June 2, 2009
AWARE SAGA
'New exco' didn't stonewall reporters
STRAITS Times editor Han Fook Kwang, in his article last Saturday ('Why we covered Aware saga the way we did'), alleged that 'reporters were stonewalled' by the new executive committee (exco) of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware). That is incorrect.�
Reporter Wong Kim Hoh called me on April 9. I told him the exco would convene next week and issue a press statement thereafter.��
The Aware president had resigned on April 8. Under the Constitution, only the president may represent Aware in its external dealings. The exco immediately called for a meeting to appoint the president. Seven days' notice was required. The earliest date was April 15. As Aware was president-less, no one had standing to speak to the press.
Ms Josie Lau was appointed president on April 15 and a press statement was issued shortly after midnight. The press statement stated that the new team intended to build on the foundations laid by the founders and promote the participation of women, on equal terms with men, in the political, social, economic and cultural life of society. It also stated that the team will focus on empowering more women to be leaders based on the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (Cedaw).
Specific plans were laid out, including increasing collaboration with other women's organisations, outreach to women who were affected by the economic downturn, and the launch of programmes such as grooming and debt management. A second media statement was issued two days later.
Mr Wong's April 10 report of a 'leadership grab' and candidates who gave 'the briefest answers' came from the old guard's perspectives. Since the candidates were elected constitutionally, the term 'grab' was inappropriate. The allegation of candidates' reticence is incorrect as each gave long election speeches and the proceedings stretched to 3-1/2 hours. The 'briefest answers' were responses to queries whether the candidates were anti-homosexual or had religious affiliations. The old guard withdrew these questions when told they were acting illegally.
The homosexual point was picked up by Mr Wong. He pinpointed me and two others as having written on Section 377A of the Penal Code (which makes sex between men illegal). We then received death threats sent on April 11. On April 12, The Straits Times branded the exco as burnishing a 'conservative stamp' and�being anti-homosexual.
This was the start of the homosexual/religious card being played out and this continued ad nauseam in subsequent weeks, using propaganda techniques of bald assertions, card stacking and jamming. This 'breathless' reporting caused the situation to deteriorate until the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts had to call for more balanced reporting by the media, as mentioned by Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng on May 14.
Jenica Chua (Ms)
EDITOR'S NOTE: The fact remains that it was only on April 23, almost a month after the new exco was voted in, that we heard how they had been urged by senior lawyer Thio Su Mien to challenge Aware's leadership because of concerns over its alleged homosexual leanings. It is disingenuous of Ms Chua to say that the 'homosexual point was picked up by Mr Wong'. It completely ignores what Dr Thio had said at the press conference.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.559
Monday, June 1, 2009
Sex Ed: What parents want schools to teach
Sex Ed: What parents want schools to teach
WHEN Madam Haslinda Putri Harun's younger daughter, 6, used the word 'lesbian', it caught her by surprise.
01 June 2009
WHEN Madam Haslinda Putri Harun's younger daughter, 6, used the word 'lesbian', it caught her by surprise.
The housewife, 38, recalled a recent incident when another classmate kissed her child on the cheek.
She said: 'My girl told her 'stop it, I'm not a lesbian.'
Madam Haslinda had to then explain to her that the other girl was just doing it as a friend, just as how her aunt kisses her.
'Already in her mind, there's this thing, that girls can't kiss other girls,'she said.
That loss of innocence is something Madam Haslinda laments.
She recalled that in her own childhood, she would bathe and sleep together with her girl friends in school and think nothing of it.
She said: 'I'm really upset, now there's a stigma and parents have to figure out when something is acceptable, and when it isn't.'
She acknowledged that sex education is more pertinent in these times, more so than ever before.
She said a welcome consequence of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) saga, was that parents were now more conscious about the need to educate their kids about sex.
She said: 'This has opened people's eyes and ears and made them realise this is something that you have to address.
'You can't say let's go have ice cream instead when the topic comes up.'
Consensus
The three parents we spoke to agreed that the following areas have to be covered when it comes to sex education - the sex act, sexually transmitted infections, contraception, masturbation, pornography, homosexuality and, most importantly, sexual morality and values.
But Mr Sebastian Anthony, 45, a corporate trainer, feels strongly that the messenger - the person teaching sex education - is just as important as the message.
He said: 'My concern at the end of the day is who is delivering the message.
'Not everyone shares the same value system so the question is, how do we cater for that?'
For instance, how do you tackle the issue of whether homosexuality is morally right, asked Mr Anthony.
He said: 'Is same-sex marriage all right? It's not science or maths, you can't just take a neutral stance.'
Instead of a one-size-fits-all approach to sex education, he suggested a more tailored approach.
He mooted the idea of having the ministry allocate funds and allowing parents to sign up with external groups or religious organisations that share their core values when it comes to sex education.
While this may put the onus on parents, Mr Anthony said parents shouldn't rely on schools all the time.
He said: 'There comes a point in time when people need to take accountability and responsibility for their own lives.'
Ms Chelsia Leung, 32, a financial consultant, suggested allowing parents to opt out of certain areas of the curriculum that they are not comfortable with.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.537
WHEN Madam Haslinda Putri Harun's younger daughter, 6, used the word 'lesbian', it caught her by surprise.
01 June 2009
WHEN Madam Haslinda Putri Harun's younger daughter, 6, used the word 'lesbian', it caught her by surprise.
The housewife, 38, recalled a recent incident when another classmate kissed her child on the cheek.
She said: 'My girl told her 'stop it, I'm not a lesbian.'
Madam Haslinda had to then explain to her that the other girl was just doing it as a friend, just as how her aunt kisses her.
'Already in her mind, there's this thing, that girls can't kiss other girls,'she said.
That loss of innocence is something Madam Haslinda laments.
She recalled that in her own childhood, she would bathe and sleep together with her girl friends in school and think nothing of it.
She said: 'I'm really upset, now there's a stigma and parents have to figure out when something is acceptable, and when it isn't.'
She acknowledged that sex education is more pertinent in these times, more so than ever before.
She said a welcome consequence of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) saga, was that parents were now more conscious about the need to educate their kids about sex.
She said: 'This has opened people's eyes and ears and made them realise this is something that you have to address.
'You can't say let's go have ice cream instead when the topic comes up.'
Consensus
The three parents we spoke to agreed that the following areas have to be covered when it comes to sex education - the sex act, sexually transmitted infections, contraception, masturbation, pornography, homosexuality and, most importantly, sexual morality and values.
But Mr Sebastian Anthony, 45, a corporate trainer, feels strongly that the messenger - the person teaching sex education - is just as important as the message.
He said: 'My concern at the end of the day is who is delivering the message.
'Not everyone shares the same value system so the question is, how do we cater for that?'
For instance, how do you tackle the issue of whether homosexuality is morally right, asked Mr Anthony.
He said: 'Is same-sex marriage all right? It's not science or maths, you can't just take a neutral stance.'
Instead of a one-size-fits-all approach to sex education, he suggested a more tailored approach.
He mooted the idea of having the ministry allocate funds and allowing parents to sign up with external groups or religious organisations that share their core values when it comes to sex education.
While this may put the onus on parents, Mr Anthony said parents shouldn't rely on schools all the time.
He said: 'There comes a point in time when people need to take accountability and responsibility for their own lives.'
Ms Chelsia Leung, 32, a financial consultant, suggested allowing parents to opt out of certain areas of the curriculum that they are not comfortable with.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.537
H1N1 FLU REACHES S'PORE: Cleared to leave CDC
June 1, 2009
H1N1 FLU REACHES S'PORE
Cleared to leave CDC
| By Jessica Jaganathan | ||
 |  | The Singapore permanent resident, who is originally from the Philippines, was discharged on Sunday afternoon after staying at the Communicable Disease Centre (CDC) since Wednesday. -- PHOTO: AP |
AFTER clearing two tests for the Influenza A (H1N1) virus, 43-year-old Ana (not her real name) was all dressed up to leave the Communicable Disease Centre (CDC) on Saturday.
But nurses told her she had one more test to clear and held her for another day.
The Singapore permanent resident, who is originally from the Philippines, was discharged on Sunday afternoon after staying at the ward since Wednesday.
Ana returned from San Francisco via Manila on Tuesday on a Singapore Airlines flight after attending her son's graduation ceremony there. She visited a general practitioner the next day when she developed a cough and cold, and was immediately asked to go to the CDC.
Her time in the CDC was spent reading, working and checking her e-mails on her iPhone, which came in handy in an otherwise empty room, she told The Straits Times in a phone interview. She was given a television set on Saturday.
Her cough and fever had both cleared by Friday, and she was totally rid of the virus on Saturday, she added, sounding tired. 'I am free...feels like I am out of prison. It is different than staying at home in your own comfort.'
She went home in a cab yesterday armed with two days' supply of Tamiflu and medical leave for at least five days.
Her four flatmates are still on home quarantine, but she wants to stay away as much as possible for now by staying in her room most of the time so that she 'does not complicate things'.
The project manager is glad to be 'over and done with the flu', and wants to go back to work soon. But she is worried about how her colleagues might react: 'I am bracing myself to go back to work and what they might think...they might tell me to stay away from them.'
Before going to see a doctor, she had gone in to work, and five colleagues who had come into close contact with her had to be quarantined as well.
Ana has volunteered to be subject to research, and will be going back to the doctors in a few weeks for them to extract blood specimens to study the disease further. 'It will be good to help contribute to future research,' she said.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=30020.1
Religion plays key role in public sphere
Religion plays key role in public sphere
MS FELICIA Tan's advocacy of pure secularism ('Facts outshine faith', last Thursday), while well-intentioned, was narrow in perspective.
I agree that logic has long served Singapore well in the implementation of policies and the decision-making process. However, pure secularism without the inclusion of religious views is impractical as it alienates large sections of society that hold common principles in their religions.
The vast majority of Singaporeans adhere to a religion. Religious beliefs often reflect the individual's set of beliefs, which are, in turn, a reflection of values held by large segments of society.
Rather than alienate any major group in Singapore, our multiracial and multi-religious society has nurtured a strong culture of diversity which is often celebrated in the form of festivals and designated holidays. Such diversity, while acknowledged as a potential cause of conflict, has also proven to be Singapore's strength.
Leveraging on the various competencies and views, we have taken a more holistic approach to the decision-making process. A case in point is the integrated resorts. Where a logical argument could have been made in favour of the economic incentives of such a project, opinions weighed in by numerous religious groups have ensured that programmes and safeguards are implemented to reduce and deal with gambling addiction, reducing the negative impact on familial ties and society as a whole.
In fact, discounting religious-driven beliefs within the public sphere can be likened to discounting racial or linguistic considerations since everyone comes to the table with preconceived notions and beliefs. What might be deemed logical in one segment of society might not be in another due to these principles.
Hence, while extremism in any racial, religious or alternative lifestyle group is undesirable, I have no doubt that religion has an essential role to play in the public sphere.
Costa Daniel Chua
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.534
MS FELICIA Tan's advocacy of pure secularism ('Facts outshine faith', last Thursday), while well-intentioned, was narrow in perspective.
I agree that logic has long served Singapore well in the implementation of policies and the decision-making process. However, pure secularism without the inclusion of religious views is impractical as it alienates large sections of society that hold common principles in their religions.
The vast majority of Singaporeans adhere to a religion. Religious beliefs often reflect the individual's set of beliefs, which are, in turn, a reflection of values held by large segments of society.
Rather than alienate any major group in Singapore, our multiracial and multi-religious society has nurtured a strong culture of diversity which is often celebrated in the form of festivals and designated holidays. Such diversity, while acknowledged as a potential cause of conflict, has also proven to be Singapore's strength.
Leveraging on the various competencies and views, we have taken a more holistic approach to the decision-making process. A case in point is the integrated resorts. Where a logical argument could have been made in favour of the economic incentives of such a project, opinions weighed in by numerous religious groups have ensured that programmes and safeguards are implemented to reduce and deal with gambling addiction, reducing the negative impact on familial ties and society as a whole.
In fact, discounting religious-driven beliefs within the public sphere can be likened to discounting racial or linguistic considerations since everyone comes to the table with preconceived notions and beliefs. What might be deemed logical in one segment of society might not be in another due to these principles.
Hence, while extremism in any racial, religious or alternative lifestyle group is undesirable, I have no doubt that religion has an essential role to play in the public sphere.
Costa Daniel Chua
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.534
Religiously informed views can make policies better
Religiously informed views can make policies better
I REFER to last Thursday's letter by Ms Felicia Tan, 'Facts outshine faith'.
Ms Tan advances the concept of pure secularism as the superior and only rational option for a multi-religious country like Singapore, believing that this is essential 'to ensure that no policies or public debates encroach on the beliefs or disbeliefs of any individual'.
I respectfully disagree. A non-religious policy has as much potential to encroach on the beliefs or disbeliefs of any individual as a religiously informed one. Even a non-religious policy such as on the integrated resorts will encroach on the beliefs of those who believe the state should not condone gambling, whether out of religious conviction or non-religious experience.
In my opinion, it is precisely because Singapore is multi-religious that it is necessary for a fair opportunity to be given to all views, whether based on religion or not, to be debated by any individual or parliamentarian who cares to raise them. What is essential is that this debate should be carried out respectfully, with the hope that different views will find common areas of agreement, and with the understanding that one view (or certain parts of one view) may sometimes have to give way graciously to another in the implementation of a policy or law.
Ms Tan also argues that, as part of pure secularism, 'only logic and reason should dominate discourse'.
And that 'scientific, sociological and economic facts' and not faith should form the basis for a policy or law.
The process of law or policymaking is not so simple.
The death penalty or castration would be highly effective in deterring rapists from re-offending. However, many of us would hesitate to prescribe such severe penalties for rapists. A clinical examination of scientific or economic facts alone does not determine law or policy.
This leaves secular values to mean the values held by the majority on a non-religious basis at a particular time. If so, Ms Tan must be prepared for the possibility that such values may change over time. What the majority perceives as cruel and unusual punishment for rapists today may be regarded as completely acceptable in the future.
Religiously informed values, on the other hand, do not shift with the mood prevailing in society, at least in theory. This is the positive contribution which religious conviction can bring to the debate and formulation of policies and laws.
Melvyn Lim
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.533
I REFER to last Thursday's letter by Ms Felicia Tan, 'Facts outshine faith'.
Ms Tan advances the concept of pure secularism as the superior and only rational option for a multi-religious country like Singapore, believing that this is essential 'to ensure that no policies or public debates encroach on the beliefs or disbeliefs of any individual'.
I respectfully disagree. A non-religious policy has as much potential to encroach on the beliefs or disbeliefs of any individual as a religiously informed one. Even a non-religious policy such as on the integrated resorts will encroach on the beliefs of those who believe the state should not condone gambling, whether out of religious conviction or non-religious experience.
In my opinion, it is precisely because Singapore is multi-religious that it is necessary for a fair opportunity to be given to all views, whether based on religion or not, to be debated by any individual or parliamentarian who cares to raise them. What is essential is that this debate should be carried out respectfully, with the hope that different views will find common areas of agreement, and with the understanding that one view (or certain parts of one view) may sometimes have to give way graciously to another in the implementation of a policy or law.
Ms Tan also argues that, as part of pure secularism, 'only logic and reason should dominate discourse'.
And that 'scientific, sociological and economic facts' and not faith should form the basis for a policy or law.
The process of law or policymaking is not so simple.
The death penalty or castration would be highly effective in deterring rapists from re-offending. However, many of us would hesitate to prescribe such severe penalties for rapists. A clinical examination of scientific or economic facts alone does not determine law or policy.
This leaves secular values to mean the values held by the majority on a non-religious basis at a particular time. If so, Ms Tan must be prepared for the possibility that such values may change over time. What the majority perceives as cruel and unusual punishment for rapists today may be regarded as completely acceptable in the future.
Religiously informed values, on the other hand, do not shift with the mood prevailing in society, at least in theory. This is the positive contribution which religious conviction can bring to the debate and formulation of policies and laws.
Melvyn Lim
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.533
Militant religionism? It's family values
Militant religionism? It's family values
I REFER to last Saturday's letter by Mr John Hui, 'Militant religionism the real threat to social harmony', which made serious, inflammatory and inaccurate allegations against me. Mr Hui adopted the propagandistic, pejorative technique of labelling me a 'militant Christian', alluding to 'militant exclusionist religionism' which 'already generated disharmony'. He alleged that I persuaded Christians to join the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) to 'push forward Christian moral values'.
What view is he demonising as an imposed Christian value? Apparently, this relates to sexual morality norms and defining 'family'. I share the Government's view that 'the conventional family, a heterosexual stable family', is society's building block. If espousing this view of the family constitutes 'militant exclusionist religionism', then most Singaporeans are guilty militants.
Mr Hui's mischievous mischaracterisation of a mainstream value as an imposed religious value incites anti-religious hostility, threatening social disharmony.
Aware did much to promote women's concerns. However, I found its apparent recent shift to advocating the homosexual agenda alarming. I encouraged people not to be passive bystanders but to participate in shaping our common good.
My concerns were validated when the Ministry of Education (MOE) suspended Aware's Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) programme, removing Aware from the external vendors list.
The CSE instructors guide contained 'explicit and inappropriate' content which conveyed 'messages which could promote homosexuality'. This violated MOE guidelines that sex education must promote 'family values'. This proved the presence of the homosexual agenda in our schools for at least two years, which understandably upset many parents.
Upholding family values most Singaporeans share is not a religious imposition. Undermining family values through school programmes disrespects valid parental concerns and the morality of the majority. Which really threatens social cohesion?
Dr Thio Su Mien
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.532
I REFER to last Saturday's letter by Mr John Hui, 'Militant religionism the real threat to social harmony', which made serious, inflammatory and inaccurate allegations against me. Mr Hui adopted the propagandistic, pejorative technique of labelling me a 'militant Christian', alluding to 'militant exclusionist religionism' which 'already generated disharmony'. He alleged that I persuaded Christians to join the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) to 'push forward Christian moral values'.
What view is he demonising as an imposed Christian value? Apparently, this relates to sexual morality norms and defining 'family'. I share the Government's view that 'the conventional family, a heterosexual stable family', is society's building block. If espousing this view of the family constitutes 'militant exclusionist religionism', then most Singaporeans are guilty militants.
Mr Hui's mischievous mischaracterisation of a mainstream value as an imposed religious value incites anti-religious hostility, threatening social disharmony.
Aware did much to promote women's concerns. However, I found its apparent recent shift to advocating the homosexual agenda alarming. I encouraged people not to be passive bystanders but to participate in shaping our common good.
My concerns were validated when the Ministry of Education (MOE) suspended Aware's Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) programme, removing Aware from the external vendors list.
The CSE instructors guide contained 'explicit and inappropriate' content which conveyed 'messages which could promote homosexuality'. This violated MOE guidelines that sex education must promote 'family values'. This proved the presence of the homosexual agenda in our schools for at least two years, which understandably upset many parents.
Upholding family values most Singaporeans share is not a religious imposition. Undermining family values through school programmes disrespects valid parental concerns and the morality of the majority. Which really threatens social cohesion?
Dr Thio Su Mien
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.532
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)