I was at my aunt's place and she was stuffing me with CNY goodies. I told her that I enjoyed the goodies very much, but I really couldn't take in any more pineapple tarts, chocolates, sweets, or bak kwa.
Then she was like "Eat more, eat more. If you don't eat more, after CNY, your uncle and I, we'll die trying to finish up the goodies. We don't actually like to eat them, but we have to buy them because it's CNY. Eat more. Eat more."
I think I seriously lol-ed and died.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Oh come on who are you kidding Singapore
I'm sure everyone is more or less familiar with Pastor Rony Tan, the pastor who made some insensitive comments regarding Buddhism and Taoism, and even posted a video of it.
This is the video in question
He was eventually hauled up by the ISD, and made to apologise for his comments, which the leaders of the two other religions have accepted.
However, I really wonder if he is sincerely apologetic, or just afraid of getting in trouble. There is a huge difference, even if in both cases an apology is supposedly enough to show his "remorse". I will elaborate on this later.
Many studies on human behaviour have shown that it is difficult to change attitudes, because they are often very deeply ingrained. I really doubt that a mere call-up by the ISD will have convinced Pastor Rony Tan of the error of his actions in a fundamental sense.
By fundamental sense, I mean the right of all Singaporeans to practice their religion of choice freely in a secular society without the fear of persecution or being subject to denigration.
This goes right down to the very core of our societal fabric because firstly, religion is often tied very closely to race and demographics, and secondly, religion is something intensely personal that people have very strong feelings about.
I find it deeply disturbing that a man who is the leader of a religious congregation engages in such childish behaviour, and even has the cheek to post it online so he can share his childish beliefs with other equally bigoted people.
I do not claim to be immune to the odd politically incorrect comment, but sharing it online on a video that "glorifies" his actions to the public is simply distasteful and to a large extent, seditious.
I actually did research on the Sedition Act in Singapore.
Here are some excerpts, as well as cases of previous offenders under the Sedition Act.
3-(1) A seditious tendency is a tendency
(e) to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore.
In 2005, 2 men and a 17-year old youth were charged under the Sedition Act for making racist comments on the Internet. More details on the cases can be found here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_(Singapore)
So the message I'm getting from the government is, if you are a normal citizen, you get charged under the full extent of the law, and jailed and fined if need be, for making seditious comments on forums and blogs.
However, if you are the leader of a religious congregation, you get a callup from the ISD, a chance to explain yourself, and all's well after you make a public apology. Why such double standards? Especially since in this case, I am pretty sure the impact was far greater, in terms of public anger and reach of the inflammatory material.
I am actually in favour of a stronger and stiffer punishment for this man, because he was in a position of authority and he did not use the power and influence accorded to him by his position in a responsible manner.
By letting him off lightly, the government gives the impression that the powerful protect each other, and in addition, people who already have an axe to grind with the Christian community in Singapore feel dissatisfied and as a result voice their disaffection with said community between themselves, reinforcing religious tensions.
I'd like the government to realise that many of us out there are not stupid. We were brought up in an environment where we received an excellent education, and with this education comes the ability to see through and question the failings of our government more acutely than ever.
If you are sincere about protecting Singapore's secularity, then show us that anyone who tries to threaten it, no matter how powerful or influential, gets the hard end of the stick.
This is the video in question
He was eventually hauled up by the ISD, and made to apologise for his comments, which the leaders of the two other religions have accepted.
However, I really wonder if he is sincerely apologetic, or just afraid of getting in trouble. There is a huge difference, even if in both cases an apology is supposedly enough to show his "remorse". I will elaborate on this later.
Many studies on human behaviour have shown that it is difficult to change attitudes, because they are often very deeply ingrained. I really doubt that a mere call-up by the ISD will have convinced Pastor Rony Tan of the error of his actions in a fundamental sense.
By fundamental sense, I mean the right of all Singaporeans to practice their religion of choice freely in a secular society without the fear of persecution or being subject to denigration.
This goes right down to the very core of our societal fabric because firstly, religion is often tied very closely to race and demographics, and secondly, religion is something intensely personal that people have very strong feelings about.
I find it deeply disturbing that a man who is the leader of a religious congregation engages in such childish behaviour, and even has the cheek to post it online so he can share his childish beliefs with other equally bigoted people.
I do not claim to be immune to the odd politically incorrect comment, but sharing it online on a video that "glorifies" his actions to the public is simply distasteful and to a large extent, seditious.
I actually did research on the Sedition Act in Singapore.
Here are some excerpts, as well as cases of previous offenders under the Sedition Act.
3-(1) A seditious tendency is a tendency
(e) to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore.
In 2005, 2 men and a 17-year old youth were charged under the Sedition Act for making racist comments on the Internet. More details on the cases can be found here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_(Singapore)
So the message I'm getting from the government is, if you are a normal citizen, you get charged under the full extent of the law, and jailed and fined if need be, for making seditious comments on forums and blogs.
However, if you are the leader of a religious congregation, you get a callup from the ISD, a chance to explain yourself, and all's well after you make a public apology. Why such double standards? Especially since in this case, I am pretty sure the impact was far greater, in terms of public anger and reach of the inflammatory material.
I am actually in favour of a stronger and stiffer punishment for this man, because he was in a position of authority and he did not use the power and influence accorded to him by his position in a responsible manner.
By letting him off lightly, the government gives the impression that the powerful protect each other, and in addition, people who already have an axe to grind with the Christian community in Singapore feel dissatisfied and as a result voice their disaffection with said community between themselves, reinforcing religious tensions.
I'd like the government to realise that many of us out there are not stupid. We were brought up in an environment where we received an excellent education, and with this education comes the ability to see through and question the failings of our government more acutely than ever.
If you are sincere about protecting Singapore's secularity, then show us that anyone who tries to threaten it, no matter how powerful or influential, gets the hard end of the stick.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Love, peace and whatever to all mankind
Today, I was at Sun Plaza on assignment when I suddenly felt mother nature calling. I was at the ground level and I saw a sign to the loo. I snuck into the nearest one and when I saw what the place looked like, I beat a hasty retreat.
Honestly, if you'd told me at the moment that an elephant had escaped from the zoo, run into Sun Plaza and crapped in that toilet, I would have believed you. I'm serious.
Note to people: When there is a hole in the floor, you crap into the hole, not all around it. Thank you.
So I was like really grossed out, and yet I had a personal emergency to attend to. I did not feel like running to the loos upstairs because I was convinced they would be just as... hygiene challenged.
And at that moment, I saw something divine that sang out to me. It was this.
Honestly, if you'd told me at the moment that an elephant had escaped from the zoo, run into Sun Plaza and crapped in that toilet, I would have believed you. I'm serious.
Note to people: When there is a hole in the floor, you crap into the hole, not all around it. Thank you.
So I was like really grossed out, and yet I had a personal emergency to attend to. I did not feel like running to the loos upstairs because I was convinced they would be just as... hygiene challenged.
And at that moment, I saw something divine that sang out to me. It was this.
I know that able-bodied people are not supposed to use them, so I looked all around for any probable disabled people before I did. By probable, I meant physically as well as mentally disabled, like those weird people you see hanging around leering at young girls.
Having ascertained that even those were not in the vicinity, I proceeded to make use of the best toilet in the shopping centre. Clean, pristine, well furnished with its own personal set of mirrors, basin, a nappy changing area where you can put your bag, and a full roll of toilet paper.
I have to say it again. The toilet bowl was white and unblemished. In a public toilet sense that is like striking 4D.
How much more awesome can a public toilet get. Just using it you feel like a king.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)