Oh my god, MOE suspends Aware's CSE programme

'Our aim has always been to help students make informed and responsible decisions about their sexuality in the context of values taught by their parents.' This is a response from an Aware spokesman. Then how could MOE suspend their CSE programme? And MOE found some information in the instructor guide inappropriate but 'Aware spokesman said: "We stand by our CSE programme." She emphasised that the guide is "a confidential document used strictly during the training of the CSE instructors".' Oh my god! Does it mean that no one is supposed to know its content because it is confidential but could be taught to students? Oh my god, MOE suspends the CSE programme in less than a week after investigation when it was officially deemed that the programme was acceptable a week ago, no complaints, fine. What is happening huh? You mean all this while some of the CSE programme were too explicit, inappropriate and promoting alternative lifestyle, were used to educate our young children and only with vehement complaints and an Aware saga that this was found out? Are we looking at the relevant facts or it was just an emotional response without facts? Oh my god, oh my god!

In praise of homosexuality education

I read several letters in the forum praising Aware for teaching homosexuality in schools. I agree that this is a subject that cannot be swept under the carpet. What I hope the MOE will make certain is the credentials of the instructors and be mindful of those with wrongful intentions that may lead the children down the wrong path, or even harbouring homosexual intent on the children they are teaching. A thorough vetting must be carried out to ensure that instructors are carefully screened. Not that I have anything against homosexuals, but I think gays and lesbians should be banned from teaching sexual education. Let the straight teachers do this job. I know that some may argue that homosexuals should be the best people to teach homosexuality because of their personal experiences on the subject. I choose to defer. Anyone got any views on this?

Was David Widjaja murdered?

This is a very serious question to ask. The family of David is protesting at the Singapore Embassy in Jakarta claiming that he was murdered. This is a big shift from the position first made known in our local media that he committed suicide by jumping down the building. How could his family be so certain when our professionals covering the case, they must be equally certain, that he committed suicide? Even the statements made by all the important people concerned pointed to the suicide road. What would be the truth? A suicide or murder cannot be so vague and grey that two parties are so certain of their opposing positions. Our forensic experts must be able to pin point the cause of death in this case with a high level of certainty. I certainly hope the truth will see the light to vindicate that justice and the rule of law are what our system stands for. And for David to rest in peace and his family appeased.

Abusing professional integrity

Yeo Toon Joo, an ex senior journalist, wrote a passionate article on the role of journalists and the media during the recent national crisis when two women groups fought for leadership in Aware. Details are in www.littlespeck.com. I can understand his disgust and anger over the state of journalism here. We have perhaps the best crop of talented reporters and journalists schooled in the best universities and returned with first class honours degrees. With such able and capable talents, it is a big waste if they are not assigned to cover more meaty and worthy news than the Aware catfight. OK, I accept that this catfight may be an issue of national proportion to some. But I have my reservation on the importance of this, as Vivian has described it most appropriately, 'petty politics'. Looking across the professions, such abuses of professionalism are quite prevalent and did great harm to the professions as well as the integrity and self worth of the professionals. Many could even compromise their moral principles to deal with things that they should not be doing as an honourable individual. I don't see any pride if the whole system and machinery are harnessed to chase children wearing T shirts screaming, 'Shut up and sit down'. I don't find it funny if senior management were to take buses just to prove that the transport claim put up by his/her subordinate is $1.10 and not $1.20. I don't find it funny if nonsensical reasons were given to justify nonsensical decisions. We have not gone down this road yet. But it will be a very sad day if such things happened. I feel terribly sorry for the professionals if they were to compromise themselves and their professional integrity to do the unsavoury. I am waiting for the day when talented journalists and reporters were assigned to write about gossips of aunties and uncles, about who is sleeping with who, who wears what and eats what, or who did not brush teeth. Would that day come? If it does, it would be the reason why our journalists are unable to excel in what they do, unable to optimise their talents in creative and investigative writings on real substance and issues of great importance. But I may be wrong, as what is important or not is just a subjective personal interpretation.

Just a thought

If a deviant sect that is banned or not accepted by society to form its own organisation officially, would it be nice to sneak into another organisation and make that organisation its front organisation? By quietly getting all its members to join an organisation, in no time, that organisation will, unconsciously become the official organisation of that sect. This is a thought that just came to me after meditating for hours on the unfolding of recent events. It can happen right? This is not much different from money laundering.