Egad, another one AND Gay Rights Cancelled
Reading in the paper today, two things. Another hyphenated name. They are all over the place. "Angela Barabash-McCann" (http://www.edmontonsun.ca/Comment/Letters/2007/08/04/4392996.html)
Then read an article in which a gay rights forum in Singapore was canceled in which a retired Canadian law professor was to speak at.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070803/singapore_canadian_070803/20070803?hub=Canada
I can understand the forum being canceled knowing Singapore's low tolerance for anything out of the 'norm' for their way of life. Gov't knows best and the best way to keep the public safe is to ban all possible things to confuse the public. Movies, shows, life style, addictive substances all have to be properly monitored by the gov't or else people might get hurt. I can even say that I support the saying that countries have no right entering into other countries telling them what to do there. I know I would take major offense to Singapore's telling Canada that they are too light on the punishment of others and that we should start hanging them by the huge numbers that Singapore does, or say that we should beat our criminals like Singaporeans have no trouble doing (but only the men..women shouldn't be caned).
The one statement that I found head scratching was "Our laws are an expression and reflection of the values of our society". Granted I am no expert on Singaporean life and thought. I have to admit that my knowledge of Singaporean mentality about what is valued in society is limited to a Singaporean wife and her friends, but I really didn't see a huge hatred of homosexuals in those people. Everytime a forum or movie was banned due to 'homosexual concerns', they were rather outspoken about the banning than the act. Almost as if the people were ok to have others love whatever gender the person choose to love. Made me wonder then, if the laws are an expression and reflection of what the PAP deem to be acceptable and valued in society.
Granted, this sort of thing happens even here in Canada where a Nova Scotian mayor refused to raise the gay pride flag during the gay pride event (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070803/against_pride_flag_080803/20070803?hub=Canada) Though their excuse was that the gay movement clashes with their christian belief. So which is worse, allowing the gay pride to hold a day but not to raise the flag, or ban a homosexual forum completely and ban the actual sex act because 'the law is a reflection of the beliefs of the society values'?
Gay rights forum featuring Canadian cancelled
Updated Fri. Aug. 3 2007 11:13 AM ET
Associated Press
SINGAPORE --
Authorities in Singapore on Friday banned a gay rights forum at which a retired Canadian law professor was to speak, the second time in a week the city-state has forbidden an event that touches on gay issues.
The forum was to feature Douglas Sanders, a professor emeritus in law at the University of British Columbia, and Thailand's Chulalongkorn University, the event's organizer, Alex Au, told The Associated Press.
But because the Aug. 7 forum, titled "Sexual Orientation in International Law: The Case of Asia," was deemed contrary to public interest, police cancelled the event's license Friday and immigration authorities rejected Sander's visa application, Singapore's Home Affairs Ministry said.
"Our laws are an expression and reflection of the values of our society; the discourse over a domestic issue such as the laws that govern homosexuality in Singapore must be reserved for Singaporeans ... foreigners should refrain from interfering," the statement said.
But Au, the forum's organizer, said Sanders had no such intention.
"He was going to do a lecture in Singapore about international trends. He is not an expert on Singapore and had no intention of talking about Singapore," Au said.
Singapore's censors earlier in the week banned an exhibition of photographs depicting gay men and women kissing, also organized by Au, saying the images "promote a homosexual lifestyle, and cannot be allowed.''
The prohibitions have come amid a debate in the city-state on whether gay sex should be decriminalized. Singapore's founding leader, Lee Kuan Yew, a few months ago questioned the ban on gay sex, saying the government should not act as moral police.
Under Singapore law, gay sex is punishable by a maximum of two years in jail. Authorities have banned gay festivals and censored gay films, but despite the official ban on gay sex, there have been few prosecutions.
Then read an article in which a gay rights forum in Singapore was canceled in which a retired Canadian law professor was to speak at.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070803/singapore_canadian_070803/20070803?hub=Canada
I can understand the forum being canceled knowing Singapore's low tolerance for anything out of the 'norm' for their way of life. Gov't knows best and the best way to keep the public safe is to ban all possible things to confuse the public. Movies, shows, life style, addictive substances all have to be properly monitored by the gov't or else people might get hurt. I can even say that I support the saying that countries have no right entering into other countries telling them what to do there. I know I would take major offense to Singapore's telling Canada that they are too light on the punishment of others and that we should start hanging them by the huge numbers that Singapore does, or say that we should beat our criminals like Singaporeans have no trouble doing (but only the men..women shouldn't be caned).
The one statement that I found head scratching was "Our laws are an expression and reflection of the values of our society". Granted I am no expert on Singaporean life and thought. I have to admit that my knowledge of Singaporean mentality about what is valued in society is limited to a Singaporean wife and her friends, but I really didn't see a huge hatred of homosexuals in those people. Everytime a forum or movie was banned due to 'homosexual concerns', they were rather outspoken about the banning than the act. Almost as if the people were ok to have others love whatever gender the person choose to love. Made me wonder then, if the laws are an expression and reflection of what the PAP deem to be acceptable and valued in society.
Granted, this sort of thing happens even here in Canada where a Nova Scotian mayor refused to raise the gay pride flag during the gay pride event (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070803/against_pride_flag_080803/20070803?hub=Canada) Though their excuse was that the gay movement clashes with their christian belief. So which is worse, allowing the gay pride to hold a day but not to raise the flag, or ban a homosexual forum completely and ban the actual sex act because 'the law is a reflection of the beliefs of the society values'?
Gay rights forum featuring Canadian cancelled
Updated Fri. Aug. 3 2007 11:13 AM ET
Associated Press
SINGAPORE --
Authorities in Singapore on Friday banned a gay rights forum at which a retired Canadian law professor was to speak, the second time in a week the city-state has forbidden an event that touches on gay issues.
The forum was to feature Douglas Sanders, a professor emeritus in law at the University of British Columbia, and Thailand's Chulalongkorn University, the event's organizer, Alex Au, told The Associated Press.
But because the Aug. 7 forum, titled "Sexual Orientation in International Law: The Case of Asia," was deemed contrary to public interest, police cancelled the event's license Friday and immigration authorities rejected Sander's visa application, Singapore's Home Affairs Ministry said.
"Our laws are an expression and reflection of the values of our society; the discourse over a domestic issue such as the laws that govern homosexuality in Singapore must be reserved for Singaporeans ... foreigners should refrain from interfering," the statement said.
But Au, the forum's organizer, said Sanders had no such intention.
"He was going to do a lecture in Singapore about international trends. He is not an expert on Singapore and had no intention of talking about Singapore," Au said.
Singapore's censors earlier in the week banned an exhibition of photographs depicting gay men and women kissing, also organized by Au, saying the images "promote a homosexual lifestyle, and cannot be allowed.''
The prohibitions have come amid a debate in the city-state on whether gay sex should be decriminalized. Singapore's founding leader, Lee Kuan Yew, a few months ago questioned the ban on gay sex, saying the government should not act as moral police.
Under Singapore law, gay sex is punishable by a maximum of two years in jail. Authorities have banned gay festivals and censored gay films, but despite the official ban on gay sex, there have been few prosecutions.
posted by Capt_Canuck at 7:52 AM
1 Comments:
The Singa govt has been 'giving' out a lot of freedoms lately, and so once in a while, it still needs to show us whose boss. The govt giveth, and the govt taketh... Very S'porean, no?
Post a Comment
<< Home