtyards, plashing fountains and afternoon tea served by liveried staff. If you can ignore the gift shops and the piped Muzak, it is still just possible to imagine how it once must have been, with just you and the memsahib.

 

Culturally, Singapore is an intriguing mixture of colonial, Malaysian and dazzlingly contemporary (its most sacred works are the Bible, the Koran, and Yellow Pages). My visit to the Buddha Tooth Relic Temple proved an unforgettable experience. An oasis in the heart of bustling Chinatown (which itself is well worth a visit), this four-tiered, ancient-looking structure is in fact relatively modern. Such is its ornate splendour, you could be forgiven for thinking it far older.

 

When I arrived, a Buddhist ceremony was under way, and the imposing central hall was filled with lines of kneeling locals, each clutching a tiny prayer book, while a phalanx of monks in orange and scarlet robes chanted their evening prayer.

 

Generally, however, there is little left of old Singapore, though the area known as Joo Chiat offers a few precious remnants of how it must have looked before the high-rise developers moved in; elegant two-storey houses painted in greens and pinks.

 

A Sunday-morning stroll round these sleepy streets offered a faint echo of an older, stiller city, concluding with a delicious bowl of katong laksa (shrimps, coconut milk, noodles, chilli and fresh lime) ordered at a street cafe. You can sample the same delicacy back at your hotel, of course, but you will be charged 10 times the price.

 

Despite a marked absence of open spaces (Singapore is the second most densely populated state on earth), there is plenty for children to see and do. They will love the zoo (especially the family of orang-utans and the white tigers) and nearby Sentosa Island , a popular beauty spot where man-made beaches and a garish version of Universal Studios keep whole families occupied for an afternoon. More sedate by far is the Capella hotel, another Foster and Partners creation – an intriguing blend of the startlingly modern (glass domes, illuminated pools flanked by grey slate) and the reassuringly old (neo-Palladian cloisters and two restored British colonial bungalows from the 1880s) intermingling with the rainforest.

 

By way of contrast, the Singapore Flyer – a larger-than-life replica of the London Eye – offers sensational views across Singapore Bay and the Marina Bay complex, where the casino boasts 600 games tables and 2,300 slot machines. As someone who believes the best way to double his money is to fold it in half and put it back in his wallet, I was content to take a quick spin around the floor. Even on a Sunday afternoon, it was thronged with weekend trippers from China and Malaysia sitting slumped at fruit machines or staring glassily across blackjack tables.

 

The government cannily deters local residents by demanding an entrance fee of S$100 (about £50 ) a head; tourists get in free upon presentation of their passport.

 

As evening fell, I took a taxi to the city’s most celebrated commercial thoroughfare, Orchard Road . A wide street shaded by elegant trees, it is fringed on both sides by glitzy shopping malls; floor upon dizzying floor linked by gleaming escalators, carrying the dedicated fashionista higher and higher into shopping oblivion. With the city gripped by Formula 1 fever, many malls had installed high-tech driving simulators, tenanted by excited teenagers staring at video screens as they negotiated their virtual way round the track.

 

Orchard Road is the weekend meeting place for thousands of Far Eastern immigrants who service the hospitality industry, and tonight they sat on the steps of the malls exchanging chit-chat or lolling on public benches fashioned into gently-rocking swingboats. I bought an attap chee (palm fruit) ice cream from a street vendor and joined some Filipina housemaids who were watching an elderly man clad only in a dhoti and a gap-toothed grin swinging long ropes of wooden balls round his midriff.

 

A laminated sign on the pavement claimed the protagonist had lost 15kg (more than two stone) in two years from his exertions. With the temperature still in the high 30s, I could well believe it.

 

In its cuisine, at least, Singapore already has a prodigious reputation. In recent years a veritable mezze of international chefs has arrived to elevate further the city’s east-meets-west culinary fusion. They include the latest pretender to the crown of Heston Blumenthal – Ryan Clift , born in Devizes, Wiltshire, whose funky restaurant, the Tippling Club , has become the hippest place in town at which to meet for a bite to eat.

 

Singapore has yet to garner its first Michelin star, but the most likely candidate is Ignatius Chan , whose elegant and unshowy restaurant, Iggy’s , on the second floor of the Hilton hotel, was the first in the city to be listed among the San Pellegrino World’s 50 Best Restaurants . My stop for lunch on my final morning was rewarded by a meeting with Iggy himself, a tubby, beneficent individual with a gentle voice and reassuring smile who in other circumstances might have done sterling work as the Dalai Lama.

 

The set menu, which began with a glass of sparkling sake , consisted of five dishes, each more mouthwatering than the last. It culminated in a thin fillet of Blackmore Wagyu beef with pink garlic and wasabi that redefined the term “melt in the mouth”. The service was gloriously unobtrusive, and the bill a mere £40.

 

As I waited in the foyer for my taxi back to the airport, I fell into conversation with an Englishman in his mid-sixties who revealed that he had once been an economic advisor to Tony Blair. “Will our savings be all right?” I asked, only half in jest.

 

He took a long, lingering puff on his cigar, before murmuring “I don’t know.” But if the look on his face was anything to go by, I can think of few better places on earth in which to enjoy yourself – while you still can – than sultry, swanky Singapore.

 

***

 

This article was first published in the Telegraph UK on 21 November 2011.

 

*******

 

what is “natural” may not be good

 

We were sitting at a table outside the church hall, chatting over a cup of coffee and some biscuits. The homily was still going on but what the heck – local christian sermons bore me to death with their irrelevant drivel that is often anti-science, anti-human knowledge, anti-evolution and anti-pluralism.

 

Anyhow, our conversation veered towards Sir Elton John’s visit to Singapore. My friend Peter (not his real name) mentioned how the Straits Times could be so “open” about the issue by mentioning Sir Elton’s partner as well as “their” son. He commented that any child who reads such a report would come away with the idea that having a partner of the same sex is normal.

 

I quipped about the existence of homosexual intercourse among other species of animals, of which the other friend Jimmy (not his real name too) became mildly surprised. Okay, he didn’t know. And I reckon so would many Singaporeans who are ignorant about issues that they think they know enough about to criticise.

 

Undaunted, Peter still believes that whether it occurs in the animal kingdom or among the human species (human beings are animals too, by the way), it is still “unnatural”. He offered the crude analogy of the vaginal hole and the male phallic pole – isn’t it obvious that somehow nature created both sexes to copulate – what is the pole used for but to insert into the hole??

 

The anus is for defecation and that is that.

 

I agree that for biological procreation to occur, heterosexual copulation has to take place. Homosexual copulation will definitely not lead to the propagation of the species. But then again, is procreation the only good thing for humankind? What about human bonding? What about romance? What about love? What about physical pleasure?

 

Anyhow, what is “natural” may not be good for humanity as a whole. Vaginal childbirth is NATURAL for the woman, but it might not be the right thing to go for if there are complications such as a breech case (the baby has not engaged into the position suitable for delivery at full-term) or when the woman is not physiologically able to do so (pelvis too small).

 

Experiencing labour pain is NATURAL for the woman to go through, but hundreds of thousands even millions prefer the use of anaesthesia. Hmm.

 

Copulation is the NATURAL process to conceive one’s offspring but for some couples, it may not be possible. And thus ARTIFICIAL methods of conception are used.

 

Procreation is always the NATURAL end result for any fertile couple but because of modern society, situations have changed. And thus the prevalent use of birth control methods, which are definitely ARTIFICIAL.

 

Wearing spectacles is NOT NATURAL since you have to add a contraption to your eyes. But it is needed if a myopic individual wants to have a better quality of life.

 

And so on and so forth.

 

There are many issues in modern life that is NOT NATURAL but are beneficial for humankind in order to progress. So in order to be consistent with the “natural vs unnatural” argument, one has to forgo a lot of things in the 21st century.

 

Okay, back to homosexual intercourse. Even though homosexual copulation will not lead to procreation, and it may appear to be “abnormal” or “unnatural” to many, one cannot argue with the FACT that there has always been a minority in any given population throughout history who are homosexual. And this minority DID NOT choose to be this way. If they could, homosexuals in the past would have opted for heterosexuality in order to escape all the inconveniences of discrimination, religious backlash, witchhunts, criminalisations, etc.

 

So do we have a right, as fellow human beings, to demonise people for simply being who they are, by no conscious choice of their own?? Do we have a right to refuse happiness for these people just because they were born homosexual?? (Yes – to argue for a homosexual who is cultivated to be that way is to argue for scientific nonsense)

 

For the sake of human well-being and flourishing, for the sake of the progress of humanity, for the sake of the very values that religion upholds – love, equality, compassion and acceptance – forbidding same-sex marriage or homosexual sex – is tantamount to a vicious crime against humanity.

 

*******

 

a different case all together

 

 

One would think that with all the media attention on the former YP (Young PAP) member, the probability of another incident with similar societal repercussions would be extremely low, even bordering on the impossible.

 

But within a few days, a fresh case surfaces. It involves an NSF (National Service-Full time) by the name of Christian Eliab Ratnam (definitely NOT a chinese, as some in online forums and chatrooms ignorantly assume) who apparently posted the above on his Facebook page.

 

The bordered text reads:

 

“Islam is not a religion or a race! Islam is an authoritarian, political doctrine which imposes itself by force. Any political doctrine that calls to kill those who do not believe in it is NOT a religion. Islam is not a religion! It is a ____ that glorifies _____.”

 

It seems to me that the majority of people are equating the above rhetoric with the previous case but I beg to differ. To blatantly call a group of innocent children on board a bus to a kindergarten terrorist trainees CANNOT be equated with a paragraph that opines on the perceived political nature of the Islamic religion. While the former is irresponsible and crass, the latter is an expression of opinion, regardless of its correspondence to reality.

 

Yes, I do not agree with Ratnam’s evaluation on the matter – has he read any works by islamic scholars like Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Tariq Ramadan, Abdal Hakim Murad or even the great medieval Islamic philosopher, Al-Ghazali? Has he genuinely investigated into the claims of Islam and whether or not the deluded extremists who kill people in the name of Islam truly represent Islam?

 

Has he NOT realise that the hebrew scriptures (the Christian old testament) contains numerous references to genocides, mass killings and gross violence in the name of God? And it takes just one loony individual who interprets those narratives literally and who is charismatic and powerful enough to perhaps start another Jewish or Christian war against the perceived enemies of God? Of course, no Jewish rabbi worth his salt would interpret those narratives literally and use them as a biblical sanction for wiping out secular atheist nations!

 

And so would any credible Islamic scholar of fiqh (jurisprudence) or Kalam (theology).

 

Besides, what one sees through the very tainted eyes of the media makes up about one to two per cent of the entire global muslim population. Similarly – there are extreme cults in the name of Judaism or Christianity that justifies the killing of innocent lives in order to create a Jewish or Christian society. But these do not represent the true face of Judaism or Christianity as we know it today!

 

Now – even after all the disagreements I have with Ratnam – I have to admit that without allowing emotion to take over, this NSF is just expressing an opinion about religion. Does he not have the basic right to express a personal opinion on anything and everything? I think he does.

 

And to demonise him just because of expressing an opinion – is bringing real shame on us as a cosmopolitan city state that upholds pluralism. We as a society have to learn to not only tolerate views akin to our own but also opposing views as well. That is a sign of maturity. Of course, because of his ignorance, we can attempt at correcting his somewhat bigoted notions of Islam by education, instruction and debate. We can set the record straight.

 

There is no need for criminalising him just for expressing an opinion.

 

Otherwise, we are no different from China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia or Iran.

 

Nations for which I have utter contempt and disdain.

 

*******

 

a step forward for singapore, i think

 

Unlike the anti-homosexual sentiments from certain fundamentalist elements of the muslim community in Malaysia, Singapore takes a remarkable step forward by not only inviting the flamboyant performer, the great Sir Elton John for a one-night concert here as part of his world tour; but also highlighted his entire family on prime time news on Channel 5 last night as well as the subsequent Singapore News tonight on Channel News Asia.

 

The bespectabled singer was accompanied by his husband, David Furnish, along with their son Zachary as they were swamped by fans at the 20th World Orchid Conference held at Marina Bay Sands. The special occasion was the naming of an phalaenopsis hybrid orchid after the British artiste.

 

Elton John Orchid, as Colourful as the Man himself

 

It was thoughtful of the news programme to even call David Furnish “his partner” and the beautiful baby boy “their son”. Such an acceptance on prime time news makes a statement that although the ignominous 377A still holds in Singapore theoretically and legally, we are not going to make criminals of the great singer and his husband even though they would obviously be sleeping on the same bed in a hotel suite in Singapore, probably being busy with baby Zachary, probably snuggling and hugging together, probably kissing and maybe even having sex.

 

We in Singapore WILL NOT be making the mistake of demonising the artiste and his family just by being the way God created them to be, homosexual men. We in Singapore are not stupid as some are across the causeway to think that just by allowing Sir Elton John to have a concert here would be “corrupting the morals” of those attending.

 

Aren’t religion about love and compassion, anyway?

 

*******

 

a lesson for secular “liberal democracies”

 

 

The above photograph shows a school bus filled with preschoolers belonging to Huda Kindergarten, an Islamic faith-based kindergarten. The caption below reads “Bus filled with young terrorist trainees?”

 

This photograph could be one among the similar thousands one would view almost every other day in Britain and the US without anyone batting an eyelid. And one of the main reasons offered for such apathy is the liberal dogma of the “basic” human right to free speech and expression.

 

This “right” to free speech apparently comprises anything and everything, from mild criticisms of the powers that be to sheer vitriolic and vulgar diatribe against religion and sometimes even race. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the Iranian-American islamic philosopher from George Washington University, made a comment once during an interfaith dialogue in the Dalai Lama’s presence in Emory University about human rights. He said that there is so  much talk about rights but almost none about RESPONSIBILITY.

 

He is right. As stewards of the freedom modern civilisation has given us, we have to be responsible in what we do with our liberties. I am so proud of civilised Singapore to have responded so swiftly and efficiently to irresponsible hate speech, whether directed to race or religion. And in the case of the above photograph which was posted by a local Young PAP member, a Jason Neo, on his Facebook page in February, action was taken almost immediately.

 

Young PAP Member quits over Offensive Remarks on Facebook

 

Of course, if there are terrorist elements lurking around in Singapore, it is our right as citizens to criticise and sound the alarm; religious or otherwise. But remarks as the above are unjustified when our madrasahs and “faith schools” are so remotely unlike some of the extreme muslim schools in the UK where male teachers were caught (by hidden camera) physically beating pupils and indoctrinating them with anti-british nonsense.

 

The muslim community in Singapore, thanks to its leadership and our government, are respectful of secular governance, tolerant of other religions and have on several occasions engaged in interfaith events and dialogue. Many are law-abiding and loyal citizens of the country they call home.

 

Incidentally, I have a muslim neighbour who sends her three young boys to a muslim kindergarten and can be seen every morning waiting for the school bus in their cute headcaps and green uniforms. They are polite, courteous and very gentle friends who greet my own children whenever they see them. Both our families exchanged red and green packets during the Chinese Lunar New Year and Eid Al-Fitr respectively.

 

The occupants of the flat before this young muslim family was also muslim – and the patriarch of that family was an active RC (Residents’ Committee) member! Shame on the Chinese living on our level, including myself.

 

This IS how politics should be done, and how a society should function. Zero tolerance for religious discrimination. It is appalling to me when prior to the Pope’s state visit to the UK, there were hordes of people behaving like lunatics, waving placards that said “Fuck the Pope…” and numerous others to that effect. Public intellectuals like Richard Dawkins and AC Grayling added their names to the lunacy as well. Is this what a so-called liberal democracy is supposed to run??!

 

*******

 

reminiscing the good ol’ days

 

If I am able to travel back in time or choose the life I want to live in Singapore, I would choose to be born in the 1950s and be a young man in the 1970s to 80s. Lifestyles were a lot simpler and the pace of living a lot slower. There would be no Ipods and Ipads to distract the young and no proliferation of computer games to divide my children’s attention.

 

 

I can still remember the Identification Cards (IC) which my parents had, pieces of laminated printed paper that looked exactly like the above.

 

 

Or the numerous SBS (Singapore Bus Service) omnibuses that looked like the above, which did not have the luxury of air-conditioning and have windows that rattled and shook every time the bus moved.

 

 

The playgrounds in the heartlands looked like the above, with concrete contraptions and cemented grounds. Children these days are very privileged to be playing in areas that are cushioned with so many “safety” precautions like padded grounds and plastic contraptions. In the past, suffering a fracture or a concussion was a guarantee if you fall from a considerable height. But then again, children seemed to be tougher back then.

 

 

My primary school English textbooks look very much like the above, part of the Primary English Programme (PEP) started by the government.

 

 

…and my stationery cases were that of the above – “pencil boxes” which were multi-purposeful and had several compartments for rubbers, pencils, pens, rulers, sharpeners, etc. We would love to compare our “gadgets” with one another in school.

 

 

This was the video game console I was exposed to during my childhood – the Atari game system, unlike the highly advanced Playstations and X-Boxes we have today. My father later “progressed” to Nintendo, and that was that. He would occupy the console most of the time which meant my entertainment in those days was very much my storybooks…

 

 

…or the Mastermind game which required lots of logical thinking. Such games gave way to the mindless mayhem of the 21st century.

 

 

When I see primary school-aged children chatting away on their mobile phones, I am often reminded of the first time I owned a pager – and that was at 17 (I owned my first mobile phone when I was 21). And it was also at 17 that I started to use the computer…

 

 

…with floppy disks like the above to store data.

 

The world is so different now. There are some things which are for the better, like human and animal rights. There are some things which may not be for the better, like technology and social networking sites which have increased the opportunity for crime and moral decline. Although the Internet has transformed the world in ways unimaginable in the past, books are fast becoming relics as information can be so easily acquired in cyberworld.

 

What will it be like when my children grow up? What will it be like when I enter my senior years? What will it be like when I no longer exist?

 

Sigh. Only homo sapiens have this curse of being so self-conscious and self-aware of the present and of the future.

 

*******

 

Thanks to Remember Singapore blog for some of the pictures above.

 

 

court allows proselytisation?

 

Last year, a federal court in the US allowed a christian pastor to distribute christian literature to muslims during the annual Arab International Festival which would be held in Michigan. The annual festival is a secular one, celebrating the arabic culture with numerous food booths, an interactive children’s stage, a large carnival, arabic merchandise, etc.

 

Court allows Pastor to distribute Christian literature to Muslims

 

The basis of the ruling is none other than US’ pet topic, the rights to free speech. It seems that because of the rights to free speech, christians in the US have the right to attempt proselytisation of people of other religious faiths, which include Islam.

 

In principle this might be the right thing to do although I sincerely suspect if the authorities would do the same for a muslim who wants to spread the knowledge of his religion in a christian event.

 

Anyhow, the basic human right to free speech and expression, in theory, is inviolable and proper. However, the implementation might be problematic as it leads to all sorts of social conflicts. Does the right to express oneself include irresponsible speech, unwarranted diatribe against authority, public displays of sexual intercourse, etc? Of course there are some countries in Europe that might consistently apply this so-called basic right to its logical extreme and allow its citizens to do whatever they want in the name of free speech; but is it the right thing to do?

 

We may have the right to express ourselves, but I do not believe that such a right includes unbridled irresponsibility – and this includes the “rights” of harmful religious cults who might practise animal sacrifice, self mutilation, rebellion against authority, etc. And thus I am ALL for the Singapore government to BAN “religions” like the Jehovah’s Witnesses (who oppose the military, salutation to the national flag and blood transfusion), Scientology, Satanism, Wicca and all of the other belief systems that run counter to national progress, peace and social stability.

 

The liberal democratic US and Europe can take their potshots at us anytime, criticising our leaders for their “draconian” and “autocratic” rule, but results speak for themselves, really. I don’t want to live in a society where riots and protests take place almost every other day, with scientologists and religious quacks running amok, attempting to brainwash my children with their rubbish and irresponsible atheists who, contrary to what they might verbally claim, are in all practical terms, trying to get rid of religion completely from society.

 

Okay, back to the christian pastor’s case. If such overt attempts at proselytising people of other religious traditions are allowed, it negates the very principle of religious plurality – the acceptance of other religions other than our own as our metaphysical equal. It is plausible if a christian expresses his beliefs and ideas to a personal friend or relative – but to do so in a public space is tantamount to inciting conflict. What if the community one is attempting to proselytise DOES NOT WANT to be handed out literature?

 

Singapore is incredibly wise in criminalising all attempts at instigating inter-religious conflict. Dialogue and discussion among religious groups is admirable and encouraged, but not debate and diatribe. Thank goodness open-air preaching is forbidden in Singapore. Thank goodness religious extremists like the evangelical christian women from Church of Our Saviour (COOS) who attempted to take over a woman’s rights organisation was somehow put down by the public. Thank goodness extremist faith healers like pastor Rony Tan from Lighthouse Evangelism was sanctioned by the society at large for putting down buddhism and taoism (besides, such an exclusivist view is actually the predominant view among christians in Singapore).

 

Anyway, let these liberal democracies be deceived by their own arrogance and delusion, and witness the corruption and downfall of their societies. Europe is now in economic tatters, and so is the US. And with all the rioting and the strikes, let’s see how these nations will continue to run. The more they criticise Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore, the more they will witness the flaws in their own ideologies.

 

It is sad that political loonies like Chee Soon Juan are so blinded by their love for Western cuisine that they seem to think that liberalism would be a better choice for Singapore.

 

Really?

 

*******

 

singaporean women not into good looks

 

Local dating agency Lunch Actually conducted a regional dating survey recently and some of the results included the resistance of Singaporean women to date shorter men as well as their penchant for confidence and a strong character more than physical good looks.

 

S’porean Women not open to dating Shorter Men

 

Thank goodness that even though I rank among the shorties in the male species, my darling happens to be more dimunitive than I am!

 

The results of the survey are not surprising at all since much of it is common sense, really. But of course, there are exceptional women who are very secure in themselves that they do not care one bit about their men being shorter.

 

In the physical looks department, it has NEVER occurred to me that Singaporean women value good looks in their men. If other blokes have always thought it is, I wonder how daft our men can get – no wonder many are still single. When I was in the army, I know of many men who held on to this misconception. It isn’t any wonder that many of them dated sweet young things.

 

It has always been ONLY adolescent girls who go gaga over handsome pop stars and TV hunks. Many if not all grew out of this childish preoccupation and realise that gorgeous hunks do not make good husbands. In fact, it is many of the geeks and nerds you know in school who become the opinion-makers, movers and shakers of the world and not the brawny college hunk who are often clueless about everything except girls and silly sports.

 

Yes – women do appreciate beauty and handsomeness – they would often comment about how handsome or how good-looking a particular bloke is, but that’s about it. It is simply observation, whereas when it comes down to qualities to look out for in a mate, good looks would often be a bonus rather than a priority.

 

*******

 

blessed hari raya haji

 

 

Yesterday – Sunday – was the actual celebration of Hari Raya Haji, or what is more accurately known as Eid al-Adha, the “Festival of Sacrifice”, and thus today is a public holiday in Singapore.

 

It commemorates the sacrifice of Ismail (Ishmael in hebrew) to Allah (“the God”) by the Ibrahim (Abraham in hebrew). Of course, in the Christian story, it wasn’t Ishmael but Isaac who was sacrificed. Anyhow, this celebration includes the import of thousands of sheep into the mosques all over Singapore for the ritual sacrifice, after which the meat would be distributed to the poor in the community.

 

As a Christian and a humanist, I need not be an active participant in the ritual or the celebration to know that it is a ritual of great significance as it implies obedience and submission to the sacred, to something more other than ourselves and this plane of existence.

 

*******

 

superstitions at work

 

 

It was just yesterday morning when representatives of eight major religions in Singapore gathered together to recite prayers of “blessing” on the Bedok Reservoir, in which a recent spate of suicides occurred. In fact, an hour before the religious gathering, another body was found in its waters.

 

Although the suicide toll in so brief a period of time at one specific venue is cause for concern for Singapore society, it should not be the reason to indulge in superstition – suicides are caused by factors both psychological or mental as well as societal or cultural – and the predominance of one venue over others is nothing more than a combination of natural factors such as coincidence, residential demographics and what my wife recently remarked – if one commits suicide in Bedok Reservoir, public visibility is 100 per cent guaranteed.

 

To require a gathering of religious leaders to “bless” the reservoir is tantamount to resorting to superstition as a solution to the problem. Suicides are NOT caused by “evil spirits” or some “evil aura” in any particular place – there is no need to invoke the gods. It reveals much more about the state of society in which we live, the trivialities of chasing after the wind, the silliness of men and women to lust after power, wealth and the vanity of the human condition. It simply reveals the futily of pursuing things that do not matter.

 

A culture of pride and pollyanna-ish falsehoods is what Singapore society is – that we are all born to succeed and win in life, that we can all make it big and rich and prosperous if we only try our darn best. Now – I am not trying to advocate pessimism, just a big reality check. Life is NOT fair, and that is a FACT. Although education can level out the playing field, society cannot and will not function if everyone is a “winner”, whatever that means. Values like success, wealth and victory are all relative categories, they do not exist in a vacuum. If there is success, there is ALSO failure. If someone wins, it means there is someone who loses. If one is rich, it means there are many others who are less rich than him/her. It becomes a misnomer, a non-sensical statement to say that “everyone is born to succeed”.

 

I know people like Adam Khoo would be shaking their heads now. Of course, otherwise motivational NLP charlatans like him would have no business. It is good to have a positive mindset, to cultivate a good working attitude, etc – but one has to be sober enough to be aware that NOT everyone can reach the stars just by trying his/her best. That IS life. It is only when we can accept our lot in life do we become fulfilled in our own selves and our own stations.

 

Besides, suicides are part of the human condition. They are morbid for the soul, yes, but nature is impartial and apathetic. It just is.

 

And thus, there is absolutely NO USE to utter empty words to the air, as though some deity or deities would reach down and stir the waters of the reservoir a bit, getting rid of the spirits of death that dwell therein.

 

DO SOMETHING about it!! Create awareness for psychiatry and psychological medicine. Create awareness of depression. Create awareness of certain charities and welfare organisations. Cultivate a society that is empathic to pain and suffering, tuned in to compassion and healing, instead of selfish ambition and more economic nonsense. So what if Singapore is “prospering” economically – as China seems to be currently doing – when many human beings are still suffering and unwanted?

 

Value our fellow human beings. They are all we have, for above us…

 

is only sky.

 

*******

 

blessed deepavali

 

Blessed Deepavali to all Hindu Singaporeans!

 

 

Deepavali (also known in the abbreviated form as Diwali) is a word in Sanskrit which literally means “Row of Lamps” and is a festival to mark the beginning of the Hindu new year in accordance to the Lunar calendar.

 

It also celebrates the universal human myth of the triumph of good over evil and light over darkness, with a whole mythology of gods and goddesses undergirding the premise of the celebration.  

 

Personal belief in Hinduism is irrelevant as every Singaporean, regardless of religion, is able to appreciate the meaning and significance of the festival and the spirit in which our Hindu brethren celebrate it.

 

*******

 

slave masters in singapore

 

I applaud Archbishop Nicholas Chia, the leader of the Roman Catholic community here in Singapore, for encouraging Catholics to apply the Golden Rule when it comes to their domestic helpers.

 

He did this on the occasion of World Migrants and Refugees Day.

 

Weekly Day Off for Maids only Fair: Archbishop

 

The maids in Singapore are a sorry lot. Their employers apparently want to have their meagre money spent on the maids stretched to its full worth by forbidding any rest and respite for these poor aliens, miles away from home. While most of these Singaporeans have a good two days’ rest every week, their own maids have no choice but to work 24/7, at the mercy of the families they work for.

 

Some even have to put on shoes and clothes for their employers’ primary school children, an utter DISGRACE. Primary school children are old enough to put on their own clothes and tie their own shoelaces, let alone feed themselves.

 

Thank goodness slavery is a thing of the past. Otherwise Singaporeans would be the first nationality to jump on the bandwagon.

 

*******

 

i am chinese but my “native” language is english!

 

Our senior statesman, the grandfather of modern Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, was at a dialogue last Friday with some 4000 Chinese entrepreneurs when he commented that chinese Singaporeans should speak Mandarin to their children at home so as not to allow the future generations lose touch with their ethnic tongue. He also revealed as to how he made efforts to speak to his grandchildren in Mandarin all the time. Besides, in the context of Singapore, children will learn English in schools anyway.

 

Lee Kuan Yew: Mistake to Lose Mandarin at Home

 

His remarks reminded me of my former employer, whose eldest and third children were raised with Mandarin at home and apparently this affected their Mandarin competence in a very positive way – both excelled in Mandarin as well as English in school! Their second son however, was raised in an English-speaking environment and alas, he grew up disliking the Mandarin language.

 

Such a method might work for some families but not all. Human beings are not born with equal intellectual and linguistic capacities – there are some who would be able to be masterfully literate in more than one language but the majority of humankind would probably master only one. And in this sense I am refering not to a practical ability to converse and read minimally which among most chinese in Singapore would never be a problem, but a genuine MASTERY of the language in both speech and word. Such an endeavour would be very difficult indeed as one has to be able to “switch” modes of thought in multiple languages.

 

My wife came from a Hokkien-Mandarin speaking family (as would a majority of people in those days) and learnt English only in school. But although she can converse in both languages fairly well, I wouldn’t label her as literate in either English or Mandarin! She cannot write Mandarin competently nor can she write in the English language without more than a couple of grammatical, syntactical and structural mistakes. So – is she competently able in both languages?

 

And I contend that most Singaporeans would be like my wife – average in both English and their second language – and not like my employer’s children. Many would also be university-educated (as was my wife), but cannot speak or write competent and excellent English. And this is NOT good in my books. I would rather be a MASTER in one language than a Jack of two.

 

Anyhow, what about families akin to my own? My native language is English, full stop. Although ethnically chinese, I was only exposed to the Mandarin language from primary 1 onwards – both my parents have always been English-speaking, with my father conversant only in English, Hokkien and Malay. This runs contrarian to whatever talk Singaporeans have on mother or native tongues. Besides, as a fourth generation Singaporean, it is illogical to equate my cultural and societal roots with China whatsoever.

 

Take for example the contemporary black community in the US or the UK. They are ethnically African and are probably descended from African slaves or immigrants either a century or several decades back. But do many of them speak their “ethnic” tongue? Of course not. It would be illogical and irrational to expect them to do so.

 

Similarly, much of the caucasian population in the US are not of “pure American stock”, if there is such a word. The only pure Americans would be the native American indians. Many of the whites would probably be of European descent, may it be Italian, Dutch, Scandinavian, Russian, Czech, Irish, Scottish, etc. But do any of them speak in their ethnic tongues? Unless they personally decide to learn their ancestral tongue, most would only speak the American language and probably Spanish as a second language, of any at all.

 

No European or African would blame an American or Briton if he/she has no clue about their ancestral language. No one would expect them to do so anyway. So what’s the difference here in Singapore? Why all the irrational fuss about our “mother tongues”, as though our native language has to do anything at all with the race which we were born with – as though we had a choice in it.

 

I have no choice in my being an ethnic Chinese with Peranakan roots. But since I am four generations away from China – and Malacca - why would I be expected to know Mandarin??! Is it immoral if I can’t utter a single word of Mandarin as a British African would not his african tongue?

 

Come off it, you chinese chauvinists in Singapore. Anyway, this applies to the other races as well. We are all Singaporean first, not Chinese, Malay, Indian or what-have-you. Quit playing the race game as though it is something morally important in this globalised 21st century world. This is Singapore – and you should be expected to be literate in ENGLISH competently, more than your Mandarin, Bahasa Malay or Tamil or Hindi.

 

*******

 

some thoughts on atheist activism in the US and UK

 

There are times I wonder if all that effort by atheists, free thinkers and humanists, mainly in the US and the UK, to eradicate religious expression in the public space, is all that good and beneficial to the cause.

 

Organisations like Freedom from Religion Foundation in the US and the British Humanist Association in the UK have often been in the political frontlines of trying to get all forms of religious expression out of the public arena like government schools, in parliament, in areas of public service, etc. Although one can indeed make a case in the US by appealing to the secular nature of the constitution, even as a freethinker myself I don’t really see what all the fuss is about when a student attempts to pray in school or when some form of religious expression is attempted.

 

Despite what these atheists and freethinkers say about respecting democratic liberalism and pluralism; they continually give me the impression that they are atheist fascists, attempting to get rid of all forms of religion in society. Is this the kind of impression you want to give to the religious community, that atheists themselves have this “evil” agenda of eliminating religion at all costs?

 

The only form of religious expression that I think should be eradicated is religious fundamentalism, in all of its evangelical, wahabi and hasidic varieties. These are definitely dangerous to humanity and human progress. But what about theraveda buddhism? What about pluralistic hinduism? What about benign attempts by sincere christians to want to pray in school?

 

I contend that such expressions are harmless and REAL humanists should never force their secularist views, however moderate or extreme, on such really innocent folks.

 

The situation in Singapore is somewhat different from the US or the UK. As a secular country, religion is almost nonexistent in any form of civil, government and public discourse, although it is mightily prevalent in our culture and society. It is almost ingrained in every Singaporean that one has no right to force his personal religious beliefs on another and thus proselytisation is almost a taboo and a no-no in Singaporean society.

 

But this does not mean that Singapore is like Sweden or Norway where citizens are mostly non-religious. Singapore is VERY religious, a melting pot of buddhism, taoism, hinduism, jainism, christianity, islam and what-have-you all in one place. But we live and let live – we simply mind our own business and allow others to practise what they want, as long as their beliefs are not dangerous to society, such as scientology or the Jehovah’s Witnesses (their opposition to military conscription and to bear arms goes against our policy of mandatory military service of every male citizen upon reaching the age of 18), which are banned in Singapore.

 

BUT…no decent Singaporean will mind if a teacher attempts to bring up his religious views in a classroom, of course, in a civilised and respectful way. It is often okay to offer exposition on one’s religious views but always in a way that DOES NOT put down another view that is contrary to oneself’s.

 

We also have our fair share of “faith” schools, schools that are affiliated with religious institutions such as the Anglican and Methodist schools as well as the Buddhist schools and the Madrasahs. With the exception of the Madrasahs which I contend could be quite dodgy in terms of their educational curriculum, all of our christian and buddhist schools are absolutely HARMLESS. All of them accept nonreligious students into their cohort and although there are chaplains and chapel services, proselytisation is a no-no without the nonreligious student’s consent.

 

There might be a prayer or two during Monday gatherings, but then again, who cares? Nonreligious students simply ignore them. There is no coercion by anybody to believe or practise the faith of the school.

 

So I suppose this is very unlike the faith schools in the UK, that are somewhat more religiously aggressive.

 

Hmm.

 

But of course, there are also many things about Singapore that is unhealthy and should be changed, like its draconian censorship laws, views on capital punishment, criminalisation of homosexuality, and its unwritten prohibition against any form of derogatory criticism of religion and religious views in public discourse.

 

But what the hell, people still have the right to practise and believe what they want, however ridiculous, erroneous and idiotic (which they are), as long as they do not force others to do the same.

 

This, I think, is what the atheists in the US and UK are doing wrong.

 

*******

 

singapore’s obsession with sex

 

 

What the fuck is wrong with Singaporeans these days? The public seems to be so obsessed with sex that they are seeing phalluses and pussies all over the place where there is none.

 

In the wake of the Abercrombie & Fitch advertisement, some Singaporeans are suggesting that the above advertisement is even more vulgar.

 

So, which ad is more indecent?

 

What the…? Although I realise where the company in question, which specialises in brazilian waxing, is driving at; the notion of vulgarity is ALL IN THE MIND. Such advertisements make life all the more exciting and interesting – playing on images, suggestions, euphemisms and the like to get important messages across.

 

It is really ridiculous to label such attempts at creativity in today’s world as vulgar or lewd when there is already so much sexuality on display in the media. Who are you trying to fool?

 

The people who would detect the so-called “vulgarity and lewdness” of such advertising would be mature adults in the first place, and what are the chances that these very adults would be so influenced by such advertising that they would become sexual psychopaths? Would we become molestors and rapists over night by being exposed to such advertising?

 

Let me suggest that there is more explicit sexuality on television these days of which children have exposure to than any advertisement in shopping centres or on Orchard Road could ever do. So shouldn’t MDA do something about it, like banning “sex” scenes even on Channel 5′s The Pupil or any of Channel 8′s drama series? Although these “sex” scenarios are never erotically explicit, children who watch such programmes with their parents can “get the idea” rather quickly – far more easily than advertisements like the above poster!

 

I wonder if any primary school child would be able to decipher what the above poster suggests, other than a fur bag that is opened?

 

Come on.

 

Sometimes I wonder if it really requires a lewd mind to interpret and suggest lewdness in an image.

 

The people who think that these advertisements are vulgar are probably vulgar themselves, sexually repressed individuals who have no way of expressing their sexual energy due to their misguided notions of an archaic morality that should have been discarded a long time ago.

 

We should be civil and logical in our discussion about sexuality in society. As mature adults, we should be able to handle a variety of sexual expressions in society, may it be erotic advertising, sexually suggestive images or prose, or simply creative eroticism at work. None of these are sexist, racist or homophobic to say the least. Whether it is the male or the female body – the human form is beautiful and sensual. Visual expressions of such beauty is art and should never be perceived as degrading to either the female or the male.

 

*******

 

singapore behaves just like another islamic theocracy

 

I posted an entry in late August commenting on an advertisement in Orchard Road depicting the beautiful abdominal muscles of a male model. There were quite a number of people who found it rather distasteful and lewd:

 

Is this Advertisement Distasteful?

 

I defended the advertisement by highlighting a letter sent to The Straits Times about the supposedly “lewd” nature of the piece and pointed out fallacies inherent in the letter.

 

It now seems that even the powers that be in Singapore is yielding to the the stupidity of the public, claiming that the advertisement has breached certain decency guidelines and thus decided to suspend the advertisement.

 

Abercrombie & Fitch Advertisement at Knightsbridge suspended

 

MDA backs ASAS call to remove Abercrombie & Fitch Ad

 

COME ON Singapore.

 

There are some who claim that it borders on indecency the moment the portion below the navel line is revealed. This is ridiculous – and I am not easily deceived by such nonsense – the navel line rule is a rule that Islam propagates for its men – the region between the navel and the knee is prohibited from exposure. So if someone brings that up in public discourse, he/she would in fact be using religion and not reason and sound logic to defend what it means to be “decent”.

 

So what about swimming trunks then? I am aware that there are indeed some muslim men who would not wear swimming trunks for apparently that line of religious reasoning. But the majority of decent men out there still wear swimming trunks to the pool or the beach and there is no hue and cry from anyone that it is indecent or lewd.

 

If the Abercrombie advertisment would be taken off, we might as well ban swimming trunks altogether.

 

This is SECULAR Singapore. And it is behaving like another Iran or Saudi Arabia, with all of their sexual paranoia and ridiculous islamic fascism. It will never be a genuine first world city if it continues to subscribe to archaic forms of morality that have no place in the 21st century.

 

*******

 

general practitioner speaks about religion to patient

 

A General Practitioner (GP) in the UK was recently embroiled in a disciplinary fracas with the General Medical Council (GMC) for speaking to a suicidal patient about Christianity. Dr Richard Scott was forced to attend the hearing because he refused to accept a mere official warning over the incident (served him right).

 

Christian GP told Vulnerable Patient to turn to Jesus

 

After reading the above news report among many others, I am reminded of the medical community here in Singapore. Although the majority of sensible GPs here do not mix religious fiction with medical science, there are instances of christian GPs who would every now and then speak about how Jesus could “heal” their patients and perhaps even “pray for them” if they willingly avail themselves. Some would even encourage their patients to attend “miracle services” organised by churches like Lighthouse Evangelism to get healed.

 

Such GPs are treading on a very fine line here. Most would not even think of speaking such things to their muslim patients (there is an obvious civil disparity here) – somehow muslims are the ones who seem to be more touchy than others about religious proselytisation – but would not think twice of sharing Jesus with patients of buddhist, taoist or hindu faiths.

 

And most of the time in such cases, patients of these religious faiths (apart from muslims) are rather nice and would not bother about complaining to the authorities that they were forcefed christianity.

 

I contend that we should. It is incredibly offensive to my sensibilities to be offered religious fiction when all I should be offered are options in medical science. In terms of cases like suicide or depression, a proper psychiatric treatment should be recommended by the GP.

 

Religion can only be shared by the GP in situations where the patient shares a similar faith. As such, the blind would only be leading the blind. No harm done to other enlightened individuals.

 

*******

 

PAP not open to change

 

Open to being persuaded? I’m not about to believe it until I see ten simple things — none of which costs much money, so they aren’t questions of budget prioritisation:

1. Repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code, apply non-discriminatory rating standards for heterosexual and homosexual media content;

2. Scrap mandatory death penalty, moratorium on all death penalty;

3. Repeal laws that permit detention without trial, i.e. the Internal Security Act and the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act;

4. Loosen up laws on public speaking and gathering — no licences needed for indoor speaking (even foreigners) whatever the topic, liberal granting of licences for outdoor gatherings and speaking;

5. Scrap all licensing for indoor arts performances; liberal granting of licences for outdoor performances and installations;

6. Scrap Sections 33 and 35 of the Films Act (political films and blank cheque given to minister to ban any film);

7. Scrap all licensing provisions for new media content;

8. Scrap newspaper/magazine licensing regime and the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act;

9. Redefine ‘contempt of court’ to a very narrow meaning that covers only disruption of court proceedings and flouting of judges’ orders;

10. Reduce ministerial salaries by at least half.

- Alex Au (Singapore political commentator, author & human rights activist)

 

The above is taken from the article entitled On a High Horse called Truth and Right, PAP lost in a changing world in Yawning Bread blog.

 

*******

 

“steamy” games?

 

 

The photograph above captures a moment in one of the many games played by the freshies in the orientation programme of the Singapore Institute of Management – University of London (SIM-UOL), held last month.

 

SIM’s Orientation Games are Sexist and Humiliating

 

And in a report presented by Stomp, an amateur, citizen-generated news outlet organised by The Straits Times, one “Stomper” which goes by the name of Zerocool, went on a tirade against such games:

 

“Why do they even allow such lewd games? They are sexist, irrelevant and humiliating, especially to the girls.

 

What do these steamy games have anything to do with being a student at SIM?

 

Are the organisers so desperate…that they have to resort to such indecent games?”

 

Three adjectives were used of the games here, namely lewd, steamy and indecent. What is so lewd about blokes in push-up positions with their lassy counterparts lying on the ground? What is so steamy – in other word, erotic – about the above picture?

 

Let me be INDECENT then. I do not see the blokes groping the breasts of the gals. I do not see any tongue action, french kissing, heavy petting, dogging or buggering of any sort. Now, if the games indeed require blokes to french kiss gals; then I would question the moral integrity of the organisers.

 

But this?

 

Such accusations speak more of the individual who made them than the issues themselves. It is akin to fanatical muslim men who claim that any sight of female skin, even if it is just the shoulders, can turn men on and thus women should cover themselves as thoroughly as possible.

 

It is my contention that such games are harmless fun. They are very common in varsities all over the world, let alone in Singapore. The intention of such heterosexual pairing is simply to incite some feelings of discomfort, which is just part of the thrill and fun. As there is no explicit sexual activity involved, there shouldn’t be any cause for alarm or worry.

 

Zerocool, or any other Singaporean whose opinion is similar to his for that matter, are simply sexually repressed individuals who still hold on to archaic codes of morality that have no place in the 21st century world.

 

They are overreacting to something that should be the least of their concerns and worry. Or unless they secretly harbour the wish to be participants of the games themselves…but since they are not and perhaps cannot due to some erroneous moral code (probably religious in nature), they go on a tirade instead.

 

Of course, in situations where the girl or even the bloke is very uncomfortable with the game, they should be allowed the choice of not participating. Then again, peer pressure among adolescents and even adults can be very strong. Human beings can sometimes be as daft as sheep, having a herd mentality that does not want to lose face or lose out with the rest of the pack.

 

Silly, really.

 

*******

 

not religion?

 

It was a good thing that CEO Isabella Loh, of Wildlife Reserve Singapore (WRS), clarified that she was NOT a christian, of which many netizens were suspecting her of, due to some comments she had made about “devil worship”.

 

She clarified that she is a buddhist.

 

Wildlife Reserves Singapore apologises to President

 

Halloween event cancelled not due to Religious reasons

 

But the statement that WRS gave to the press that the event was cancelled NOT due to religious reasons is somewhat dubious.

 

It is dubious because Ms Loh has yet to elaborate on the exact content of the feedback, of which I suspect have to do with “reasons” that are not coherent with current global standards of humanistic morality, secular humanism and empirical research; but loosely based on so-called traditional “family values”, “wholesomeness”, what is “good for society and family” (as though harmless horror fun can be detrimental to the moral fabric of society), etc.

 

It is a no-brainer that perhaps those “feedback” did not actually contain words like “religion” or “christian values” or “islamic principles” as Singapore, thanfully, is a strictly SECULAR country where issues regarding the public have to be discussed rationally, with alternative views defended based on publicly available evidence and reason, NOT sacred texts or sacred principles. Such appeal to authority is no argument at all.

 

Then again – the folks who often espouse “traditional family values” are usually the religiously motivated. Thus I will still reject the claim of WRS that reasons to cancel Halloween Horrors are not religious.

 

Ms Loh apparently also commented to her management team regarding the “controversial” nature of Halloween, citing the example of some schools in the United States that banned its celebration.

 

How ignorant can she get – the United States, for goodness’ sake – much of their population even think that evolution is controversial! She should have realised that although the US is a secular nation with a secular constitution, in all practical terms, it is still a thoroughly “christian” country with christians having a lot of power in the political arena. There are schools in the US who still teach pseudoscientific stuff like Intelligent Design! It is no surprise that some of these evangelical idiots might want to ban Halloween at all costs! I know for a fact that some christians, even in Singapore, who will believe that all the gore, blood and spook in Halloween, is somehow inspired and instigated by the devil so that he can have an influence on the people through their innocent celebrations.

 

Bah!

 

Halloween aside, it is now almost a well-attested public knowledge that European countries like Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Finland have one of the most peaceful societies in the world. But they also have one of the least religious societies in the world – compare them with the United States – and it seems that religion is doing the US more harm than good.

 

And surprise, surprise, some of these Scandinavian nations have one of the most anarchic, brutal and “devilish” (if you want to use that term) death metal bands around! Death metal is a genre of music that is often characterised by lots of gothic, dark and biblical imagery of devils and demons, gore and blood, etc. But these bands do not go around spreading the message of evil and murder to their fans! It is a very ignorant stereotype which religious people make of alternative lifestyles like goth and such.

 

In fact, it is mostly the zealously religious who spread the message of hate and evil – who are the ones who love to oppose same-sex marriage? Who are the ones who love to see “God’s Law” imposed on the societies of the world? Who are the ones who believe that everyone who does not follow their code of beliefs will go to hell? Who are the ones who burn people at the stake just for contradicting them? Who are the ones who would kill people like death metal band members if they were living in the middle ages? Who are the ones who would rather obey their “gods” than love their fellow humanity?

 

You and I know the answer.

 

I suppose I got carried away again. Sheesh. Back to the WRS and Halloween Horrors.

 

It isn’t the apologies that we want to hear, Ms Loh. It is the REINSTATEMENT of the event, Halloween Horrors, for at least this year, if not the next. Although this cancellation would not have any detrimental result on the Singapore Polytechnic students’ gradings, THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE! The emotional abuse has already been executed. All the hard work that have been put – and they cannot even showcase it to the public! The pleasure of an artist is twofold – the pleasure of the creation and the process as well as the pleasure of interacting with the audience. By cancelling the event, the public can never get to enjoy the fruits of the students’ labour.

 

I have a family too – and my children are all young, too young I reckon, to appreciate and enjoy the fictional horrors of halloween. But that does not mean that I have to forbid them from doing so with the reason that it will harm them morally. There is nothing unwholesome about fiction and make-believe. Such art is neutral and it often takes an idiot to interpret such art and turn it into the rubbish and decadence that some moral pedants love.

 

It might be a shock to some parents, but I expose my young children to films like The Walking Dead. Of course it is not something I relish doing in the sense that I allow them to watch every episode. But I would not switch the channel if the kids happened to be still awake. And I would explain to them that IT IS ALL MAKE-BELIEVE. The zombies, or “monsters” as kids would like to call them, are NOT REAL monsters.

 

And you know what, my five-year-old son and four-year-old daughter understands. By explaining it to them, and exposing it that it is NOT REAL, I am telling them that ALL HORROR is fiction. And so are any supposedly paranormal phenomena – they are all bullshit.

 

I am appalled by some parents who create a climate of fear for their kids by telling them not to go into the dark, for it is scary, there are ghosts there. For Holy Mother’s sake! There is no such thing as ghosts. Full stop.

 

By the way, Ms Loh also made a statement regarding her feelings about the event, that she found it too scary.

 

What??! Since when Halloween has to be sugar and nice, meek and mild? Sigh. I am trying darn hard not to sound sexist now, but it seems that if she is a bloke, she would not have made such a silly remark. No bloke who’s worth his prick would think of cancelling something just because he finds it too scary for his taste!

 

Personal taste and business do not mix, my dear.

 

*******

 

 

i suspect wrs is not telling the truth…

 

 

Wildlife Reserve Singapore (WRS) has suddenly cancelled its annual Halloween Horrors event, just two weeks prior its scheduled opening, to the consternation and shock by many.

 

The reasons for the cancellation, as offered by the spin doctors of its website, are thus:

 

The Halloween Horrors event is cancelled because of the negative feedback received from corporations, the public and the media about the event, especially over its relevance in relation to conservation.

 

Wildlife Reserves Singapore (WRS) will focus on organising more family-centric activities, which will include new youth-engagement and interactive activities and events.

 

In place of Halloween Horrors next month, we will organise a special Deepavali experience at Jurong Bird Park and Singapore Zoo. It will offer a great occasion for us to spread our message of wildlife conservation through educational and engaging family-oriented activities.

 

The website also mentioned that:

 

WRS will refocus our energies on events and activities with family wholesome themes and festivities like Moon Nights, Deepavali and others.

 

It is very weak-willed of the management to simply cancel something because of “negative feedback”, especially when those feedback might not necessarily affect the event’s profitability or marketing potential. Organised since 2006, Halloween Horrors have been proven to be quite a lucrative event here in Singapore, let alone in many parts of the world where Halloween has been part of their tourism marketing strategies.

 

Economy or tourism aside, I don’t see why the theme of Halloween cannot be imaginatively adapted to resonate with conservation. It is fallacious to argue that just because Halloween, at its face value, is perceived to have no relevance to conservation, should thus be scrapped. In its place, WRS decided to organise a Deepavali event – to use WRS’ argument – what has Deepavali got to do with conservation?

 

Of course, the organisers can tinker here and there to make the event somehow related to conservation – but so can Halloween!

 

I suspect that there is more to this whole fracas over Halloween than meets the eye. Relevance to conservation is just a red herring to mislead the public from perhaps the real reasons behind the cancellation.

 

WRS’ statement about “family wholesome themes” is revealing. Does the “negative feedback” have anything to do with Halloween not being “wholesome” enough for families to enjoy, childhood fears notwithstanding?

 

Does the negative feedback have anything to do with Halloween being “not good” for children, having some unwholesome connotations?

 

Come on – like the Hungry Ghosts Festival – Halloween is a harmless custom rooted in fiction. Of course, regardless of what some people might believe about these cultural customs, there is really nothing empirically true about them.

 

I really suspect that among all the naysayers of the event, a high percentage could be the modern fundamentalists of religion, trying to impose their bigoted and very ignorant views on the public.

 

And I really sympathise with the 17 or so final-year students of Singapore Polytechnic who helped to plan the event as part of their final-year projects. All their sleepless nights and tight schedules just to meet the deadlines of WRS. The potential worth of their portfolios for their future careers.

 

Furore over Halloween Horrors’ Sudden Cancellation

 

Really, even if WRS decides to cancel the event, why not do it from next year? That would be a more logical thing to do.

 

I will not be surprised if this was indeed the handiwork of christians and maybe even muslims in our midst. Only people like them can cook up something as immoral and evil as this.

 

*******

 

 

 

drag queen of singapore finally comes out

 

 

He denied it adamantly twice before. But he finally decided to take one of the boldest step for himself by publicly admitting that he is homosexual.

 

Kumar publicly admits he’s gay

 

Kumar has been one of the most enigmatic and popular figures in Singapore’s entertainment scene – his meteoric rise came with the RaRa Show in the ’90s on primetime telly.

 

Although his homosexual or at least bisexual tendencies seem quite obvious to the majority of the public, coming out as part of the LGBT community in Singapore is no stroll in the park. Despite her public relations tagline of being a first world and cosmopolitan city and all that, Singapore is still a barbarous nation through and through.

 

Apart from its laws regarding the death penalty (even the US has many states abolishing this archaic law) as well as its fascist-like censorship grip on the news media, this medusa also makes LGBT sex a crime, which is akin to criminalising an individual of a different race than oneself just because.

 

It was also a shame and a disgrace for the Singapore authorities to criminalise a British journalist simply for writing a book criticising the use of the death penalty in Singapore’s legal system.

 

Hmm. So like the crazy Ayatollahs of Iran who issued a fatwa on celebrated author Salman Rushdie for simply writing a novel which they are apparently offended with in 1989. Singapore is not unlike such regimes in this respect.

 

There are also societal underpinnings that are not so favourable to the LGBT person – many ordinary Singaporeans still view homosexuality as a sexual deviance and something that is morally evil, probably promulgated by religions such as Christianity and Islam in the country.

 

With ninety-five per cent of  christians in Singapore being tied to the evangelical-fundamentalist view, it is no surprise that christianity in Singapore represents homophobia through and through. Thank goodness a dose of the Enlightenment has been experienced and no christian here would think of really imprisoning gays or executing them simply for practising what they are born with. Unlike places in Africa like Nigeria and Uganda.

 

There is also this strange view that homosexuality is a Western phenomenon, whereas there are Chinese scholars who believe that homosexuality had been a crucial aspect of ancient Chinese civilisation.

 

Like any other civilisation in times past and present, really.

 

With this as a backdrop to Singapore’s inherent prejudice against alternative lifestyles (sexual orientation is NOT a lifestyle choice, by the way), no wonder Kumar had a difficult time coming out.

 

There are many more in the entertainment scene like him, fearing to come out and fearing society’s so-called traditional or religious wrath on them. Popular host, comedian and actor Hossan Leong is one of them. No one really knows if the relationship he is having now is a same-sex relationship or a normal one. He also attends a Pentecostal church almost every Sunday, and so for those who knows his “christian” background might believe he is indeed a heterosexual. But then again, no gay will think of coming out in a Pentecostal church in Singapore! The pastors might then think of exorcising some demon of homosexuality from you!

 

Hairstylist Addy Lee is another one. And so are TCS 8 actors Chen Hanwei and the hunkily gorgeous Qi Wu.  The former is a very very obvious candidate for gaydom, but in Singapore, one simply live and let live. One can be a gay, as long as one does not try to be a hero about it.

 

*******

 

hypocrisy of the evangelical loon

 

Here are some of my favourite slogans from the Scumbag Christian Quickmeme site:

 

 

One of the most infuriating things I often hear from evangelicals is the way they often thank God for healing their ailments even though it is so obvious it was the medication that they took, the treatment they undergone, the exercise regime that they undertook. On the other hand, if prayer was all they did with no medical intervention (which in fact is the proper way to test if faith-healing works), and no healing result; they seem to forget who the real culprit was.

 

 

A common apologetic tactic which evangelicals use when cornered with the facts of all the insanities and idiocies of their faith is to claim that we are making a generalisation of christians – that not all christians believe or practise those silly things. But when in the offensive, they often lump all atheists together and make ridiculous assertions like atheism will lead to gross evil, or that most atheists are hedonists. Hypocritical.

 

 

This might not be a trait of only the evangelical. Societies that promote archaic forms of morality, like Singapore, are guilty of this form of hypocritical intellectual gymnastics. They often lie through their teeth that life is precious, and that they believe in the dignity of the individual, etc. But when it comes to the law, they take away human lives as though they are nothing but dung. And they blame it on utilitarian politics – it works, so let’s continue with it! Drug traffickers are scumbags – get rid of them! Murderers are dirt – get rid of them!

 

In a similar vein, evangelicals love to sing the chorus that “Abortion is MURDER!” but at the same time supporting the death penalty. There seems to be an unjustified disparity between the “killing” of a foetus that is not sentient at all, let alone a complete homo sapien, and the murder by the state of a fully sentient homo sapien who knows what lies ahead of him.

 

 

The evangelical can be very guilty of criticising the atheist for being “arrogant” and trying to “force his beliefs”, or non-beliefs, for that matter, on everyone but at the same time, has this secret desire that the country he is residing in becomes a “christian” nation that abides by christian morals, even though there may be many citizens in that country that do not subscribe to those selfsame christian morals. They may not like casinoes, but there are many others who do. They may not like nightclubs and discotheques, but there are many others who do. They may not like brothels, but there are many others who need such services. So they wish to wipe out all these “places of vice and decadence”?

 

 

The Lord’s Day, on Sundays, to most christians, is their version of the Jewish Sabbath, which is traditionally a Saturday. It is a day of rest, of rejuvenation, of recuperation. It is supposed to be a day when one rests from the stresses and hardships of the work week.

 

But how in the name of heaven can we REST if we are SUPPOSED (forced is the more accurate and honest word) to go to church, spend about an hour or two listening to silly sappy songs and oftentime an equally silly sermon by an inarticulate and ill-educated preacher? How are we to rest if we have to wearily smile at fellow parishioners, pretend to be all holy and that, and tow the party line? How are we to rest if we are also parents, with a few young kids in tow, screaming and running and crying all at the same time?

 

Won’t it be better if we just STAY AT HOME on Sundays??!!

 

 

This is the hypocrisy, not only of the evangelical right in the US but also the christian community here in Singapore. Every time when the media corners a cleric or spokesperson from the National Council of Churches Singapore about other religious faiths, the two-faced liar would definitely spin doctor his way, claiming that christians are law-abiding citizens who would tolerate and respect all the other religious faiths in Singapore, etc. But it doesn’t take a rocket scientist in us to know that the majority, if not all of the practising christians in Singapore, believe that all the other religious faiths are BUNK and that only Christianity is the TRUTH. In their heart of hearts, they believe that unless we become christians like them, we would all perish in hell fire.

 

Of course, “christians” like me are perceived by the powers that be as heretics and unbelievers, wolves in sheeps’ clothing to deceive the righteous and the true believers.

 

This is the honest truth. I have been around the christian community for quite a while to know what I am saying. In fact, I am still in the community. Bah!

 

*******

 

rich and arrogant, short and ugly

 

Apparently, the above is what a 26-year-old mainland Chinese woman, by the name of Zhang Miao Yu who works as a pub singer in Singapore, was quoted to be saying, by the China Press, about Singaporean men.

 

Yet in spite of such negative remarks, this same lady still desires to hook up with one as she perceives our local blokes as financially stable and affluent. She wouldn’t mind all the lavish gifts her men splashed on her, along with the flashy cars in which they drove her.

 

Give Me My Singaporean Man!

 

Then again, the blokes whom she meets in her line of work are probably a minority of the entire blokish population in Singapore – the ugly rich businessman – whereas there are many more dudes in downtown Orchard Road that would make any male escort green with envy!

 

Still – such news is but confirmation to many of us blokes that chinese women are nothing but money-minded bitches who wince in private at our fat bellies and small pricks while praising sweet nothings to our faces when we buy them diamonds and gold.

 

Thank goodness I have married an incredible lady who is none of these.

 

*******

 

the games people play

 

I can only speak for the native community here in Singapore and hence I would qualify that what follows is but a personal musing on the state of affairs as observed in the Singaporean context.

 

One of the games that adult individuals in the Singaporean community play is that of reciprocal “goodwill”, if one is able to call it by that name, for want of a better term. It is a game which hinges on the fundamental premise of “losing face” as the most primeval of evils. It is the evil that one has to avoid at all costs, if one desires to maintain “cordial” relationships in the community.

 

My wife aptly labels it using money or goodwill to maintain relationships. I prefer the more blunt notion of “buying” relationships. In a sense, it is bribery, period.

 

One can observe such a game at play in the office, when subordinates often offer to pay for the meals of the immediate superior, or vice versa. Most of the time peers play the same game, using the frequent or occasional “treat” of coffee or toast in the mornings to “maintain” good relationships in the office.

 

On a philosophical level, are good relationships built on the trivialities of such fiscal politicking? Or are these but purely business relationships which do not impinge on the personal sphere on family and personal friends?

 

I for one, refuse to indulge in this silliness. And often come back wounded. The issue is, if a colleague intends to “treat” the rest of us – it is his prerogative and his own act of benevolence. But that does not justify the rule that I have to “treat” him back in return, otherwise it is nothing more than hypocritical barter trade. If I offered to give someone a treat, it is a genuine treat, period. I will NOT expect the person to treat me back in the future.

 

Despite my position being the minority report in Singaporean society, I am willing to bet my life on it. This IS bribery. Otherwise, why wouldn’t official auditors accept your cup of coffee or toast of bread when they are officially auditing your company? Isn’t the reason being that such an act is perceived as an attempt on your part to bribe?

 

Weddings in Singapore are not exempt from such fiscal corruption. It is often said to a newcomer in the game that one has to take note of the exact monetary amount that a particular guest gave in one’s wedding dinner. This is to ensure that one would “give back” the exact amount or more to him/her at his/her own wedding. To give less is a moral evil, an act of moral travesty.

 

But what justification is offered for such a play in the game? Is morality and public courtesy nothing more than “tit for tat”, the primate urge of “you scratch my back, I scratch yours”?

 

If not absurd, it is downright hypocrisy. What is worse is the often chinese propensity to deny reciprocity while actually yearning for reciprocity in the heart. Most Singaporeans wince at not returning the exact monetary amount to another.

 

But to lead the issue on its logical path, one will soon be able to see what a fallacy and a sham this game is. Imagine a neighbour giving a red packet of SGD$100 or more to each of your children on the first day of Chinese New Year. Does that mean that you have to give the same amount to each of his children in kind? What if he has more children than yourself? What if you are financially tighter than he is? What if you cannot afford that much? Is it possible to give a much lesser monetary amount back to him?

 

Doesn’t the intent to give count more than the monetary amount?

 

The rules of the game would deny you the possibility.

 

Isn’t the pleasure of giving in the compassion and the mercy? Isn’t the joys of giving inherent in the nonexpectation of anything in return? True giving is the denial and refutation of reciprocity.

 

Personally, I would be insulted if upon giving a gift to someone, I have it returned it back to me one for one. When I gave a malay neighbour red packets to his children during the Chinese New Year period early this year, he gave the same amount back to me in kind. Worse, I suspect they were the exact notes which I gave him!

 

What is wrong in receiving some blessings from a neighbour? Why does one have to repay in kind?

 

And thus when he gave us green packets (the malay version of the chinese red packet) during Hari Raya Puasa, my wife insisted and demanded that I return back to them, in red packets, the exact amount.

 

And as expected, we had a tumultuous argument. One that our world has never witnessed before.

 

Bah!

 

Although barter trade and mutual beneficiality is extant in business transactions and relationships, it cannot be the means to purchase genuine friendships or relationships. Relationships are built on sturdier material than that.

 

And so are friendships. Genuine friendships. True friendships.

 

Perhaps such is the condition of humankind, fragile and frought with the evolutionary legacy of survival at all costs, whatever the price, whatever the cost. Perhaps such is the nature and state of existence in this world.

 

One might as well not live then, in such a world.

 

*******