Tribute to Alex Au & his ’05 talk at AWARE’s HIV forum
I wrote the letter below to Alex Au, in response to his latest article (24th Apr). It is a tribute to him, because THAT talk, was one of the major reasons why I am AWARE’s CSE trainer today, and the biggest influencer on the message I bring out to the girls. Please read.
(Background:
Alex Au’s article:
”Pirate mother ship appears on horizon, guns blazing” ( http://yawningbread.org/arch_2009/yax-1011.htm ), in particular the part in the pink box which goes
“Among the “proofs” the new exco put to the media that AWARE had adopted a mission to promote homosexuality, was this:
When Aware wanted to conduct health education courses, it invited Alex Au, ‘a famous homosexual activist’, to talk about HIV.– Straits Times, 24 April 2009 ( http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/BgSty_367873_1.html ),
.
20 August 2005 talk at the forum on HIV and women titled “Playing it Safe – Keeping HIV at Bay”
Title [of the talk]: Relearning the alphabet: A is for Abstinence, B is for Be faithful and C is for Condoms. It’s a message that covers all bases, and yet may not work. Why? Alex Au argues that to understand HIV, we have first to understand people. The essay When sex, condoms and HIV remain unspeakable ( http://yawningbread.org/arch_2005/yax-475.htm ) refers to this talk I gave.)
Hi Alex,
Thought I’ll let you know that it was YOUR particular talk back in 05 at that HIV forum, that made me realise how the “ABC” message was not enough, and could even be dangerous at times.
I was that member of the audience who related her friend’s story you mention here http://yawningbread.org/arch_2005/yax-475.htm . (She’s now married and pregnant with the same guy by the way = ) )
Your message at that particular forum was one of the major factors why I decided to sign up with AWARE’s HIV subcom, on that particular day. That was the first step I took to the journey that led me to being AWARE’s Comprehensive Sex Ed trainer that I am today.
Funny how things come around eh?
The other factors that contributed to my decision that day : The appalling state of Singaporean womens’ knowledge ( eg. the nurses at the polyclinic!) , the abortion statistics and HIV statistics — There was just that obvious need for something to be done!
And the final factor that contributed to my decision — my Christian belief that meeting people’s needs were part of social justice, and that it was a worthy cause to work towards.
It’s such an irony that today, my work with AWARE and CSE is coming under fire by Christians. It’s even more ironic, because the Christian verses that inspired me to join AWARE’s HIV-subcom and later to do CSE, are the very same ones Thio, Josie et al. are hiding behind.
They wave Sodom and Gomorrah, but
“Sodom’s sin were pride, laziness, and gluttony, while the poor and needy suffered outside her door. She was proud and did loathsome things, so I wiped her out, as you have seen (Ezekiel 16 : 49-50)”
And in the same Proverbs 31 where the supposed perfect biblical woman is described,
“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rghts of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy”
I believed that society was doing STI/HIV patients, single mothers, women who had abortions (more than 10,000 each year in Singapore alone!) such a great injustice by not equipping them with the info they needed to help themselves, and then by further unjustly victimising them with unfair laws and policies. These “poor and needy” were the product of social injustice, and I wanted to be part of the solution, not the problem.
I think your talk that day showed me the message I needed to bring across, and AWARE showed me the platfrom from which I could speak.
Thio was absolutely right — Having the ‘famous homosexual activist’ Alex Au speak at AWARE’s event clearly did influence young girls present. But you know what? I think that is something that both you and AWARE can be really really proud of.
9 Responses
Subscribe to comments with RSS.
[...] the rest here: Tribute to Alex Au & his ‘05 talk at AWARE’s HIV forum Share and [...]
Hi Mathia,
No, I don’t believe in infiltrating an organization.
I am a Christian who base my worldview according to the Bible. I believe in every part of it and try to follow its teaching as much as I can. Yes, I am a Christian Fundamentalist as popularized by the media recently
Your quote on Ezekiel was only a part of why Sodom and Gomorrah was judged. To see the bigger picture, we should always go back to the source in Genesis 19:4-9.
4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
(The men of Sodom surrounded Lot’s house)
5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
(These men wanted to “know” the visitors. In this case, we understand “know” means to have sexual relations with. Another example will be 1 Samuel 1:19 where Elkanah “knew” Hannah, his wife. These men did not merely wanted to make friends)
6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,
7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.
(Lot beseeched the men not to commit such wickedness. Homosexuality is considered wicked, just like lying, cheating, etc.)
8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
(Lot was willing to even offer these men his virgin daughters which tells us how morally corrupted he had become)
9 And they said, Stand back. And they said again , This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door.
(These men were not interested in the daughters, they wanted the visitors)
Homosexuality is one of the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah. Ezekiel explains to us that other than homosexuality, there are other sins which was committed. And finally if we read Jude 1:7,
“Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”
Now the picture is complete. The cities were immoral. They fornicate, went after “strange flesh”, pride, laziness, gluttony and thus the cities were destroyed. The main focus of Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible was to point to us how God detest the sin of homosexuality. There are other passages in the Bible which elaborates on that.
I’m saying these as loving as I can. The recent spotlight on AWARE has made Christians out to be homophobic which is untrue. If we were to read what the Bible say, we are all sinners and are no better than each other. We all sinned in Adam. My purpose in writing this comment is not to debate you. Just to give you a complete picture on what the Bible said.
Hi pilgrim
i think what you just mentioned is a classic example of how Biblical interpretation is highly subject to the interpreter’s bias. I don’t even need to question the errancy of the bible —- the interpretation and understanding is just variable enough. How so?
i believe the passage you qouted is rape, and would be rape by any standards in any era. Rape, whether or not they were asking for men and women.
Imagine, you check into a hotel in a foreign city, and a mob forms outside, asking the hotel manager to hand you over to them so that they can have sex with you — what’s that!??!?! does it matter if it was homosexual or heterosexual sex? do you think that your hotel manager at that point would be pleading against the wickedness of rape or homosexuality?
Lot offered his daughters because he underrstood the madness of the crowd and the importance of his visitors — it was sacrifice. Its like the hotel manager offering his daughters because his guest who is in danger of mob-rape is the Pope or Mother Theresa or the Dalai Lama.
When you interpret “strange flesh” as a term refering to homosexuality, you are already imposing your cultural bias and prejudice into your intepretation. I could easily interpret “strange flesh” as the need to go for new partners all the time, or indulge in practices such as necrophilia or bestiality.
Hi Mathia,
its interesting how different people can come to different conclusions reading the same thing isn’t it? I agree with you that it is about rape. The men of Sodom wanted to rape the visitors who were men. They were not interested in Lot’s daughters because they wanted to rape the men as seen in verse 5.
Yes “strange flesh” when interpreted alone can refer to bestiality and etc but we need to read this in context. What was the verse talking about? It was about men in Sodom who wanted to rape the male visitors in Lot’s house. Therefore when placed in context, it refers to homosexuality.
“They were not interested in Lot’s daughters because they wanted to rape the men as seen in verse 5.”
1. you reason for them not being interested in Lot’s daughters was that they were interested in men — that gender was the main motivation . that’s only an assumption on your part. other possibilities could be that they wanted to bully the foreigners etc . I’m not saying i’m right and you’re wrong; i’m saying its vague enough that what we read from it is very subjective to our own assumptions
2. Even if your reason was spot on, the crime was in rape, not necessarily in the homosexuality
“Therefore when placed in context, it refers to homosexuality.”
the “context” is already subject to your cultural bias and assumptions — any subequent interpretations based on that “context” would be equally dependant on the validity of imposing your cultural bias and assumptions into the interpretation of that passage.
Romans 1:18-32
18 ¶ For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man — and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
24 ¶ Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 ¶ For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 ¶ And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
erm, your point being?
Oh and by the way, if ABC says ” XYZ is not a very beautiful person, but I love XYZ very much, with all my heart” , it would be completely cruel and irresponsible to convey only half the message “ABC said XYZ is not a very beautiful person” to XYZ, without mentioning the other half.
Likewise with Romans. Romans was writen as a continuous letter, we have to always remember that, and the chapter/verse markings were added centuries later for convenience of referencing.
So you can’t just stop reading at Romans 1:31, ever, because that’s only half the message.
You must read the ENTIRE letter.
I’m just putting up exerpts here.
Following Romans 1:31:
Romans 2: 1 onwards:
1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness leads you toward repentance.
I think the point here is that NO PERSON should ever be passing judgement on another person, regarding the things spelt out in Romans 1. The main message of Romans 1 is that, in God’s view, EVERY SINGLE PERSON that has ever lived has been guilty of a sin on THAT magnitude. That EVERY SIN, is EQUALLY big or small, and so no person has the right to judge.
And the reason why Romans 1 has to establish that, is so that in the later part of Romans, it makes sense why EVERYONE needs God’s Grace.
Because in the early days of the church, there were many people who saw themselves as morally superior to others, because they didn’t see themselves as sexually immoral and or murders, or gay etc etc. And so some of these “self-righteous” people were furious when the apostles suggested they too needed to repent. Other people who saw themselves as “self-righteous” also thought that those were were “too evil” were not worthy of forgiveness and acceptance into the church. Romans 1 seeks to debunk these 2 views.
—————
I hope that Christians take the time to read the WHOLE of Romans before using the bible as a weapon to hurt and condemn others.
I also hope that non-Christians recognise the bible sometimes comes across as being very unreasonable, only because it has been misqouted and misused by people.
Further Romans references:
Romans 3
9What shall we conclude then? Are we any better[b]? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. 10As it is written:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”
19Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.
21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,[i] through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
Romans 5
20The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, 21so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
===========================================
If non-Chrisitians use this to accuse Christians of being “arrogant and unreasonable” of saying that everyone is sinful and salvation only is given to those who believe in JC, I think this is a justified accusation, because seriously, this is THE defination of being a Christian! The accusation is as meaningless as accusing a vegetarian of not eating meat!
But for Christians to use Romans to justify the way they condemn others, especially non- Christians, I think they are doing the very thing that Romans is preaching AGAINST.
Of course, don’t just believe my selective qouting. Go read it for yourself if you’re interested. Plenty of online bibles, just google