Churches of Singapore, how can I worship with you any longer?
I have to be very honest, and say that the last few days have presented the biggest challenge to my Christian faith.
These days, I find it so increasingly impossible to identify with a group that seeks to use the law — a tool that jails & oppresses — against homosexuals it claims to “love”. First it was FCBC Pastor Lawrence Khong’s FB posts (here & here) calling for homosexual men to be jailed. Then it was Cornerstone Community’s note calling Christians to battle LGBTs. The last straw was National Council of Churches of Singapore calling for homosexual women to be jailed as well.
Since I was young, the church has preached the importance of communal worship to me, but I honestly cannot worship with such people. You know, I respect & would even defend the church’s right to believe that homosexuality is sinful in the eyes of God.
But I cannot support the use of force and violence (Cornerstone Comm church calls Christians to battle against homosexuals). I dread to think that our church might be no different from countries that seek to pass a law that executes homosexuals, if our law had originally called for execution rather than a jail term.
What holds my faith together though, are stories of how Prophets and Jesus himself, stood against the religious leaders & organisations of their day, when they believed the religious organisations sinful. I remind myself that one can still remain in God’s grace and salvation even if one rejects or speaks against the teachings and actions of the earthly institution of God.
And so, yes, after everything, I still believe in God & Jesus Christ.
But the Jesus Christ I love & worship is one who’d rather drink from a Samaritan woman’s jar than the Pharisee’s cup; one who would rather stand with the non-religious Humanists who have unfailingly stood by the persecuted LGBT, than a church who claims to love but seeks to jail homosexual children of God.
15 Responses
Subscribe to comments with RSS.
http://www.facebook.com/notes/lawrence-khong-fcbc/sp-lawrence-khongs-statement-at-esm-goh-chok-tongs-visit-to-tc/504436446267141
Mr Goh, it’s my pleasure to welcome you once again to Faith Community Baptist Church. The last time we met was during the Marine Parade light up.
We are so honoured by your visit again this morning.
I would like to take this opportunity to share with you my heart and the heartbeat of the people in this church, as well as committee pastors of LoveSingapore which is an informal, relational network of some 100 churches with a membership of at least 40,000 Christians.
One, we believe that the building of Singapore is an exciting enterprise.
Two, we feel passionately that Singapore is a place worth fighting for!
Three, we want to create a Singapore we are all proud of.
Sir, we are convinced that there’s no better starting point for this noble endeavor than the Family.
Therefore, we are committed as a church to build strong families in Singapore.
We affirm that the family unit comprises a man as Father, a woman as Mother, and Children. This is the basic building block of society, a value foundational for a secure future, a premise fundamental to nation-building.
We see a looming threat to this basic building block by homosexual activists seeking to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code.
Examples from around the world have shown that the repeal of similar laws have led to negative social changes, especially the breakdown of the family as a basic building block and foundation of the society. It takes away the rights of parents over what their children are taught in schools, especially sex education. It attacks religious freedom and eventually denies free speech to those who, because of their moral convictions, uphold a different view from that championed by increasingly aggressive homosexual activists.
We love our nation. We sincerely pray for and look to the Government to provide moral leadership in preserving this basic building block and foundation of our society. And with that, to robustly protect our constitutional rights to free speech and religious liberty; so as to ensure that social cohesion and religious harmony are maintained in Singapore.
Mr Goh, thank you so much for the great work you have done for Singapore and for this constituency. We will now pray for you, your family, and your continual work among us in this nation.
Lawrence Khong
Senior Pastor, Faith Community Baptist Church
http://www.facebook.com/lawrence.khong.fcbc/posts/506201919423927
My Statement read to ESM Goh Chok Tong on Sunday 13th January, has drawn a lot of interest. Some are glad. Others are mad. I am happy that it got your attention. I will be addressing a number of issues in subsequent posts. But first, I want to focus on the Homosexual Agenda. We must make a clear distinction between a homosexual person and the homosexual agenda.
To anyone out there with homosexual orientations, I want to say: God loves you. The Bible (God’s Word) unequivocally calls me and my fellow Christians to love you unconditionally. While we reject sin, we love and accept the sinner. The Bible tells us clearly that sexual sin includes any form of sexual activity outside of marriage which is instituted by God as a union between one man and one woman (Genesis 2). Sexual sins, therefore, include heterosexual promiscuity, homosexuality, polygamy, paedophilia, beastiality and necrophilia. It was Dr. Merville Vincent of Harvard Medical School who said: “In God’s view, I suspect we are all sexual deviants. I doubt if there is anyone who has not had a lustful thought that deviated from God’s perfect ideal of sexuality.” I can’t agree more.
Hence, as Christians, we should never reject anyone who struggles with sexual sins. With God’s help, we seek to love these and draw them into a relationship with God, so that they can experience His grace and healing, victory and freedom from sexual bondage.
I say to fellow Singaporeans who are part of the homosexual community: I repent of rejecting, alienating, and condemning you because of my own fears or ignorance of or indifference to your struggle. On behalf of the Christian community, I ask you to forgive us for where we have consciously or unconsciously rejected you or condemned you. I commit myself and my church to do our best to come alongside you in your sexual struggle—while not condoning sexual sin, be it yours or mine.
In the last 12 years, I have been involved in a number of theatre shows both as a producer and a performer. I have many homosexual and lesbians in my production team. Not once have I ever discriminated against them. I hire them on the basis of their competence. Their sexual orientation was never a consideration. I have never imposed my moral and religious convictions on them. I have even engaged them for my church productions. I have learned to appreciate them for their talents and their passion for the Arts. A number of them have become my good friends.
Having said all the above with genuine sincerity, please understand that, as concerned citizens of Singapore and as Christians, we are NOT against the homosexual person, but we are unapologetically against the homosexual agenda. And that makes a world of difference.
Please understand that the homosexual agenda is a political movement. It is well-funded internationally. The objective is to restructure societies so that homosexualism becomes mainstream and traditional core values are thrown aside and trampled upon. Homosexuals have a well-thought out plan. It comes in five steps:
1. Decriminalization of homosexual acts or sodomy.
2. Equalization of age of consent for heterosexual sex and homosex.
3. Anti-discrimination laws e.g. pushing for equality in sex education to cover heterosexual sex and homosex
4. Same sex marriage or civil union
5. Homosexual parenthood and adoption rights
Can you see now that the repeal of Section 377A is pivotal to the implementation of the gay agenda? Once repealed, the door opens to everything else. There will be no distinction between heterosex and homosex. This will naturally lead to the equalization of age of consent for both.
The next step is to seek anti-discrimination laws to establish once and for all that homosexuality is normal and natural. It builds on the premise that some are born gay. I do not wish to discuss this now. Suffice it to say, that there is no scientific evidence for being born homosexual.
In effect, anti-discrimination laws will reverse-discriminate against anyone who does not believe in the homosexual agenda. We will be prohibited to voice our moral and religious views on the issue. I am told that at least three churches in Canada were bankrupted by law suits against them because the pastor refused to solemnise homosexual marriages.
Homosexuality will be taught in schools as the accepted norm and parents will have no rights, no say over that. To speak against this would be deemed discriminatory. Future posts on this Facebook page will feature more cases in which freedom of speech and freedom of religion have been denied those who hold different views from that of the LGBT community.
Once anti-discrimination laws are passed, the inevitable next step is the legalization of same-sex marriage. After all, no one can object anymore or else he or she will be found guilty of violating the anti-discrimination laws. All this leads to homosexual parenthood and adoption rights.
There is one more step: the enactment of “hate crimes” legislation! These are laws which make it an offence to say anything against homosexualism. This drives the final nail into the coffin of freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
This is the end game of the homosexual agenda. Some of you may say: “No, this is not going happen to Singapore.” Think again. Many have said that too about their own nation. We have seen this agenda advance step by step in countries around the world. We must not repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code, because when we do that, we open the door of our nation to unbridled destruction. Our core values will be systematically eroded until homosexuality is elevated as king in our land. Subjects of this king will silence all dissenters and make them submit to a new orthodoxy.
I appeal not just to Christians, but to fellow citizens of Singapore regardless of language, race or religion who believe in decency and who value right morals. Let us shut this door that would destroy us as a people.
I appeal to the LGBT community who are not homosexual activists. Rise above your own personal need and do not be party to this insidious conspiracy. Singapore society has given you space to live your lives, earn a living, and contribute to society—without discrimination or harassment. However, we will not let LGBTs set the tone for society. Section 377A draws a high moral line which restrains the forces that seek to normalize what is not right, not good for Singapore. Section 377A must remain.
http://www.cscc.org.sg/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=472&Itemid=0
In the days of the great prophet Elisha, a Syrian General had contracted leprosy and he had heard that there was a God in Israel who could perform miracles. At this time, Israel was at war with the Syrians and so, the whole idea of going to the enemy to ask for a favour was in itself a humbling thing for this General to do. Nevertheless he humbled himself to come and see this great prophet. And the prophet Elisha did not even extend the courtesy of coming out to speak with him. Instead, he sent a servant to tell him to go and dip in the muddy waters of the Jordan River seven times.
The General was mad with rage and rode off, almost missing the greatest miracle in his life because of his pride. But his servants eventually persuaded him that dipping in the Jordan River wasn’t really going to cost him anything, and that he actually stood to gain everything. He humbled himself and went into the waters and dipped himself. On the seventh dip, his leprosy was completely healed and his skin was restored and made new and soft, like that of a baby. He was amazed and returned to the prophet and asked what he wanted and how he could reward him. Really, all the prophet wanted was for Syria to stop harassing Israel. The rationale was very simple – God did this favour for you; now you go and show kindness to Israel. The General rode off but lo and behold, Elisha’s servant Gehazi, a greedy and foolish man, approached Naaman’s entourage and said “my master Elisha has need of some precious stuff”, which the General was more than glad to oblige and give. But when he returned, this was what the prophet said to him, “Did not my heart go with you when the man turned back from his chariot to meet you? Is it time to receive money and to receive clothing, olive groves and vineyards, sheep and oxen, male and female servants?” The leprosy that was on Naaman was then transferred over to Gehazi, who lived and died a leper.
The important question we need to ask is – what period were they all living in? Israel was at war. The threat was existential. But the prophet’s apprentice, Gehazi, had not understood the seriousness of the season. Listen – there is a time to receive clothing; there is a time to receive money and all kinds of nice stuff. But now is not the time. This is a season of spiritual warfare.
Don’t you understand what period the church is living in? God is not against all that receiving and buying and selling. But we need to be aware of the time we are now living in. When we crossed over into 2013, it was as if God sounded a trumpet and all of us must realise the severity of the hour we are living in. We are entering into a time of great conflict and the church must not be ignorant of the dangers that lie at our gates. We must not be oblivious to our responsibilities as an army to push back the powers of darkness. So how is it that at the most critical time in history, the church finds itself so unprepared to face the almost insurmountable challenges before us?
We must sound the trumpet because the church must get herself into battle footing, and be battle-ready. The church will arise victorious. We are more than conquerors in Christ Jesus who loved us. Grace to all of you.
Pastor Yang Tuck Yoong
19 January 2013
Originally it contained this paragraph that was deleted 3 days after the posting:
“”We must sound the trumpet because the church must get herself into battle footing, and be battle-ready. The first salvo was fired by the Senior Pastor of FCBC this week on the LGBT issue and the churches are beginning to mobilise themselves not just for this battle, but for the many battles ahead of us. The LGBT bloc will of course be outraged, but that is to be expected. We must make a stand for righteousness in this nation. This war is winnable and the church will arise victorious. We are more than conquerors in Christ Jesus who loved us. Be ready for a sharp polarising of our society over the gay and lesbian issue and when it happens, you better make sure you know which side you are on. Grace to all of you.” – Pastor Yang Tuck Yoong
http://www.methodistmessage.com/mar2007/penalcode.html
THE National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) is of the view that generally speaking, the proposed amendments to the Penal Code (PC) are relevant, timely, compassionate and appear well thought through.
In presenting this feedback, the NCCS is mindful of the role of governing authorities and the Scriptural injunction to Christians on their attitude towards the higher powers (Romans 13:1).
Additionally, in making these comments, the NCCS is aware anecdotally that there are other individuals or groups in society that intend to give appropriate feedback to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on some of the proposed amendments to the PC from other perspectives (e.g. criminal justice viewpoints) and may proffer analysis of both the underlying policies of the Government and the legal wording.
Therefore, the NCCS confined itself only to the proposed amendments that are likely to be of concern to Christian churches, groups and individuals in Singapore.
In this regard, the NCCS gave three feedback points:
‘(a) the proposed section 298A PC (“Promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion or race, and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony”). An issue that arises for consideration (quite apart from the legal issue of what is the mens rea [i.e. blameworthy state of mind] involved in this intended offence) is what scenarios are envisaged by the Government as constituting: -
(i) words/signs/visible representations that “[promote] disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious … groups or communities” or
(ii) acts that are “prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious … groups or communities … which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity”
The deeper or underlying issue is how these intended PC offences correlate with fundamental rights enshrined in Article 15(1) of the Constitution safeguarding the freedom of religion (i.e. the right to profess, practise and propagate one’s religion). Will a Christian who shares his/her faith to a non-Christian trigger off the commission of a criminal offence under this section? This issue may not be unique to Christians alone. It may also impact on devotees of other “missionary” religions such as Islam.
Other examples come to mind. If a Christian narrates his testimony of conversion in his web log or personal website and makes reference to how he failed to find fulfilment and meaning in his former religion and only found the same in Christ, could that constitute promoting disharmony or feelings of ill-will (even if it does not meet the conceivably higher threshold of promoting enmity or hatred) between different religious groups/communities?
Assuming that we have a situation of a Muslim convert that wishes to be baptised in a local church … could the act of baptism performed by the pastor be prejudicial to the maintenance of religious harmony and likely to disturb the public tranquillity?
In this regard, it is interesting to note that the language in the proposed section 298A PC is similar to section 8(1) of the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (Cap 167A) (“MRHA”). That section allows the Government to make a restraining order against religious leaders where the Minister is satisfied that that person has committed/is attempting to commit acts that cause “feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different religious groups”. As far as we know, no restraining order has been made under the MRHA since that legislation was enacted. However, the present statutory changes envisaged to the PC elevate the commission of such acts to a criminal offence. The danger with this is the possible subjectivity and arbitrariness of the judgment which may be made about which acts transgress the boundaries and which do not. The uncertainty is unsatisfactory.
To remedy the same, one view is that the Government should insert some illustrations and explanatory notes to this statutory provision to clarify what constitutes an offence under this new section and what does not. This approach adheres to the scheme of the PC as originally codified. This will enable the parameters of the criminal offence concerned to be spelt out clearly.
The problem with the approach in the preceding paragraph, however, is that illustrations are not exhaustive. Much will turn on the context and circumstances of the words/acts concerned and an objective analysis of the same. In line with this, the alternative approach to that in the preceding paragraph is therefore to leave it to the courts to be the final arbiters in determining whether a contravention of intended section 298 has taken place or not.
Homosexual
lifestyle:
NCCS
commends
Govt on taking
bold stand
(b) The Explanatory Notes to the Proposed Amendments issued by the MHA state that “The Public Prosecutor is aware that some offenders are of low IQ or mentally deficient. They take this into account in deciding whether or not to charge the offender.” This approach by the Public Prosecutor demonstrates compassion towards low IQ offenders and the NCCS commends the same. The question is whether, given the variety of conditions that exist within the spectrum of mental illness, the statutory general exception for unsoundness of mind (section 84 PC) should be amended substantively to reflect the same. This contrasts with the present approach of leaving the same for prosecutorial discretion.
(c) We are aware that the proposed amendment to delete section 377 PC but on the other hand retaining section 377A PC may be controversial in some quarters. Nevertheless, we consider homosexual acts to be sinful, abhorrent and deviant, whether consensual or not. The NCCS commends the Government on taking a clear, unequivocal and bold stand of neither encouraging nor endorsing a homosexual lifestyle and opposing the presentation of the same as part of a mainstream way of life. At the same time, we do not condemn homosexuals as the Bible calls us to hate the sin but love the sinner. Given that section 377A PC criminalises homosexuality whether done private or publicly, we are of the view that a similar prohibition ought to be enacted in respect of lesbianism, considering that lesbianism (like homosexuality) is also abhorrent and deviant, whether consensual or not.’
http://www.facebook.com/notes/humanist-society-singapore/open-letter-to-minister-k-shanmugam/457925710922509
Mr K Shanmugam
Minister for Foreign Affairs
Minister for Law
21 Jan 2013
Dear Minister K Shanmugam,
The Humanist Society (Singapore) was heartened to hear about your meeting with members of Sayoni, (a Singapore-based community of lesbian, bisexual and transgender women) on 27th November 2012. We support your decision to connect with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) citizens as a constituent part of our society who contribute to our economy, protect our citizens and serve our country.
The Humanist Society (Singapore)(HSS) is a registered society in Singapore for humanists, freethinkers, atheists, agnostics and other like-minded people. Humanism is a non-theistic ethical life stance affirming the human right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethics based on a spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. As part of our objectives, we seek to uphold the importance of maintaining secular space in the interest of social harmony, and we encourage respect for all men and women to be free from discrimination on the basis of race, religion, class, disability, gender, sexual orientation, age, or nationality.
Over the last decade, an increasing body of scientific evidence has demonstrated that sexual orientation is part of the human biological make-up that an individual has no conscious choice over. The legalization of homosexuality and same sex/gender unions in many countries has also demonstrated that homosexual relationships are as healthy and normal as any heterosexual relationship. Consequently, many countries, including ASEAN countries and international bodies like the United Nations, are calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality and the removal of policies discriminatory to LGBT persons. The HSS supports the review and repeal of Section 377a of the Penal Code, as a move that would put Singapore in line with international progress and standards.
We recognize that there are fellow citizens who continue to object to homosexuality based solely on their personal religious beliefs. While we recognize their right to do so, Section 377a criminalizes a significant proportion of gay men whose own religious beliefs do not conflict with homosexuality, or who are non-religious. We would like to highlight that Section 377a also applies to LGBT Humanists and free-thinkers, whose community and beliefs are supportive of their relationships. We applaud our Government’s efforts in maintaining Singapore as a secular state that respects people of all religions. Therefore, we call on the Government to repeal Section 377a. Legislation based on religious beliefs that are not shared by many Singaporeans should not have any place in our secular state. DPM Teo Chee Hean addressed Parliament recently in Oct 2012 that the government accepts the need to keep religion and politics separate in Singapore and the HSS agrees with that principle.
We also wish to highlight that LGBT persons, including children, are often subject to arbitrary discrimination, bullying and harassment, because of personal prejudices and ignorance. We appeal to the Government for greater space to raise awareness of and respect for LGBT persons through public education. The impact of LGBT discrimination is also greatly felt by the friends and family of LGBT persons, who share in their struggle for acceptance. As long as Section 377a exists, those of us who love and support our LGBT family and friends could even be found guilty of abetting their criminal activities.
We have been encouraged by the Government’s strong stance against racial and religious intolerance, whether at an institutional level, or as a result of personal prejudice. We hope that such a stance against intolerance can also be extended to the LGBT community. LGBT persons are only seeking to live their lives without the fear of persecution just as non-LGBT persons do.
In the recent National Day 2012 Message, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong highlighted the need for Singaporeans to work together to build an inclusive society with a heart. In line with PM Lee’s message, we hope that this is the first step to achieving our goal of inclusiveness and non-discrimination.
Mark Kwan
President
Humanist Society (Singapore)
——————————————————–
NOTE: Letter is also published on HSS website: http://www.humanist.org.sg/news/announcements/215-open-letter-to-minister
From Law Minister K Shanmugam’s FB:
http://www.facebook.com/k.shanmugam.page/posts/486564638056738
On 4 January I posted a short record of my meeting with some activists from Sayoni. They advocate greater LBGT rights. Since then I have received emails, from several Singaporeans, who take a different position from that of the LGBT activists. Enclosed are a couple of the emails. One is from a Church group. They have asked to meet me, and I have said that I will meet them. A few others, who take a different position from the LGBT activists, have also asked to meet me. I will meet them as well, just like I met with the activists from Sayoni.
Dear Minister,
1. A recent news report in The Straits Times and on your personal Facebook page caught our attention. It was about a meeting you had with “some activists from Sayoni, a Singapore-based platform for lesbian, bisexual and transsexual Asian women.” This has garnered high-profile publicity for the group. This could be read as high-level endorsement of their agenda. We are deeply concerned. We have been concerned ever since October 2007 when Section 377A of the Penal Code was debated in Parliament.
2. Hence, this letter on behalf of a Team of Senior Pastors representing LoveSingapore. We are an informal relational network of some 100 churches with a membership of at least 40,000 Christians. We love our nation. We share a common passion to be a blessing to Singapore, and to see her flourish and be a positive force of influence in the world from generation to generation.
3. We humbly request a meeting to dialogue with you, Minister. We want to share our views and position.
4. We sincerely respect our Government for her track record of being pro-Family. We recall the assuring words of Prime Minister Lee in Parliament on 23rd October 2007: “Singapore is basically a conservative society. The family is the basic building block of our society. It has been so and, by policy, we have reinforced this and we want to keep it so. And by “family” in Singapore, we mean one man one woman, marrying, having children and bringing up children within that framework of a stable family unit.”
5. Today, we see a looming threat to this basic building block of our conservative society by homosexual activists seeking to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code through a court petition challenging its constitutionality.
6. Thank you for considering our request for a meeting. Please feel free to call me at xxx ….We look forward to hearing from you.
May God bless you.
Lawrence Khong
Senior Pastor, Faith Community Baptist Church
Committee Chairman, LoveSingapore Network of Churches
Dear Mr Shanmugam,
I am writing to you to express my deep concern at an issue that I see will come to affect Singapore in a very negative way – that is, the repeal of 377a. The government has been encouraging Singaporeans to voice out and share their viewpoints and I highly respect leadership who is sincere in wanting to listen to the people’s heart. Hence, I wish to voice out my stand that I strongly disapprove of repealing this law and I hope that you would hear me out, and also express my concerns to the relevant parties in affecting change. As the Minister of Law, I hope that you will be able to guard what is healthy and good for Singapore in terms of our laws.
I do not believe in repealing 377a because I think that it will bring a shift in the value system in Singapore. Singapore is still by and large a conservative nation and I see this very positively! We have strong beliefs in a healthy and wholesome family. I see this in the government’s support and efforts to promote growing families, for healthy parenting, for children and parents to have better bonds e.g. Dad’s for life activities which help fathers to be more involved in their children’s lives. All these in totality demonstrate to me that the government wants Singaporeans to highly value the family unit, and in particular, a family that is headed by a father and a mother. I know that the government has not always made decisions that everyone supported or viewed as good, but I continue to support because the government has shown that they want to continue to promote healthy values that would allow our society and the next generation to grow up in a wholesome and healthy way.
Making the change to the law does affect the lives of the group that is lobbying for it, but they are not the majority. It may make their lives more convenient and pleasant, but at what cost to our society? I’m not saying that the minority are not important citizens, but decisions that affect society cannot be based upon what pleases or displeases them, but rather what is truly beneficial for our nation, because these laws reflect what our society will live by (adhere and be instructed by) and live towards (values that we aspire towards) as a standard and as a value.
By allowing this law to change, the government is being incongruent with its longstanding message about supporting healthy families, and is inconsistent with its communication to Singaporeans about wanting us to grow our families, what with the low birth rate and all. It will communicate that the government is expressing approval about the homosexual lifestyle and accepting it as a healthy alternative to the currently defined healthy family unit (father, mother, children). The nation is made up of families. Therefore, the state of families will define the state of the nation and how the nation will progress (or regress) because in these family units contain the next generation. I believe that the government should only endorse what would strengthen the traditional family unity (father, mother, children) and really support each member (father and mother) to be strong in parenting and values, so that they will raise children who will continue to be the backbone of this country. The change of this law will eventually attack and break down this family unit as I had defined.
The argument for allowing it so that different people may express freely who they are, is at best an emotional argument. We have many different laws to keep people from freely expressing in a way that is harmful to themselves and others. Take for example, we have laws against people from engaging in sex with those below 16 of age for good reason, and these laws should not be taken away simply because some say that it is simply an expression of their love for each other. If the argument of human rights holds for all cases to allow everything a person desires, then these laws should also be changed! And a homosexual lifestyle, objectively, does put one at a significantly higher risk for sexually transmitted diseases. My thoughts are that just because something is an expression of personal desire for an individual does not mean that it is necessarily beneficial and should be allowed or approved of.
The argument that it is alright because it is a personal choice and therefore not a concern of others is also not particularly logical as well. There are many many examples where the law encroaches upon the “personal freedom” of an individual, like for example, it is unlawful to attempt/commit suicide. It is illegal to take and possess drugs even if one claims that it is for personal use and not for selling.
Laws of a nation may not please everyone in that nation, but that is not its purpose. It is to reflect the collective moral standard of the nation and to set a certain standard that as citizens, we want to live by and live up to. It governs the way citizens are to engage in right living, even though not every person agrees with that particular way. Those who want to attempt suicide, want to legally pursue sexual activity with minors or use drugs certainly would not feel that the law is fair to them and that they don’t have the personal freedom that they wish to have, but the law is here for good purpose. People are always inclined to define what’s best and right by their own desires, but the law should remain true to a high moral standard and define what is best and right for the society as a whole in moving forward.
The law will inevitably restraint some for the greater good as it causes people to act or don’t act in a way that reflects the values of the nation. People openly litter in many other nations and enjoy their freedom in doing so without much penalty, but it is the strong anti-littering laws of this nation that allow us (and me) to enjoy my freedom of a clean country. By the strong anti-littering laws, I know that Singapore is a place that values personal ownership of the country’s well-being and of course, cleanliness.
I am not against homosexuals as people. I know friends and also family who engage in that lifestyle and I love and appreciate them as individuals. I have also seen how their families break up over their lifestyle and over the kind of values that come from this lifestyle. I also know people who are not homosexuals who have engaged in lifestyles who are unlawful (e.g. drug taking). In the same way that I do not approve of the unlawful (and unhealthy) lifestyle of those who are not homosexuals, so do I not approve of the homosexual activities of homosexuals as in 377a. But nonetheless, I will not appreciate them as individuals any less compared to any other person.
Ministry Heng Swee Keat said, “We are at a critical junction in Singapore’s development – the challenges today and those in the future are real and will affect how Singapore grows as a nation. How can we, as a country realise our vision of Singapore as a ‘Home with Hope and Heart’?”
The challenges are real and I know there is a pressure to follow after the patterns of other nations that have changed this law. However, these nations have been affected negatively as a result, and changing this law in Singapore at this juncture will affect Singapore’s growth negatively as a nation. I want to realize the vision of Singapore as a Home with Hope and Heart and I believe that it starts off by strengthening the wholesome growth of the family unit and safeguarding that by not allowing anything else to threaten or break it.
My group and family would love to meet with you if you are open to talk more on this.
Thank you for reading my letter. I hope that you can help to express my concerns and make my voice heard.
Yours Sincerely,
xxxx
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/14/iran-gay-men-executed-hanging_n_1515207.html
Four Iranian gay men are due to be executed for sodomy under their nation’s Shari’a laws, Pink News is reporting.
The four men — identified by the Human Rights Activist News Agency in Iran as Saadat Arefi, Vahid Akbari, Javid Akbari and Houshmand Akbari — are set to be hanged after their guilty verdict was approved recently by high court judges.
“I am horrified and saddened to have heard the news about these four men,” London-based Iranian human rights lawyer Mehri Jafari is quoted by Pink News and LGBTQ Nation as saying. “Not only with regards to the execution which is about to take place, but the fact that is beyond our control.”
The news comes just two days ahead of the release of a new report on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in Iran, which will highlight the problems they face in their own country and when they flee into exile, according to Gay Star News.
“If I said I saw myself as being part of this society, I’d be telling the biggest lie of my life,” one contributor is quoted in the report as saying. “That’s because of my homosexuality and the Iranian people’s mentality about homosexuality. I usually refer to Iran as ‘your country’ instead of ‘my country’ or ‘our country.’”
The contributor, identified only as a 26-year-old gay man from Bandar Anzali, a harbor city on the Caspian sea, added, “Words can’t describe how important the Internet is for me…Because I live in a really small city, where the homosexual community is very secretive. The only way for me is the Internet.”
The new survey, “LGBT Republic of Iran: An Online Reality?,” can be viewed here.
In April, The Guardian reported that Ayatollah Abdollah Javadi-Amoli, an influential cleric and an Islamic scholar based in Iran’s holy city of Qom, referred to homosexuals as inferior to dogs and pigs in a speech.
“If a society commits a new sin, it will face a new punishment,” Javadi-Amoli said, according to The Guardian’s translation of a report by the Iranian news website Khabaronline. “Problems like AIDS did not exist before.”
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+23&version=NIV
Matthew 23
New International Version (NIV)
A Warning Against Hypocrisy
23 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4 They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
5 “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries[a] wide and the tassels on their garments long; 6 they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; 7 they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.
8 “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. 10 Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. 11 The greatest among you will be your servant. 12 For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.
Seven Woes on the Teachers of the Law and the Pharisees
13 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. [14] [b]
15 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.
16 “Woe to you, blind guides! You say, ‘If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but anyone who swears by the gold of the temple is bound by that oath.’ 17 You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred? 18 You also say, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but anyone who swears by the gift on the altar is bound by that oath.’ 19 You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 Therefore, anyone who swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. 21 And anyone who swears by the temple swears by it and by the one who dwells in it. 22 And anyone who swears by heaven swears by God’s throne and by the one who sits on it.
23 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. 24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.
25 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.
27 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. 28 In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.
29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. 30 And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!
33 “You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? 34 Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. 35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 Truly I tell you, all this will come on this generation.
37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 38 Look, your house is left to you desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’[c]”
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+4&version=NIV
John 4
New International Version (NIV)
Jesus Talks With a Samaritan Woman
4 Now Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that he was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John— 2 although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples. 3 So he left Judea and went back once more to Galilee.
4 Now he had to go through Samaria. 5 So he came to a town in Samaria called Sychar, near the plot of ground Jacob had given to his son Joseph. 6 Jacob’s well was there, and Jesus, tired as he was from the journey, sat down by the well. It was about noon.
7 When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, “Will you give me a drink?” 8 (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.)
9 The Samaritan woman said to him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?” (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.[a])
10 Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”
11 “Sir,” the woman said, “you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? 12 Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his livestock?”
13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”
15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water so that I won’t get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water.”
16 He told her, “Go, call your husband and come back.”
17 “I have no husband,” she replied.
Jesus said to her, “You are right when you say you have no husband. 18 The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true.”
19 “Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. 20 Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”
21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”
25 The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”
26 Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”
The Disciples Rejoin Jesus
27 Just then his disciples returned and were surprised to find him talking with a woman. But no one asked, “What do you want?” or “Why are you talking with her?”
28 Then, leaving her water jar, the woman went back to the town and said to the people, 29 “Come, see a man who told me everything I ever did. Could this be the Messiah?” 30 They came out of the town and made their way toward him.
31 Meanwhile his disciples urged him, “Rabbi, eat something.”
32 But he said to them, “I have food to eat that you know nothing about.”
33 Then his disciples said to each other, “Could someone have brought him food?”
34 “My food,” said Jesus, “is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work. 35 Don’t you have a saying, ‘It’s still four months until harvest’? I tell you, open your eyes and look at the fields! They are ripe for harvest. 36 Even now the one who reaps draws a wage and harvests a crop for eternal life, so that the sower and the reaper may be glad together. 37 Thus the saying ‘One sows and another reaps’ is true. 38 I sent you to reap what you have not worked for. Others have done the hard work, and you have reaped the benefits of their labor.”
Many Samaritans Believe
39 Many of the Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, “He told me everything I ever did.” 40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they urged him to stay with them, and he stayed two days. 41 And because of his words many more became believers.
42 They said to the woman, “We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Savior of the world.”
Jesus Heals an Official’s Son
43 After the two days he left for Galilee. 44 (Now Jesus himself had pointed out that a prophet has no honor in his own country.) 45 When he arrived in Galilee, the Galileans welcomed him. They had seen all that he had done in Jerusalem at the Passover Festival, for they also had been there.
46 Once more he visited Cana in Galilee, where he had turned the water into wine. And there was a certain royal official whose son lay sick at Capernaum. 47 When this man heard that Jesus had arrived in Galilee from Judea, he went to him and begged him to come and heal his son, who was close to death.
48 “Unless you people see signs and wonders,” Jesus told him, “you will never believe.”
49 The royal official said, “Sir, come down before my child dies.”
50 “Go,” Jesus replied, “your son will live.”
The man took Jesus at his word and departed. 51 While he was still on the way, his servants met him with the news that his boy was living. 52 When he inquired as to the time when his son got better, they said to him, “Yesterday, at one in the afternoon, the fever left him.”
53 Then the father realized that this was the exact time at which Jesus had said to him, “Your son will live.” So he and his whole household believed.
54 This was the second sign Jesus performed after coming from Judea to Galilee.
=========================================
Background: In the society Jesus lived in, Samaritans were a racial group of people who worshiped the God of the Jews, but whom the Jews looked down on, because their practices differed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritans
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+10%3A25-37&version=NIV
Luke 10:25-37
New International Version (NIV)
The Parable of the Good Samaritan
25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b]”
28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’
36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
=========================================
Background: In the society Jesus lived in, Samaritans were a racial group of people who worshiped the God of the Jews, but whom the Jews looked down on, because their practices differed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritans
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/pastors-plea-retain-section-377a-sparks-online-furore
Pastor’s plea to retain Section 377A sparks online furore
(Todayonline 18Jan)
In the presence of ESM Goh,church leader Khong urges Govt not to repeal law that criminalises sex between men
SINGAPORE — A plea by a church pastor — made during morning service last Sunday — to Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong against the repeal of Section 377A of the Penal Code, which criminalises sex between men, has drawn strong reactions from the online community.
Mr Goh happened to pass by the Faith Community Baptist Church (FCBC) during his regular walkabout in his Marine Parade constituency and was invited by the church leaders to meet the congregation.
While Mr Goh was on the stage in the church’s auditorium, FCBC senior pastor Lawrence Khong (picture) read from a prepared statement. Among other things, he called the effort to repeal Section 377A “a looming threat” to the family unit, which he defined as “a man as father, a woman as mother, and children”.
“We see a looming threat to this basic building block by homosexual activists seeking to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code,” said Mr Khong, who also urged the Government to “provide moral leadership in preserving this basic building block and foundation of our society”.
In response, Mr Goh made a general remark that people are free to stand by their beliefs: “You stand by your belief, and you’ll be fine.”
The church, which has a congregation of 10,000, has posted Mr Khong’s full statement, accompanied by photographs of Mr Goh at the church, on its website and on Mr Khong’s Facebook page.
The statement has been reposted on several online forums and websites, sparking anger among the gay community and its supporters.
Yesterday, Reverend Miak Siew, executive pastor of Singapore’s Free Community Church and member of gay advocacy group People Like Us, questioned on Fridae.asia the timing of the statement, noting that two constitutional challenges against Section 377A will be heard in the High Court.
One was filed last November by two men who have been partners for 15 years, saying the law entrenches “stigma and discrimination against lesbian, gay, transgender and bisexual people in society”. The other follows a successful appeal by Tan Eng Hong, who was arrested for having oral sex with another man at a public toilet in CityLink Mall in March 2010, and had applied to have 377A of the Penal Code declared unconstitutional for violating his right to personal liberty, among other things.
Mr Miak also wrote an open letter on his Facebook page to Mr Khong: “The repeal of 377A poses no threat to families bound together by love. It is the continued stigmatisation of LGBT people that you are perpetuating that is a threat to families — because you have placed obstacles in how parents understand their children who are different, and create huge rifts in these families.”
Other netizens defended Mr Khong, saying he was entitled to his beliefs.
http://www.todayonline.com/voices/pastor-shouldnt-impose-views-secular-nation
Pastor shouldn’t impose views on secular nation
FROM
TAN WEE CHENG (21 Jan 2013)
I refer to the report “Pastor’s plea to retain Section 377A sparks online furore” (Jan 18).
Traditional Asian family values emphasise love and empathy. Therefore, I am surprised that Pastor Lawrence Khong had described his campaign against the repeal of Section 377A as one motivated by his support for family values.
According to the United Nations, at least 76 countries have laws that criminalise same-sex relations. Most of these are in the Middle East and Africa.
Most Asian countries, including China, Taiwan, Korea, Japan, Thailand, Philippines and Indonesia, do not criminalise gay communities.
Mr Khong has every right to preach his belief to his church, but he should not seek to impose his views on our secular nation and, in the process, create hardship for a community which, according to many studies, comprise 5 per cent or more of any population.
I encourage him and his followers to channel their efforts towards more pressing existential issues such as global warming, poverty, disease, illiteracy and military conflicts.
Christ has brought the kingdom of
God nearer to earth; but he has been misunderstood; and in place of
God’s kingdom the kingdom of the priest has been established among
us.
Desmond Tutu in a BBC interview has said the church is misplaced to spend so much time arguing over sexual issues instead of helping the poor and dying. I agree with him.
http://theelders.org/article/africa-step-backward-human-rights
I can’t quite get hold of the BBC interview but he said the Church has gotten its priorities wrong. And so it is.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7602498.stm
Got it. This is what he said…We must ponder well on it.