The Aware Battle - Who won?

From an obscure little association of 300 members, it's membership has swelled to over 3000 in a matter of weeks. The association must be the biggest winner in this battle. The old Exco has been returned to power and the new Exco booted out. The new Exco did not stand a chance the moment the church cuts off its support from the group. Otherwise, what is 3000 members, they could get 30,000 or more if they were together. And the voting was all about the composition of the new Exco, that it does not reflect the racial and religious realities of the country. They were seen as being too Christian and too Chinese for a secular organisation. The homosexual agenda was a non issue. Is it that it was a non issue or it was swept away by the forces to remove the new Exco for the way they invited themselves to a party? Apparently, from the lack of interest in discussing the homosexual issue, one can interpret that homosexuals are now an accepted and welcome reality in our society. Their presence was greatly felt in the EGM in great numbers. The homosexuals should take some comfort that they have been accepted by all as part and parcel of our way of life, not queers. They no longer need to feel paranoid about themselves and hide in the closet. In fact, other than a few small groups that have very strong views of homosexuality, no one bothers about whether one is straight or queer. With this issue settled, will the curriculum of the CSE need to be revised, or should the investigation by MOE continue? The EGM has in a way confirmed that what Aware has been doing is what the Aware members want, or what the supporters of the old Exco want. A new chapter of the Aware movement has begun. Or the old chapter will continue to be written the way it was written.

CSE - No complains means OK?

Minister of State for Education, Iswaran, told the public to get the facts right on sex education in school. 'Get your facts right on what is happening in Singapore schools when it comes to sex education, and do not base comments on "innuendo or information receive on the fly". The schools' sex education programme is based on "the guiding principle that the family is the basic building block of society". 'In a letter, the MOE said the schools "found that the content and messages of the sessions(CSE) were appropriate for their students and adhered to guidelines to respect the values of different religious groups'. And there has been no complaints against the programme, so far. So the MOE has done the necessary vetting and the parents are happy as they are not complaining. I presume that MOE must have consulted the various religious bodies or have religious representatives saying that the programme is acceptable. The latest is that some parents have started to complain about the CSE and MOE is starting an investigation. What is interesting is that though the content of the CSE is posted everywhere, no religious body is coming out to comment on its appropriateness. All adopting a politically correct stance. And a bishop has spoken to distance the church from the new Aware Exco. But where does the church stands on homosexuality? To stand at a distance on the ground that the new Exco is mainly a Christian group gatecrashing into a secular organisation is one thing. Taking a stand on homosexuality and sexual conduct is another. One wrong does not make the other wrong. It will be interesting to see the facts of the MOE investigation and the comments of the NCCS. They are going to be very embarrassing for sure.

Understand the important issues at stake

My fear of the mindless and unthinking hoards descending onto the Aware EGM is beginning to crystallise. I have scanned through several of the blogs and read the comments of the pro and anti factions to the Aware episode and what came through is that the moral issues were ignored or escaped the interests of the commentators. The issue is now of a Christian group taking over aware in a high handed manner, and this is found offensive. I can only hope that these comments were actually posted by the activitists who have their own private agenda to push and not simply by innocent people taking sides without understanding what the real issues were. There is nothing wrong with a group of activists taking over an organisation within the rules of engagement as long as their intent is honourable. The new exco won the election fairly, or unfairly to some, but this is due to the complacency of the incumbents. No fault of the new exco. They played within the rules and this should not be an issue of contention. The ousted exco can always fight back in the next AGM in the same way, legitimately. By crying foul and bitching around on other issues only reflect badly on themselves. There is no justification whatsoever for the new Exco to resign from their posts. The second issue is that it was a Christian takeover. For those who are less favourable of the religious connotation or have misgivings of Christian groups, this may be offensive and unacceptable. If we are prepared to set this aside, taking the Christian background of the new exco as incidental, and look at what they are standing for, there is another picture to consider. The new exco is awared of their Christian background but has failed to distinguish this from the issues at stake. They should make it categorically clear that it is the issues, secular issues and not Christianity in question, and that they are not there to push a Chrisitian agenda or Christian values but simple human values that transcend all culures, race and religion. What are the issues? Sexual promiscuity and the promotion of certain sexual behaviours and preferences as being normal and healthy. interested parties must look at the content of the Aware CSE curriculum that was taught and adovocated to school children and ask themselves if these are values and behaviours that they are comfortable with, that this is where we should be heading. Some of the things that are taught as normal behaviours are homosexuality, pre marital sex, anal sex, virginity etc. We are a liberal society and many old practices and values relating to sexual conduct and relationship have changed with time. Many things that were forbidden in the past are no longer so. The question is how far are we willing to go as we walk down this path of moral misconduct? Do we want to encourage our children to change the values and all their thinkings and accept the new way of life? Or do we want them to still observe or retain some of these things, or be more discreet about them? To be a little conservative or to be totally liberal about such things is not an issue of absolute right and wrong. And there are preferences by different interest groups and individuals on how far they want to go. What is at stake is, as a society, how far do we want to promote sexual freedom, freedom to choose sexual partners of the same sex, as something normal and acceptable? These are the issues at stake, not how one group took over another group in an association or the colour and creed of the the group. What is important is the agenda and whether the new Exco is promoting their religious righteousness or just some common and universal values. I declare that I am not a Christian or practitioner of any faith. And I am just a normal healthy person.

The power of women

This catfight has hijacked every single issue that we have been discussing. Even the Swine Flu has to play second fiddle to the women and their agenda. See how powerful they are? And everyone, like it or not, interested or not, have been lambasted with this Aware fight. The govt said they did nott want to be involved, but they are involved with the comments of several ministers. The church too is involved indirectly when a Bishop has to come out to make a stand. While the issue is simmering and the pressure building, let's recollect what were the hot issues before this thing erupted. Oh, there was a series of write ups on all the great salary earners, all earning millions as employees. I was wondering what was the agenda, to tell people that it is acceptable and admirable to earn that kind of money? Or to tell people that something is fundamentally wrong, that earning that kind of money as pay is simply atrocious? Or is it paving the ground for more people to ask for more and bigger pay packages? Or is it to say that we are still earning peanuts compare to those big earners in Wall Streets? What is the moral behind the high pay stories? What else were hot? The high HDB prices priced according to the market demand. Now that the private housing prices are tumbling, are we seeing any sign of HDB lowering their prices? No. HDB is not price takers or price followers. HDB is the real market price maker. It determines the prices of public and private housing for the masses, at least 80% of flat owners. HDB is the one that determines the price of public flats and the lower level private flats. All the crap talks about HDB pricing its flats according to the market and private sector is all bull. It is time for HDB to return to its past policies of building affordable flats for the people. Affordable should be defined using the premises of the past, not the current premises when one needs two pay packets and a life time to pay up the mortgages, and for smaller flats. The people shall not be made to pay for a small little space in the air with a big chunk of their income. This is not quality living. In fact the quality of life is declining in terms of space for the family for the money they can buy. The money can be better spent in other areas. Will we see a change in the policies for public housing? Will the people make their feelings on this issue felt in the next General Election?

YPAP Forum canned?

I tried but was unable to access the YPAP forum. It was not even reflected in the main page of the revamped YPAP blog. I think they must have taken it down. With so many unsolicited pornographic material flooding the blog, might as well close it and start a new one. If that be the case, the resident bloggers would left without a home.