le_englishmajor

Check out this site: http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/about/article/336/ 

Interesting take on current affairs and issues that concern human behavior, society, politics, and the like. 

Tell us what you think!

le_englishmajor

In 2006, mrbrown was suspended from TODAY newspaper after his article ‘Singaporeans are fed, up with progress!’ (http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2006/07/today_sporeans_.html) was published in July. Three days after this article appeared, a letter from K Bhavani, Press Secretary to MICA, was also published (http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2006/07/letter_from_mic.html).

A hot debate about censorship in the media soon followed after mrbrown’s suspension and the subsequent resignations of Mr Miyagi, a fellow blogger and TODAY columnist, as well as the editors of TODAY by the end of 2006. 

Today, mrbrown is still continuing with his podcasts and blog, www.mrbrown.com , on which he still expresses his opinions about events in Singapore.

In the 2006 National Day Rally, PM Lee also made references to this issue: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/nationalday/rally/english6.htm (Section 9e).

Practice the AQ!

To what extent should the “mainstream mass media” (as quoted from PM Lee’s speech be subject to censorship? Your answer should make reference to the passages and your own knowledge and examples.

*NB: It is important to understand the context of the situation above as well as the issues raised by the situation, before you attempt this question.
 

kampongexpress

I refer to article On Section 377A ... Forum on gay law well-attended, but change unlikely MPs

I personally feel that before for Singapore to actually progress as a society, our government must be more politically open. From the article I can feel Mr. Baey frustration on the whip which disallows him to comment on section 337A any further. He was being forced to do so to protect the government's interest or rather People Action's Party (PAP) interest. The homosexuals community are still consider the minority in Singapore, and the survey results does do them any good, as most of the people still disagree of homosexuality in Singapore.

Singaporeans are people who are more realistic and down to earth. The small community must show what good and significant they can bring to the society before they will be accepted. Such is the case of IRs where 10 years ago, it was unacceptable by the people's context but now due to the great amount of money it can bring in, the government accepted this proposal. Thus money is still the thing that makes the world goes round.

"Pitching your arguments in terms of civil rights ... will not take it very far." This point shows that the fabric of Singapore is closely knitted by religion and people. People are the only human resource in Singapore, and religion are beliefs of the people. From my own personal knowledge, no religions have admitted homosexual are accepted. This poses a mountainous task for the homosexual community to convince the government. Let me remind all readers that Singapore is a socialist society not a democratic one. The differences between these two are that civil and human rights are only given to the right extent to protect the Country's interest. While in a Democratic society eg. USA, human rights are deemed above the law. This explains for the approval of gay marriages in California.

I myself, approve the existence of gay and hope to see them in Singapore. Not because I¡¯m gay or because I have no religion. But I do really hope to see Singapore progress as a society. Based on my own knowledge, no Asian country have approved of gay marriages, Singapore the first to do so? Why not? After all WE are a "city of possibilities".

Read your articles here :  http://comunity.livejournal.com/curious_minds/1786.html#cutid1

nirosha_03

It has been an unofficial saying that homosexuals are more creative and artistic than hetrosexuals. However it may not be true. But there are reasons for us to believe such as well. In my opinion, a homosexual would be much better in expressing himself creatively and artistically. If a homosexual is bold enough to let know his true identity in a society in which homosexuality is alomost a taboo. I think he or she would be bold enough to express himself much better than a hetrosexual both artistically and creatively.  Not that a hetrosexual is unable to do such, but i feel that the homosexuals are more bolder in doing so.

Refering to the first article,

We realise that our Singapore stage plays have been one of the first few to portary homosexuals in a positive way even before SCV or other movies did. Chay Yew's Ten Little Indians are one of the examples of such plays, which came out in 1988. In some of the plays like Jakson On A Jaunt by Eleanor Wong, the Ministry of Community Development even withdrew its funding as they were afraid that homosexuality might be encouraged as normal in the Singaporean society.  From this it is quite obvious that homosexuality is considered a taboo not only in the society but also in media, like stage play. Being homosexual does not come from influence but it comes genetically. The government was not willing to accept that and it even criminalizes homosexual activities such as oral or anal sex.. It is obviously a preference of a person like how one is allowed to smoke and drink alcohol which is harmful to the health. In my opinion the government should give people freedom in their actions when it comes to issues such as this. I feel that one has their own right in deciding if they were to be a heterosexual or homosexual according to their genetics.  That does not mean that the government should allow homosexual marriages. But they should not criminalize their homosexual activities. The local theatre has been portraying homosexuality in a positive way even from the time when the topic of gay was a taboo.

Refering to the second article, its very obvious that homosexuality is not only a non-taboo subject but it is accepted in a society such as San Francisco. They even hold parades to celebrate their identity as a homosexual. If it is acceptable in other countries, why not Singapore?  Why cant we accept our people as who they are and not intimidate them by criminalizing homosexuality. In  my second article a woman has mentioned that she will not allow her child to brought up in a society where homosexuality is acceptable though she knows as a personal in the medical field that it come with the genes. Homosexuals are not monsters from whom we should run away from. They do not harm us. They are human being as wells. They are jus like how normal people are but they only differ in their love partner as they fall in love with someone of the same gender rather then someone of  an opposite gender like most of us in our society.

Article 1: http://www.fridae.com/newsfeatures/article.php?articleid=1725&viewarticle=1&searchtype=author&textby=Ng+Yi-sheng

Article 2:  http://www.straitstimes.com/ST+Forum/Online+Story/STIStory_140397.html