31/05/2009
HOMOSEXUALITY IS A MENTAL DISORDER
By SuperAdamantium @ 4:08 AM :: 54 Views :: 0 Comments :: General
HOMOSEXUALITY IS A MENTAL DISORDER. Not convinced? Then read this factual account of what happened in the 1970s that forced the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from its list of disorders. Homosexual activists threatened and bullied the APA into submission. The APA did not come to this decision by scientific recourse. READ ALL ABOUT IT
http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/homosexual-activists-intimidate-american-psychiatric-association-into-removing-homosexuality-from-list-of-disorders/#more-20
Music Playlist 1
Friday, June 26, 2009
REACH Blog
29/05/2009
In Defence of Society's Standards
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/BlogUs/tabid/54/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/576/In-Defence-of-Societys-Standards.aspx
By SuperAdamantium @ 9:38 PM :: 46 Views :: 0 Comments :: Aspirations for REACH
The last time I checked, the MOE had fired AWARE as a sex education programme provider because of the latter’s promotion of gay propaganda. If calling a spade a spade is deemed moral bashing, I wonder what would one call MOE’s action? Moral execution? Yet MOE’s action was widely applauded by mainstream society.
Most of the moral decline in Western societies and now in Singaporean society that allowed for the rise of homosexual militancy almost unchecked stemmed firstly from a misplaced sense of societal harmony ------ that moral indignations are called moral bashings, that groups with aberrant norms or morals must be included to reach a consensus for the sake of harmony, that an amoral, laissez faire attitude is best.
The issue now is a fight over standards, moral standards for society. Not a fight over whether homosexuals have the right to live.
Standards cannot entertain exceptions, just like 1 metre must equal 100 centimetres ------ there are no exceptions to this measure. Or that the passing mark for an examination is 50.
You may fail to live up to the standard; but the standard stays. You don’t change the passing mark just so that you can pass. That’s subversion.
So the moral standard for sexuality in our society is heterosexuality. That which doesn’t make the grade then is deemed immoral. What’s immoral ------ homosexuality, bisexuality, paedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, sadomasochism, etc, whatever.
Homosexuals are now trying, through AWARE, through sex education programme in schools, through the media, the arts and politics to change society’s moral benchmark to include homosexuality as a pass.
Like I said, society’s moral standards should not change. You can fail to make the grade. You live to try another day. Nobody’s denying you the right to live. But mainstream society would and should deny homsosexual activists' efforts at corrupting and subverting our moral standards.
In Defence of Society's Standards
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/BlogUs/tabid/54/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/576/In-Defence-of-Societys-Standards.aspx
By SuperAdamantium @ 9:38 PM :: 46 Views :: 0 Comments :: Aspirations for REACH
The last time I checked, the MOE had fired AWARE as a sex education programme provider because of the latter’s promotion of gay propaganda. If calling a spade a spade is deemed moral bashing, I wonder what would one call MOE’s action? Moral execution? Yet MOE’s action was widely applauded by mainstream society.
Most of the moral decline in Western societies and now in Singaporean society that allowed for the rise of homosexual militancy almost unchecked stemmed firstly from a misplaced sense of societal harmony ------ that moral indignations are called moral bashings, that groups with aberrant norms or morals must be included to reach a consensus for the sake of harmony, that an amoral, laissez faire attitude is best.
The issue now is a fight over standards, moral standards for society. Not a fight over whether homosexuals have the right to live.
Standards cannot entertain exceptions, just like 1 metre must equal 100 centimetres ------ there are no exceptions to this measure. Or that the passing mark for an examination is 50.
You may fail to live up to the standard; but the standard stays. You don’t change the passing mark just so that you can pass. That’s subversion.
So the moral standard for sexuality in our society is heterosexuality. That which doesn’t make the grade then is deemed immoral. What’s immoral ------ homosexuality, bisexuality, paedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, sadomasochism, etc, whatever.
Homosexuals are now trying, through AWARE, through sex education programme in schools, through the media, the arts and politics to change society’s moral benchmark to include homosexuality as a pass.
Like I said, society’s moral standards should not change. You can fail to make the grade. You live to try another day. Nobody’s denying you the right to live. But mainstream society would and should deny homsosexual activists' efforts at corrupting and subverting our moral standards.
REACH Blog
9/5/2009
OVERSIGHT ON MOE REGARDIN AWARE SEX GUIDE
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/BlogUs/tabid/54/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/564/OVERSIGHT-ON-MOE-REGARDIN-AWARE-SEX-GUIDE.aspx
By Raymond Lo Wan Mou @ 5:52 PM :: 110 Views :: 0 Comments :: The Young Ones
Dear Reach Executive,
Ministry of Education (MOE) has announced the suspension of The Aware sexuality educational programme for all main stream schools.
I am thoroughly disappointed with MOE on why it takes so long to do this.
They are supposed to be professional educators moulding the future of this nation. Their fundamental responsibility is to nurture our children into good citizens, conscious of their responsibilities to their families, society and country.
Being a cabby and had picked up countless number of times students and youth, I know for a fact that our young ones of both sexes are very aggressive, covetous, disrespectful, destructive and full of expletives and vulgarity whenever they speak- every expression contains the 4 letter word. From some of their conversation, they have given me the impression that they had already engaged in all forms of sex at young age. Is it surprise that there are many teenagers’ abortion nowadays?
Allowing AWARE's sex guide in our mainstream schools for so long wittingly or unwitting by MOE has made the matter worse on our impassionate youth. And please MOE do not tell me that there is an oversight on your part on this important educational programme.
Of course, bad role model and indulgent parents also plays a crucial part on bad development of our young ones.
And why is it that MOE must wait for parents to complain of this unhealthy sex programme - only then they will review the guideline? Is it not their primary duty as professional educators to do this in the first place?
It is in this aspect that MOE has let down our parents and children in particular, and our society and nation in general.
Warmest Regards
OVERSIGHT ON MOE REGARDIN AWARE SEX GUIDE
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/BlogUs/tabid/54/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/564/OVERSIGHT-ON-MOE-REGARDIN-AWARE-SEX-GUIDE.aspx
By Raymond Lo Wan Mou @ 5:52 PM :: 110 Views :: 0 Comments :: The Young Ones
Dear Reach Executive,
Ministry of Education (MOE) has announced the suspension of The Aware sexuality educational programme for all main stream schools.
I am thoroughly disappointed with MOE on why it takes so long to do this.
They are supposed to be professional educators moulding the future of this nation. Their fundamental responsibility is to nurture our children into good citizens, conscious of their responsibilities to their families, society and country.
Being a cabby and had picked up countless number of times students and youth, I know for a fact that our young ones of both sexes are very aggressive, covetous, disrespectful, destructive and full of expletives and vulgarity whenever they speak- every expression contains the 4 letter word. From some of their conversation, they have given me the impression that they had already engaged in all forms of sex at young age. Is it surprise that there are many teenagers’ abortion nowadays?
Allowing AWARE's sex guide in our mainstream schools for so long wittingly or unwitting by MOE has made the matter worse on our impassionate youth. And please MOE do not tell me that there is an oversight on your part on this important educational programme.
Of course, bad role model and indulgent parents also plays a crucial part on bad development of our young ones.
And why is it that MOE must wait for parents to complain of this unhealthy sex programme - only then they will review the guideline? Is it not their primary duty as professional educators to do this in the first place?
It is in this aspect that MOE has let down our parents and children in particular, and our society and nation in general.
Warmest Regards
REACH Blog
6/5/2009
My Humble Thoughts on AWARE
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/BlogUs/tabid/54/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/561/My-Humble-Thoughts-on-AWARE.aspx
By Charisso @ 6:47 PM :: 85 Views :: 0 Comments :: Women, General
I am among those who attended the EGM on Saturday. I must say I have witnessed a demonstration of 'whoever is louder wins', because by sheer volume, one side has many times deprived the other of its right to deliver statements and even to reply to questions posed to them. While I am impressed by the pro-Old Guards party for their passion and firm belief in inclusiveness, I cannot say the same for the behaviour. I think it is basic courtesy not to interrupt when another person is talking, what's more, answering a question that was posed by themselves. Don't they want to hear the answer to their question? Or were they are only interested in shouting out their displeasure and fanning the emotions of the crowd? Throughout the meeting, there were cutting-in, booing and jeering while the Ex-Co was trying to reply. Josie did not even get a chance to deliver her President's Message in peace. I am appalled. I wonder what is the indication of this for the civic space in Singapore. I really have to applaud Josie's team for their courageous effort, standing up to the thousand plus people, railing and yelling at them for a full 7 hours. I for one, would not have been able to withstand it.
One other issue that bothered me was besides the 3000 who turned up, I wonder how informed the rest of the Singaporeans are about this matter. I recalled a survey done by the papers during the month-long report of this entire saga, majority were either not aware or not bothered. I think this is a cause for concern because everyone has to realise that their stand matters. We cannot rely on another person to make a choice for ourselves because logically, the other person may not make the choice that we want. If we have a choice, we should make it. If not, we have robbed ourselves of that right. And if the final result is not what we wanted, then we only have ourselves to blame because we did not voice out what we want. It is a consequence that the entire society has to bear because of apathy.
Thirdly, I have great reservations on the impartiality of the reports we have seen so far on the papers. One would have noticed a severely unbalanced 'air time' given to the Old Guards compared to the New Guards. Day after day, reports of perturbed, upset and disappointed Old Guards were splashed across the prime pages. May I ask, is this stirring up for sympathy votes? Is this stirring up of anti-New Ex-Co feelings? In my humble opinion, it really looks like it. Why do I not see the same treatment for the new Ex-Co members who received threats to their life and careers just because they stood up to fight for the good of our next generation! What is this! For as far as I can remember, when the first report came out on Good Friday papers, the New Guards were portrayed as power-grabbers who overthrew the overly-trusting Old Guards, the report likening it to a merciless coup. May I ask, which is merciless – a civilised and legitimate voting in of new people into the Ex-Co on the 28 March AGM or that unruly and unreasonable yelling and jeering for full 7 hours at the 2 May EGM? By the way, does the Constitution say that they can vote in a replacement Ex-Co right on the spot? Perhaps someone can clarify this.
Finally, as a parent to-be, I am most concerned what will be taught to my son in school. The unearthing of the contents of the CSE programme is the most harrowing yet consoling thing that has come out of the entire issue. Harrowing because of the questionable values that the programme imparts to unsuspecting young minds. I remember the astonishment I felt when I read that anal sex can be healthy so long as it is practised with a condom and with consent. The statement that pre-marital sex is actually neutral also sent a chill to my heart. Perhaps I am old-fashioned, but for me, even to see such statements in adult magazines would have been mind-boggling, what more for 12 to 18-year olds? What is the point of telling them that? Nevertheless, it is a consolation that the programme is being investigated now, and I think this episode has awakened many parents to take more interest in their children's lives. They are after all our precious ones, do we not want the best for them?
My Humble Thoughts on AWARE
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/BlogUs/tabid/54/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/561/My-Humble-Thoughts-on-AWARE.aspx
By Charisso @ 6:47 PM :: 85 Views :: 0 Comments :: Women, General
I am among those who attended the EGM on Saturday. I must say I have witnessed a demonstration of 'whoever is louder wins', because by sheer volume, one side has many times deprived the other of its right to deliver statements and even to reply to questions posed to them. While I am impressed by the pro-Old Guards party for their passion and firm belief in inclusiveness, I cannot say the same for the behaviour. I think it is basic courtesy not to interrupt when another person is talking, what's more, answering a question that was posed by themselves. Don't they want to hear the answer to their question? Or were they are only interested in shouting out their displeasure and fanning the emotions of the crowd? Throughout the meeting, there were cutting-in, booing and jeering while the Ex-Co was trying to reply. Josie did not even get a chance to deliver her President's Message in peace. I am appalled. I wonder what is the indication of this for the civic space in Singapore. I really have to applaud Josie's team for their courageous effort, standing up to the thousand plus people, railing and yelling at them for a full 7 hours. I for one, would not have been able to withstand it.
One other issue that bothered me was besides the 3000 who turned up, I wonder how informed the rest of the Singaporeans are about this matter. I recalled a survey done by the papers during the month-long report of this entire saga, majority were either not aware or not bothered. I think this is a cause for concern because everyone has to realise that their stand matters. We cannot rely on another person to make a choice for ourselves because logically, the other person may not make the choice that we want. If we have a choice, we should make it. If not, we have robbed ourselves of that right. And if the final result is not what we wanted, then we only have ourselves to blame because we did not voice out what we want. It is a consequence that the entire society has to bear because of apathy.
Thirdly, I have great reservations on the impartiality of the reports we have seen so far on the papers. One would have noticed a severely unbalanced 'air time' given to the Old Guards compared to the New Guards. Day after day, reports of perturbed, upset and disappointed Old Guards were splashed across the prime pages. May I ask, is this stirring up for sympathy votes? Is this stirring up of anti-New Ex-Co feelings? In my humble opinion, it really looks like it. Why do I not see the same treatment for the new Ex-Co members who received threats to their life and careers just because they stood up to fight for the good of our next generation! What is this! For as far as I can remember, when the first report came out on Good Friday papers, the New Guards were portrayed as power-grabbers who overthrew the overly-trusting Old Guards, the report likening it to a merciless coup. May I ask, which is merciless – a civilised and legitimate voting in of new people into the Ex-Co on the 28 March AGM or that unruly and unreasonable yelling and jeering for full 7 hours at the 2 May EGM? By the way, does the Constitution say that they can vote in a replacement Ex-Co right on the spot? Perhaps someone can clarify this.
Finally, as a parent to-be, I am most concerned what will be taught to my son in school. The unearthing of the contents of the CSE programme is the most harrowing yet consoling thing that has come out of the entire issue. Harrowing because of the questionable values that the programme imparts to unsuspecting young minds. I remember the astonishment I felt when I read that anal sex can be healthy so long as it is practised with a condom and with consent. The statement that pre-marital sex is actually neutral also sent a chill to my heart. Perhaps I am old-fashioned, but for me, even to see such statements in adult magazines would have been mind-boggling, what more for 12 to 18-year olds? What is the point of telling them that? Nevertheless, it is a consolation that the programme is being investigated now, and I think this episode has awakened many parents to take more interest in their children's lives. They are after all our precious ones, do we not want the best for them?
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Objectivity In Media Reporting
Even Straits Times with huge resources and many years of experienced reporters has kept quiet
23 Jun 09 , 17:30 PM
ha ha, more likely that gay activists cannot rebut against "handful" of upset parents. Even Straits Times with huge resources and many years of experienced reporters has kept quiet against "handful" angry parents here. At least now people know that capable people are not only in Straits Times only.
-------------------------------
One-sided story
22 Jun 09 , 22:27 PM
We are surrounded by Muslim Neighbours (Countries). Our very own National Anthem is in Malay. Isn't it insulting to the Muslim Community if we were to open up to liberalism, promoting homosexual activities? Our PM is definitely right to stand firm on this issue to remain a conservative society, unless we be a laughing stock by our very own neighbours.
23 Jun 09 , 17:30 PM
ha ha, more likely that gay activists cannot rebut against "handful" of upset parents. Even Straits Times with huge resources and many years of experienced reporters has kept quiet against "handful" angry parents here. At least now people know that capable people are not only in Straits Times only.
-------------------------------
One-sided story
22 Jun 09 , 22:27 PM
We are surrounded by Muslim Neighbours (Countries). Our very own National Anthem is in Malay. Isn't it insulting to the Muslim Community if we were to open up to liberalism, promoting homosexual activities? Our PM is definitely right to stand firm on this issue to remain a conservative society, unless we be a laughing stock by our very own neighbours.
Ensuring A Diversity Of Views In Parliament
Silent Majority
23 Jun 09 , 17:42 PM
Silent Majority
23 Jun 09 , 10:52 AM
Hi, "Too concerned......"
Heard you! Trouble now is Beatrice is out of the picture for now as the Arts scene of about 150 people have already voted in 2 of their cohorts, namely, Audrey Wong(Substation) and Loretta Chen(confirmed L***) as their representatives.
Regards,
-------------------------------------------
23 Jun 09 , 09:58 AM
Dear Silent Majority,
Besides the 2 Arts NMP, please do not forget Beatrice Chia! She is no better than Loretta Chen or Siew Kum Hong. All are Pro-LGBTs and LGBT. You should check out all her many films. Themes on Homosexuality, sexually explicit and erotic, sado-masochistic and the list goes on...
She is highly Controversial, vocal and daring. Isn't it obvious WHY she applied to be in parliament? Voice for Alternative, Liberal, Unnatural, Unhealthy, Lifestyles and another Pro-LGBT Activist!
We do NOT want or need people like that in our parliament! One is already too many!
Please all when you write, don't forget Beatrice Chia too.
23 Jun 09 , 17:42 PM
Silent Majority
23 Jun 09 , 10:52 AM
Hi, "Too concerned......"
Heard you! Trouble now is Beatrice is out of the picture for now as the Arts scene of about 150 people have already voted in 2 of their cohorts, namely, Audrey Wong(Substation) and Loretta Chen(confirmed L***) as their representatives.
Regards,
-------------------------------------------
23 Jun 09 , 09:58 AM
Dear Silent Majority,
Besides the 2 Arts NMP, please do not forget Beatrice Chia! She is no better than Loretta Chen or Siew Kum Hong. All are Pro-LGBTs and LGBT. You should check out all her many films. Themes on Homosexuality, sexually explicit and erotic, sado-masochistic and the list goes on...
She is highly Controversial, vocal and daring. Isn't it obvious WHY she applied to be in parliament? Voice for Alternative, Liberal, Unnatural, Unhealthy, Lifestyles and another Pro-LGBT Activist!
We do NOT want or need people like that in our parliament! One is already too many!
Please all when you write, don't forget Beatrice Chia too.
Another Concern Citizen 13 Jun 09 , 10:20 AM
REACH Thread - Objectivity In Media Reporting
Hi All, I strongly recommend this blog site, just in case there are still some people that have yet to fully understand or seeks more information regarding Aware devious CSE program, which you do not hear or hardly hear from the media. In fact it was thru this blog that I am able to get a copy of the CSE trainer manual and also came to know REACH web site.
Go to this site: http://tampinescourt.blogspot.com/
Scroll down to read more on past articles/comments concerning Aware & CSE for more understanding.
By the way, just thinking...if only we can let the 7200 over concern people that petition to MOE to remove the CSE program to be aware of REACH web site,to know that finally their opinions can be heard in REACH and not shut out by the media. REACH is a great web site unlike the media with its censorship and bias reporting, as it allows your voice to be heard. Fortunately, we still have REACH and some public spirit blog sites that enables us to access informations that are kept out from the media,so that we can be more discerning and able to make better judgements on our own with more balance informations available.
Hi All, I strongly recommend this blog site, just in case there are still some people that have yet to fully understand or seeks more information regarding Aware devious CSE program, which you do not hear or hardly hear from the media. In fact it was thru this blog that I am able to get a copy of the CSE trainer manual and also came to know REACH web site.
Go to this site: http://tampinescourt.blogspot.com/
Scroll down to read more on past articles/comments concerning Aware & CSE for more understanding.
By the way, just thinking...if only we can let the 7200 over concern people that petition to MOE to remove the CSE program to be aware of REACH web site,to know that finally their opinions can be heard in REACH and not shut out by the media. REACH is a great web site unlike the media with its censorship and bias reporting, as it allows your voice to be heard. Fortunately, we still have REACH and some public spirit blog sites that enables us to access informations that are kept out from the media,so that we can be more discerning and able to make better judgements on our own with more balance informations available.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Video Interview By CNA With AWARE ON CSE
Dear All
Good if all of you get some ideas on what AWARE said of their CSE and what it's about on CNA.
Scroll to the 2 videos you need to watch on the Talking Point programme below are:
SEXUALITY EDUCATION AND
TEEN PREGNANCY AND ABORTION
Click on the article titled above: "Video Interview By CNA With AWARE ON CSE" and watch the videos between CNA & AWARE" to view. Or you may go to below-mentioned site:
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/tp/archive.htm#4
Good if all of you get some ideas on what AWARE said of their CSE and what it's about on CNA.
Scroll to the 2 videos you need to watch on the Talking Point programme below are:
SEXUALITY EDUCATION AND
TEEN PREGNANCY AND ABORTION
Click on the article titled above: "Video Interview By CNA With AWARE ON CSE" and watch the videos between CNA & AWARE" to view. Or you may go to below-mentioned site:
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/tp/archive.htm#4
Homosexual Activists Intimidate American Psychiatric Association into Removing Homosexuality from List of Disorders
1
Homosexual Activists Intimidate American Psychiatric Association into
Removing Homosexuality from List of Disorders
from: http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/homosexualactivists-
intimidate-american-psychiatric-association-into-removinghomosexuality-
from-list-of-disorders/#more-20
Posted by foospro86 on October 1, 2007
BY RYAN SORBA
“It was never a medical decision—and that’s why I think the action came so fast…It was a political move.”
“That’s how far we’ve come in ten years. Now we even have the American Psychiatric Association running scared.”
-Barbara Gittings, Same-gender sex activist
Let us, for a moment, rewind to the year1970. In this year, same-gender sex activists began a program of intimidation aimed at the American Psychiatric
Association (APA).
Activist Frank Kameny states the movement’s objective clearly, “I feel that the entire homophile movement…is going to stand or fall upon the question of whether or not homosexuality is a sickness, and upon our taking a firm stand on it…” (The Gay Crusaders, by Kay Tobin and Randy Wicker, p. 98)
In 1970, psychiatrists generally considered sexual desires toward members of one’s own gender to be disordered.
Karoly Maria Kertbeny’s term, “homosexual” was the official descriptor for those inflicted by this mental-physical disassociative disorder.
Psychiatry’s authoritative voice influenced public opinion, which at the time was negative toward same-gender sex.
Of course, public sexual activity in parks and public restrooms contributed to societies negative views about the types of people that did such things, but “scientific opinion” was crucial in the public
attitude.
Led by radicals like Frank Kameny, same-gender sex activists attacked many psychiatrists publicly, as Newsweek describes, “But even more than the government, it is the psychiatrists who have experienced the full rage of the homosexual activists.
Over the past two years, gay-lib organizations have repeatedly disrupted medical meetings, and three months ago—in the movements most aggressive demonstration so far—a group of 30 militants broke into a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in Washington, where they turned the staid proceedings into near chaos for twenty minutes.
‘We are here to denounce your authority to call us sick or mentally disordered,’
shouted the group’s leader, Dr. Franklin Kameny, while the 2,000 shocked
psychiatrists looked on in disbelief.
‘For us, as homosexuals, your profession is the enemy incarnate. We demand that psychiatrists treat us as human beings, not as patients to be cured!’” (Newsweek, 8-23-71, p.47)
Ironically, at the very moment Franklin Kameny was claiming that same-gender sex was healthy, safe, and natural, a deadly virus was silently passing through communities of men all over the nation as a result of the promiscuous, unhealthy nature of the sex they were having. Only a decade later, thousands of men would be dead or dying, of AIDS.
On June 7, of the following year, 1971, Franklin Kameny wrote a letter to the
Psychiatric News threatening the APA with not only more, but worse, disruptions.
In this letter he states, “Our presence there was only the beginning of an ncreasingly intensive campaign by homosexuals to change the approach of
psychiatry toward homosexuality or, failing that, to discredit psychiatry.”
(The Gay Crusaders p. 130-131)
Same-gender sex activists continued to pressure the APA through 1973. A samegender
sex magazine, The Advocate, talks of “…what happened in 1973…referring to the widespread protests by the gay and lesbian community that led to the APA’s dropping homosexuality from the DSM.” (The Advocate, 12-28-93, p.40)
As a result of the pressure, in the words of the prominent journalist and same gender
sex activists, Andrew Sullivan, in December of 1973 the APA, “…under intense political pressure…removed homosexuality from its official list of psychiatric disorders…” (Love Undetectable, book by Andrew Sullivan, 1998, p.107) Under this “intense political pressure” the APA’s board of trustees finally caved in to the demands of same-gender sex activists.
Another same-gender sex activist Mark Thompson writes, “Just before the first of the year, the American Psychiatric Association’s board of trustees declared we were no longer sick.” (The Long Road to Freedom, ed. by Mark Thompsan1994, p.97)
After the vote by the American Psychiatric Associations Board of Trustees, some
members of the APA, led by Dr. Charles Socarides called for a full vote by the
APA’s 17,905 members. (The Long Road to Freedom, ed. by Mark Thompsan1994, p. 104)
On April 9, 1974, results of the vote were announced. Only 10,555 of the 17,905
APA members had voted in the election.
The results were as follows:
Total APA members eligible to vote: 17,905
Number of APA members that actually voted: 10,555
Number of members that “Abstained”: 367
Number of “ No” votes-votes to keep “homosexuality” in the DSM as a
mental disorder: 3,810
Number of “Yes” votes-votes to remove “homosexuality” from the DSM as a
mental disorder: 5,854
It should be noted that the number of “Yes” (5,854) made up only 32.7 percent of
the total membership of the APA.
Only slightly less than one-third of the APA’s
membership approved the change.
It should be further noted that the “National Gay Task Force” was able to obtain APA members addresses and the “NGTF” (with-out identifying itself) and they sent creepy letters to all members urging them to vote to remove “homosexuality” from the DSM.
Bruce Voeller, the head of the NGTF admits, “Our costly letter has perhaps made the difference.” (The Long Road to Freedom, ed. by Mark Thompsan1994, p. 105-106)
Dishonesty and intimidation had won the day for the same-gender sex movement, and when activists publicly claim that this vote was a scientific decision; they hide three years of deceit and intimidation.
In same-gender sex publications, however, activists are remarkably candid about the reality of the vote. For example, Kay Tobin Lahausen, co-author of The Gay Crusaders describes a variety of activism. “We did all sorts of protests…When the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations came out of some meeting and got in hisbig black limousine, I remember going crazy, rocking and beating on the limousine…He had never been besieged by a bunch of homosexuals before. But he had said something that got us going.” (Making History: The Struggle for Gay and Lesbian Equal Rights, 1945-1990: an Oral History by Eric Marcus p.216-217) (–Author Marcus has worked as an associate producer for “CBS This Morning” and “Good Morning America.”)
Lahausen’s lover, Barbara Gittings was a well known activist during this time as
well.
Gittings was the first head of the American Library Association Gay Task Force, although she was not a librarian her objective was to bring books advocating the same-gender sex movement to the attention of librarians in hopes of having them included in libraries.
At one American Library Association meeting Gittings set up a same-gender kissing booth, to attract attention to the same-gender sex.
Gittings tells about her activism against the APA. “Besides the ALA, I was also very involved, along with many other people, in efforts to get the American Psychiatric Association… to drop its listing of homosexuality as a mental illness. Psychiatrists were one of the three major groups that had their hands on us. They had a kind of control over our fate, in the eyes of the public, for a long time. “Religion and law were the other two groups that had their hands on us. So, besides being sick, we were sinful and criminal. But the sickness label infected everything that we said and made it difficult for us to gain any credibility for anything we said ourselves. The sickness issue was paramount.” (Making History: The Struggle for Gay and Lesbian Equal Rights, 1945-1990: an Oral History by Eric Marcus p.221)
Gittings took place in the disruptive attacks (“saps”) on the APA. She states, “I am
not opposed to sap tactics. In fact, I spearheaded a sap at a psychiatrists meeting
and I’m ready to do it again.” (The Gay Crusaders, p.234) Barbara Gittings recounts, “The 1970 convention in San Francisco was disrupted by a group of feminists and gay men who were enraged by what the psychiatrists were saying about them—and newspapers all around the country carried the story” (The Gay Crusaders, p.216).
The “Gay” Militants, a book about that time, adds details, “On May 14, 1970 psychiatrists became the hunted. An invasion by the coalition of ‘gay’ and woman’s liberationists interrupted the national convention of the American Psychiatric Association in San Francisco to protest the reading of a paper by an Australian psychiatrists on the subject of ‘aversion therapy,’ a system of treatment which attempts to change gay orientation by keying unpleasant sensations (such as electric shocks) to homosexual stimuli.
By the time the meeting was over, the feminists and their gay cohorts were in charge…and the doctors were heckling from the audience.’” (The Gay Militants,
by Donn Teal, p.272-273)
Same-gender sex activists took over the podium and microphones. Then, “Konstantin Berlandt, of Berkeley GLF, paraded through the hall in bright red dress. Paper airplanes sailed down from the balcony. With two papers still unread, the chairman announced adjournment.” (Ibid., p.274) On June 23, 1970 same-gender sex activists disrupted yet another meeting, this time in Chicago, be repeatedly shouting down the main speakers discourse. (Ibid., 275)
Then, in October at a meeting at the University of Southern California, same-gender
sex activists shouted down a speaker and then took over the stage and the microphone. (Ibid., pp.276-280)
Kay Lahusen and Barbera Gittings know what really happened to the APA. In the
book, Making History they are quite open about the reality.
Kay: This was always more of a political decision than a medical decision.
Barbara: It never was a medical decision—and that’s why I think the action came
so fast.
After all, it was only three years from the time that feminists and gays first sapped the APA at a behavior therapy session to the time that the Board of
Trustees voted in 1973 to approve removing homosexuality from the list of mental
disorders. It was a political move.” (Making History, p.224)
The APA was thoroughly intimidated. Later in the same year (1974), after the APA’s vote, Gittings was interviewed by a historian of the same-gender sex movement, Jonathan Ned Katz. Gittings brags, “That’s how far we’ve come in ten years. Now we even have the American Psychiatric Association running scared.”
(Gay American History, by Jonathan Ned Katz, 1992, p.427. This interview was
taped July 19, 1974). Anytime a scientific organization endorses same-gender sex,
remember Gittings words: “They are running scared.”
Same-gender sex activists have learned that intimidation works and they are never hesitant about using intimidation, psychological manipulation and deceit to reach the goals of their radical agenda.
Later in 1974, same-gender sex activists set their vicious sights on an individual
member of the American Psychiatric Association, Dr. David Rueben, who was perhaps the best-known psychologist in the area of human sexuality at the time.
Unbeknownst to Dr. Reuben, same-gender activists were lying in wait outside one
of his lectures, and his physical safety was at risk.
A same-gender sex activist and writer, Leigh Rutledge describes the attack in her
book The Gay Decades, “June 16, A fist fight broke out at a Philadelphia playhouse when ten gay activists interrupt a lecture by Dr. David Rueben and denounce him as ‘a criminal’ for his views on male homosexuality.
One policeman and a protestor are injured in the melee.” (The Gay Decades, by a man that engages in same-gender sex and writer, Leigh W. Rutledge, 1992, p.69)
On that same page, this book tells us that, “The Centers for Disease Control
estimate that gay or bisexual men account for as much as one-third of the syphilis
cases in the U.S.”
Apparently, the American Psychological Association also got the message of intimidation, because they caved in to same-gender sex activists in 1975. In the
book, The Long Road to Freedom the author writes, “January…The American
Psychological Association and American Association for the Advancement of Science echoed the American Psychiatric Association in deeming homosexuality not an illness.” (The Long Road to Freedom, pp.115) The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) publishes the scientific journal Science, intimidation by same-gender sex activists was over for them. “Under pressure from gay scientific groups, Science magazine banned anti-gay bias in its staff hiring and advertisement.” (The Long Road to Freedom, pp.214)
Could the AAAS have been thinking about “pressure from gay scientific groups” when they published the poorly done studies by LeVay (“gay” brains) and Hamer (“gay” gene)? Two scientists who protested the LeVay study raise serious questions about AAAS, Science, and same-gender sex activists. “The appearance of LeVay’s paper highlights a serious issue in science public policy.
Should such a study, based on a questionable design, with subjects drawn from a
small, highly selected and non-representative sample, receive the kind of
international attention and credibility that publication in a journal with the stature of Science lends?” (Science, 11-1-91, p.630)
If Dr. LeVay was not able to draw a proper sample and to fulfill other basic
requirements for a scientific study, why did he conduct the study at all?
If the study was not done for scientific reasons it must have been done for political
reasons.
Indeed, LeVay’s study was part of a public relations campaign, (the born “gay” hoax) to make the public believe that individuals were born “gay.”
Science, a supposedly reputable publication, must have been intimidated to risk
their own legitimacy by published such shoddy work. When unethical political
movements dominate science, pushing science in unscientific directions, science
suffers and leads society astray.
One lesson from these facts is unmistakable: every time a scientific group repeats
the same-gender sex movement’s propaganda, you may justifiably suspect that these groups are acting out of ignorance or intimidation.
Another lesson is that same-gender sex activists are so desperate to cover their
deeply dysfunctional condition that they will stop at nothing to hide the facts from
the public.
Award-winning writer and same-gender sex activist Randy Shilts describes the denial among men that have sex with men, about their unhealthy lifestyles causing AIDS to be epidemic among them when he writes, “…the desperation of denial: how when something is so horrible you don’t want to believe it, you want to out it out of your mind and insist it isn’t true, and how you hate the person who says it is.” (And the Band Played On, 1988, p. 182) Desperate denial –this seems to be what drives the deceit, psychological manipulation, and intimidation of both scientific groups and the public.
Here is a link to a video about same-gender sex activist, Frank Kameny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_4S_iQ3fEo
Homosexual Activists Intimidate American Psychiatric Association into
Removing Homosexuality from List of Disorders
from: http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/homosexualactivists-
intimidate-american-psychiatric-association-into-removinghomosexuality-
from-list-of-disorders/#more-20
Posted by foospro86 on October 1, 2007
BY RYAN SORBA
“It was never a medical decision—and that’s why I think the action came so fast…It was a political move.”
“That’s how far we’ve come in ten years. Now we even have the American Psychiatric Association running scared.”
-Barbara Gittings, Same-gender sex activist
Let us, for a moment, rewind to the year1970. In this year, same-gender sex activists began a program of intimidation aimed at the American Psychiatric
Association (APA).
Activist Frank Kameny states the movement’s objective clearly, “I feel that the entire homophile movement…is going to stand or fall upon the question of whether or not homosexuality is a sickness, and upon our taking a firm stand on it…” (The Gay Crusaders, by Kay Tobin and Randy Wicker, p. 98)
In 1970, psychiatrists generally considered sexual desires toward members of one’s own gender to be disordered.
Karoly Maria Kertbeny’s term, “homosexual” was the official descriptor for those inflicted by this mental-physical disassociative disorder.
Psychiatry’s authoritative voice influenced public opinion, which at the time was negative toward same-gender sex.
Of course, public sexual activity in parks and public restrooms contributed to societies negative views about the types of people that did such things, but “scientific opinion” was crucial in the public
attitude.
Led by radicals like Frank Kameny, same-gender sex activists attacked many psychiatrists publicly, as Newsweek describes, “But even more than the government, it is the psychiatrists who have experienced the full rage of the homosexual activists.
Over the past two years, gay-lib organizations have repeatedly disrupted medical meetings, and three months ago—in the movements most aggressive demonstration so far—a group of 30 militants broke into a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in Washington, where they turned the staid proceedings into near chaos for twenty minutes.
‘We are here to denounce your authority to call us sick or mentally disordered,’
shouted the group’s leader, Dr. Franklin Kameny, while the 2,000 shocked
psychiatrists looked on in disbelief.
‘For us, as homosexuals, your profession is the enemy incarnate. We demand that psychiatrists treat us as human beings, not as patients to be cured!’” (Newsweek, 8-23-71, p.47)
Ironically, at the very moment Franklin Kameny was claiming that same-gender sex was healthy, safe, and natural, a deadly virus was silently passing through communities of men all over the nation as a result of the promiscuous, unhealthy nature of the sex they were having. Only a decade later, thousands of men would be dead or dying, of AIDS.
On June 7, of the following year, 1971, Franklin Kameny wrote a letter to the
Psychiatric News threatening the APA with not only more, but worse, disruptions.
In this letter he states, “Our presence there was only the beginning of an ncreasingly intensive campaign by homosexuals to change the approach of
psychiatry toward homosexuality or, failing that, to discredit psychiatry.”
(The Gay Crusaders p. 130-131)
Same-gender sex activists continued to pressure the APA through 1973. A samegender
sex magazine, The Advocate, talks of “…what happened in 1973…referring to the widespread protests by the gay and lesbian community that led to the APA’s dropping homosexuality from the DSM.” (The Advocate, 12-28-93, p.40)
As a result of the pressure, in the words of the prominent journalist and same gender
sex activists, Andrew Sullivan, in December of 1973 the APA, “…under intense political pressure…removed homosexuality from its official list of psychiatric disorders…” (Love Undetectable, book by Andrew Sullivan, 1998, p.107) Under this “intense political pressure” the APA’s board of trustees finally caved in to the demands of same-gender sex activists.
Another same-gender sex activist Mark Thompson writes, “Just before the first of the year, the American Psychiatric Association’s board of trustees declared we were no longer sick.” (The Long Road to Freedom, ed. by Mark Thompsan1994, p.97)
After the vote by the American Psychiatric Associations Board of Trustees, some
members of the APA, led by Dr. Charles Socarides called for a full vote by the
APA’s 17,905 members. (The Long Road to Freedom, ed. by Mark Thompsan1994, p. 104)
On April 9, 1974, results of the vote were announced. Only 10,555 of the 17,905
APA members had voted in the election.
The results were as follows:
Total APA members eligible to vote: 17,905
Number of APA members that actually voted: 10,555
Number of members that “Abstained”: 367
Number of “ No” votes-votes to keep “homosexuality” in the DSM as a
mental disorder: 3,810
Number of “Yes” votes-votes to remove “homosexuality” from the DSM as a
mental disorder: 5,854
It should be noted that the number of “Yes” (5,854) made up only 32.7 percent of
the total membership of the APA.
Only slightly less than one-third of the APA’s
membership approved the change.
It should be further noted that the “National Gay Task Force” was able to obtain APA members addresses and the “NGTF” (with-out identifying itself) and they sent creepy letters to all members urging them to vote to remove “homosexuality” from the DSM.
Bruce Voeller, the head of the NGTF admits, “Our costly letter has perhaps made the difference.” (The Long Road to Freedom, ed. by Mark Thompsan1994, p. 105-106)
Dishonesty and intimidation had won the day for the same-gender sex movement, and when activists publicly claim that this vote was a scientific decision; they hide three years of deceit and intimidation.
In same-gender sex publications, however, activists are remarkably candid about the reality of the vote. For example, Kay Tobin Lahausen, co-author of The Gay Crusaders describes a variety of activism. “We did all sorts of protests…When the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations came out of some meeting and got in hisbig black limousine, I remember going crazy, rocking and beating on the limousine…He had never been besieged by a bunch of homosexuals before. But he had said something that got us going.” (Making History: The Struggle for Gay and Lesbian Equal Rights, 1945-1990: an Oral History by Eric Marcus p.216-217) (–Author Marcus has worked as an associate producer for “CBS This Morning” and “Good Morning America.”)
Lahausen’s lover, Barbara Gittings was a well known activist during this time as
well.
Gittings was the first head of the American Library Association Gay Task Force, although she was not a librarian her objective was to bring books advocating the same-gender sex movement to the attention of librarians in hopes of having them included in libraries.
At one American Library Association meeting Gittings set up a same-gender kissing booth, to attract attention to the same-gender sex.
Gittings tells about her activism against the APA. “Besides the ALA, I was also very involved, along with many other people, in efforts to get the American Psychiatric Association… to drop its listing of homosexuality as a mental illness. Psychiatrists were one of the three major groups that had their hands on us. They had a kind of control over our fate, in the eyes of the public, for a long time. “Religion and law were the other two groups that had their hands on us. So, besides being sick, we were sinful and criminal. But the sickness label infected everything that we said and made it difficult for us to gain any credibility for anything we said ourselves. The sickness issue was paramount.” (Making History: The Struggle for Gay and Lesbian Equal Rights, 1945-1990: an Oral History by Eric Marcus p.221)
Gittings took place in the disruptive attacks (“saps”) on the APA. She states, “I am
not opposed to sap tactics. In fact, I spearheaded a sap at a psychiatrists meeting
and I’m ready to do it again.” (The Gay Crusaders, p.234) Barbara Gittings recounts, “The 1970 convention in San Francisco was disrupted by a group of feminists and gay men who were enraged by what the psychiatrists were saying about them—and newspapers all around the country carried the story” (The Gay Crusaders, p.216).
The “Gay” Militants, a book about that time, adds details, “On May 14, 1970 psychiatrists became the hunted. An invasion by the coalition of ‘gay’ and woman’s liberationists interrupted the national convention of the American Psychiatric Association in San Francisco to protest the reading of a paper by an Australian psychiatrists on the subject of ‘aversion therapy,’ a system of treatment which attempts to change gay orientation by keying unpleasant sensations (such as electric shocks) to homosexual stimuli.
By the time the meeting was over, the feminists and their gay cohorts were in charge…and the doctors were heckling from the audience.’” (The Gay Militants,
by Donn Teal, p.272-273)
Same-gender sex activists took over the podium and microphones. Then, “Konstantin Berlandt, of Berkeley GLF, paraded through the hall in bright red dress. Paper airplanes sailed down from the balcony. With two papers still unread, the chairman announced adjournment.” (Ibid., p.274) On June 23, 1970 same-gender sex activists disrupted yet another meeting, this time in Chicago, be repeatedly shouting down the main speakers discourse. (Ibid., 275)
Then, in October at a meeting at the University of Southern California, same-gender
sex activists shouted down a speaker and then took over the stage and the microphone. (Ibid., pp.276-280)
Kay Lahusen and Barbera Gittings know what really happened to the APA. In the
book, Making History they are quite open about the reality.
Kay: This was always more of a political decision than a medical decision.
Barbara: It never was a medical decision—and that’s why I think the action came
so fast.
After all, it was only three years from the time that feminists and gays first sapped the APA at a behavior therapy session to the time that the Board of
Trustees voted in 1973 to approve removing homosexuality from the list of mental
disorders. It was a political move.” (Making History, p.224)
The APA was thoroughly intimidated. Later in the same year (1974), after the APA’s vote, Gittings was interviewed by a historian of the same-gender sex movement, Jonathan Ned Katz. Gittings brags, “That’s how far we’ve come in ten years. Now we even have the American Psychiatric Association running scared.”
(Gay American History, by Jonathan Ned Katz, 1992, p.427. This interview was
taped July 19, 1974). Anytime a scientific organization endorses same-gender sex,
remember Gittings words: “They are running scared.”
Same-gender sex activists have learned that intimidation works and they are never hesitant about using intimidation, psychological manipulation and deceit to reach the goals of their radical agenda.
Later in 1974, same-gender sex activists set their vicious sights on an individual
member of the American Psychiatric Association, Dr. David Rueben, who was perhaps the best-known psychologist in the area of human sexuality at the time.
Unbeknownst to Dr. Reuben, same-gender activists were lying in wait outside one
of his lectures, and his physical safety was at risk.
A same-gender sex activist and writer, Leigh Rutledge describes the attack in her
book The Gay Decades, “June 16, A fist fight broke out at a Philadelphia playhouse when ten gay activists interrupt a lecture by Dr. David Rueben and denounce him as ‘a criminal’ for his views on male homosexuality.
One policeman and a protestor are injured in the melee.” (The Gay Decades, by a man that engages in same-gender sex and writer, Leigh W. Rutledge, 1992, p.69)
On that same page, this book tells us that, “The Centers for Disease Control
estimate that gay or bisexual men account for as much as one-third of the syphilis
cases in the U.S.”
Apparently, the American Psychological Association also got the message of intimidation, because they caved in to same-gender sex activists in 1975. In the
book, The Long Road to Freedom the author writes, “January…The American
Psychological Association and American Association for the Advancement of Science echoed the American Psychiatric Association in deeming homosexuality not an illness.” (The Long Road to Freedom, pp.115) The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) publishes the scientific journal Science, intimidation by same-gender sex activists was over for them. “Under pressure from gay scientific groups, Science magazine banned anti-gay bias in its staff hiring and advertisement.” (The Long Road to Freedom, pp.214)
Could the AAAS have been thinking about “pressure from gay scientific groups” when they published the poorly done studies by LeVay (“gay” brains) and Hamer (“gay” gene)? Two scientists who protested the LeVay study raise serious questions about AAAS, Science, and same-gender sex activists. “The appearance of LeVay’s paper highlights a serious issue in science public policy.
Should such a study, based on a questionable design, with subjects drawn from a
small, highly selected and non-representative sample, receive the kind of
international attention and credibility that publication in a journal with the stature of Science lends?” (Science, 11-1-91, p.630)
If Dr. LeVay was not able to draw a proper sample and to fulfill other basic
requirements for a scientific study, why did he conduct the study at all?
If the study was not done for scientific reasons it must have been done for political
reasons.
Indeed, LeVay’s study was part of a public relations campaign, (the born “gay” hoax) to make the public believe that individuals were born “gay.”
Science, a supposedly reputable publication, must have been intimidated to risk
their own legitimacy by published such shoddy work. When unethical political
movements dominate science, pushing science in unscientific directions, science
suffers and leads society astray.
One lesson from these facts is unmistakable: every time a scientific group repeats
the same-gender sex movement’s propaganda, you may justifiably suspect that these groups are acting out of ignorance or intimidation.
Another lesson is that same-gender sex activists are so desperate to cover their
deeply dysfunctional condition that they will stop at nothing to hide the facts from
the public.
Award-winning writer and same-gender sex activist Randy Shilts describes the denial among men that have sex with men, about their unhealthy lifestyles causing AIDS to be epidemic among them when he writes, “…the desperation of denial: how when something is so horrible you don’t want to believe it, you want to out it out of your mind and insist it isn’t true, and how you hate the person who says it is.” (And the Band Played On, 1988, p. 182) Desperate denial –this seems to be what drives the deceit, psychological manipulation, and intimidation of both scientific groups and the public.
Here is a link to a video about same-gender sex activist, Frank Kameny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_4S_iQ3fEo
Sunday, June 21, 2009
THINK AGAIN - 21 Jun 09 , 15:21 PM
Those who read ST article “COMING OUT IN CHINA”. Do you realize how the media sensationalized the issue as if there’s such a large majority that’s beginning to accept homosexual acts?
Quote from ST: “”In a survey of 400 people across Chinese cities last year, sociologist Li Yinhe, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, found what she termed a 'quite high' level of tolerance of gays - 'possibly because China has no widely held religion and hence no religion-based opposition to homosexuality like in the West', she wrote on her blog””Unquote.
MY VIEW: China has over 1.3 BILLION people. The survey is from only 400 people across the Chinese cities. Yet they actually quote this sociologist as saying that this is a “quite high” level of tolerance? 400 surveyed out of 1.30 BILLION PEOPLE is “quite high”?
----------
http://www.straitstimes.com/Asia/China/Story/STIStory_392792.html?sunwMethod=GET
June 20, 2009
MEMO FROM BEIJING
'Coming out' in China By Sim Chi Yin, China Correspondent
While homosexuality is still largely a social taboo, Chinese society is slowly opening up .
A crowd of 200 gay, straight, Chinese and expatriate guests gathered ..at the Songzhuang Art District on the city's outskirts for what organisers quietly hailed as a breakthrough for gays in China, where homosexuality was delisted as a 'mental illness' only in 2001.. Unquote
MY VIEW: The media loves to say homosexuality was delisted as a mental disorder. But they fail to report another side of it: Homosexual Activists Intimidate American Psychiatric Association into Removing Homosexuality from List of Disorders.
Read it on:
http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/homosexual-activists-intimidate-american-psychiatric-association-into-removing-homosexuality-from-list-of-disorders/#more-20
-----------------------------------------------
MY VIEW: The media loves to say homosexuality was delisted as a mental disorder. But they fail to report another side of it: Homosexual Activists Intimidate American Psychiatric Association into Removing Homosexuality from List of Disorders.
Read it on:
http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/homosexual-activists-intimidate-american-psychiatric-association-into-removing-homosexuality-from-list-of-disorders/#more-20
Quote from ST: “”In a survey of 400 people across Chinese cities last year, sociologist Li Yinhe, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, found what she termed a 'quite high' level of tolerance of gays - 'possibly because China has no widely held religion and hence no religion-based opposition to homosexuality like in the West', she wrote on her blog””Unquote.
MY VIEW: China has over 1.3 BILLION people. The survey is from only 400 people across the Chinese cities. Yet they actually quote this sociologist as saying that this is a “quite high” level of tolerance? 400 surveyed out of 1.30 BILLION PEOPLE is “quite high”?
----------
http://www.straitstimes.com/Asia/China/Story/STIStory_392792.html?sunwMethod=GET
June 20, 2009
MEMO FROM BEIJING
'Coming out' in China By Sim Chi Yin, China Correspondent
While homosexuality is still largely a social taboo, Chinese society is slowly opening up .
A crowd of 200 gay, straight, Chinese and expatriate guests gathered ..at the Songzhuang Art District on the city's outskirts for what organisers quietly hailed as a breakthrough for gays in China, where homosexuality was delisted as a 'mental illness' only in 2001.. Unquote
MY VIEW: The media loves to say homosexuality was delisted as a mental disorder. But they fail to report another side of it: Homosexual Activists Intimidate American Psychiatric Association into Removing Homosexuality from List of Disorders.
Read it on:
http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/homosexual-activists-intimidate-american-psychiatric-association-into-removing-homosexuality-from-list-of-disorders/#more-20
-----------------------------------------------
MY VIEW: The media loves to say homosexuality was delisted as a mental disorder. But they fail to report another side of it: Homosexual Activists Intimidate American Psychiatric Association into Removing Homosexuality from List of Disorders.
Read it on:
http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/homosexual-activists-intimidate-american-psychiatric-association-into-removing-homosexuality-from-list-of-disorders/#more-20
LEE - 21 Jun 09 , 14:33 PM
For "yeah right" who obviously has no idea about what I spoke about on the site Journalism.sg. You said "boy another anonymous person in the journalism.sg article."
Here is some background about the people on their journalism site. Its good that there are still a remnant out there who share the same views as those on this thread regarding media coverage of Aware saga.
http://journalism.sg/perspectives/
Editor Cherian George (cherian@journalism.sg) Cherian is an assistant professor, Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
The research and writing team comprises journalism students at the Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore:
This site was launched in June 2007 to serve anyone interested in the news media in Singapore, whether a practising journalist, researcher, teacher, student, concerned citizen, media activist or policy maker. To facilitate dialogue among these various constituencies, the articles and links published here are deliberately diverse in their orientations. They range from activists' critiques, academic analyses and professionals' perspectives to government officials' points of view.
-------------------------
Seems the anonymous one hiding is the writer posting under "Yeah right" and not the ones on journalissm.sg
-------------------------
Here is some background about the people on their journalism site. Its good that there are still a remnant out there who share the same views as those on this thread regarding media coverage of Aware saga.
http://journalism.sg/perspectives/
Editor Cherian George (cherian@journalism.sg) Cherian is an assistant professor, Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
The research and writing team comprises journalism students at the Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore:
This site was launched in June 2007 to serve anyone interested in the news media in Singapore, whether a practising journalist, researcher, teacher, student, concerned citizen, media activist or policy maker. To facilitate dialogue among these various constituencies, the articles and links published here are deliberately diverse in their orientations. They range from activists' critiques, academic analyses and professionals' perspectives to government officials' points of view.
-------------------------
Seems the anonymous one hiding is the writer posting under "Yeah right" and not the ones on journalissm.sg
-------------------------
LEE - 21 Jun 09 , 14:19 PM
Thank you "good seed", that was very assuring.
To those who may be discouraged or wonder why MICA or the Govt doesnt seem to be doing anything about the pro gay activists stand by our media.
Have faith that if you are writing to our leaders, you are being heard. It could be that the Govt or MICA is "silent" because they dont want to give the LGBT bullies in the West the smugness of saying ST and company are puppets of the Govt. If the Govt comes out to publicly shame the Press and Media, it may backfire.
My advice is continue doing what we have been doing, let our voices be heard loud and clear and dont fret about ST and their arrogance. Let the public and leaders know the truth and inform them about what the media will not write about. That's important than waiting for apologies that wont come.
To those who may be discouraged or wonder why MICA or the Govt doesnt seem to be doing anything about the pro gay activists stand by our media.
Have faith that if you are writing to our leaders, you are being heard. It could be that the Govt or MICA is "silent" because they dont want to give the LGBT bullies in the West the smugness of saying ST and company are puppets of the Govt. If the Govt comes out to publicly shame the Press and Media, it may backfire.
My advice is continue doing what we have been doing, let our voices be heard loud and clear and dont fret about ST and their arrogance. Let the public and leaders know the truth and inform them about what the media will not write about. That's important than waiting for apologies that wont come.
a good seed 21 Jun 09 , 13:34 PM
"to their US counterpart the Aware saga."
Credit must be given to our PM when he purported to have replied ".. what Josie and her party did (winning the Aware election) was perfectly legal or something to that effect)..".
We are happy to have our PM to stand up to those LGBTs bully boys from the States.
Let us all use the internet with sound intelligence to ferret out the pro-gay activists who are trying their best to rail-road their LGBTs group into Parliament: deny them all; people like MPs Charles Chong, Hri Kumar Nair and more. Vote them OUT OF PARLIAMENT BEFORE THEIR KIND TURN SINGAPORE INTO THEIR LITTLE AMERICA - DO NOT VOTE FOR ANY OF THEM. SHOW THEM THE EXIT AT GE2010/2011.
EVERY CONCERNERD PARENTS MUST STAY PRO-ACTIVE ON ALL WAVELENGTHS ALL THE TIME - English, Chinese, Malay, Indian and others; RISE UP TOGETHER WITH THE GOOD SALTS IN PARLIAMENT AND DENY THESE SOULESS INDIVIDUALS (reminds me of that character 'Cracken' in the 'pirate movie' the creature with waiving tentacles; waiting to pull evertbody it accosted into the watery depths of its souless world) FROM TURNING SINGAPORE INTO A LGBTs SOULESS SOCIETY.
YOUR FAITH WILL SAVE THE CHILDREN, OUR FUTURE LEADERS OF SINGAPORE.
Credit must be given to our PM when he purported to have replied ".. what Josie and her party did (winning the Aware election) was perfectly legal or something to that effect)..".
We are happy to have our PM to stand up to those LGBTs bully boys from the States.
Let us all use the internet with sound intelligence to ferret out the pro-gay activists who are trying their best to rail-road their LGBTs group into Parliament: deny them all; people like MPs Charles Chong, Hri Kumar Nair and more. Vote them OUT OF PARLIAMENT BEFORE THEIR KIND TURN SINGAPORE INTO THEIR LITTLE AMERICA - DO NOT VOTE FOR ANY OF THEM. SHOW THEM THE EXIT AT GE2010/2011.
EVERY CONCERNERD PARENTS MUST STAY PRO-ACTIVE ON ALL WAVELENGTHS ALL THE TIME - English, Chinese, Malay, Indian and others; RISE UP TOGETHER WITH THE GOOD SALTS IN PARLIAMENT AND DENY THESE SOULESS INDIVIDUALS (reminds me of that character 'Cracken' in the 'pirate movie' the creature with waiving tentacles; waiting to pull evertbody it accosted into the watery depths of its souless world) FROM TURNING SINGAPORE INTO A LGBTs SOULESS SOCIETY.
YOUR FAITH WILL SAVE THE CHILDREN, OUR FUTURE LEADERS OF SINGAPORE.
a good seed - 21 Jun 09 , 13:08 PM
limited its present abilities by the
limitations of its past.
Like the elephants, how many of us go through life
holding onto a belief that we cannot do something
simply because we failed at it once before? How
many of us refuse to attempt something new and
challenging because of our so called MINDSET?
Your attempt may fail, but never fail to make
attempt............................
And CHOOSE NOT TO ACCEPT THE FALSE BOUNDARIES
LIMITATIONS CREATED BY THE PAST.............."
ST and CNA are now tools of the LGBTs and their activists/lobbyists. They blame Josie and her group of good Christians and played the religious issue (when none exists).
On CNA's primetime news a fortnight ago (to be exact on Tuesday, 2 June 2009), the pair of newsreaders when exchanging small talk on US President Obama's pending vivit later that day to the Saudi kingdom showed an interview with a Saudi gentleman who said ".. it is not what he (Obama) says but what he does (that matters).." Immediately, a picture of 'Obama' in the form of an Indonesian orang utan was shown to viewers swinging across a tree-top. Are these newsmen trying to embrass our PM and his good people by insulting the US President and the American people?
Like ST, CNA saw it fit not to apologise to the US President and the American people for their backers and the very same group now in control of many of the states in US.
How many of us were aware (more likely unaware) that when our PM H S Lee visited US recently, during a meeting of US businessmen, sourcing for new enterprise and business opportunities for these would be businessmen in Singapore, the LGBTs and their activists during question and answer, quizzed our PM on why his government allowed the "hijacking" (same lingo being used here by ST and CNA) by Josie and her group of Aware then. This clearly shows the immense power of the LGBTs in the States.
Their Singapore's side must have relayed to the US counterpart of the Aware
limitations of its past.
Like the elephants, how many of us go through life
holding onto a belief that we cannot do something
simply because we failed at it once before? How
many of us refuse to attempt something new and
challenging because of our so called MINDSET?
Your attempt may fail, but never fail to make
attempt............................
And CHOOSE NOT TO ACCEPT THE FALSE BOUNDARIES
LIMITATIONS CREATED BY THE PAST.............."
ST and CNA are now tools of the LGBTs and their activists/lobbyists. They blame Josie and her group of good Christians and played the religious issue (when none exists).
On CNA's primetime news a fortnight ago (to be exact on Tuesday, 2 June 2009), the pair of newsreaders when exchanging small talk on US President Obama's pending vivit later that day to the Saudi kingdom showed an interview with a Saudi gentleman who said ".. it is not what he (Obama) says but what he does (that matters).." Immediately, a picture of 'Obama' in the form of an Indonesian orang utan was shown to viewers swinging across a tree-top. Are these newsmen trying to embrass our PM and his good people by insulting the US President and the American people?
Like ST, CNA saw it fit not to apologise to the US President and the American people for their backers and the very same group now in control of many of the states in US.
How many of us were aware (more likely unaware) that when our PM H S Lee visited US recently, during a meeting of US businessmen, sourcing for new enterprise and business opportunities for these would be businessmen in Singapore, the LGBTs and their activists during question and answer, quizzed our PM on why his government allowed the "hijacking" (same lingo being used here by ST and CNA) by Josie and her group of Aware then. This clearly shows the immense power of the LGBTs in the States.
Their Singapore's side must have relayed to the US counterpart of the Aware
a good seed - 21 Jun 09 , 12:40 PM
Bouquets for you u guys "Lee"; "Think Again" "Too Concerned to Remain Silent Anymore"; "Truth"; and many many other concerned parents and bloggers out there.
I am so heartened to know we have a big and strong voice to support our PM and his good men and women in Parliament in all things good that they do for the welfare of all Singaporeans. At times the things they do and say must seemed hurtful to us 'mere mortals' so said one of the current MP and what he said was prominently carried out in the Straits Times(ST) and ChannelNewsAsia (CNA).
This particular MP (an active lobbyists for the LGBTs) is trying to create a wedge between the Government and us citizens, hoping to divide our Government and its citizens.
The following article aptly entitled IT'S CALLED MINDSET is dedicated to each and every concerned parents who cares too much for their loved ones and the nation to allow such pro-gay activist/lobbyist to gain a foothold into Parliament:
IT'S CALLED MINDSET
"As my friend was passing the elephants, he suddenly
stopped, confused by the fact that these huge
creatures were being held by only a rope tied
to their legs. It was obvious that the elephants
could, at anytime, break away from the ropes they
were tied to but for some reason, they did not.
My friend saw a trainer nearby and asked why these
beautiful, magnificent animals just stood there and
made no attempt to get away.
"Well", the trainer said, "when they were young
and much smaller we used the same rope to tie
them and at that age, it's enough to hold them.
As they grow up, they are conditioned to believe
they cannot break away. They believe the rope
can still hold them, so they never try to break
free."
My friend was amazed. These animals could at
any time break free from their bondage but
because they believed they couldn't, they
were stuck right there they were.
The powerful and gigantic creature has
I am so heartened to know we have a big and strong voice to support our PM and his good men and women in Parliament in all things good that they do for the welfare of all Singaporeans. At times the things they do and say must seemed hurtful to us 'mere mortals' so said one of the current MP and what he said was prominently carried out in the Straits Times(ST) and ChannelNewsAsia (CNA).
This particular MP (an active lobbyists for the LGBTs) is trying to create a wedge between the Government and us citizens, hoping to divide our Government and its citizens.
The following article aptly entitled IT'S CALLED MINDSET is dedicated to each and every concerned parents who cares too much for their loved ones and the nation to allow such pro-gay activist/lobbyist to gain a foothold into Parliament:
IT'S CALLED MINDSET
"As my friend was passing the elephants, he suddenly
stopped, confused by the fact that these huge
creatures were being held by only a rope tied
to their legs. It was obvious that the elephants
could, at anytime, break away from the ropes they
were tied to but for some reason, they did not.
My friend saw a trainer nearby and asked why these
beautiful, magnificent animals just stood there and
made no attempt to get away.
"Well", the trainer said, "when they were young
and much smaller we used the same rope to tie
them and at that age, it's enough to hold them.
As they grow up, they are conditioned to believe
they cannot break away. They believe the rope
can still hold them, so they never try to break
free."
My friend was amazed. These animals could at
any time break free from their bondage but
because they believed they couldn't, they
were stuck right there they were.
The powerful and gigantic creature has
LEE - 21 Jun 09 , 11:08 AM
Dear "Too Concerned to remain silent"
You have done a lot of work by extracting certain portions of Mike Haley's book. Thank you very much for the effort. I am sure many have found it helpful.
May I offer some suggestions?
1) You can transport all your posts on this book to REMARKS BY EDUCATION MINISTER ON SEXUALITY PROGRAMME. Then whatever NEW extracts you wish to type can be continued from there.
2) The information you have is good for MOE and the Education Ministry so having it on their thread is good. Best to do it asap so Reach can feedback to them.
3) You have covered quite extensively from your current pages on this thread on Mike Haley. The information was useful. Perhaps you can just put a latest comment for others to read the rest of it on the REMARKS BY EDUCATION MINISTER thread.
4) I hope others out there will take the initiative to check with the bookstores and ask them to order the book if it's not available. Please share if any of you managed to find it from any bookstores here. They will order it for you if you request esp Borders.
You can also can be order direct through the Net via Amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/Frequently-Asked-Questions-About-Homosexuality/dp/0736914706
I found out that a friend has it and will be borrowing it to read.
5) Each one of us must continue to be pro-active, take the initiative and steps to do what is needed if you are interested in the contents of the book. That way, "Too Concerned to remain silent" doesnt have to do so much work. I understand what you mean about being tired. This is time consuming but its to stem the tide of moral decay.
6) Do take note of copyright laws when extracting as it should only be a small portion of the book.
Regards
censorship rules
You have done a lot of work by extracting certain portions of Mike Haley's book. Thank you very much for the effort. I am sure many have found it helpful.
May I offer some suggestions?
1) You can transport all your posts on this book to REMARKS BY EDUCATION MINISTER ON SEXUALITY PROGRAMME. Then whatever NEW extracts you wish to type can be continued from there.
2) The information you have is good for MOE and the Education Ministry so having it on their thread is good. Best to do it asap so Reach can feedback to them.
3) You have covered quite extensively from your current pages on this thread on Mike Haley. The information was useful. Perhaps you can just put a latest comment for others to read the rest of it on the REMARKS BY EDUCATION MINISTER thread.
4) I hope others out there will take the initiative to check with the bookstores and ask them to order the book if it's not available. Please share if any of you managed to find it from any bookstores here. They will order it for you if you request esp Borders.
You can also can be order direct through the Net via Amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/Frequently-Asked-Questions-About-Homosexuality/dp/0736914706
I found out that a friend has it and will be borrowing it to read.
5) Each one of us must continue to be pro-active, take the initiative and steps to do what is needed if you are interested in the contents of the book. That way, "Too Concerned to remain silent" doesnt have to do so much work. I understand what you mean about being tired. This is time consuming but its to stem the tide of moral decay.
6) Do take note of copyright laws when extracting as it should only be a small portion of the book.
Regards
censorship rules
??? - 21 Jun 09 , 10:00 AM
Dear "You guys go ahead to new "site" on 21 Jun 09 , 08:39 AM
Reach only censors if you have posted comments that have been inflammatory, crude. If you have been following others in that style, then it may be removed. If you post what is relevant, there should be no reason for Reach to censor it. I am also a little puzzled with your comments.
Reach only censors if you have posted comments that have been inflammatory, crude. If you have been following others in that style, then it may be removed. If you post what is relevant, there should be no reason for Reach to censor it. I am also a little puzzled with your comments.
Noor's Comment To REACH - FYI
21 Jun 09 , 09:53 AM
Until we hear what MICA has to say about comments on this thread, surely this thread should not be archived?
--------
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/YourDiscussionCorner/tabid/117/ptid/414/page/4/totrecs/31/threadid/1802/forumtype/posts/Default.aspx
Noor ""said :
I am new to REACH having started only in May 2009. It is disconcerting for users to give feedback without direct replies from the relevant goverment agencies. I see not much progress on this matter since Feb 2009
To raise the level of discourse and the volume of viewership of REACH portal, govt must go online and reply say by 3 days. Otherwise netizens are no different from people who gather at coffeshop - ie REACH will be like an online coffeshop if there is no participation from govt""
--------
Reply from Reach:
Dear Noor (I am Guest),
Thank you for your comments. With regard to responses from government agencies, you may be pleased to know that various agencies have in fact, responded on our discussion forum. The links to some of these responses are as follows:
CPF – Li / HDB - Wet Market Bid/ PUB - PUB rates went up again ? /NEA – PUB rates went up again ? / MOE- How can MOE work with parents on sex education?
NPARKS - Islandwide Park Connectors - to include bicycles ?
We agree with your observation that communication needs to be two-way. In this regard, please be assured that the Government is committed to two-way e-engagement, and REACH will, together with MICA, continue to work with Government ministries and agencies on e-engagement. Over time, we are confident we will see more Ministries and agencies e-engaging and responding on the REACH website.
We will nevertheless, bear your concerns and comments in mind as we seek to continue to improve on our e-engagement efforts. Thank you once again for your comments and we look forward to your continued participation on the REACH forums."
Regards, Ling (REACH Admin)
-------------
So please keep this thread active until there is truly objectivity in media coverage.
No response?
Until we hear what MICA has to say about comments on this thread, surely this thread should not be archived?
--------
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/YourDiscussionCorner/tabid/117/ptid/414/page/4/totrecs/31/threadid/1802/forumtype/posts/Default.aspx
Noor ""said :
I am new to REACH having started only in May 2009. It is disconcerting for users to give feedback without direct replies from the relevant goverment agencies. I see not much progress on this matter since Feb 2009
To raise the level of discourse and the volume of viewership of REACH portal, govt must go online and reply say by 3 days. Otherwise netizens are no different from people who gather at coffeshop - ie REACH will be like an online coffeshop if there is no participation from govt""
--------
Reply from Reach:
Dear Noor (I am Guest),
Thank you for your comments. With regard to responses from government agencies, you may be pleased to know that various agencies have in fact, responded on our discussion forum. The links to some of these responses are as follows:
CPF – Li / HDB - Wet Market Bid/ PUB - PUB rates went up again ? /NEA – PUB rates went up again ? / MOE- How can MOE work with parents on sex education?
NPARKS - Islandwide Park Connectors - to include bicycles ?
We agree with your observation that communication needs to be two-way. In this regard, please be assured that the Government is committed to two-way e-engagement, and REACH will, together with MICA, continue to work with Government ministries and agencies on e-engagement. Over time, we are confident we will see more Ministries and agencies e-engaging and responding on the REACH website.
We will nevertheless, bear your concerns and comments in mind as we seek to continue to improve on our e-engagement efforts. Thank you once again for your comments and we look forward to your continued participation on the REACH forums."
Regards, Ling (REACH Admin)
-------------
So please keep this thread active until there is truly objectivity in media coverage.
No response?
Which site? 21 Jun 09 , 08:58 AM
Which site?
21 Jun 09 , 08:58 AM
What new "site" are you talking about?? You mean the Reach Discussion thread on 'JOURNALIST MUST BE IMPARTIAL"?
There is nothing wrong with sharing certain truths if it is relevant. Just because they happen to be "christian" doesnt mean it cannot be shared. As long as its not causing religious hatred. Your comment is like saying only so called liberals can state their views because its "secular".
Not sure where you are coming from because your comments are rather confusing and contradictory.
--------------------------------------------------------
You guys go ahead to new "site", I not that capable.
21 Jun 09 , 08:39 AM
You guys go ahead to new "site", I not that capable. I tried to follow some of the postings and post some of my view points along that style, but Reach admin censored and removed them, guess they weren't good enough. It is ok, not that I am unhappy about the censorship, guess following the style of others is a repetition of sorts, that's why such comments have been removed. Best to leave it to more capable people to band together and protect our values for our future. Will support in spirit. By the way, just feel that some of those christian testimonies are more appropriate on your own christian website, which has been mentioned below, wouldn't repeat the url as it may be misunderstood as promoting that url. Thought best to write in secular way to convince people of the world then using religion to talk down to people. Oh yes, forgot to mention, very unhappy with Straits Times way of reporting recently, seems that the views and articles of one side is not reflected in equal proportions to other side.
21 Jun 09 , 08:58 AM
What new "site" are you talking about?? You mean the Reach Discussion thread on 'JOURNALIST MUST BE IMPARTIAL"?
There is nothing wrong with sharing certain truths if it is relevant. Just because they happen to be "christian" doesnt mean it cannot be shared. As long as its not causing religious hatred. Your comment is like saying only so called liberals can state their views because its "secular".
Not sure where you are coming from because your comments are rather confusing and contradictory.
--------------------------------------------------------
You guys go ahead to new "site", I not that capable.
21 Jun 09 , 08:39 AM
You guys go ahead to new "site", I not that capable. I tried to follow some of the postings and post some of my view points along that style, but Reach admin censored and removed them, guess they weren't good enough. It is ok, not that I am unhappy about the censorship, guess following the style of others is a repetition of sorts, that's why such comments have been removed. Best to leave it to more capable people to band together and protect our values for our future. Will support in spirit. By the way, just feel that some of those christian testimonies are more appropriate on your own christian website, which has been mentioned below, wouldn't repeat the url as it may be misunderstood as promoting that url. Thought best to write in secular way to convince people of the world then using religion to talk down to people. Oh yes, forgot to mention, very unhappy with Straits Times way of reporting recently, seems that the views and articles of one side is not reflected in equal proportions to other side.
NARROW AND WIDE - 21 Jun 09 , 08:06 AM
Dear "Terminator",
Exactly!! Send your posting directly to Reach because its a good reason why this thread should not be archived.
Agree with what you said:
"I wonder why the liberals in our media can mock the conservatives so openly and yet when the conservatives try to voice their concerns and opinions the government says that we need to be more tolerant. Haven't the conservatives been very tolerant? Why are the liberals getting away with all these free for all statements in the press. T
The press always features articles that are pro-liberals and hardly articles that promote the conservatives. "
Exactly!! Send your posting directly to Reach because its a good reason why this thread should not be archived.
Agree with what you said:
"I wonder why the liberals in our media can mock the conservatives so openly and yet when the conservatives try to voice their concerns and opinions the government says that we need to be more tolerant. Haven't the conservatives been very tolerant? Why are the liberals getting away with all these free for all statements in the press. T
The press always features articles that are pro-liberals and hardly articles that promote the conservatives. "
NARROW AND WIDE - 20 Jun 09 , 19:20 PM
Okay Terminator, I found it. Yup, the 3rd page is probably what you were getting at.
http://www.todayonline.com/Columns/Maladjusted/EDC090619-0000025/Just-an-old-fashioned-family-guy
Just an old-fashioned family guy
But how can I share your family values when we’re not, like, related?
by Phin Wong
Updated 08:52 AM Jun 19, 2009
From page 3...It may just be a film or teachers’ guide today, but what happens if a vocal segment of society insists that evolution be dropped in school curriculum in favour of creationism? Or that Shakespeare be removed from classrooms because of the Bard’s penchant for cross-dressing? Surely politicking science and literature goes against some parents’ family values, too? So, who has the right of way and who has to filter out?
Back to “liberal” parents and would-be parents like Sham. Perhaps it is simply a matter of semantics. The dictionary definition of “liberal” commonly includes phrases like “free from prejudice or bigotry” and “open-minded or tolerant”. Only someone in favour of bigotry and intolerance would be opposed to that.
But, in this silly worldwide fight between “liberals” and “conservatives”, the word has taken on extra connotations of being radical or immoral (once again - immoral to whom?).
--------------------
Like "LEE"s answer to "CW" about the use of the word immoral.
LEE
19 Jun 09 , 05:20 AM
On the issue of IMMORALITY
As much as I wish we didnt have to use that term, I am afraid this is where we will have to disagree. Homosexuality involves constant acts of anal sex. This is something that is not natural nor healthy. As such I am sorry that these acts will continue to be an issue of immorality for many of us. But remember my earlier post that we are not into gay bashing. As mentioned in my earlier reply to you, many of us interact and get along with our gay friends even though we disagree on certain acts. Asking us to say its not immoral is like asking us to say smoking is healthy. If sm
http://www.todayonline.com/Columns/Maladjusted/EDC090619-0000025/Just-an-old-fashioned-family-guy
Just an old-fashioned family guy
But how can I share your family values when we’re not, like, related?
by Phin Wong
Updated 08:52 AM Jun 19, 2009
From page 3...It may just be a film or teachers’ guide today, but what happens if a vocal segment of society insists that evolution be dropped in school curriculum in favour of creationism? Or that Shakespeare be removed from classrooms because of the Bard’s penchant for cross-dressing? Surely politicking science and literature goes against some parents’ family values, too? So, who has the right of way and who has to filter out?
Back to “liberal” parents and would-be parents like Sham. Perhaps it is simply a matter of semantics. The dictionary definition of “liberal” commonly includes phrases like “free from prejudice or bigotry” and “open-minded or tolerant”. Only someone in favour of bigotry and intolerance would be opposed to that.
But, in this silly worldwide fight between “liberals” and “conservatives”, the word has taken on extra connotations of being radical or immoral (once again - immoral to whom?).
--------------------
Like "LEE"s answer to "CW" about the use of the word immoral.
LEE
19 Jun 09 , 05:20 AM
On the issue of IMMORALITY
As much as I wish we didnt have to use that term, I am afraid this is where we will have to disagree. Homosexuality involves constant acts of anal sex. This is something that is not natural nor healthy. As such I am sorry that these acts will continue to be an issue of immorality for many of us. But remember my earlier post that we are not into gay bashing. As mentioned in my earlier reply to you, many of us interact and get along with our gay friends even though we disagree on certain acts. Asking us to say its not immoral is like asking us to say smoking is healthy. If sm
Terminator - 20 Jun 09 , 23:27 PM
Dear all
The article is found in Fri edition not sat. Title: Just an old-fashioned family guy. Can find this online too on Today website.
I wonder why the liberals in our media can mock the conservatives so openly and yet when the conservatives try to voice their concerns and opinions the government says that we need to be more tolerant. Haven't the conservatives been very tolerant? Why are the liberals getting away with all these free for all statements in the press.
The press always features articles that are pro-liberals and hardly articles that promote the conservatives. They always say such a such a country or countries are already doing it. There are also countries that aren't doing it and yet they never write about it. For e.g they will say homosexuality is allowed or practised in such countries. However, there are many countries that do not allow the practice of homosexuality especially in Muslim countries.
The article is found in Fri edition not sat. Title: Just an old-fashioned family guy. Can find this online too on Today website.
I wonder why the liberals in our media can mock the conservatives so openly and yet when the conservatives try to voice their concerns and opinions the government says that we need to be more tolerant. Haven't the conservatives been very tolerant? Why are the liberals getting away with all these free for all statements in the press.
The press always features articles that are pro-liberals and hardly articles that promote the conservatives. They always say such a such a country or countries are already doing it. There are also countries that aren't doing it and yet they never write about it. For e.g they will say homosexuality is allowed or practised in such countries. However, there are many countries that do not allow the practice of homosexuality especially in Muslim countries.
NARROW AND WIDE - 20 Jun 09 , 19:08 PM
Hi "Terminator",
Could you post the online link and title of article by Phin that you mentioned?
These days the reporters are from that generation when its cool to be neutral and "broad". Thats the direction the world is taking. Remember we can choose. Glad to know majority here are taking the one that leads to life.
The Narrow and Wide Gates
13"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
Could you post the online link and title of article by Phin that you mentioned?
These days the reporters are from that generation when its cool to be neutral and "broad". Thats the direction the world is taking. Remember we can choose. Glad to know majority here are taking the one that leads to life.
The Narrow and Wide Gates
13"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
Too Concerned to Remain Silent anymore! 20 Jun 09 , 16:57 PM
Dear "Concerned"
You are welcome!
Although homosexuals do not chose to be gay, they are also NOT born gay. There are NO respected geneticist in the world to have claimed that they have found a "gay gene".
There is really NO such a thing as a homosexual. As strange as that may sound, it's true. We are all biological heterosexuals.
Give me some more time, I will be continuing writing more from the book and on this subject, and also on the prevention of homsexuality later and then posting it.
Thanks for all your patience!
"So let me say clearly again: NO one chooses to feel attracted to someone of the same sex. However, men and women DO choose how they will act on those feelings. When the pain of this struggle captivates the heart, some people believe their only option is a homosexual identity and lifestyle. That’s where CHOICE comes into play: actively participating in a homosexual act".
You are welcome!
Although homosexuals do not chose to be gay, they are also NOT born gay. There are NO respected geneticist in the world to have claimed that they have found a "gay gene".
There is really NO such a thing as a homosexual. As strange as that may sound, it's true. We are all biological heterosexuals.
Give me some more time, I will be continuing writing more from the book and on this subject, and also on the prevention of homsexuality later and then posting it.
Thanks for all your patience!
"So let me say clearly again: NO one chooses to feel attracted to someone of the same sex. However, men and women DO choose how they will act on those feelings. When the pain of this struggle captivates the heart, some people believe their only option is a homosexual identity and lifestyle. That’s where CHOICE comes into play: actively participating in a homosexual act".
Terminator - 20 Jun 09 , 16:47 PM
Dear all
Thanks for continuing to write and research into the issues that are close to our heart.
I am really glad that most of us conducted ourselves in a gracious manner.
We have to show the rest that we can discuss and debate about things in a mature and dignified way.
NO need to jeer, sneer, mock or issue threats and etc not like the other group.
Actually the words civic and pluralistic have been redefined by that newspaper into " must think like them if not you are not going to be treated civicilly and will not be tolerated.
I thought these people are masters of the words and yet can't understand the real meaning of the words. It is really time for an overhaul of that newspaper. Standards of english have dropped so low!
Please read the TOday paper sat edition. An article written by Phin is quite slanted towards that side. Please comment.
Thanks for continuing to write and research into the issues that are close to our heart.
I am really glad that most of us conducted ourselves in a gracious manner.
We have to show the rest that we can discuss and debate about things in a mature and dignified way.
NO need to jeer, sneer, mock or issue threats and etc not like the other group.
Actually the words civic and pluralistic have been redefined by that newspaper into " must think like them if not you are not going to be treated civicilly and will not be tolerated.
I thought these people are masters of the words and yet can't understand the real meaning of the words. It is really time for an overhaul of that newspaper. Standards of english have dropped so low!
Please read the TOday paper sat edition. An article written by Phin is quite slanted towards that side. Please comment.
Too Concerned to Remain Silent anymore! 20 Jun 09 , 16:33 PM
Dear P,
I would like to thank you for your expertise, your time and your efforts in setting up the citizenwatch88 blog site, a "home" for all of us here to migrate to.
Thank you and appreciate!!!
I would like to thank you for your expertise, your time and your efforts in setting up the citizenwatch88 blog site, a "home" for all of us here to migrate to.
Thank you and appreciate!!!
concerned - 20 Jun 09 , 16:29 PM
Dear CW, must say that I do appreciate your postings and wish that there are more like you...we can agree to disagree and in doing so, helping each other to increase our own understanding of perspectives and views.
Dear "Too concerned to remain silent anymore" - appreciate your postings concerning choice of being gay. Clarified my own misconception that they choose to be...lack of sensitivity on my part...need to do more homework.
To LEE, P and others - Wow! About blog, alternative email and all. Thankful for all of you. Still collating and forwarding your helpful inputs. It's not about just starting well, but continuing to act on our convictions and finishing well. Thanks for setting the example and pace.
Dear "Too concerned to remain silent anymore" - appreciate your postings concerning choice of being gay. Clarified my own misconception that they choose to be...lack of sensitivity on my part...need to do more homework.
To LEE, P and others - Wow! About blog, alternative email and all. Thankful for all of you. Still collating and forwarding your helpful inputs. It's not about just starting well, but continuing to act on our convictions and finishing well. Thanks for setting the example and pace.
LEE 20 Jun 09 , 16:00 PM
Hi friends,
We are not alone in this issue on the lack of objectivity in media coverage. Read the articles posted on this website called "Journalism.sg"
http://journalism.sg/2009/05/17/straits-times-aware/
We are not alone in this issue on the lack of objectivity in media coverage. Read the articles posted on this website called "Journalism.sg"
http://journalism.sg/2009/05/17/straits-times-aware/
THINK AGAIN - 20 Jun 09 , 14:03 PM
Anyone who thinks ST is going to stop being a platform for the LGBT’s, THINK AGAIN.
Read today’s article under ASIA. Look at what our national media is doing. No doubt just reporting “facts” but again, in a bid to push the pro gay agenda to public space.
http://www.straitstimes.com/Asia/China/Story/STIStory_392792.html
Home > Asia > China > Story
June 20, 2009
MEMO FROM BEIJING
'Coming out' in China
While homosexuality is still largely a social taboo, Chinese society is slowly opening up
By Sim Chi Yin, China Correspondent
Excerpts:
In a survey of 400 people across Chinese cities last year, sociologist Li Yinhe, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, found what she termed a 'quite high' level of tolerance of gays - 'possibly because China has no widely held religion and hence no religion-based opposition to homosexuality like in the West'.
A crowd of 200 gay, straight, Chinese and expatriate guests gathered over soft drinks and beer at the Songzhuang Art District on the city's outskirts for what organisers quietly hailed as a breakthrough for gays in China, where homosexuality was delisted as a 'mental illness' only in 2001.
In Shanghai, the country's first week-long Pride Festival reached its climax last Saturday with drag shows, a 'hot body' contest and a symbolic gay wedding ceremony.
Mardi Gras it was not, but after the police stopped three of the 10 planned events, the rest went off largely without a hitch, said Shanghai-based organiser Hannah Miller, a school teacher.
Slowly but surely, in a gradually liberalising social environment, ever more 'lalas' and 'comrades' are coming out.
Gays are also becoming more visible in the media here. Last week, the English-language China Daily ran a front-page story and an editorial touting the Pride Festival in Shanghai as a symbol of a progressive China. Even the usually staid Xinhua state news agency carried a lengthy feature story detailing Beijing's gay scene just before the Olympics Games.
And last week's issue of the widely read Southern Weekend newspaper splashed the story of a pair of Guangdong university students 'coming out' - complete with a photo of the men clasping hands.
Dr He Xiaopei, executive director of the independent Pink Space Sexuality Research Centre in Beijing, said: 'With more activities and media coverage, gays here can be seen more readily and people then realise 'Oh, they are just ordinary people'. All that helps with social acceptance.'
In a survey of 400 people across Chinese cities last year, sociologist Li Yinhe, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, found what she termed a 'quite high' level of tolerance of gays - 'possibly because China has no widely held religion and hence no religion-based opposition to homosexuality like in the West', she wrote on her blog.
That most of China's gay men dutifully marry also means a group of women, now known as tong qi (or wives of comrades), are unwittingly exposed to the risk of Aids - not to mention, emotionally and sexually neglected.
Gay women like 'Amanda', 26, an attractive media professional, simply lead a double life.
To her mother, aunts and colleagues, she is an eligible but picky woman who has been match-made, without success, about 50 times.
'It's the only way not to hurt everyone's feelings,' she said.
Likewise for divorced civil servant 'W', 39, who had been married for 11 years before falling for a woman five years ago.
She has not told her family she is gay but is hoping to have a child with her partner.
Since it is illegal for China's hospitals to artificially inseminate an unwed woman, 'W' will resort to a do-it-yourself procedure with donated sperm.
The most difficult part for her will come after she becomes pregnant.
'I will have to tell my family that I'm gay. And then I will have to marry some guy - just to get the right paperwork for my child to be registered and to go to school - and then divorce him.'
Read today’s article under ASIA. Look at what our national media is doing. No doubt just reporting “facts” but again, in a bid to push the pro gay agenda to public space.
http://www.straitstimes.com/Asia/China/Story/STIStory_392792.html
Home > Asia > China > Story
June 20, 2009
MEMO FROM BEIJING
'Coming out' in China
While homosexuality is still largely a social taboo, Chinese society is slowly opening up
By Sim Chi Yin, China Correspondent
Excerpts:
In a survey of 400 people across Chinese cities last year, sociologist Li Yinhe, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, found what she termed a 'quite high' level of tolerance of gays - 'possibly because China has no widely held religion and hence no religion-based opposition to homosexuality like in the West'.
A crowd of 200 gay, straight, Chinese and expatriate guests gathered over soft drinks and beer at the Songzhuang Art District on the city's outskirts for what organisers quietly hailed as a breakthrough for gays in China, where homosexuality was delisted as a 'mental illness' only in 2001.
In Shanghai, the country's first week-long Pride Festival reached its climax last Saturday with drag shows, a 'hot body' contest and a symbolic gay wedding ceremony.
Mardi Gras it was not, but after the police stopped three of the 10 planned events, the rest went off largely without a hitch, said Shanghai-based organiser Hannah Miller, a school teacher.
Slowly but surely, in a gradually liberalising social environment, ever more 'lalas' and 'comrades' are coming out.
Gays are also becoming more visible in the media here. Last week, the English-language China Daily ran a front-page story and an editorial touting the Pride Festival in Shanghai as a symbol of a progressive China. Even the usually staid Xinhua state news agency carried a lengthy feature story detailing Beijing's gay scene just before the Olympics Games.
And last week's issue of the widely read Southern Weekend newspaper splashed the story of a pair of Guangdong university students 'coming out' - complete with a photo of the men clasping hands.
Dr He Xiaopei, executive director of the independent Pink Space Sexuality Research Centre in Beijing, said: 'With more activities and media coverage, gays here can be seen more readily and people then realise 'Oh, they are just ordinary people'. All that helps with social acceptance.'
In a survey of 400 people across Chinese cities last year, sociologist Li Yinhe, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, found what she termed a 'quite high' level of tolerance of gays - 'possibly because China has no widely held religion and hence no religion-based opposition to homosexuality like in the West', she wrote on her blog.
That most of China's gay men dutifully marry also means a group of women, now known as tong qi (or wives of comrades), are unwittingly exposed to the risk of Aids - not to mention, emotionally and sexually neglected.
Gay women like 'Amanda', 26, an attractive media professional, simply lead a double life.
To her mother, aunts and colleagues, she is an eligible but picky woman who has been match-made, without success, about 50 times.
'It's the only way not to hurt everyone's feelings,' she said.
Likewise for divorced civil servant 'W', 39, who had been married for 11 years before falling for a woman five years ago.
She has not told her family she is gay but is hoping to have a child with her partner.
Since it is illegal for China's hospitals to artificially inseminate an unwed woman, 'W' will resort to a do-it-yourself procedure with donated sperm.
The most difficult part for her will come after she becomes pregnant.
'I will have to tell my family that I'm gay. And then I will have to marry some guy - just to get the right paperwork for my child to be registered and to go to school - and then divorce him.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
