Today I attended a friend’s wedding. It was nice catching up with people whom I’ve not seen for some time. Later on when they were doing a screening of their lives together (the marring couple) I felt sad. Sad because T and I will never have a chance to have family and friends together to enjoy and give us their blessings. The world is just so unfair but then again since when is the world fair.
Even if we are in a place (like Canada) where same-sex marriages are permitted, this type of celebration of the union will never happen. I have thought about this and I realised that in the Asian context, it has never been anything to do with religion or religious views, in face Buddhism never stated that anything is sinful or wrong (except when it causes great harm to another person) unless you indulge in it. Like drinking, sex, etc. In Asia, the important part of getting married is so that you can continue the family name. This is our culture. So unlike in America (yea, the ‘greatest’ human rights country) where the objection to same-sex marriages is based in Christianity, in Asia it is because of carrying on the family line.
So there I was sitting there, enjoying the wedding banquet and my friends but felling very sad that this can never happen to me.
29 May 2005
18 May 2005
West Wing and more
I just watched the “West Wing” episode 25 (yes, yes I know it is really OLD but hey I just obtained the DVDs recently so don’t flame me. :P I love the show but I think this episode really stands out because of the way the President (played by Martin Sheen) reprimanded a Laura Schlessinger like person. If you are interested to know more about it you can go to this site and read it.
I don’t want to comment anything about it. I want to talk about the fundamentalist christians’ reaction to it.
I’ve read a number of websites dedicated to this ‘speech’ and most of them are by the fundamentalist christians’ who cited reasons why this speech is flawed. And the most important thing that hit me is that they say we (GLTB and the producers of “West Wing”) take these verses out of context. Gosh! The audacity! So when we quote the bible to justify our existence (created not made and still loved by God) we are taking it out of context and when they do it, it is right and proper. No they definitely do not take the quotes against homosexuality out of context. Of course not, why Jesus came to preach separation, discrimination and bigotry. He came to condemn the sinners and to exalt the Jews, especially the Pharisees and Sadducees. He told people to judge because by judging, your Father in heaven will praise you.
These people believed that Jesus will condemn the GLTB community if he was alive today. The same way the Pharisees and Sadducees believed that the Christ would condemn the tax-collectors and prostitutes of that time. Jesus welcomed the outcast, telling them that God loves them because they are his children. And that is the most important part of Jesus teachings, loving the outcast, Jesus never gave lip service, he did these things. That is why Mother Teresa is considered a Saint (note the capital S) because she really was Jesus in the flesh. She loved the outcast and loved being seen with them, like Jesus who preferred to be with the outcast then with the rich, wealthy and effluent.
I don’t want to comment anything about it. I want to talk about the fundamentalist christians’ reaction to it.
I’ve read a number of websites dedicated to this ‘speech’ and most of them are by the fundamentalist christians’ who cited reasons why this speech is flawed. And the most important thing that hit me is that they say we (GLTB and the producers of “West Wing”) take these verses out of context. Gosh! The audacity! So when we quote the bible to justify our existence (created not made and still loved by God) we are taking it out of context and when they do it, it is right and proper. No they definitely do not take the quotes against homosexuality out of context. Of course not, why Jesus came to preach separation, discrimination and bigotry. He came to condemn the sinners and to exalt the Jews, especially the Pharisees and Sadducees. He told people to judge because by judging, your Father in heaven will praise you.
These people believed that Jesus will condemn the GLTB community if he was alive today. The same way the Pharisees and Sadducees believed that the Christ would condemn the tax-collectors and prostitutes of that time. Jesus welcomed the outcast, telling them that God loves them because they are his children. And that is the most important part of Jesus teachings, loving the outcast, Jesus never gave lip service, he did these things. That is why Mother Teresa is considered a Saint (note the capital S) because she really was Jesus in the flesh. She loved the outcast and loved being seen with them, like Jesus who preferred to be with the outcast then with the rich, wealthy and effluent.
17 May 2005
The all loving, all accepting Catholic Church
Gay Catholics Denied Communion
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
Posted: May 16, 2005 12:01 am ET
(St. Paul, Minnesota) A group of about 100 gay Roman Catholics and their supporters were denied Holy Communion at Pentecost Mass at the Cathedral of St. Paul on Sunday.
The Rainbow Sash Alliance has been taking Communion on Pentecost at the Cathedral for the past four years, but Archbishop Harry Flynn changed the policy this year, under pressure from the Vatican.
Earlier this month Flynn, in a letter to the Rainbow Sash Alliance, warned that members would be denied communion because their sashes were seen as a protest against Catholic teaching and unacceptable to the Vatican.
"I am asking you to remove your sashes before you receive Holy Communion," Flynn wrote. "I ask you to observe this sign of respect for the Eucharist not only in the Cathedral but in all our parishes. No one wearing the sash will be permitted to receive the Blessed Sacrament."
The Rainbow Sash movement is an international organization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Catholics and their families and friends.
Among those who attended mass Sunday were Dominican Sister Donna Quinn, director of the National Coalition of American Nuns, Joseph and Barbara Parot of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) and long time Catholic gay rights activist Rick Garcia.
After the sash wearers were denied, Sister Donna, the Parots and Garcia approached the altar and received Communion. To the surprise of some, including the sash wearers, the four then approached the sash-wearers and gave them a portion of their consecrated hosts.
"It is a scandal that the Body of Christ would be denied to a baptized Catholic who approached the altar simply because of what he or she was wearing. I am still shocked and in disbelief that the priest would deny these people," said Sister Donna Quinn. "The Eucharist should not be used as a political tool and that is exactly what Cardinal George has made it."
Sister Quinn and the Parots approached the priest after Mass and expressed their displeasure and sadness at his action.
"Some priests and bishops throughout the country have denied communion to sash wearers today. How many of these same priests have ever denied anyone else communion?" Garcia asked. "This has nothing to do with upholding Church teaching and it has everything to do with rank anti-gay sentiment."
©365Gay.com 2005
------
Oh yea, Jesus came to teach us discrimination and he came save only the few, I get it now.
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
Posted: May 16, 2005 12:01 am ET
(St. Paul, Minnesota) A group of about 100 gay Roman Catholics and their supporters were denied Holy Communion at Pentecost Mass at the Cathedral of St. Paul on Sunday.
The Rainbow Sash Alliance has been taking Communion on Pentecost at the Cathedral for the past four years, but Archbishop Harry Flynn changed the policy this year, under pressure from the Vatican.
Earlier this month Flynn, in a letter to the Rainbow Sash Alliance, warned that members would be denied communion because their sashes were seen as a protest against Catholic teaching and unacceptable to the Vatican.
"I am asking you to remove your sashes before you receive Holy Communion," Flynn wrote. "I ask you to observe this sign of respect for the Eucharist not only in the Cathedral but in all our parishes. No one wearing the sash will be permitted to receive the Blessed Sacrament."
The Rainbow Sash movement is an international organization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Catholics and their families and friends.
Among those who attended mass Sunday were Dominican Sister Donna Quinn, director of the National Coalition of American Nuns, Joseph and Barbara Parot of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) and long time Catholic gay rights activist Rick Garcia.
After the sash wearers were denied, Sister Donna, the Parots and Garcia approached the altar and received Communion. To the surprise of some, including the sash wearers, the four then approached the sash-wearers and gave them a portion of their consecrated hosts.
"It is a scandal that the Body of Christ would be denied to a baptized Catholic who approached the altar simply because of what he or she was wearing. I am still shocked and in disbelief that the priest would deny these people," said Sister Donna Quinn. "The Eucharist should not be used as a political tool and that is exactly what Cardinal George has made it."
Sister Quinn and the Parots approached the priest after Mass and expressed their displeasure and sadness at his action.
"Some priests and bishops throughout the country have denied communion to sash wearers today. How many of these same priests have ever denied anyone else communion?" Garcia asked. "This has nothing to do with upholding Church teaching and it has everything to do with rank anti-gay sentiment."
©365Gay.com 2005
------
Oh yea, Jesus came to teach us discrimination and he came save only the few, I get it now.
11 May 2005
Working in Australia
I have been holding an Australian PR since January last year. I have been planning to work in Australia for a while now and maybe become an Australian or come back after a number of years (thinking for 8 to 10, to gain enough experience). Who knows what the future holds. All I know is that I'm not making any plans that are caste in stone. Just praying for discernment and knowing that the Lord will bless and help me.
A number of people asked my why PR if I just wanted to work there. There is a simple reason, there is no way I'll get a job here if I require a work permit. Unlike in Singapore, getting work permits in Australia is a great hassle and no company would bother to hire a foreigner if there is local equivalent. Less hassle.
I've just sent my CV to a professor that I spoke to earlier today (I was at a conference and so happens his lab is in Melbourne). He gave me a short interview and said that I fit in perfectly to what they required to replace a person that has left. So I'd most probably get this job and I really hope so.
So the wheels have started turning and things seem to be moving very smoothly. I am blessed.
T knows about my plans and because of this he has decided that he would like to do what I'm doing too, get PR to work in Australia for a while. The experience would do us both good. I know things would work out well, with the Lord guiding and blessing me.
A number of people asked my why PR if I just wanted to work there. There is a simple reason, there is no way I'll get a job here if I require a work permit. Unlike in Singapore, getting work permits in Australia is a great hassle and no company would bother to hire a foreigner if there is local equivalent. Less hassle.
I've just sent my CV to a professor that I spoke to earlier today (I was at a conference and so happens his lab is in Melbourne). He gave me a short interview and said that I fit in perfectly to what they required to replace a person that has left. So I'd most probably get this job and I really hope so.
So the wheels have started turning and things seem to be moving very smoothly. I am blessed.
T knows about my plans and because of this he has decided that he would like to do what I'm doing too, get PR to work in Australia for a while. The experience would do us both good. I know things would work out well, with the Lord guiding and blessing me.
06 May 2005
Discrimination - Singapore style
A few days ago, there was an article in the newspaper regarding this condominium in Singapore that told a security agency that they didn’t want Indian security guards, I thought, “wow, Singapore is starting to be very bold in their discrimination”.
Today in the Straits Times forum page, there were a lot of people who cried foul about this, saying that discrimination and bigotry should have no place in a society in Singapore. Now that got me thinking, if it was an ad for no gays wanted or allowing of a gay activity (like a forum, talk or party) would these people still say things the same way or is anti-discrimination only for races or age or religion but not sexual orientation. Well, this is what Martha Luther King predicted when he was fighting racism in America. He said (to paraphrase) “a threat to anyone's basic rights is a threat to everyone's basic rights”. This is so true. I speculate that the committee of the condominium is Chinese (most probably), effluent and English speaking, which makes them think that their own prejudices are valid. It starts off with one group and it will extend to others, this is how discrimination works, especially when one group of people think they are better and more superior to another. And as we can see, it has started. Discrimination against minorities in Singapore is nothing new, starting with older workers, going onto gays and lesbians and now race. Well, we have no anti-discrimination laws here. Lets see how long the gahmen can pretend that these laws are not needed but then even if they do, the GLTB community will NOT benefit from it.
These people, like the right wing Christians in Singapore, who think that their own opinions and values (which are religiously based) are the opinions and values of the whole of Singapore, don’t these people know that Christians only account for at most 20% of Singapore’s population!* It is not even the a simple majority of the population. Gosh, who are they to dictate to the masses? Preaching to a mostly Buddhist population. Good examples are the casino where they believed their opinion hold the ultimate truth because their religion is the ultimate truth, see that is discrimination by itself. The other is the fight against AIDS, they are so against preaching condom usage that it has started to make matters worse. There are more and more people in Singapore who are having sex without a condom, especially with people they don’t know. They believe their own morals is right, but they account for less than 20% of the population, who are they, the minority, to dictate, to the majority that they should be faithful to one partner. Their words fall on deaf ears but do they know that? No! So instead of AIDS support groups like Afa going the, use a condom route, they are forcing them and indeed the gahmen to go the abstinence route. Is this working? Nope, but they still will not change their tune because they believe they have the ultimate true. When will people realise that if another doesn’t belong to your group, they will never listen. Imagine, the LOUD minority.
*In 2000 the number of people who declared that they are Christians was 14.6% (up from 12.7% in 1990). Compare this with people who declared that they were Buddhist in 2000 was 42.5% (up from 31.2% in 1990)
Today in the Straits Times forum page, there were a lot of people who cried foul about this, saying that discrimination and bigotry should have no place in a society in Singapore. Now that got me thinking, if it was an ad for no gays wanted or allowing of a gay activity (like a forum, talk or party) would these people still say things the same way or is anti-discrimination only for races or age or religion but not sexual orientation. Well, this is what Martha Luther King predicted when he was fighting racism in America. He said (to paraphrase) “a threat to anyone's basic rights is a threat to everyone's basic rights”. This is so true. I speculate that the committee of the condominium is Chinese (most probably), effluent and English speaking, which makes them think that their own prejudices are valid. It starts off with one group and it will extend to others, this is how discrimination works, especially when one group of people think they are better and more superior to another. And as we can see, it has started. Discrimination against minorities in Singapore is nothing new, starting with older workers, going onto gays and lesbians and now race. Well, we have no anti-discrimination laws here. Lets see how long the gahmen can pretend that these laws are not needed but then even if they do, the GLTB community will NOT benefit from it.
These people, like the right wing Christians in Singapore, who think that their own opinions and values (which are religiously based) are the opinions and values of the whole of Singapore, don’t these people know that Christians only account for at most 20% of Singapore’s population!* It is not even the a simple majority of the population. Gosh, who are they to dictate to the masses? Preaching to a mostly Buddhist population. Good examples are the casino where they believed their opinion hold the ultimate truth because their religion is the ultimate truth, see that is discrimination by itself. The other is the fight against AIDS, they are so against preaching condom usage that it has started to make matters worse. There are more and more people in Singapore who are having sex without a condom, especially with people they don’t know. They believe their own morals is right, but they account for less than 20% of the population, who are they, the minority, to dictate, to the majority that they should be faithful to one partner. Their words fall on deaf ears but do they know that? No! So instead of AIDS support groups like Afa going the, use a condom route, they are forcing them and indeed the gahmen to go the abstinence route. Is this working? Nope, but they still will not change their tune because they believe they have the ultimate true. When will people realise that if another doesn’t belong to your group, they will never listen. Imagine, the LOUD minority.
*In 2000 the number of people who declared that they are Christians was 14.6% (up from 12.7% in 1990). Compare this with people who declared that they were Buddhist in 2000 was 42.5% (up from 31.2% in 1990)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
