Friday, May 1, 2009

DPM Wong welcomes umbrella Christian body's stand on AWARE saga

DPM Wong welcomes umbrella Christian body's stand on AWARE saga
By Hoe Yeen Nie, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 01 May 2009 2233 hrs

Photos 1 of 1 > " onclick="Next();" src="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/butt_next.gif" type="image" width="18" height="15">

Wong Kan Seng
Special Report
AWARE Dispute

SINGAPORE: Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng has welcomed the position taken by the National Council of Churches of Singapore, on the recent saga involving women's group, AWARE.

On Thursday, the umbrella Christian group issued a statement saying, among other things, that it did not condone the use of the pulpit to get involved in the controversy.

Mr Wong, who is also Home Affairs Minister, said it was a "responsible" stand that will help prevent any misunderstanding that the churches are backing one side in the AWARE dispute, or that this is a dispute between Christians and other Singaporeans.

He added that tolerance and restraint by all racial and religious groups is the "only practical way" for them to pursue their faiths in peace.

AWARE is having an extraordinary general meeting at Suntec City Hall 402 on Saturday, 2 pm, following a "no confidence" call by the old committee, after a new committee took over recently.

- CNA/yt

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.290

Aware: The old guards should be hauled up for questioning

The old guards like to rally people to go against establishment, instigating the centre manager to deny the president access to her email, releasing phone numbers and contacts to the press, sending death threats, lots of drama mama like soap opera. Saying that this issue is a Singapore issue, until so many minister got to say this is petty politics and not a national issue. The old guards is also trying to incite anti-Christian sentiments by keep harping that a religious group is behind this whole thingy. Singapore officially and legally don't allow homosexuals and lesbianism. so is anal sex. I am shock to note that the old guard through its sexuality program say it is okay for anal sex. Just by what I have listed, I dun know how many laws they have broken:
1)misure of computer act
2)Incitement of disorder through religious means
3)Posing a threat to internal security.
4) Promotion of pornography.

Can some government agencies haul some of the old guards for questioning? Maybe the police or internal security ?

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.264

EOGM later moved due to 'law-and-order' reasons

Net fury over venue for Aware meeting
EOGM later moved due to 'law-and-order' reasons
THE Aware saga has taken yet another twist, in the run-up to the highly-anticipated extraordinary general meeting (EOGM) scheduled for Saturday.
By Ng Tze Yong
01 May 2009

THE Aware saga has taken yet another twist, in the run-up to the highly-anticipated extraordinary general meeting (EOGM) scheduled for Saturday.

Netizens are incensed after finding out that the meeting would have been held virtually next door to a Christian conference.

The conference, called Transformation 2009, is organised by a conglomerate of churches which includes Church of our Saviour, which several members of the new exco attend.

The brochure for the conference states that it aims to 'inspire and challenge us to rise up and transform the marketplace' and urges participants to 'get set for God's agenda in transforming Singapore for His Kingdom'.

The conference will held from 9am to 6pm on Friday and Saturday at Hall 10.

The Aware EOGM was scheduled to be held at Hall 2 from 2pm to 5pm.

Upset netizens wasted no time in connecting the dots.

An article on socio-political blog The Wayang Party ranted: 'It doesn't take a genius to know that this change of venue is to 'facilitate' participants of the Transformation Conference to 'hop by' next door to vote at the EOGM!'

For many, the revelation smacks of the same alleged sneakiness that marred the victory of the new exco, however legitimate.

Others, however, voiced caution, saying that participants of the Christian conference would be busy with their own programmes.

Wrote wonderswiss on the Wayang Party blog: 'If you look at the Transformation Conference schedule, from 2pm, they will have just finished their lunch breaks and will be returning to Hall 10 for the afternoon session of their conference on 2nd May 09.'

Nonetheless, Aware announced late last night that it is changing the venue for the EOGM again - this time to Suntec exhibition hall 402, which can seat 2,000.

Its press release read: 'Aware was informed yesterday afternoon of Singapore Expo's decision to withdraw the venue through its event management company, Ape Communications, and no reasons were given until this afternoon.

'Aware understands that its meeting cannot be held at the Singapore Expo for 'law-and-order' reasons.'

When pressed for more answers, Aware was not forthcoming.

Ape Communications too, declined comment.

A police spokesman said the police advised the Singapore Expo management to turn down Aware's application to hold its EOGM there.

'The police received information that a member of the former Aware exco has approached the Singapore Expo management for a venue to hold a meeting there at the same date and time,' he said.

'The police have also advised the Expo management to similarly turn down this application if it is submitted.'

Ex-vice-president Margaret Thomas confirmed that the old exco tried to book three conference rooms at the Expo as administrative areas for its supporters.

'We don't know how many will turn up so we just want to make sure there is order,' she said.

The request, however, seemed to have been the motivating factor for the police to step in.

It cited the 'strong possibility that a coming together of members and supporters of the opposing camps at the same venue may result in law-and-order problems'.

The police spokesman did not elaborate on why the police would not oppose having the EOGM held somewhere else.

Registration for admission into Saturday's EOGM at Suntec will begin at noon. Attendees must show their identity cards or passports to enter.

On-site registration for new members is allowed but it will close at 2pm, when the meeting begins.

Aware says: No comment

THE New Paper asked the new Aware exco, among other things, why it decided to hold the EOGM at S'pore Expo, despite knowing that Transformations 2009 was being held there.

The exco declined to comment.

It also declined to respond to netizens' questions on whether the choice of venue was just coincidence, given that a Christian conference was to be held at the same venue.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.263

Let’s talk to teens about sex

Let’s talk to teens about sex

By Chua Mui Hoong, for the Straits Times
01 May 2009

WITH sex in the news, I asked my 13-year-old niece: ‘Do you have sexuality education in school?’

‘Yes, my teacher says it’s okay to watch porn!’ she announced cheerfully.

I blinked. ‘What was the context? Did she say, only for adults or something?’

‘Um, she said it’s okay to watch but don’t watch every day otherwise you can get hooked,’ she said, nose wrinkling in recall.

‘And what did you learn about sex before marriage?’

‘She said you can’t prevent teen sex so you must have safe sex,’ she said.

Her summary may of course be suspect. But whatever the teacher’s intention was in her neighbourhood secondary school, these were the messages my niece and her friends received from the lessons.

I said: ‘You know your teacher is wrong, ya? We are Catholics and the church teaches no sex before marriage. Watching porn gives you a perverted idea of sex. Sex is a loving act between a committed couple married to each other.’

She nodded. In the nature of things, today’s average 13-year-old gets inundated with mixed messages on issues from what to wear and how to behave to whether it’s okay to eat pork during a swine flu pandemic and whether one sneeze counts as a flu symptom.

Getting conflicting signals from the adults and the authorities around her on sexuality is part and parcel of being a teen in modern Singapore.

Still, I wonder if there can be better partnership between schools and family, so that the messages sent to teens on sexuality are congruent.

One good thing that has come about from the ongoing battle for control over women’s group Aware is that the spotlight is on sexuality education in schools.

Aware has a new executive committee consisting of mainly new members who joined in the last year. The group’s members, at least four of whom attend the same church, said they were concerned about a comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) programme Aware brought to 11 schools. They said the programme promoted homosexuality, although Aware members familiar with it said it discussed homosexuality tangentially and without value judgments.

Sex education in schools is a hot-button issue, fraught with concerns over moral and religious values. There is no such thing as a value-free sex education.

Although the new Aware exco focused on homosexuality as a key threat to family values, in fact the key distinction in sex education programmes is whether they promote abstinence only, or include information on contraception and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).

Advocates and well-organised groups on both sides will point to voluminous research to argue their case. Essentially, those who advocate an abstinence-only message say that teaching teens about contraception, STDs and abortion tempts them into having sex earlier and experimenting more.

Others point to a World Health Organisation study of 35 sex education programmes around the world. This found no evidence that comprehensive programmes encourage sexual activity, and concluded that abstinence-only programmes are less effective than comprehensive classes that promote abstinence and also teach about contraception and disease prevention.

What is a parent or concerned aunt to do? First, find out just what the MOE’s stand is on sex education. Its website reminds parents that the main responsibility for sex education lies with parents, not schools. What the school teaches should be viewed only as complementary.

This is a sober reminder. The onus is on parents to engage their teenage children to talk about sex and not abdicate this role to the school.

Second, find out what schools are actually teaching teens about sex. Is sex before marriage okay? Do boys and girls behave differently? What does respect for others mean? How do you say ‘no’ if in a relationship? These are issues that schools should explore - and the values espoused by the school should be consistent with those of the majority of parents.

Most reasonable parents would want their teens to understand that sex is not the vehicle for lust as seen in movies, but is an expression of love within a loving, committed relationship. Most sensible parents would want schools to promote abstinence until marriage.

Beyond this, however, values will diverge. Do you want your teen to learn about contraception and STDs? Some do, believing this helps teens protect themselves. Others do not. Yet others prefer to educate their teens on such sensitive matters themselves.

One thing that is not useful is to assassinate sex education programmes by label. The label ‘comprehensive sexuality education’ is sometimes taken by advocates of ‘abstinence-only’ sex education as being a short cut for promoting promiscuous behaviour, and encouraging sexual experimentation at a young age with members of the same and opposite sex. No less an organisation than WHO has debunked this view.

It also does a grave disservice to the CSE movement, which at its heart aims to put information on sex, and the consequences of sex, into the hands of teens so that they know how to protect themselves.

A good sexuality education programme for Singapore’s teens - exposed to multiple influences, but mostly residing in fairly conservative homes - would be ‘abstinence-plus’. This would promote a loving family unit as ideal, advocate abstinence before marriage, and discourage early sexual activity.

But unlike head-in-the-sand abstinence-only programmes, abstinence-plus programmes also teach teens about STDs and contraception. After all, teens may not get another chance to learn such things in a guided manner before they venture into the adult world. It makes sense to give students a rounded perspective on sex while they are ‘captive’, so to speak, in the schools.

There is an ongoing effort to collect signatures online to petition MOE to look into Aware’s sexuality education programme. But parents must realise that they also need to do their part. Before pointing fingers at Aware, or MOE, or other groups that conduct CSE, they must talk to their teens about sex themselves.

Parents who hold MOE or other groups responsible for teaching their children morals are simply turning over their parental responsibility to the state.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28486.70

MOE probes sexuality subject

May 1, 2009
MOE probes sexuality subject
By Theresa Tan & Amelia Tan
The ministry is now looking into whether the Aware instruction guide was used for sexuality education workshops run by the group in schools. -- ST FILE PHOTO
THE Ministry of Education (MOE) is investigating the sexuality education programme run in some schools by the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) after receiving complaints from parents.

The move comes two days after the ministry said in a letter to the media that it had not received any complaints about the programme and thus saw no reason to intervene.

But since then, it said, some parents had expressed concern about the content found in an instructor guide for Aware's programme, which had been posted online.

The Straits Times understands that since the ministry's letter was published on Wednesday, the new guard of Aware has encouraged parents to make their concerns known to MOE.

In addition, a petition has been circulating online. It wants the Education Minister to probe Aware's programme.

The ministry is now looking into whether the Aware instruction guide was used for sexuality education workshops run by the group in schools.

It is also reviewing the contents of the guide.

In a statement yesterday, the ministry also said it had received some feedback and queries from parents.

In general, it said, parents had asked for clarification on what students are taught during sexuality education programmes in school.

In response, the ministry said its programmes reflect 'the mainstream views and values of Singapore society, where the majority of Singaporeans hold conservative views of sexuality'.

It added that homosexuality is covered in one lesson for lower secondary classes.


http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.258

Controversial content in AWARE's sex education programme sparks debate

Controversial content in AWARE's sex education programme sparks debate
By Alicia Wong, Lin Yanqin & Ester Ng, TODAY | Posted: 01 May 2009 0823 hrs

Photos 1 of 1 > " onclick="Next();" src="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/butt_next.gif" type="image" width="18" height="15">

TODAY photo
Special Report
AWARE Dispute

SINGAPORE: The debate over the sexuality education programme by the Association of Women for Action and Research boils down to a 15-minute segment of its three-hour workshop, TODAY has learnt after obtaining on Wednesday pages of the group’s Comprehensive Sexual Education: Basic Instructor Guide.

The section in question defines terms such as “anal sex”, “virginity”, “teenage pregnancy” and “homosexual”. As part of the workshop exercise, students are asked to associate these terms according to three categories: Positive, neutral and negative.

TODAY had approached AWARE’s old guard to verify the material, after receiving it from a source outside the group, and compared it with hard copies of the actual guide, which has separately been put on the Internet.

The rest of the guide deals with topics such as body image, HIV/Aids, contraception and relationships. But it is the description of terms such as homosexuality and anal sex that appears to be at the heart of the contention raised by self-declared “feminist mentor” and senior lawyer Thio Su Mien.

She took issue with homosexuality being seen as a neutral, not negative, word.

Founding AWARE member and its first president, Lena Cheng, met with TODAY and said that the group had consulted religious groups, academics, social workers and teachers when they adapted the guide from the 25-year-old International Women’s Health Coalition, which promotes and protects girls’ and women’s sexual and reproductive rights and health. “We’re not some feminists who just thought this up,” she said.

AWARE’s former programme manager Deeksha Vasundhra said the definitions are for instructors to facilitate discussions.

The “private and confidential” guide is never given to students, she said.

Students can also place the terms in question in more than one category and they are not pushed to accept certain views.

“I tell trainers, it’s not up to you to teach values. Decisions are made based on family, culture and religion,” she said, and added that children are always advised to speak to their parents or teachers.

Since the material caters to a wide age group, the onus remains on instructors to focus on the relevant topics, said Ms Vasundhra.

AWARE’s 10 trainers are selected for their maturity, open-mindedness and ability to manage young people. They go through a stringent selection process, training sessions and examinations.

One trainer told TODAY, discussions are “very student driven”.

“We basically ask students, ‘what’s your views?’ We don’t say anything, and let them hear all the different ideas... I only make sure everybody respects each other. We don’t believe in imposing any viewpoints,” she said.

During class, trainers use the word “partner” instead of “husband”, for instance, so that lesbian students do not “tune out,” said Ms Vasundhra. Ditto for homosexuality, which is not defined as abnormal so students do not feel excluded.

Ultimately, the aim, said Ms Vasundhra, is to “help kids see that everybody is different and help them to accept that”.

The workshops, conducted by AWARE at 11 secondary schools last year, were fully subsidised thanks to a donation from the Chen Su Lan Trust.

Each workshop cost between S$500 and S$600 but was free for the schools, which have not yet been named publicly.

Former AWARE president Constance Singam revealed to TODAY that S$35,000 out of the S$113,000 donated by the Chen Su Lan Trust last year was spent on the free Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) workshops at schools.

Asked if he was aware of the content of the CSE programme, Reverend Yap Kim Hao, the chairman of the Chen Su Lan Trust, said that he had been given a “rough outline” of the programme, but he had not seen the teaching materials.

When TODAY showed him two pages of the CSE trainers’ manual, which stated that “anal sex can be healthy” and that “homosexuality is perfectly normal”, Rev Yap said that he “had no problems” with the content.

“I recognise there are dissenting views, but these have to be presented and it’s up to the student to make a decision so (the trainer) is not promoting one particular view,” said Rev Yap.

The 80-year-old is a retired Bishop of the Methodist Church here and currently pastoral adviser to the Free Community Church.

TODAY contacted five schools about the programme. Four neither confirmed nor denied if they had the programme, and one said yes but did not reply to queries.

TODAY also showed 13 parents with teenage students the copy of the training material.

While the majority saw the importance of educating their children on sexuality and making the right choices, many also questioned the handling of controversial topics and the explicitness of the material.

“It’s okay to let them know (about sex) but not to this extent. I don’t want my son to learn such explicit things,” said Ms Nor, a mother of three.

Father of six, Rizan Jantan, 45, felt children could approach parents and “we can explain to them (right from wrong).”

A mother of two boys said it was “all natural”, while businessman Chung Toh Keong, 56, felt such issues should be taught, since we “don’t dare talk about such taboo topics”.
-
TODAY/yb


http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.257

About AWARE'S Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE)

About AWARE'S Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE)

The Comprehensive Sexuality Education 9CSE) was developed by the HIV/ AIDS sub-committee in AWARE in 2006 – 2007 in response to the growing number of young people who were being infected by STIs (Sexually Transmitted Infections), and HIV/ AIDS and the increasing number of teenage pregnancies. In the years, 2000 to 2005, the number of those with STIs for those aged between 10 and 19 rose from 184 to 526 and among teenage girls the figure rose by 3.4 times.

In order to understand this problem better, a Focus Group discussion was conducted at a post-secondary education institute. We learnt that they had received a lot of factual information, but did not have the skills to actually use this information. Of further concern was the fact that students got most of their information from three sources – the internet, friends and magazines. Given the potential risks inherent in sexual activity, we believe we owe it to young people to help them safeguard their own futures. A sexuality education programme was the best way to get accurate, reliable information to youths.

A literature review was carried out to examine the different kinds of sexuality programmes available both nationally and internationally. This included a review of the existing sex-education programme guide produced by MOE in Singapore. We found that research consistently showed when given accurate information, young people are more likely to make wise, realistic, and informed decisions. Some studies have found that young people who have been through comprehensive sexuality education have sexual intercourse later, and have fewer sexual partners. Given this information, AWARE went ahead and developed a comprehensive sexuality education programme, as it was proven to be effective in providing young women with the tools, knowledge, skills, attitude, and values to make responsible choices about their sexual health.

AWARE’s CSE Programme draws on established international programmes and has been developed over a course of a year in consultation with parents, youth social workers, teachers, and academics from a range of institutions. As with all other AWARE programmes, it has been through a rigorous process of internal and external auditing and pilot testing. This process has been a continuous one, and in June – July 2008, we reviewed the CSE Basic programme and made appropriate improvements based on trainer and student feedback.

A good CSE programme is much more than a simple sex education programme. A CSE programme empowers young women to develop a healthy and positive attitude towards sexuality. AWARE’s CSE programmes consists of a Basic and Advanced workshop which are each conducted by certified trainers for small groups of young women. Each workshop consists of games, role-play, discussions, and a presentation.

The workshops cover topics such as

  • Information on STIs, HIV, and contraceptives
  • Negotiation skills to resist peer pressure
  • Clear communication skills
  • Building healthy relationships
  • Evaluating one’s needs and wants

The Instructors guide has exercises and games of different levels. The instructors would then, in consultation with the school modify the programme to best meet the needs of their students. AWARE also provided an opt out form for parents to sign, if they did not wish their children to attend the programme.

CSE has been conducted in various secondary schools and welfare homes in Singapore and is well respected as a responsible and appropriate approach to sexuality education. As of November 2008, the CSE programme had reached 12 different schools and welfare homes. It covered just under 500 students over 24 sessions. We have had several schools calling for repeat workshops, and have even had to turn some requests away because of insufficient trainers.

There have been concerns raised about the fact that the CSE programme is promoting homosexuality, or more specifically, lesbianism amongst our young girls. Homosexuality is a complex issue, and there is no consensus as to what causes it. What we do know is that many young women suffer in silence and in shame because they fear social ostracism. They may also engage in unprotected sex and are more likely to have sexual health problems. In teaching about sexual orientation, we are hoping to dispel myths with accurate information, and to protect young women from the risk of violence, discrimination, depression and self-destructive behaviors.

We have therefore chosen to list homosexuality as a neutral issue in an exercise which helps young women understand all the different aspects of their sexuality. The objective of this exercise is to help young women understand that their views are determined by culture, law, mass media, religion, peers and education, amongst others. At no point does the programme try to challenge existing values; it only helps people understand themselves better and be more aware when they take decisions. The ability to rationalize and think through their decisions is one that most parents would want their children to have.

Our programme has been well received by the students in Singapore. The majority rated the programme above-average or excellent.

Statements from students about what they learned from the workshop:

“The steps to protect myself during sexual activity.”
“How to say no to my boyfriend if he wants to have sex.”
“The risks of having sex.”
“We can say no to sex.”
“The consequences of having sex.”
“How to protect ourselves.”
“To practice safer sex.”
“What a healthy relationship is.”
“We have the right to say no and think twice.”
“I know how important it is to talk to be ready and talk to your boyfriend.”

From "before and after" surveys

Before our workshops:

  • The majority of participants had average or less knowledge about sex and sexuality before the workshop.
  • The top reasons participants think teenagers have sex are: “they want to experiment / they are curious”, “they want to share a close connection with their boyfriend / girlfriend”, and “their boyfriend / girlfriend pressures them to”.
  • The top reasons participants think teenagers who have sex but do not use protection are: “they do not think it is important”, “they do not like using them”, “boyfriend / girlfriend does not want to use them”, and “they feel embarrassed to ask their boyfriend / girlfriend”.
  • Of those who knew teen friends that were having sex, over 1/3 said protection was not used at all, while many others reported that protection was only used sometimes, or by some friends.
  • The majority did not know where to go for confidential consultation with a doctor about sex.
  • The majority did not know where to where to go for confidential, low-cost STI/pregnancy testing.
  • The majority did not know where to get quality condoms.
  • The majority did not know that there is no age requirement to purchase condoms.
  • The majority did not feel comfortable talking to their partner or an adult about sex.
  • The majority do not know how to use contraception.


After our workshops:

  • Almost all of the students said they now knew more about sex and sexuality, the risks of engaging in sexual activity, and protecting themselves.
  • Almost all believe they have the right information to protect their sexual health.
  • Almost all understand the importance of proper communication, including “no means no”.
  • Almost all feel more comfortable talking to their partners and adults about the topic of sex.
  • Almost all know how to stay safe if they do decide to engage in sexual activity, and plan to be safe.
  • Almost all know where to get safe, accurate information and protection.
  • We believe Q10 may have been misunderstood due to the series of previous “yes” answers, and have reworded it for future evaluations.
  • The majority rated the program above-average or excellent.

http://we-are-aware.sg/cse

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.255

MOE investigates complaints over AWARE's sex ed programme

MOE investigates complaints over AWARE's sex ed programme
By TODAY | Posted: 01 May 2009 0837 hrs

Photos 1 of 1 > " onclick="Next();" src="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/butt_next.gif" type="image" width="18" height="15">

Special Report
AWARE Dispute

SINGAPORE: The Ministry of Education (MOE) said Thursday that some parents have expressed concern over the content found in an “AWARE Comprehensive Sexual Education: Basic Instructor Guide” that has been posted online.

The MOE said it was investigating this matter.

Apart from MOE’s own sexuality education programme, the ministry said that “schools can also collaborate with other agencies”. In doing so, schools must ensure that any programmes run by external agencies are guided by the same principles set out in MOE’s framework for sexuality education, said the ministry.

Why do schools engage external agencies?
As the needs of students vary across schools, schools are given the autonomy to decide on topics that would best meet their students’ needs to augment sexuality education in schools; and also on which external agency to engage. For this purpose, guidelines on the engagement of external organisations to conduct sexuality education have been given to schools.

What are the guidelines for schools to engage external vendors?
Sexuality programmes conducted by external agencies should adhere to the guiding principles as set out in the framework for sexuality education. They have to be premised on the importance of the family and respect for the values and beliefs of the different ethnic and religious communities on sexuality issues. Parents may also opt their children out of any sexuality education programme.

What should schools look out for when engaging external vendors?
Specifically, in the selection of external vendors, schools are advised to screen external agencies to ensure that they are of good repute. In addition, the schools should consider (a) background of the vendor, (b) details of the programme, (c) key messages conveyed, (d) mode of delivery that would best engage students, (e) feedback and evaluation process for future improvements.

What are the common topics covered by the external agencies?
In secondary schools, the common topics include boy-girl relationship, STI/HIV prevention, consequences of pre-marital sex, Internet safety and pornography. Post-secondary schools cover topics on STI/HIV prevention, consequences of pre-marital sex, dating, love and relationships.

Does MOE audit programmes by external agencies?
Currently, schools audit the programmes and provide MOE with the feedback. As specified in the guidelines in engaging external agencies, teachers should be present with the students to ensure that the key messages conveyed are consistent with those agreed upon by the school and the external agency.

It is good practice for teachers to follow-up with their students after the workshop to clarify any outstanding issues or concerns that were either not addressed during the workshop or were surfaced during the workshop itself. Schools are also advised that they can check with Guidance Branch if they need further information and advice on the programmes conducted by specific vendors.

-
TODAY/yb


http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.254

What the 'Aware Saga' really is

What the 'Aware Saga' really is

Thirty-five days on and the 'Aware Saga' appears to have reached a logical conclusion: the head of the official council of Protestant churches in Singapore has issued a statement to the effect that it does not condone churches getting 'involved' in the ‘saga’.

“In fact, our heads of churches have very recently reiterated to their clergy the standing instruction on the proper use of the pulpit,” read the National Council of Churches of Singapore statement signed by the president, Anglican Archbishop John Chew, and general secretary, Lim K Tham.

A brilliant ‘saga’ of an ‘anti-homosexual’ church ‘motivating’ a group of women to use ‘storm-trooper tactics’ to take over a secular non-governmental organisation so as to promote ‘parochial’ and ‘exclusivist’ interests of Christians and their faith has come to a head. But instead of accepting the media reports hook, line and sinker, it is necessary to reflect on what the ‘Aware Saga’ really is – and what it is not but has been made out to be.

It is a group of concerned women that have come together to restore an influential women’s rights organisation to its original, noble mandate of advancing female rights in society

Get it from the horse’s mouth. Rather than believing rumours and speculations that while sounding good to our itching ears are anything but the truth, the Christian public should take the four women leaders at their words.

“It has now become a single-objective organisation. So that’s what the new team is here to do: we want to bring Aware back to its original, very noble objective, which is to represent all women, to advance their cause, all women whatever race and religion in areas such as professional development, their private life, their health… We need to look at ageism, all the problems… So we should be pushing those cause,” stated Aware president Josie Lau last Thursday.

Why were they not upfront and direct about the evils that were taking place with Aware as a platform?

If previous leaders of Aware had indeed been up to no good and in a clandestine way as report after report has revealed, what gives them the right to remain as leaders? Aware may be a non-discriminatory and inclusive organisation, but there is a world of difference between discrimination and moral discernment. The former case has to do with amoral issues while the latter has to do with moral issues. Besides, the leaders were democratically elected into the exco.

It is not a conflict between homosexuals and Christian fundamentalists

Rather, it is a conflict between a liberal and conservative worldview and those who hold the mutually opposing views. One group believes that there are no absolute morals and that every view is and has been socially-constructed and socially-determined. The other side maintains that moral absolutes exist; that there is such a thing as right and wrong, virtue and vice, decency and decadence.

Unfortunately, instead of recognising the difference in viewpoint the liberal proponents accuse the conservatives, targeting evangelical Christians, of ostracising and persecuting them. They use terms like ‘homophobic’ to describe well-meaning and sincere people who may have no hatred for homosexuals per se but simply consider homosexuality a sin.

And yet it is impossible to resolve such a conflict without mutual understanding. It is likely that homosexual activists will not appreciate the distinction between discrimination and discernment until there is admission that an absolute morality exists. The timeless clash between the liberal or anti-moral and conservative camps cannot be resolved unless one viewpoint is utterly conquered. Until that day comes, every sincere action of Christians to engage society in regard to homosexuality and any other controversial moral issue will always be regarded with scorn and contempt and understood as an attempt to oppress and dictate.

What we can do

After recognising that the Aware conflict is not one that is easily resolved because it involves two mutually-opposing worldviews, certain parties such as the official press need to avoid getting into the ‘fray’ as it were in an unhelpful way.

The newspapers, especially the Straits Times, should not take sides in the debate. It is possible for a press to be completely informational and objective, to report fact without interpretation. In this regard it is not constructive of the papers to favour one side by using its terms like ‘saga’ to describe the unfolding of events and getting figures in authority to speak on it as if that point of view was a universally accepted one.

The real issue at hand is not whether or not churches should be involved in the NGO – the crisis is that society cannot understand Christians and what it doesn’t understand it is apt to misunderstand and fear. To the multitudes of non-Christians of an anti-moral persuasion, churches should not get involved simply because Christians are ‘aggressive’ people with a ‘dangerous’ agenda to ‘impose’ their values and beliefs on the rest of the world. If it had been a non-Christian leader representing a different religion, such fears would perhaps not have surfaced.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.405

Former Chairman of Reform Party gives press conference on his alleged ouster

Former Chairman of Reform Party gives press conference on his alleged ouster

Mr Ng Teck Siong, former Chairman of the Reform Party, conducted a press meeting at Speaker’s Corner on 30 April, at around 6.30pm, to explain the events surrounding his alleged ouster from the party, and discuss his future political direction. The press meeting was attended by around 20 supporters, which included former CEC members of the Reform Party who also tendered their resignations this week.

Mr Ng Teck Siong first read out his statement to the press, a copy of which is attached below this article. In his press statement, Mr Ng said: “I have been JBJ’s steadfast companion and right-hand man from the time we left the Worker’s Party in 2001, to the formation of the Reform Party. I have always seen the Reform Party as the embodiment of JBJ’s ideals and values. While I was Chairman of the party, I strongly believed that in addition to paying close attention to the bread and butter issues concerning all Singaporeans, the Reform Party should also seek to reform our political system and campaign for effective separation of powers between the legislature, Executive and Judiciary. Only when Singaporeans have been granted political rights can they effectively campaign for their economic rights.”

Mr Ng also said that he wished to rally his comrades in Opposition towards the common goals of fostering opposition Unity and delivering a credible and robust challenge to the PAP.

During question-and-answer time, mainstream media and alternative media reporters were very keen to know more about the disagreements between Mr Ng Teck Siong and the new Secretary General, Kenneth Jeyaretnam.

Mr Ng said that the new team in Reform Party was “weak and infirm of purpose”. He also expressed regret that “a mis-step had arrived”, referring to recent events leading up to the installment of Kenneth Jeyaretnam as the new Secretary General.

In a press release on 27 April, the Reform Party said that “a vote of no confidence in Ng Teck Siong as Chairperson of the party was passed by a majority vote of the CEC”. However, Mr Ng repeatedly denied this claim, saying: “There was no meeting.”

Further queries by reporters about the vote of no confidence were dismissed by Mr Ng, who said that he did not wish to dwell on past disputes.

Mr Ng also denied being ousted from the party, saying that he resigned on his own accord.

According to TOC who spoke to Mr Ng Teck Siong after the press conference, Mr Ng had called for an emergency meeting on 26 April, and that four items were on the agenda. However, the meeting could not proceed, and he had no choice but to call it to a close.

I also checked with Teck Siong after the press conference was over. He confirmed that after he closed the emergency meeting, there had been no further communication between him and the other CEC members who had crossed over to Kenneth Jeyaretnam’s side on Sunday. He had submitted his resignation letter on Monday morning, and up till that point, he was not even aware about there being any vote of no confidence against him.

“How could a vote of no confidence be passed when only 3 attendees signed the attendance sheet?” he asked, in reference to my question whether the motion of no confidence was passed on Sunday itself

________________________________________

Press Release By Ng Teck Siong

Dear fellow Singaporeans and friends from the media,

A very good evening to all of you. Thank you for taking the time to attend this press conference.

As you know by now, I have resigned as Chairman and member from the Reform Party.

I have been JBJ’s steadfast companion and right-hand man from the time we left the Worker’s Party in 2001, to the formation of the Reform Party. I have always seen the Reform Party as the embodiment of JBJ’s ideals and values. While I was Chairman of the party, I strongly believed that in addition to paying close attention to the bread and butter issues concerning all Singaporeans, the Reform Party should also seek to reform our political system and campaign for effective separation of powers between the legislature, Executive and Judiciary. Only when Singaporeans have been granted political rights can they effectively campaign for their economic rights.

After JBJ left us for a better world last September, I have been constantly searching for and recruiting the right candidates to take over the helms of party leadership.

The purpose of this press conference is not to harp on our differences in the party but to rally my comrades in Opposition to see if we can find common goals of fostering opposition Unity and delivering a credible and robust challenge to the PAP.

I will be keeping my options open for now, but at the same time, I hope to initiate new dialogues and open channels of communication with the other opposition comrades and supporters.

Today I want to pay tribute again to JBJ and the profound legacy he has left us.

Tomorrow we fight a new battle to win the hearts and minds of Singaporeans.

Thank you very much, and have a pleasant evening!

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28195.2

Church of Our Savior supports gay marriage

Church of Our Savior supports gay marriage

In a statement released to the media on 30 April 2009, the Church of Our Saviour (COOS) said "No homosexual should ever be deprived of any right enjoyed by every other Singaporean." It is splendid news indeed that this church believes that since heterosexuals have a right to marry someone they love, so should homosexual Singaporeans. As far as Yawning Bread can recall, no other local church has so publicly supported full equality for gay people across all rights.

COOS has been linked to the controversy surrounding the takeover of the women's organisation AWARE by its members. The self-declared "feminist mentor" behind the new executive committee (exco), Thio Su Mien - the one who told the media that homosexuality is a man's issue - is also a member of the church.

In the statement published on www.asiaone.com, COOS denied that they were behind the takeover: "Church of Our Saviour did not initiate or instigate any campaign to take over the leadership of AWARE."

To press home the point, it also said that it hoped people would not hold the "wrong assumption that the exco is a pawn of the church or that it has intentions to turn it into a religious organization as that is totally untrue." It is interesting how the church is so certain that the new exco, who are not its pawns, do not have such intentions. If the new exco is independent of the church, how does the church control its intentions? I guess I don't understand the nature of divine insight.

COOS loves homosexual people. "Church of Our Saviour does not have an agenda against homosexuals. We are not antihomosexual ... We believe homosexuals should be extended understanding, kindness and love like every other human being."

It doesn't love gay activists, however, for it "does have a stand against the agenda of activists promoting homosexuality as a normal alternative lifestyle. Just as much as the Bible commands us to love the homosexual person, it also states categorically that homosexual practice is wrong."

It sounds like a rather complicated position, but we shouldn't nitpick. So long as the church supports full equal rights for gay people, we should give them some leeway. It would have been better though if COOS explained how happily married gay couples could consummate their marriages which the church so bravely supports as an equal right

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.230

Petitionon Against the Degradation of Our Faith

A Call For The Most Revd Dr John Chew and All Faith Leaders to Protect Against the Degradation of Our Faith

To: Most Revd John Chew and Christian Faith Leaders

The Church’s stand on the issue of homosexuality is unequivocal and steadfast. While the Christian community should remain resolute in the defense of our beliefs, we must not let the actions of few degrade our faith through their manipulation of the flock.

By signing this petition, we stand together as brothers and sisters in Christ, to voice our concerns over the unbecoming usurpation of leadership in AWARE.

We have to ask ourselves - no matter the existence of good intentions - do we want to build our houses on rock, or sand? If we allow the New Guard of AWARE to conduct themselves through subterfuge and not openness, through force and not dialogue, where will we be left standing when the storm comes?

By signing this petition, we call for our leaders to provide the spiritual compass so that we do not veer down the path of self-destruction. We ask not for your stand on homosexuality, but on the conduct of a few running their own doctrine by using God’s authority in vain.

“This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me;
in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'"
-- Matthew 15:8-9

Our faith is built on acceptance not polarization. On love and not contempt. And this petition is testament of that.

Sincerely,

http://www.petitiononline.com/matt1589/petition.html

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.229

Aware: Churches should stay out

May 1, 2009
Aware tussle
Churches should stay out

Umbrella Christian body concerned over religion being dragged into row

By Zakir Hussain & Wong Kim Hoh
Dr Chew the NCCS president, says member churches of the council are not involved in the leadership tussle at Aware. -- ST FILE PHOTO
THE National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) has said it does not condone churches getting involved in recent matters related to the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware).

It also does not condone pulpits being used for the purpose, it said in a statement on Thursday night.

'We do not condone churches getting involved in this matter; neither do we condone pulpits being used for this purpose. Our member churches are not involved in the present saga.

'In fact, our heads of churches have very recently reiterated to their clergy the standing instruction on the proper use of the pulpit,' it said.

The statement was issued by the current NCCS president, Dr John Chew, and its general secretary, Mr Lim K. Tham.

The NCCS brings together churches from various Christian denominations, such as the Anglican, Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Salvation Army and Syrian Orthodox churches, among others. Its leadership is rotated among the heads of the major groups.

The current NCCS president, the Reverend Chew, is also Bishop of the Anglican Church in Singapore.

The leadership tussle at women's advocacy group Aware took a religious turn last week when it emerged that six new committee members attend the Church of Our Saviour in Margaret Drive.

The church's Pastor Derek Hong reportedly urged, in a Sunday sermon, the women in his flock to 'be engaged' and support new Aware president Josie Lau and 'her sisters' at the group.

In its statement last night, the NCCS said it had been following the recent events related to Aware.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.227

PM's May Day message

May 1, 2009
PM's May Day message
Strengths will see us through

May Day message is of cautious optimism amid fears of prolonged crisis

By Sue-Ann Chia, Senior Political Correspondent
ST FILE PHOTO
SINGAPORE has reason to be 'quietly confident' of overcoming the tough times because its economy has 'important strengths', said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

In broad strokes, he painted a picture of the various features and efforts being made that will lead the country to better days.

However, his May Day message of cautious optimism, released on Thursday, is now tinged with some uncertainty as the swine flu outbreak threatens to further worsen the global economic crisis.

But even without it, the journey to recovery will not be short.

Said Mr Lee: 'We must prepare for a prolonged difficult period and continue to build capabilities for the future.

'But we have reason to be quietly confident. Our economy has important strengths.'

These are: sound banks, competitive industries, flexible wage systems, many good jobs still available, workers getting skills to stay employable and the country's substantial reserves funding anti-recession programmes.

'Few countries are in as secure a position as Singapore,' said Mr Lee.

In addition, Singaporeans can expect more job-creating projects beyond the two integrated resorts, he said, citing the International Cruise Terminal, Asia's first River Safari in Mandai and Gardens by the Bay, a park in the Marina Bay area.

He also highlighted the continuing growth of Singapore's external wing, as businesses expand their network of export markets.

Read the full story in The Straits Times today.

But he is confident Singapore's wide network of free trade pacts with its major trading partners will 'prove invaluable'.

He also called on workers and employers to do their part. Workers should re-skill and accept jobs even if these are not a first choice, while employers should retrench only as a last resort, he said.

Noting the angry protests by workers in many countries as the slump deepens, he said: 'These outbursts are understandable but unfortunately they do not make things better.'

On the other hand, the response here has been 'rational and constructive', which he credited to unions, employers and the Government working together to find practical solutions.

'It is helping Singapore to stand out from other countries, enhancing our reputation and bringing in more investments and jobs,' he said.

Looking beyond the dark clouds, Mr Lee made a rallying call to Singaporeans: 'We must use this crisis to prepare for a different, more competitive world when the storm passes.

'We must build resilience in a new generation of Singaporeans, and strengthen their bonds with a new team of leaders.

'Most of all, we must unite as a nation, keep our calm, unflinching spirit and emerge stronger from the crisis.'

sueann@sph.com.sg

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28209.1

A very big Thank You to all Parents and Responsible Citizens!

A very big Thank You to all Parents and Responsible Citizens!

We have won the battle (well, almost) before it even began!

MOE has decided to investigate the matter concerning AWARE's Comprehensive Sexual Programme.

Although the official outcome of the investigation has not been announced, I am quite sure that the parts that portray homosexuality in positive light will be removed. Just my hunch. Read the full text of MOE's reply and you will know what I mean.

Thank you all parents and responsible citizens. Without your help, our fight against the gays' covert homosexuality programme to indoctrinate unsavoury ideas into the minds of 12 year old girls would not have reaped results.

Finally, I would like to thank Josie Lau and company, who have bravely risked their careers, family and even lives in their attempt to uncover the truth that has been kept away from parents.

I am no Christian - but I don't see anything wrong in saying, "May God bless and guide you, Josie and Company! We owe our children's future to you and we love you!"


http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/forum/2009/04/reply-to-media-queries-on-moes.php

April 30, 2009

Reply to Media Queries on MOE’s Sexuality Education Programme

1 The Ministry of Education (MOE) has received a number of queries and feedback. Parents were generally asking for clarification on what students are taught during sexuality education programmes in school.

2 MOE’s sexuality education programme, conducted from upper primary to pre-university level, reflects the mainstream views and values of Singapore society, where the majority of Singaporeans hold conservative views on sexuality. Thus, MOE’s programme on sexuality education is situated within the context of Singapore society which upholds the family as a key social institution.

3 In MOE’s sexuality education programme, homosexuality is covered in one lesson in the lower secondary package. The lesson seeks to inform students of the definition of “homosexual”, and that homosexual acts are illegal under Singapore law. It does not promote homosexuality, but follows social norms of mainstream society.

4 In delivering the programme, teachers are guided by the principle that parents are ultimately responsible for the values education of their children and that issues of sexuality often involve a question of values. Thus, students are encouraged to seek guidance from their parents on contentious issues such as homosexuality, so that they clarify their personal values and beliefs and take informed, responsible and values-based decisions regarding sexuality, while being aware of different views and perspectives in society.

5 Some parents who wrote in to the Ministry have also expressed concern over the content found in an “AWARE Comprehensive Sexuality Education: Basic Instructor Guide” that has been posted online. MOE is investigating this matter.

6 Background information on sexuality education programmes in school (see FAQs) is available on the Ministry’s website for parents’ reference.

Once again, thank you for your support!

PS - Perhaps to show our appreciation for Josie and company, we could all take the trouble to meet them at Saturday's Aware EGM to thank them personally. What is one afternoon to us, compared to the weeks they have put in for dear our children?

Don't forget you need to register as AWARE members in order to be able to attend the EGM.
http://www.aware.org.sg/?page_id=130

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.261

Swine flu watch

May 1, 2009
Swine flu outbreak
Swine flu watch


PHOTO: AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

KEY developments on swine flu outbreaks, according to Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, World Health Organisation, and government officials.

SUSPECTED AND CONFIRMED CASES

Deaths:

84 in Mexico, eight confirmed as swine flu and rest suspected. One confirmed in US, a 23-month-old boy from Mexico who died in Texas.

Sickened:

2,500 suspected and 26 confirmed in Mexico. Confirmed elsewhere: at least 100 in US; 13 in Canada; three in New Zealand; five in Britain; three in Germany; four in Spain; two in Israel; one in Austria; one in Netherlands; one in Switzerland; two in Costa Rica; and one in Peru.

US cases confirmed by CDC and state officials: 50 in New York, 10 in South Carolina, 14 in California, 26 in Texas, three in Maine; two in Kansas, two in Massachusetts, and one each in Indiana, Ohio, Arizona and Nevada.

CDC also said Michigan had two, but state officials said only one was confirmed.

MEASURES TAKEN IN ASIA

Asia, a continent that has battled deadly viruses such as the H5N1 bird flu and SARS in recent years, has been taking steps to ward off the new swine flu virus. Following are some details of how Asian countries are responding to the crisis

AUSTRALIA - Pandemic plans in full swing. Govt approves tough new powers to detain and disinfect people suspected of carrying swine flu. All incoming flights have to declare suspected flu cases on arrival, have inflight announcements. Passengers have to fill in health declaration card. Govt runs ads in media, sets up hotline. Thermal scanners and extra medical staff also being sent to international airports.

Enough anti-viral drugs stockpiled to cover around 41 percent of 21 million population. Australia has stockpiled 8.7 million doses of Tamiflu and Relenza drugs. Stockpile of 50 million surgical masks.

SOUTH KOREA - Recommends nationals staying in Mexico to leave unless on urgent business. Agriculture Ministry suspends imports of live pigs from North America. Running round-the-clock emergency quarantine centre.

Tamiflu stockpile for 2.5 million people and is working to increase that to 10 percent of population of about 49 million.

HONG KONG - Will shut schools if one or more confirmed cases found at schools and if a sign disease is spreading.

Media say authorities have 20 million doses of Tamiflu and other anti-flu drugs. Steps up screening at all entry points.

VIETNAM - Visitors arriving from the swine flu infected countries to be isolated. Nationals advised not to visit zones reported with the disease.

Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam's largest city of more than 8 million people, has stocks of Tamiflu enough for 1 million people.

SINGAPORE - Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew quoted in Straits Times as saying nationals returning from Mexico will be quarantined.

'We're taking no chances. We learnt from Sars,' he said.

Thermal scanners at airport and isolation units at hospitals, where staff at some emergency departments are wearing full protective clothing.

JAPAN - Central government has Tamiflu stockpile for about 22.5 million, and Relenza stockpile for about 2.68 million people, for combined stock which would cover nearly 20 percent of population. Local governments have own stockpiles but figures not available.

- Military doctors, nurses posted to Narita Airport to help check passengers from Mexico, Canada and the United States.

NEW ZEALAND - Public health officials say 'ample stocks' of anti-flu drugs. NZ built up stockpile after bird flu scare sufficient to cover between 25-30 percent of the 4.3 million population.

Raised the level of its national pandemic plan and screening all flights from North America.

TAIWAN - Current supplies of swine flu treatment to cover 10 percent of Taiwan's 23 million population. More than one million facemasks for emergency use.

MALAYSIA - Tamiflu stockpile covering more than 2 million of the 27-million strong population.

THAILAND - Government has 320,000 sets of Tamiflu stockpiled. GPO, state-owned drug maker, can produce one million capsules of generic Tamiflu if needed. Thailand has a population of about 65 million.

Temperature screening checkpoints at international airports in Bangkok, Chiang Mai, Phuket.

PHILIPPINES - Govt says has Tamiflu stockpile of 600,000 for 60,000 possible cases and buying 10 million pesos worth of additional Tamiflu, covering small fraction of Philippines population of 90 million.

Airports equipped with thermal scanners, hired additional medical staff to handle swine-flu related cases.

CHINA - National tourism administration orders travel agencies to suspend tours to Mexico, according to state media. Chinese authorities tell hospitals to swiftly report suspected cases of swine flu. Official press is vowing fast public disclosure of any cases. Prevention education campaign launched in schools.

BANGLADESH - Travellers, particularly those coming from countries already hit by recent outbreak, to be screened.

INDONESIA - Temperature scanners installed at 10 airports and ports with immediate effect.

At least 3 million Tamiflu capsules in stock.

INDIA - Has stockpiled one million Tamiflu doses which cover more than 142,000 people. Government has requested another one million doses which it expects to receive within 7-10 days.

Surveillance stepped up at international airports and ports.

Asean - Has 500,000 courses of antivirals stockpiled in Singapore and another 500,000 distributed among Asean member states.

Asean also has stockpile of personal protective equipment but it did not give details.

Health ministers from Southeast Asian countries will meet, probably in early May in Bangkok, to discuss how to deal with the swine flu crisis, said Surin Pitsuwan, the secretary-general of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)

He said the ministers 'should get together at the earliest time possible,' according to a press release from the group.

TRAVEL WARNINGS

The following countries have issued advisories against non-essential travel to Mexico: Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Vietnam, Indonesia.

Japan advised nationals currently in Mexico to consider returning home soon and has suspended visa waivers for Mexicans.

Vietnamese Health Ministry advised against travel 'to the zones reported with the disease'. China suspending tours to Mexico.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28208.1

Isn't the old guard using a similar ploy?

Isn't the old guard using a similar ploy?

MUCH has been said about the questions raised by the conduct and composition of Aware's new executive committee (exco). I have questions about the conduct of the old guard too, such as:

# How representative was the old Aware? Much has been made about the need to represent all beliefs in a multi- faith, multiracial society.

Was this wide representation a feature of the old Aware? If it is important, why is it not explicitly enshrined in the Constitution of Aware, or indeed in the Constitutions of all non-governmental organisations in Singapore?

# How does the old guard justify the dwindling membership of Aware in recent years? Could it be that the old guard leaders were more concerned with their pet projects, instead of reaching out to the people of diverse interests they are now appealing to for support?

At least the new exco, in swelling the numbers of Aware members, did something that the old exco seemed incapable of.

# Is religion or race a factor in the membership of Aware? I was under the impression that the only criterion for membership was gender. If race or religion is truly irrelevant, let us stop harping on the religious affiliations of the new exco. The views of the new exco on certain issues are not exclusively held by Christians.

# In rallying people to join at the last minute to vote for a no-confidence motion against the new exco at tomorrow's extraordinary general meeting, are not the old guard and its supporters using the same tactics they accuse the new exco of using at the annual general meeting?

Boey Shee Lye (Ms)

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.226

AWARE Readers' checklists for rivals

May 1, 2009
AWARE'S EMERGENCY MEETING TOMORROW
Readers' checklists for rivals
Is new guard believable on inclusiveness?

AS A longstanding, if temporarily lapsed, associate member of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware), I read new executive committee (exco) president Josie Lau's letter on Tuesday, 'What being inclusive means', with interest.

Ms Lau rightly notes that Aware is a secular and inclusive organisation. Words now need to be matched with deeds. I would be grateful if Ms Lau could answer the following questions:

# Aware has always tried to reflect the cultural diversity of Singapore society. How many women from minority communities are on the new exco?

# Aware has always been open to people with a wide range of religious beliefs, including free thinkers. Do members of a single religious group now constitute a majority on the new exco?

# Aware has always been an autonomous organisation, with its officers acting independently of any other organisation. Are the majority of the new exco members connected to any single organisation, religious or otherwise?

# Aware has always abided by a fundamental Singapore value that has again been reinforced by government ministers this week - separation of religion and politics. Has any religious organisation to which new exco members are affiliated actively solicited its members to join Aware and vote at either the annual general meeting or extraordinary general meeting?

Clear, straightforward answers to these questions from Ms Lau will enable Aware members, and Singaporeans in general, to decide for themselves on the issues involved.

Philip Holden

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.223

Workshops were funded by donation

Workshops were funded by donation

Friday • May 1, 2009

THE sex education workshops conducted by Aware at 11 secondary schools last year was fully subsidised, thanks to a donation from the Chen Su Lan Trust.

Each workshop cost between $500 and $600 but was free for the schools, which have not yet been named publicly.

Yesterday, former Aware president Constance Singam revealed to Today that $35,000 out of the $113,000 donated by the Chen Su Lan Trust last year was spent on the free Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) workshops at schools.

Asked if he was aware of the content of the CSE programme, Reverend Yap Kim Hao, the chairman of the Chen Su Lan Trust, said that he had been given a “rough outline” of the programme, but he had not seen the teaching materials. When Today showed him two pages of the CSE trainers’ manual, which stated that “anal sex can be healthy” and that “homosexuality is perfectly normal”, Rev Yap said that he “had no problems” with the content.

“I recognise there are dissenting views, but these have to be presented and it’s up to the student to make a decision so (the trainer) is not promoting one particular view,” said Rev Yap.

The 80-year-old is a retired Bishop of the Methodist Church here and currently pastoral adviser to the Free Community Church. According to the church’s website, it accepts same-sex relationships and welcomes lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered persons. Esther Ng

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.273

AWARE, The Straits Times exposed!‏

AWARE, The Straits Times exposed!‏

The inordinately extensive and daily coverage of the AWARE leadership tussle exposes and underscores the provincialism of Singapore’s press, the Straits Times in particular.

Any thinking person, with a modicum of appreciation of what constitutes news, must marvel over the MSM’s (mainstream media) ability to ignore the real issues of the day in Singapore while focusing so much of its might on what was primarily a parochial affair.

Instead of enlightening Singaporeans on the pressing issues confronting us – events that beg many questions and offer much scope for enquiry – our national press chooses to rivet readers’ attention through a daily barrage of reporting on the dispute of a marginal organization, till recently, of no more than 100 or 200 feminists.

Has the subservient MSM lost its way, just as AWARE allegedly had lost its own focus and objective?

It is incredible that the full strength of the MSM’s reporting staff had failed so remarkably to ferret out the real issue of the leadership coup – until spoon-fed by the protagonist.

In the not too distant days of yore, one of my rookie reporters would surely have enlightened us, and quite early on, too.

The Straits Times’s willingness to manipulate, or be manipulated (wittingly so) by minority interest groups, is so clear for all to see: any image consultant worth his salt will promptly point out how the ST’s photo/news editor had deliberately selected for publication the most frumpy photos of the new committee while editing so dramatically the most flattering portraits of the old, ousted committee members.

Sure, concern over AWARE’s alleged espousal of the cause of lesbianism and homosexuality was at the crux of the crisis. But this is no longer the hot issue of the day.

Aren’t there other pressing national issues worth examining? Is Singapore so boring that a storm in a teacup should excite the brains of its handpicked leaders? Should the people who wield the mighty pen (in our newspaper offices) engage in such peevishness? And be so actively stoking it up into a national controversy?

If our national press is truly unable to focus on what concern more Singaporeans than what used to engage a handful of AWARE feminists, may I suggest that it thinks about real national issues and cease its tomfoolery. May I offer some news gathering tips to our wayward press:

· Stop conducting yourself like a mosquito press while holding – by default only – the mantle of a national daily

· Be serious and desist from propagating a modern version of yellow culture in your pages or so-called Life-style sections (“Bollywood’s newest hotties”! My foot! Only good upbringing constrain me from a rude retort; MITA whither art thou?)

· Stop flaunting semi-nude bodies in your life-style pages or flashing regularly the bust lines of dumb broads, and exalting the careers of those engaged in promoting the bacchanalian life styles of geeks and Zouks

· Desist from playing up the prating of some misguided, immature, amorous young reporter who boasts about squeezing some exposed part of a film or rock star (such a confession should, in a court of law, rightly result in a charge of criminal molestation)

· Tell us about the vast disparity of incomes in our so-called 1st World economic miracle and how suffering Singaporeans are coping with the recession

· Instead of giving him scant attention, tell us more and truthfully about Kenneth Jeyaretnam, JBJ’s second son and his dream for the Reform Party. What about his brother Philip?

· Tell us also about the millions being frittered away everyday to finance the myriad failed bio-tech start-ups, and round it up with a balance sheet of Singapore’s successes-failures in this field – and what prospect the future holds

· Tell us something about how our Ah Bengs and Ah Lians are coping in this new world order and with unemployment, or do they not exist?

· Explain how that Singapore family could lose its 5-room HDB flat, and fall through the cracks of MCDYS’s social benefits safety net to spend the past year cadging for food and sleeping on park benches

· If the Straits Times press could devote a full page to profiling China’s five rising stars, why do our leaders in Temasek remain anonymous? Can’t get an interview with them? Surely!

· How will Singapore hope to recover some of its lost national wealth in the world’s economic downturn?

· If even a Warren Buffett could be caught out by the economic downturn and make some massive investment mistakes why is blogosphere so unkind to and unreasonable with Ho Ching?

· If Singapore could throw up a Ho Ching, a truly remarkable woman, why are so few women in parliament and just one has become a full fledge cabinet minister? (This is one issue the old AWARE could have shown some gumption in pursuing)

· Tell us how are our million guest workers, especially the lower-skilled ones, coping with Singapore’s recession and what is their likely fate; this study could also include the sub-standard living conditions of these people, the prostitute camps that used to spring up overnight around their dormitories, and their exploitation by hard-pressed and ruthless employers

· We read that, together with the 1.8k workers whose contracts were terminated prematurely, total redundancy in Singapore increased to a record 12.6k in 1Q09. Obviously, poor people do not exist in the MSM’s world; everyone seems to be happily employed only in media and marketing, if not in the press

· Tells us also what it means to our society to have a trade volume that is three times our GDP; does this not affect our values?

· Throw the spotlight on our local banks, e.g. how did the still independent OCBC and UOB manage to escape being caught more deeply in CDOs and toxic assets of other banks?

· How is Wee Cho Yaw planning his leadership renewal and how he built up his father’s little bank into the behemoth it is today without a foreigner at the helm, while OCBC still struggles to raise its profile, and why DBS with all its patronage is not faring so well

· Stop publishing all the incredible ‘feel good’ stories that we read daily, e.g. how our displaced unemployed workers are merrily engaging in community work, how Mr Mohd Zainuddin is happily adapting to a lowly paid job (1/3 what he used to earn) and is so optimistically looking forward to promotion in his new found position, and signing for self-improvement marketing courses in his late middle-age

· And, if you are truly interested in why and how people become homosexual, conduct a real examination of this subject. Give us, in a non-partisan and objective manner, an intelligent digest of the question. So many people, including even senior cabinet ministers, still labour under much misunderstanding of this subject. Apparently, too, even our Minister Iswaran (Education) and the Ministry’s director of education programmes have not read the old AWARE’s manual on sex education before issuing a defence on the issue a few days ago.

The ideas thrown up above are quick from-the-hip suggestions that any news editor worth three-quarters his salt would suggest on a daily basis, even hourly if need be. That’s because, unlike now, the journalists of old used to be trained, sensitive, experienced and fiercely jealous of their independence. We were not automatons who had to wait for cues from news editors who reside outside the newsroom.

I know Saturday’s EGM at AWARE will throw up more morsels for the MSM to continue its feeding frenzy. If it is true that the newspapers of a country reflect the caliber and depth of a society’s intellect, then the MSM does Singaporeans much injustice.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.272

How much money did AWARE new exco spend since 28 March 2009?

How much money did AWARE new exco spend since 28 March 2009?

It has been a month since the new exco won the AGM elections of AWARE and while we are still unclear about their goals and vision for AWARE, they are certainly not ashamed to display their spending prowess for all to see.

From the changing of all the locks in the office in one night, reinstalling a new security system and to renting of a hall at Raffles Town Club to give their first press conference, the new ladies in charge have been quite alarmingly profilgate in their spending.

The venue at EGM was initially held at HSR Auditorium in Toa Payoh. What was the amount of deposit forfeited for the cancellation of booking when it was changed to the Singapore EXPO?

A half day use of Singapore EXPO Hall 2 on a weekend could have easily run up to a six figure sum according to friends we spoke to in the industry. The cost is S$50 + GST per pax per event day.

In the event of cancellation after the contract is signed, a progressive cancellation fee of up to 80% of the contractual amount will be levied.

Since the EGM was forced by the police to relocate to Suntec, it is unknown if the cancellation fee still applies.

The new venue at Suntec Exhibition Hall 402 doesn’t come cheap either and will be probably cost between S$20,000 to S$50,000 depending on the number of hours used and if refreshments are provided. Don’t forget this is not inclusive of the cost of engaging an external events organizer - APES communication. (CNA reported that Suntec will be ‘pricer’ without quoting the figures, read here)

AWARE new exco has also engaged Rajah & Tann as Aware’s legal advisers and said lawyers would be present to address questions that arise, including any on ‘matters intended to be transacted, Aware’s Constitution and meeting law and procedure’.

This is the first time AWARE has engaged a law firm to be present during its meetings.

We do not know the identities and numbers of lawyers who will be at present during AWARE’s EGM, but obviously none of them will be doing pro bono for AWARE.

According to inside sources, a Senior Counsel can command up to $300 to $500 dollars a hour for their time, a lawyer with 20 years of experience may cost $200 to $400 a hour. (note: this is a conservative estimate only)

Will the lawyers be representing the entire AWARE or the new exco? Who will be footing the bill? These are pressing questions which must be raised and addressed during the EGM.

Though the cost incurred so far can be defrayed partially or completely by the fees collected lately from the spike in membership, it still doesn’t make economic sense to spend so much money in so short a time when there are cheaper alternatives available.

AWARE is a secular NGO whose funds are derived from a number of sources. As and far as possible, its funds should be managed prudently to serve the interests of the community while keeping its operating expenses to minimum.

The new exco doesn’t inspire confidence from the way it manages AWARE’s finances. As a non-profit organization, we would expect them to pay closer attention to fiscal matters instead of splurging unnecessarily.

AWARE members may like to consider if there are grounds to lodge a complaint to the Registry of Societies for possible misuse of money of the society under provision 19 of the Societies Act (CAP 311).


http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.271

Pastor Derek Hong contradicts himself in his statement on Aware connection

Pastor Derek Hong contradicts himself in his statement on Aware connection

In the statement from Church of Our Savior on Aware connection released on 30 April 2009, Pastor Derek Hong blamed the media “creating the perception” that his church was behind the move to take over AWARE.

He claimed that “Church of Our Saviour did not initiate or instigate any campaign to take over the leadership of AWARE.”

However, it was widely known and acknowledged that it was Dr Thio Su Mien, the “feminist mentor” from COOS who sent out emails attached with the AWARE application form a few weeks beforethe AGM on 28 March 2009 imploring fellow Christians to sign up for its membership and cast a vote to change its direction.

It is not a surprise that 6 of the office holders of AWARE are from COOS. In fact, many of the new members who voted at the AGM for the first time might be from COOS too.

Is Dr Thio getting in her own individual capacity as a “concerned” parent or is she receiving tacit support from the church?

If COOS is not involved in the leadership grab in Aware, Pastor Hong should have distanced himself from the actions of Josie Lau and her team. Instead, he called on his congregation during a sermon last Saturday to lend support to them:

“We are in a season where things are being shaken. As a church, we believe in what the ladies are doing and Alan of course is part of the process as well and so we want to just lift them up for what the Devil is trying to do, God will turn it in the glory of its name.” (read full article here)

Obviously Pastor Hong believed in and supported the take over of Aware. It’s hard to believe that he has no prior knowledge of the plan hatched by members of COOS to seize control of the organization to push its own religious agenda into mainstream society.

Pastor Hong denied that that “the exco is a pawn of the church or that it has intentions to turn it into a religious organization”.

If this is indeed the case, why is he, as a non-member of Aware, interfering in its EGM by encouraging people to join Aware to support the new team?

In a weekend sermon posted on its website, Pastor Derek Hong urged the women in his flock to ‘be engaged’ and support Ms Lau and ‘her sisters’ at Aware. (read article here)

Isn’t asking COOS members to join Aware en masse with the sole intention of supporting Josie Lau tantamount to converting it to a pseudo-religious organization which is closely affliated to COOS?

During the same sermon last Saturday, he told a crowd of 5,000, he compared homosexuals to thiefs, drunkards and liars:

“No where in the bible is homosexuality condoned. Every time the practice of homosexuality is mentioned, there is strong prohibition and judgement, right through the bible. At the same time, it is very clear that homosexual practice is not seen as the worst kind of sin, in fact God doesn’t grade sins, all sin is sin. So homosexuality is like other wrongdoings like idolators, thiefs, drunkards, liars are included in the same breath as homosexual offenders.”

In fact, he had lashed out against homosexuals and the “agenda” of gay activists several times in the past to the extent of demonizing them as being “used by Satan” to destroy the Church which contradicts his statement that his church has no agenda against homosexuals (listen to his speeches here)

Pastor Hong promised that he will not allow his pulpit to be used to intentionally teach anything that would arouse social tensions, divisions and unrest.

Unfortunately, his open call to stop Singapore from “crossing the line drawn by God” is discomforting and intimidating to those who do not share his belief:

“It’s not a crusade against the people but there’s a line that God has drawn for us, and we don’t want our nation crossing that line.”

Does Pastor Hong know that Singapore is a multi-racial and multi-cultural country and the “line” God has drawn for Christians does apply to non-believers? So how can he use the name of Singapore to defend his “crusade” against the sexual minorities?

There are many Singaporeans out there who do not share his views that homosexuality is a sin which must be corrected at all cost.

If Pastor Hong is really sincere in keeping COOS out of Aware’s internal affairs, he should issue the following statements to publicly dissociate the church from Aware and its new exco:

1. COOS does not support or endorse the actions of its members, namely Josie Lau and the other 5 exco members of Aware.

2. While COOS remain steadfast in its belief on homosexuality based on the Bible, it will not seek to impose or propagate it in mainstream society.

3. COOS members should sign up for Aware membership at their own discretion. The Church does not encourage or discourage members from serving in secular NGOs.

The official statement from COOS is in reality a hollow statement bereft of any meaning or importance until COOS stop mobilizing its members to influence the outcome of Aware’s EGM.

It is nothing more than another ploy of Pastor Hong to deflect intense public pressure from COOS and to buy himself some precious time.

The target audience of his message is not the public, but the authorities to allay their suspicions and concerns of his real motives.

Perhaps Pastor Hong is aware of Chapter XV of the Penal Code:

Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion or race and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony
298A. Whoever ––

(a) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, knowingly promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion or race, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious or racial groups; or

(b) commits any act which he knows is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious or racial groups and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquility,



shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years, or with fine, or with both.

[source: Statues]

Pastor Hong is running on borrowed time and this latest PR stunt may prove too late to convince the public that he is no threat to Singapore’s multi-racial and multi-religious society.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27734.270