A Word About Intolerant Christian Views

Much has been written, blogged and printed about a certain evangelical church pastor’s publicly-aired views about Buddists and Taoists. I believe one of the words the Straits-jacketed Times used to describe his ill-fated sermon was “insensitive”.

Singapore

Home > Breaking News > Singapore > Story

Feb 9, 2010

Insensitive comments made

Pastor called up by ISD

Leader of independent church apologises to Buddhists and Taoists

I read, goggled-eyed about the ISD (Singapore’s Gestapo) swooping in on Pastor Rony Tan when word got out (he had posted the video of his own remarks online) and the blogosphere almost overheated from the angry backlash. The result: a seemingly contrite apology made on his website, retracting his clearly bigoted remarks and a trotting out of a dozen or so “statements” from members of the various religious denominations here as well as university sociologists giving their take on the fracas.

A few observations to note:

1) People can very defensive about their (and other people’s) religious views. Not only were Buddhists and Taoists incensed by the pastor’s incendiary remarks, people belonging to other faiths or not espousing any faith were quick to denounce the guy. I believe someone termed this spate of events "vigilantism" by the cyber community in today's review.

2) Most people interviewed by the press expressed positive views about the ISD's swift action. In fact many others think the errant Pastor should have been arrested for sedition and that he got off too lightly, with nary a rap on his knuckles.

Personally, I find the above fascinating and troubling. First, it is not at all surprising to me that jokers like Rony Tan said what he had said. After all, a key foundation of the Church's Old Testament tenets had always been the running down of other religions, which it deemed in direct competition and conflict to it. Modern day Protestant denominations and even the Catholic Church has become less Nazi about it, seeing that it is unfashionable to embark on such ideological crusades. However, leaders of the highly evangelical new religions like the charismatic Christian churches, in a bid (my opinion) to gain and retain its super-base of followers, have been known to regularly speak rubbish without a brain-filter. The problem is, this is the first time (aside from the controversial AWARE women's coup incited by another conservative church pastor) such content has been made publicly available and circulated online.

Therefore, the shit hit the fan, but the shit has always been circulating amidst our "peaceful" multi-religious and multicultural society. It is fascinating that the community swooped down with such force and vehemence, to the point that the ISD (and government) were compelled to publicly call for calm and to take Rony Tan to task. I am relieved and extremely heartened that we have a civil society after all, even if its presence is felt mostly online. The cyber community proved that it was able to gather like nebulous storm clouds to form a real typhoon of anger.

But this seeming unity brings me to my second point -- the visceral reaction to Rony Tan's comic act. Now I will be the first person to run this kind of behaviour down, it is not just disrespectful, it is downright dangerous. I've always maintained that the Christian fundies are as big a danger to society as Osama's terrorists. The fact that Rony Tan had made these remarks in public without compunction already speaks to his fundamental beliefs - he SINCERELY despises those who are not of his ilk, and he PASSIONATELY believes he is right and that he has the right to say so.

But back to the overwhelming reactions from civil society: I find it disturbing that people simply applauded the government's reaction and even expressed approval that such intervention is good. I am not disagreeing. But I am saying that by the time the ISD gets involved, it's really damage-control more than anything else. The harm has been done, the poison has spread.

Nobody has asked this question: have OB markers on religious debate partly caused this fiasco?

For the past 40 years, we have not been allowed to speak of race, in order to preserve "racial harmony". And yet we have racists among us, being arrested by the police.

We have not been allowed to speak of religion, in order to preserve "religious harmony". And yet we have bigots among us, regularly popping up in the news, in the NUS Law Faculty and Parliament, in public harassing young students in an attempt to evangelise. And now Rony Tan.

The Government has gone to great measures to make people fear the repercussions of BEHAVING in an openly racist or bigoted manner. But it has done very little do stem the poison and rot of THINKING in racist and bigoted manners. I am sure the ISD has moles in City Harvest Church, New Creation, and the other mega churches. But the only way for a society to grow, to understand the many viewpoints out there (be they intolerant and offensive or not) is to have open and candid debate. In this regard, the Government still suffers from the Stupid Population Paranoia -- that Singaporeans are incapable of controlling themselves in an open debate and any talk of race or religion would end up in a bloody riot.

Rony Tan was caught with his pants down due to his own narcissistic hubris. The others like him -- Pastor Prince of FCBC, Kong Hee of City Harvest -- are simply smart enough to do their ranting within the safety of their church walls, away from public scrutiny.

The OB markers and the blanket ban on religious debate and exchange has benefitted the Christian Fundamentalists tremendously - they have been driven "underground" so to speak. Because there is no public arena or platform to share and exchange views, religious content is very much restricted to the confines of the churches. In a way, this has remained a "private" domain because the same people get together to talk about the same views they all share. This is dangerous and disturbing because they hear no alternative views, and have no exposure to other faiths, they rely and believe what they hear in their groups. Those with a critical mind will question and debate views they find questionable, but these individuals will soon find themselves cast out of the flock. This is how the poison of religious bigotry thrives in small, closed groups, and how small closed groups perpetuate religious bigotry.

If we simply leave it to the police and the ISD to identify thought-terrorists like Rony Tan, and then take them to task the next time they behave like asses, we as a population will always be guilty of being the dependant children that the Government treats us as. The Government cannot and must not be the final arbiter of "proper" conduct as a religious leader. We allow it to be because we have surrendered free speech. We must seek a more open and engaging society where ALL views -- be they on religion, race, sexuality -- can be aired in a responsible manner.

If not, the religious zealots and fundies will continue to run their shady shows in the closed confines of their church walls, with nobody to challenge their intolerant attitudes or the seditiousness of their teachings because now, nobody is going to be stupid enough to post their rants online and wait to be caught.

Daniel Surprises Me

Like everything else in life, being nice to a girl by buying her a perishable horticultural product is important and should be done in moderation. Too often and it becomes banal, too predictably on birthdays and Valentines' and it becomes a cliche; but done on the sly, after many months of skilful contempt of flower-sending, and you've got a well-timed surprise.

Of course, the note matters - you don't want to sound sappy or stilted.
In this regard, I have trained Daniel well.

Traditional Chinese Medicine

I got sick 2 weeks ago, the same old virus that attacked my gut (made me puke) and gave me flu-like symptoms (cough, cold, sore throat). No fever. I went to the Western doctor (aka GP) to get medication to stop my nausea, vomiting and what-not. It worked as long as eradicating my symptoms went....but a week later, my dry scratchy cough was still bothering me. So I went to the Chinese sinseh (traditional chinese medicine practitioner). The first time, I took the bottled medicine (pre-cooked) which brought ALL the worst symptoms back - day one was my nose dripping non-stop; day two my whole body started to ache; day three i started coughing non-stop, the phlegm that was congealed in my lungs started coming unglued. Completely disgusting.

Second visit to sinseh led me to the home-cooked prescription. I was to boil the entire prescription and drink it religiously. The medicine consists of a ton of leaves, roots, seeds and things I cannot even recognise much less spell. I soaked this for half an hour in water and brought it to a boil. After simmering for 15 minutes, I strained the liquid from the gunk.

Absolutely disgusting and smells as bad as it looks.

But $58 and 4 days of drinking this later, I am glad to say I feel a lot better. All symptoms gone except the putrid phlegm trying to make its way out of me.

The proud and prejudiced should not give counsel

The Great Leader is opposed to increasing the available HDB rental flats to cater to needy Singaporeans because it would “create a dependency group’– “those constantly dependent on the Government and on subsidies” (ST, 28 January 2010, page A6).

To him, this “dependency group” appears to be young Singaporeans who “believe (they) can be a great entrepreneur” so they should “go and rent a flat from somebody” or use their flat as collateral to get a bank loan*.

*Straits Times noted in the same article that HDB clarified that you can’t use your HDB flat as collateral, duh. Some important take-aways from this excerpt:

1) By referring solely to Singaporeans in need of start-up capital (and thereby being unable and/or unwilling to take on a hefty housing mortgage in order to OWN a HDB flat), is the Great Leader implying that there is no other group that has difficulty finding housing?

2) If he is, what would we call these groups of people:

a) Singaporeans who have limited employability because of sickness, disability or lack of education and hence cannot afford mortgages and must rent?

b) elderly Singaporeans who fall into category 2a who either cannot depend on their children to house them or have none to speak of?

c) single parent families comprised of a non-working mother who was abandoned by her husband or divorced and cannot depend on alimony because the ex-husband cannot or refuses to pay child support?

d) single parent families who fall under category 2c who cannot depend on their relatives for shelter?

e) Families (either with or without children) who come under the poverty line, who have lost their homes due to reasons that the Rich and Middle Class have never experienced simply because they will never lose their homes to these reasons**?

(** Fine, if you must be nitpicky, then try cancer treatment or hospitalisation costs from sudden illness or accidents, or family members with bad habits like gambling, unwise investments and expensive tastes in cars who have depleted your life savings. I jest about the cars of course, but my point is, when these unfortunate disasters strike a family, the Rich and Middle Class are quite buffered from immediate poverty because they have resources like savings, insurance, trust funds. It is the poor, working classes that find themselves in sudden and immanent penury.)

3) Coming back to the “dependency groups” that Great Leader seems to have no inkling of, are we then to assume that the people I listed in categories 2a to 2e are not worthy of Government assistance? These are the very people who are receiving welfare and aid from non-government organisations as well as the Government itself. I am stunned that the first image that Great Leader associates with building more HDB rental flats is that of a 30-something year old idealist with irresponsible dreams of being his own boss.

4) Finally, what does Great Leader and the Ruling Party regard a HDB flat as? Is basic shelter from rain and shine a fundamental human right, or is it an “asset that increases in value” bestowed on the people (at S$30K less the current market rate) through a government strategy of nation-building?

I am highly disturbed by the rising number of families and singles of all age groups living under the poverty line (in Singapore, you cannot qualify for financial assistance if you earn more than S$1500 a month).

I am even more disturbed by the fact that we do not even talk about a poverty line when people cope with rising living costs on ever shrinking or stagnant salaries with each passing day.

Don’t you think it is unconscionable to deny the existence of the socially underprivileged and destitute?

If I were a single mother raising two small kids on a receptionist’s salary of $1400 before CPF because my husband ran off with his mistress to China and my in-laws have kicked me out, I would not appreciate a world-renowned politician and prominent member of the establishment telling me I don’t deserve a low-rent HDB flat because I fall into the category of a young punk with a dependency mentality who doesn’t want to get a job to buy a proper HDB flat.