I started blogging in February 2003 and have made it habit to blog almost everyday. This page is where I note down my thoughts, opinions and critique of almost everything. Please note that this is an adult blog and would require the reader to be thick-skinned. Oh, and some of the stuff here may be gay related so proceed at your own risk. No refund given for offence taken.
...thrills, spills & flatliners
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
WEBLOGS I READ
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
While waiting for dinner this evening, I was checking my Twitter app on my trusty little Nokia when I came across several disturbing tweets with links to news articles, "One church in KL attacked last night". Later it was three churches attacked. My heart and stomach sank. It couldn't have come to this has it? The right to use the name of God has spilled over to open violence? Is this the prelude to the Balkanisation of Malaysia?
I didn't know what to think except to go straight into my usual anti-religion rhetoric, about how all religions, or Abrahamic religions specifically, despite claims to the contrary has been the cause of so much wars, oppression and brutality throughout history.
I have to clarify that I see "religion" as a human institution created in the name of a deity and dedicated to its worship.
So in this case, it seems the cause of the problem is not so much god who does not even intervene or communicate directly to its most pious adherents. The root of the problem is therefore humans.
We are an interesting species. We are capable of the most beautiful art and selfless acts of love and kindness. Yet, we are also capable of the most despicable acts of depravity and cruelty. Consequently, we can unite together for the cause of a greater and noble good. Yet often, in our pursuit of a greater and holier goal, we sink to depths of evil that even Satan would approve.
We humans have an innate destructive ability to fuck up whatever that is good or divine.
This is not the monopoly of religion even though countless wars, inquisitions and violence were committed in the name of god and orthodoxy.
Karl Marx famously said that "religion is the opiate of the masses". And ironically, in the communists' effort to rescue humans from this feudal and backward superstition while freeing them from oppression by the monied and landed classes unleashed waves of execution, torture and imprisonment thus becoming the monsters they fought.
Likewise the French revolution that overthrew the oppressive ancien regime and the subsequent bloody "reign of terror" with its infamous guillotine.
Fortunately, brutalities in the name of ideology do draw to a close when people see the light, are proven wrong or when logic prevails.
But what if it's for the sake of religion? One where everything has to be accepted by faith as the truth and the ancient, timeless and immutable word of god? How do you convince violent maniacs gathering under a holy banner and who believe that by being extreme can one be more pious and holier, that all sacrifices and acts no matter how dastardl or brutal are for the sake of the afterlife, and where time is not measured in decades or from election to election but for eternity?
In the case of Malaysia where the Islamic identity is conflated with their racial identity, things get more complicated. It's not just the use of the name of god but the perceived encroachment on their political dominance and identity, their exclusive concept of Ketuanan Melayu.
I guess UMNO kind of brought this upon themselves when they tried to out-Islamise PAS after the latter's initial state electoral victory in 1999.
The country is still in the midst of their watershed moment. Whether it comes out of this for the better or the worse is anyone's guess. But what is heartening is the numbers of Malaysian Muslims who came out against last night's attack and their efforts to come up with ideas to counter the extremists' actions and hate. I honestly hope they will succeed.
I've always believe that religion should be a private affair and should never be allowed any room in politics and common social spaces. It causes too much harm than good. And when you look at last night's events and our own AWARE saga earlier last year, I'm sure you can understand why.
Perhaps I am being hopeful. But maybe these attacks might become the catalyst that will bring all Malaysians regardless of race and religion together in unity and say, "Enough is enough. Not in our name and certainly not in our country."
Note:
I kind of stole the above title from the opening of Art Harun's emotional and moving post "Our Failings" about last night's events that is a must-read. "And as the flames climbed high into the night; To light the sacrificial rite; I saw Satan laughing with delight; The day the music died." American Pie - Don McLean.
Okay, this is a bit passed sell-by date. But some comments and articles decrying the uncivil atmosphere at the recent AWARE EGM reminded me of something similar I had witnessed years ago.
I was once a member of this mega church located somewhere in the prime district of Orchard Road.
After the previous minister left at the end of his contract, a new one was brought in as his replacement. All was going well; he was vibrant (though not young), filled with enthusiasm and brought a much lacking passion back to the church. The young came back in droves, brought back by those who were there all this while. Everyone was filled with the fire of the spirit (I can't believe I just used that term).
Wow... church activities really shot through the roof. Church camps, bible studies, musicals, fellowships, prayer meetings, etc. all saw record attendance and involvement.
And mind you, this was a "conservative" non-charismatic/Pentecostal type church which does not practise faith healing and speaking in tongues. Meaning, a church that is supposed to be more straitlaced and sedate, hence, supposedly lacking in passion. In short, the church was transformed to something no one thought was possible.
Yup, my life was centred on the church then. I was there practically every day after school on top of the usual Saturdays and Sundays.
One fine day, a bunch of church leaders decided that this minister had to go. I don't really know the reason why (and I still don't), it's just that they had enough of him and his ways. I was too young then to know the politics that was going on behind the closed doors of the leadership meetings.
What I did know was that the leader who had rejuvenated the church was suddenly fired for no apparent reason.
And like a headless chicken, the church was left running around in circles with no one knowing what was happening.
Of course things didn't go the way according to plan. Members demanded an EGM to find out what was happening and voice their opinions. Lines were drawn and enemies made. Even I got into fierce disagreements with my mother (who I saw as siding the other camp) and my sister who couldn't be bothered and felt (wisely I may add) that I should stay uninvolved.
Gosh, the EGM was the most raucous I had ever seen. I don't remember booing and jeering, but I do remember shouting matches, interruptions one after another, quoting of bible verses against each other, banging of tables and pews, and a whole bunch of other unpleasantries.
As a young member of that church, I was extremely discombobulated by the situation. The church that formed the centre of my life was in disarray, its head beheaded.
In the end, the leadership got its way and the minister was sent packing. The church as a result was split with one section leaving to form their own outside of the original denomination.
As far I know, enmity made then remains to this day. Even though they may speak of loving each other, their actions (or inaction) speaks otherwise.
Looking back, I can confidently say that each party saw themselves as the righteous one and the other threatening the unity of Christ's body. Who was right? Who was wrong? I don't know and I don't bother anymore. That is a past that I had exorcised and thrown into a bottomless pit.
So what's the point of this post? Well, it's more of an exercise of recollection for me on one hand, and on the other, to point out that religious EGMs can be as uncivil as secular ones when passions flare and everyone felt they had a lot at stake in the outcome.
By now, everyone in Singapore is aware of the second part of the hostile takeover of AWARE saga.
Smarting from their defeat, a group of likeminded people (parents and others) who are more or less allied to the ideas of Thio Su-Mien, Josie Lau and company have bombarded MOE with allegations about AWARE's Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) "promoting" homosexuality, pre-martial sex, etc. by the mere mention of them in neutral terms.
Neutral because the course is supposed to give students the facts AND encouraged them to think about actions and consequences.
But knowing how "some people" operate, they chose to take certain lines from the material out of context, blow it out of proportion and go "LOOK!! SEE!! AWARE is promoting homosexuality, pre-martial sex, etc. by not using negative terms against it!!"
It has even spilt over to JC General Paper (GP) lessons, which is kind of stupid and sad considering that in GP lessons, students are made to think through and analyse topics of the day. These include terrorism, religious fundamentalism, etc. etc.
The main point is to get them to think. But some paranoid and overprotective parents are so afraid that the mere mention and discussion of homosexuality will turn their JC kids gay. Gosh... I guess there should be a lot of new terrorists and religious fundies in JC by now.
This whole episode shows the absurdity of Singapore's education and parents' expectations. First we complain that our kids and university graduates don't know how to think, analyse, write properly and have knowledge and opinions about current issues of the day. Then we scream in horror when teachers try to equip them with the skills necessary to do so.
I mean like what do we expect GP teachers to do? Discuss less controversial topics like water desalination, COE prices and state of canteen food?
But parents being parents will always see their children as kids who need to be protected and guided regardless of how old they are. Not realising that kids are way much smarter than we give them credit for. They do have an opinion and they don't take everything at face value.
And as for the CSE programme, if they don't get their knowledge from school with the right tools to make informed and responsible decisions, guess where they are going turn to?
The internet of course!
And that should worry parents much more than CSE and GP teachers discussing "controversial" topics. Because if parents have actually been on the 'net, they should know that nothing there is regulated. Information, misinformation, hard core pornography and all that would turn their gut inside out is available to all who search for them.
Without the necessary knowledge and with misinformation from the 'net and hear-say from their peers who may be just as ignorant as them, one shouldn't be surprised if they start experimenting with disastrous results.
Ignorance or innocence, your choice.
Anyway, I think this post by a GP teacher who is in the know more than me has said more than I could. It was forwarded to me by a friend and I have posted it on my "Stolen Goods" blog (with full credit). Check it out here.
Well, that's it. The 5th column-elected new exco of AWARE has resigned in the wake of a no-confidence motion and a new one unaffiliated with the Anglican Church of our Saviour (COOS) or Thio Su-Mien (TSM) has been elected.
All this saga and waste of time and money brought on by Christian extremists who are way too fixated on one "bogeyman".
Bogeymen or cause célèbre is nothing new. Political and religious movements have used it countless of times throughout history to rally their adherents (ie: The Spanish Inquisition, Salem witch trials, burning of witches and perceived heretics, etc etc). Of course in modern day Singapore, it is too politically sensitive and incorrect to use another religion (like Islam in some Western countries) as their bogeyman. So what do TSM and her COOS fellow members do? They learn from their American co-religionist and target homosexuality. Delusional, they sincerely believe there is a hidden gay agenda with a gay mafia in Singapore.
Hypocritically I might add. Since there are countless things the bible denounced and yet they don't seem to have an issue with. For example, remarriage after divorce is adultery according to Jesus and adulterers do not inherit the kingdom of god. Yet we don't seem to hear TSM or Pastor Derek Kong having a field day with that.
But you know what's really sad? It's how AWARE got dragged into TSM and COOS's "spiritual warfare". Yes, they call their fight "Spiritual Warfare". "Holy War" chope by another religion lah.
As far as AWARE and everyone (everyone except you know who) is concern, they are a feminist organisation dedicated to the fight for equality and non-discrimination of females regardless or race, religion, age, language, cultural, financial and sexual background. Since their establishment in 1985, they have advocated, taught, researched, conducted workshops, counselled, etc. etc. Great work if you asked me. Of course some may disagree.
But never were they ever a "homosexual" organisation. The bone of TSM and COOS's contention is just a very small part of their comprehensive sexual education programme for schools which covered homosexuality in neutral terms (neither for nor against) for about 5 minutes or so.
Somehow or other, this was taken out of context by TSM and COOS and blown way out of proportion. All of a sudden, a feminist organisation became a "homosexual one" and fell into the holy gun sights of the extremists. And before they knew it, a fifth column was secretly installed and their members voted into the exco.
I don't blame the original AWARE for this. Never in their right mind did they think that a religious group in Singapore (of all places) won't do such a thing and never did they think they would be a target. I mean they are a feminist organisation dedicated to issues concerning women in Singapore, nothing too controversial about that right?
And who would have thought that a religious group that prided itself on being on the moral high ground would have resorted to such underhanded and distasteful (though legal) hostile takeover tactics usually practiced by greedy corporate raiders of the 80s.
Well, the battle is won for inclusiveness but the war is not over. The extremist likes of TSM and COOS will continue, just like comic book villains, always in the background but showing up once in a while to fight the heroes of the Marvel and DC comic universe.
The upside to this whole fiasco? It has exposed the face of Christian fundies in our midst and has also shown the whole of Singapore that religious extremism is not the sole monopoly of one religion and not all extremists are locked away by ISD.
As for AWARE, I hope the indignation, outrage and passion shown by old and new(est) members will translate into more zest and groundbreaking good work by them.
As for the rest of us, I think after this incident, not just AWARE but all civil societies and NGOs in Singapore should start looking into and tightening up their constitution to prevent another hostile takeover by outsiders.
My friend brought my attention to two rather interesting things to read on the web today.
One is an article in the New York Times about how the conservative evangelical churches and lobby group in the US seem to be changing directions. Among some of the reasons put forward is the retirement or passing on of the politically inclined leaders like Falwell and Dobson, while at the same time the evangelical congregants have grown tired of the endless political tirade of their spiritual leaders at the expense of their personal faith and growth.
...In the past, Hybels has scrupulously avoided criticizing conservative Christian political figures like Falwell or Dobson. But in my talk with him, he argued that the leaders of the conservative Christian political movement had lost touch with their base. "The Indians are saying to the chiefs, 'We are interested in more than your two or three issues,' " Hybels said. "We are interested in the poor, in racial reconciliation, in global poverty and AIDS, in the plight of women in the developing world"...
..."I thought in my enthusiasm," he (Rev. Gene Carlson) told me with a smile, "that somehow we could band together and change things politically and everything will be fine." But the closing of Dr. Tiller's clinic was fleeting. Electing Christian politicians never seemed to change much. "When you mix politics and religion," Carlson said, "you get politics."
In more recent battles, Carlson has hung back. On the Sunday before the referendum on a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, Carlson reminded his congregation that homosexuality was hardly the only form of sex the Bible condemned. Any extramarital sex is a sin, he told his congregation, so they should not point fingers.
"We wouldn't want to exclude some group because we thought their sin was worse than ours," Carlson told me with a laugh...
It's a pretty long article, but worth the read to get a sense of how the religious-political landscape of the US is changing. And though some might argue otherwise, it also has possible political ramifications in Singapore considering how some churches here seem to be aping the political stance of their co-religionists in the US.
Another article (or rather a blog post) I read is this "Reverse Redacting Thio Li Ann" which attempts to draw parallels between her speech in parliament and her article in the Straits Times with "The Homosexual Rights Agenda: Reframing the Debate" published on "The Road to Emmaus: A School of Judeo-Christian Apologetics".
Pretty interesting I must say. I think it helps people see where she is coming from and where she gets (or who she shares) some of her ideas (with).
Which brings to mind what I wrote about her in my post dated 19 January 2007:
..."There're a whole myriad of factors, from the treatment of maids to education issues, to political liberalisation, free speech issues, human rights and women's rights."
Promote human and women's rights but deny equal treatment to gays and lesbians? How schizophrenic is that. Or has reactionary and conservative religion contaminated her more progressive and liberal views towards such basic rights as equality of everyone regardless of sex, age, race, sexuality, religion, economic class, etc.
I wouldn't be surprised if she'll use this new platform to sprout and pursue her homophobic agenda. Or maybe that was the PAP's idea when they selected her as a new NMP. Then again, those who make the loudest noise usually have something to hide. Remember the former Pastor Ted Haggard from the Nov 2006 scandal?...
Thank god for people like NMP Siew Kum Hong and the PAP MPs who spoke up against the retention of 377a. At least there's some people in the house who could speak in opposition to her.
I don't know, but maybe I might have been wrong about it being PAP's idea to have her chosen as an NMP because of her homophobia. Then again, that was pure speculation on my part.
I just saw this report on BBC news about the Chinese PRC government and the selection of the next Dalai Lama.
..."No outside organisation or individual will influence or control the reincarnation of living Buddhas [eminent monks]," states one article of the new regulations.
They also say that any reincarnation has to be approved by various levels of government.
In the case of the most pre-eminent monks, who would include the Dalai Lama, China's cabinet has to give its seal of approval...
This is so effing hilarious! What... now the commie heads are going to decide on who can reincarnate as whom?
Okay folks, maybe you can use this to your advantage. Just write in to the PRC's State Administration for Religious Affairs to request for your choice of reincarnated being.
Hmmm... I think I will request to be reincarnated as a tall, tanned, hunky and drop-dead gorgeous East Asian (Japanese, Chinese, etc) model-type of gay man.
I was having dinner last night with my friend when the topic veered towards religion. He is administratively Christian but he quoted something that I thought was rather interesting:
"When one man believes in something unproven (or does not exist), it is delusion. When many people believe in it, it is religion."
But regardless of whether you believe in a greater deity or not, the fact that political theology is reasserting itself again is a fact we cannot deny.
Just when we thought we have moved out of the dark ages of religious warfare and political control because of divine right into the enlightened era when God (and its accompanying acts of irrationality by men who profess divine guidance) has been removed from the public and political sphere, we find ourselves coming back full circle.
It is undeniable that religion and faith is an intrinsic part of the human existence. We have always depended on the "existence" of a greater being to explain things beyond our understanding and will continue to do so. And hence, no matter how much we wish otherwise, political theology will always exist.
The only question is to what degree and damage.
In the light of all that has happened in recent years, Mark Lilla has written a very interesting and timely essay (based on his upcoming book, "The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics and the Modern West") that tries to shed light on this resurgent phenomena.
When 9/11 happened, it was convenient to explain it by using convenient catchphrase like "They hate our freedom", etc. etc.
But what liberal democracy failed to realise and understand is that Islam and the Islamic world operates on a completely different system of logic and rationale. The act of those hijackers and Al-Qaeda cannot just be diluted to poverty, oppression and opposition to American foreign policy. Yes, they may contribute to some of the reasons, but it is way too simplistic to believe that it's only that.
In "The Politics of God", Mark tries to remind us all that almost everyone in the world is a part of that same tradition. And it is to our detriment if we ignore it or fail to understand and engage it in its own language.
We should also not make the mistake of thinking that this is only an issue with the Islamic world. As we sit and ponder, Christian political theology is making its presence strongly felt in the US. While here at home, we have people of "influence" using Christianity and the bible as justification to pursue a certain agenda and shape policies that affect the shared public sphere.
And lest we be mistaken, this is not only confined to the two great monotheistic faiths of Christianity and Islam. For example, we see it resurging in India through the pantheistic Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party.
There is no way for us to ignore it and wish it away. In the whole history of mankind, 99% of it has seen religion (and the belief in god's divine revelation as a way to live our life) intertwined with politics in a way that affects both the public as well as private individual sphere. It is only in recent history that man has somewhat successfully (depends on how you see it) separate religion from politics.
To assume that we are successful and that's the way things are going to be from now on is plain folly.
After all, we are atavistic creatures who often depend on the divine when we exhaust our intellectual cache.
The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics, and the Modern West (by Mark Lilla) Editorial Reviews - From Publishers Weekly:
Starred Review. This searching history of western thinking about the relationship between religion and politics was inspired not by 9/11, but by Nazi Germany, where, says University of Chicago professor Lilla (The Reckless Mind), politics and religion were horrifyingly intertwined. To explain the emergence of Nazism's political theology, Lilla reaches back to the early modern era, when thinkers like Locke and Hume began to suggest that religion and politics should be separate enterprises. Some theorists, convinced that Christianity bred violence, argued that government must be totally detached from religion. Others, who believed that rightly practiced religion could contribute to modern life, promoted a liberal theology, which sought to articulate Christianity and Judaism in the idiom of reason. (Lilla's reading of liberal Jewish thinker Hermann Cohen is especially arresting.) Liberal theologians, Lilla says, credulously assumed human society was progressive and never dreamed that fanaticism could capture the imaginations of modern people-assumptions that were proven wrong by Hitler. If Lilla castigates liberal theology for its naïveté, he also praises America and Western Europe for simultaneously separating religion from politics, creating space for religion, and staving off sectarian violence and theocracy. Lilla's work, which will influence discussions of politics and theology for the next generation, makes clear how remarkable an accomplishment that is. (Sept. 14)
Since Malaysia's 50th birthday is coming up on the 31st of August, I thought it would be a good time to see what was on the minds of their founding fathers when they drafted the constitution with the Reid Commission. So if you're interested in what's happening religiously up north, I would like to direct your attention to this very interesting article. It gives a historical perspective on the current issue/controversy about the country being an Islamic state even though the constitution says otherwise.
The first and third PM of Malaysia say "secular", then the fourth and the fifth's DPM say "Islamic". So when did it change? I think it was during the tenure of the fourth when he tried to out-islamise PAS.
But I am more incline to take the view of Israeli archaeologist Amos Kloner who said that the names marked on those coffins were very common at the time.
CURRENT
TOP