ST: Greater openness here now, says WP chief (Nov 1)

WORKERS’ Party (WP) leader Low Thia Khiang sees the Government’s handling of the recent debate on the law against male homosexuality as a sign of greater openness here.

He cited the Section 377A debate as an example of a more relaxed political atmosphere, as he gave the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) a “passing grade” for its governance.

“You don’t see very strong reactions from the Government towards criticisms and citizen initiatives,” he told The Straits Times last night.

“The environment has changed compared to when I just joined politics in the early 80s…People are more vocal and people are more comfortable to air their views in public. So I think it is an improvement.”

The highly charged debate over Section 377A took place both in and outside Parliament.

It was sparked by a citizens’ petition to the House to repeal it from the Penal Code and over two days last week, 16 MPs spoke on the controversial issue.

The WP is holding its 50th anniversary celebrations on Saturday.

In an interview with Chinese-language daily Lianhe Zaobao ahead of the celebrations, Mr Low was asked how he would grade the PAP government. He said it was “definitely a pass”.

But at the same time, he criticised some of the Government’s policies, arguing that the recent Central Provident Fund (CPF) changes are unfair to the elderly.

He said that by delaying the draw-down age of the CPF Minimum Sum, the Government is essentially leaving older Singaporeans with no choice but to continue working.

While supporting the Government’s anti-terrorism moves, he expressed concern that they may increase the authorities’ power.

Still, the WP secretary-general - who said he hoped that he will not be the party leader when it celebrates its 60th anniversary - insists it is not right for a political party to oppose for the sake of opposing.

“The term opposition is a legacy of the Western parliamentary system, and I have never believed that an opposition party should oppose for the sake of opposing or to shoot one’s mouth off.

“Politics should be about responsible politics. The opposition should be a watchdog, not a mad dog. That should be the path for a political party.”

It is also not the job of the opposition here to offer alternatives to all government policies, he argued.

While the ruling party has specialists to study and research various issues, the opposition lacks the resources to come up with alternatives.

He pointed out that the WP is unlike the opposition parties in the West, which come up with alternative policies for everything.

The WP’s role is to revise and improve on government policies. Moreover, the opposition should not shoot its mouth off, and offer alternative policies on a whim.

“A political party needs to reach a certain stage before it can offer alternative policies, that is, at a stage where it is capable of replacing that government. And WP still has a very long way to go before reaching this stage.”

In fact, he did not think his party is ready to challenge the PAP for government in the “near future”.

Said the 51-year-old: “To become ready to take over the government is a very long-term goal. Every political party wishes to be ready to form the government and eventually become the ruling party. But to me, this is still very far, we need to take one step at a time.”

Methodist Message: Importance of our Connectionalism shines through issues (Nov 07)

Importance of our Connectionalism shines through issues
By Peter Teo

METHODIST connectionalism – that important link which is inherent in our tradition – was pushed to the forefront in the last few months by several international conferences held in Singapore and the region.

There was plenty of sharing of ideas and experiences and a time of close fellowship at each of these conferences, beginning with the Asian Christian Women’s Leadership Training and Dialogue held here from July 27 to Aug 3, which was attended by some 80 participants from the region and the United States.

The event was hosted by the General Conference-Women’s Society of Christian Service and co-sponsored by the Singapore women, the Women’s Division of the General Board of Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church in the US, and the Global Women’s Leadership Centre-Korea.

The women were taught leadership skills and discussed a wide range of subjects, including societal issues and the role of Christian women in missions today.

The focus shifted to the region when the Annual Meeting of The Methodist Mission in Cambodia was held in Phnom Penh on Sept 7 and 8.

A high point of that meeting was the ordination of 10 local pastors – one as an Elder and nine as Deacons. The ordination was conducted by Bishop Dr Robert Solomon, Bishop Roy I. Sano of The United Methodist Church, and Bishop Han Chung Suk of Korea Methodist Church.

Then came the Regular Meeting of the Fellowship of Asian Methodist Bishops (FAMB) in Manila on Sept 10, followed immediately the next day by the meeting of the Executive Committee of the Asian Methodist Council (AMC), also held in the Philippines capital.

At the FAMB meeting, the challenge of providing proper care to Filipino workers abroad was discussed at length.

In a report to the FAMB, The United Methodist Church, Philippines Central Conference College of Bishops disclosed that some 3,000 Filipinos were leaving the country for jobs abroad every day.

Consequently, Filipino pastors based in South Korea, Japan, Singapore and the Middle East have been asked to provide spiritual needs to the Filipinos working in those countries.

The Philippines Bishops have also appealed to their brother bishops in the region to “help look after” the Filipinos working in their respective countries.

“The economic nuances of corporate globalisation and the war on terror are also affecting our people,” they said.

In his country report on Singapore, Bishop Dr Robert Solomon mentioned the Singapore Government’s emphasis on strengthening inter-racial and inter-religious harmony within the community in order to minimise tension should a terrorist incident occur.

Dialogue and engagement with people of other faiths were encouraged through community programmes where the various communities could meet and interact to build confidence, friendship and trust with each other.

He said: “The Methodist Church in Singapore supports the need for religious harmony. Together with the National Council of Churches of Singapore, we have been educating Christians on how they should conduct themselves and maintain their Christian values in inter-religious relations.”

One of the outcomes of the FAMB and AMC meetings was the issuance of a statement on the issue of homosexuality.

The Asian Bishops unanimously decided to send a letter to the Council of Bishops of The United Methodist Church (UMC) stating that:

“Our Asian Methodist Churches and communities have held, and continue to hold to the teachings of Scripture and our historic Christian faith on the issues of marriage and sexuality. Sexual relationships outside marriage are against the teachings of Scripture. The marital relationship is also between a man and a woman. We have also held that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teachings. We expect our clergy and lay to abide by these teachings and standards. We appreciate that the United Methodist Church has taken a position similar to that of the Asian Methodist churches and pray that the UMC will continue to make a clear stand. The unity of the global Methodist family will be seriously affected if any member of this family moves away from the biblical and historical position on the issues of marriage and sexuality. We therefore pray that together, we will be committed to maintain the teaching of Scripture and the historical and unanimous tradition of our global Methodist, and wider Christian, family.”

The letter was sent in the light of the UMC’s upcoming General Conference in April next year at which the homosexuality issue is expected to be raised again.

Following the FAMB and AMC meetings, about 200 leaders from all over the world converged in Sydney from Sept 15 to 20 for the World Methodist Council (WMC) Executive Committee meeting.

It was decided that the next World Methodist Conference will be held in Durban, South Africa in 2011. It is expected to be held from Aug 2 to 9.

It was also decided that the next WMC Executive Committee meeting will be held in Santiago, Chile in 2009.

The World Methodist Conference meets once in five years. The last conference was held in Seoul from July 20 to 24, 2006 amidst heightened tension on the divided Korean peninsula and the unrest in the Middle East.

Durban was a runner-up to Seoul when the location of the 2006 World Methodist Conference was selected. With more than 3 million residents, it is South Africa’s second largest city.

The Rev Dr George Freeman, General Secretary of the WMC, said that South African Methodists wanted their global counterparts to meet in Durban “so they could experience the changes that have taken place in southern Africa since apartheid ended”.

The Sydney meeting centred on strategic planning of the WMC and the proposed changes to the WMC Constitution.

Reports on subjects such as Family Life, Theological Education, Worship and Liturgy, Ecumenics and Dialogue, and Evangelism were also tabled by the various committees for discussion.

The Ecumenics and Dialogue Committee reported that the dialogue between the WMC and the Roman Catholic Church was continuing with an emphasis on “the Sacramental Nature of the Church.” The dialogue with the Salvation Army will continue with an emphasis on “Mission and Evangelism”.

A recommendation from the Division of World Evangelism that member churches of the WMC dedicate the first Sunday in Advent as a “Day of Prayer for Peace” was enthusiastically approved.

The WMC has also sent word to The Methodist Church of Lower Myanmar and The Methodist Church of Upper Myanmar reminding them of the prayers of the WMC family for their country and for the witness of their Church during the current political crisis.

Peter Teo is the Editor of Methodist Message.

ST Forum: Writer's article unfair and undermines civil debate (Nov 1)

Nov 1, 2007
Writer's article unfair and undermines civil debate

I REFER to Mr Janadas Devan's article, '377A debate and the rewriting of pluralism' (ST, Oct 27).

It is unfortunate that Mr Janadas Devan was 'exceedingly' depressed by the parliamentary debate on S377A of the Penal Code. However, one's personal feelings and sentiments such as 'was left looking stupid, speechless, confused, sour-faced and uncivil' is neither a rational nor relevant argument.

The use of expressions such as 'she tore to shreds so many of our cherished beliefs' obfuscates real concerns of what such beliefs may be and whether they ought to be so cherished in the first place. This emotional appeal insidiously draws attention away from the validity of opposing arguments.

Nominated Member of Parliament Thio Li-ann validly used the phrase 'chronological snobbery' in her parliamentary speech to counter the argument that S377A was 'archaic' and therefore should be repealed. Mr Devan's observation that 'chronological snobbery' was first coined by Owen Barfield and C.S. Lewis, is irrelevant. First, his observation fails to justify the 'labelling' of S377A as 'archaic'. Second, parliamentarians do not assert originality in their speeches, but
instead seek to express views relevant to law and policy making.

Mr Devan alluded to Professor Thio's use of uncivil and unkind phrases such as 'shoving a straw up your nose to drink' and 'Mundur Singapura' ('backward' in Malay).

He observed that the first phrase has been used in 'American anti-gay pamphlets'. A cursory sweep of gay activists' propaganda will reveal the convenient labelling of all contrary viewpoints including reasoned arguments, as 'anti-gay'. Such labelling avoids a substantive debate of the real concerns. S377A prohibits acts of gross indecency between two male adults. Any argument for or against its retention must
necessarily consider the repugnancy of anal sex or sodomy justifying its classification as 'gross indecency'.

He further observed that 'Mundur means 'backward' in Malay, and 'backward' here alludes to that 'straw' and another orifice'. If Mr Devan had read Professor Thio's speech carefully, he would have noticed that the phrase 'Mundur Singapura' was spoken in the context of not allowing our society to 'regress' to early civilisations where
indiscriminate sex was prevalent and there was no laws governing sexual behaviour. This is hardly uncivil or unkind. It is inappropriate and unconscionable for anyone to suggest otherwise.

Parliamentarians speak to the population at large. To use colloquial language at times to illustrate a point is perfectly permissible.

For Mr Devan to declare and wax lyrical about his depression, is at best highly self-indulgent.

Yvonne Lee Ching Ling (Ms)

ST Online Forum: Polarisation beginning to surface after S377A debate (Nov 1)

Nov 1, 2007
Polarisation beginning to surface after S377A debate

BOTH sides of the recent Section 377A debate have claimed victory and selectively focused on relevant portions of PM Lee's speech in Parliament to back up their stands.

Rather than victory, I suggest that both camps have 'lost' in their recent effort to bring the moderate majority to their stated cause.

For those who supported the retention of Section 377A, and especially the deeply religious, this effort has alienated the moderate majority in their lop-sided emphasis on 'hating the sin' and neglecting the equal call to 'love the sinner'.

While they need not renounce their opposition to homosexual behaviour to welcome the gay and lesbian community, it is a reality that the religious have yet to adopt an openly consistent and compassionate approach with people with homosexual tendencies.

For those who supported the repeal of Section 377A, their insistence on labelling all those who oppose the repeal as bigots and right-wing religious fanatics did little to draw the moderate majority to them either.

The polarisation effects are beginning to surface. Mr Janadas Devan fired the first salvo in his satire piece tearing into Thio Li-Ann's logic and Andy Ho focused his spotlight on PM Lee's assertion that homosexuality is substantially inborn in one single edition of The Straits Times (Oct 27). Alex Au, the well-known gay activist whom the media always turn to for views on homosexual issues, has also taken
off the gloves in his Yawning Bread website by portraying the 'religious right' as Ku Klux Klan and writing that there is no need to be civil to those who take an opposing stand from them. While I have my own reservations regarding Thio Li-Ann's fiery speech in Parliament, a local playwright and aspiring teacher's threat to desecrate her grave was not a civil way to debate the issue. More of these vitriol exchanges will cement the current battle line drawn in the sand and PM Lee's warning of a divided and polarised society will become a reality.

Let's maintain the pragmatism, cherish the space, respect the limits, live and let live.

Alex Tan Tuan Loy

ST Review: The Gay Debate, Present by denied (Nov 1)

Nov 1, 2007
THE GAY DEBATE
Present but denied
By John Gee

AFTER the parliamentary debate over Section 377A ended in the retention of the clause, one pro-change activist was quoted as saying: 'What makes this so divisive is that so many of those who are against gays do not have gay friends and do not understand them.'

The sad reality is that many probably do have gay friends, but they just don't know it.

As a teenager in Britain, I remember hearing programmes on the radio in which gay characters featured, and knowing about certain gay people in public life and history books, but I didn't know any fellow students or teachers who were definitely gay.

Among people of my acquaintance, I was aware of no gay men and knew just one woman who was fairly certainly a lesbian, although the word was never used. She was a great-aunt of mine, who would come to family occasions with a woman who was always known as her 'friend', and whom she lived with for half of her life until she died at a ripe old age, loved and respected by all who knew her.

It was only when I went to university that I met men and women who were very open about being gay or lesbian, but that was something of a special environment, more tolerant of differences than most, even though male homosexuality had been decriminalised in 1967 (lesbianism was never recognised in British law).

Even there, I realised that there were gay men who quite deliberately kept their distance from those who were 'out'. They made a decision not to draw attention to their sexuality. I don't think it could have been as easy as it would at first seem; it meant forgoing the casual intimate exchanges in which heterosexuals often engage without a second thought - a touch, an embrace, an intense, close-up conversation.

As chance would have it, I came to know more lesbians than gay men, and two became close friends. Things they said gave me new insights into why it is that many homosexuals are wary of revealing their sexual identity.

One woman came from a Muslim family and had lived quite happily until her father decided that it was time she got married. Arranged marriages were the rule in her community, but she decided that she could not marry someone she could never love, and left home. Her mother and brothers were quite sympathetic, but the rift between
father and daughter was lasting.

When I first met her, I thought that she was very puritanical as whenever any reference to sexual matters arose, she seemed uncomfortable and would steer the conversation to another topic. It was only after a couple of years that a mutual friend told me, in a very matter-of-fact way, that she was a lesbian. Eventually, after a big upheaval in her life, she suddenly became very willing to pour out
her woes to me, and it was then that I heard the whole story.

Another woman I knew had several boyfriends, but the relationships never lasted long. It was only after a few years that she told me one day that she had a girlfriend.

She said she would have mentioned this to me before, but I had told a story about a gay man I knew that she saw as derogatory of him, and that frightened her into keeping quiet about her own sexuality. I knew her parents, whom she loved very much. Both were devout Catholics.

Her father died without her being able to tell him honestly about her sexual identity, but she did eventually manage to talk about it with her mother. There are old school friends she still sees occasionally, but she does not dare to risk them turning away from her if she reveals her sexuality.

Odd incidents served to remind me what gay people could face, simply because they were gay. A man I knew was beaten up one night just outside his own home after a group of particularly unpleasant and hefty young bigots living in the neighbourhood discovered that he was gay.

This was a far from isolated incident, but it hadn't happened to anyone I knew before.

A writer I knew and respected shared a home with his male partner for most of his life. They were very happy together and, had they been man and woman, most people would have seen theirs as a model relationship.

The writer died, and his lifelong partner was status-less. Arrangements for the funeral fell to the deceased's nearest blood-relatives and the grieving partner had to request their permission for him to attend, which, to their credit, they gave
willingly. I attended the memorial service and could not help thinking that this relationship had never been more explicitly acknowledged by the author's friends and family than at that moment.

I knew a trade union official who took on the case of a woman who claimed that she had been unfairly dismissed from her workplace. He soon found that his union superiors were reluctant to support her. One eventually spoke to him 'off the record' and said: 'You know she's a lesbian, don't you?' - an issue that had not figured explicitly in her dismissal. The official, an Irishman of distinctly nationalist
outlook, stood his ground: 'Lesbian? I'd defend her even if she was a Protestant!'

Homosexuals belong to many different communities and backgrounds, which is why talk of a 'gay community' can be misleading; sexuality is not the be-all and end-all of anyone's existence.

One consequence of this is that some gay people share most of the values of people who display strong hostility towards them. They may be strongly Christian or Muslim, or socially conservative; it must be wounding when they hear words of condemnation or mockery, but they persist in these antagonistic surroundings because they feel they have so many shared ideals.

And so I look back on my schooldays with a mind informed by experience and I realise that I almost certainly did know gay people then. I also remember the jokes told about homosexuals and how they were so often figures of fun, malice and fear.

I felt uncomfortable about the hostility this expressed, and soon stopped laughing at the jokes, but I didn't speak up to object, and I don't remember anyone else doing so: After all, people might have said that you were one of them, and who wanted that? How would young gay people have dared to reveal their true sexual feelings in those
circumstances? So they lived out a pretence, unable to be true to themselves.

It still happens, all around the world. If, in most societies, homosexuals largely seem to belong to a middle class or intellectual environment, it is because that is where they tend to be most readily accepted as the individuals that they are. Homosexuals who are poor and live in more socially conservative environments just become used to adopting a heterosexual facade, even entering into loveless
marriages that must often leave both partners unsatisfied and children disturbed at the sense of something missing in their parents' relationship.

I have no view one way or the other about homosexuality being right or wrong: It exists and it doesn't matter to me what consenting adults do in their private lives, providing it causes no harm to others. That is what reason says, regardless of religiously based prohibitions. I do have a definite view on lives being blighted and human happiness denied by the enforcement of codes of behaviour and values that force
many of those they target into living a lie: That is wrong - morally wrong, I believe.

I can only be sceptical of perspectives that, at no cost to those who embrace them, force upon others lives of self-denial and often loneliness, as well as varying degrees of estrangement from family, co-religionists and segments of their communities. While that happens, many people will go on knowing gay men and lesbian women, but not knowing that they do.

John Gee is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

ST: NUS don warns of 377A fallout (Oct 30)

Oct 30, 2007
NUS don warns of 377A fallout‏
By K. C. Vijayan

IF THE police, on a tip-off, raid a flat for suspected drug offenders and discover no drugs but gay sex instead, would they prosecute?

NUS law don Michael Hor says this scenario could arise from the government's stand that it would not be proactive in enforcing S377A.

'Does the non-enforcement policy cover this, for it might be argued that the police were not 'pro-active'?' he wrote in a new book of essays launched on Tuesday.

He cites a similar example in Texas, the United States, where the US Supreme Court had struck down a sodomy statute.

The book, titled ' Lives in the Law ', honours three luminaries in Singapore's legal academia - Mr Peter Ellinger, Ms Koh Kheng Lian and Mrs Tan Sook Yee -who recently retired from full-time appointments at the National University of Singapore's Law Faculty.

Jointly published by Academy Publishing and the NUS, the trio are described as 'Singapore's foremost experts in their specialised fields of study and teaching,'' by Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong in his foreword to the book.

In his essay on the recent changes to the Penal Code, Professor Hor further argues there is also no indication that the policy of not prosecuting under the 377A will not change overnight and without prior notice.

After heated debate in and out of Parliament over changes to the Penal Code last week, Parliament retained 377A which outlaws homosexuality.

The government also indicated then it will not proactively enforce the section.

But Professor Hor notes that it is 'impossible to tell' if the courts are willing to hold the government from prosecuting against this declared policy.

Separately, another NUS law don has called for the courts to review aspects of entrapment in an essay on the issue of consent as interpreted under the Penal Code.

Professor Stanley Yeo plumbed for a practical approach to the issue of consent in cases involving entrapment, citing Professor Koh Kheng Lian, one of the three honorees of the book.

Prof Koh had said the law should be guided by 'what is fair or unfair conduct on the part of the entrapper in his efforts to entrap the defendant.'

Prof Yeo said it would be unfair to prosecute a homosexual, for example, if he was enticed by a police officer posing as a gay, since it was the latter who freely gave his consent to the former's advances.

'Instead of imposing a blanket rule that consent is irrelevant whenever it is secured by entrapment, fairness to the accused requires the courts' to study the facts of a particular case to see if consent had been freely given, he said.