An online forum posting from someone in the Straits Times today:

I AM not a member of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware), but I am surprised by some of the statements made by old guard members.

For instance, when Ms Nancy Griffiths asked if the new executive committee accepted homosexuality, and newly elected honorary secretary Jenica Chua stood up and said ‘no’, Ms Griffiths said she was ‘flabbergasted’. What is there to be flabbergasted about? Whether one accepts a certain condition or not is a personal choice – even if Ms Griffiths accepts homosexuality, she should not be offended that Ms Chua does not.

Acceptance of homosexuality is not an Aware membership criterion, nor is it in its mission statement. Surely, Aware can accept diversity of views among its members.

Next, the old guard’s statement referring to DBS Bank’s credit card campaign last year supporting Focus on the Family is tainted with misconceptions. Focus on the Family is not an evangelical Christian organisation; it is a social charity and evangelism is not on its charter. Merely because Focus on the Family was founded by an evangelical Christian does not make it evangelical Christian.

The issue of sub-committees being overhauled is one faced by all elected societies. These sub-committees should never be under the illusion that their terms are entrenched. Once there is a change of management, they face potential change.

Similar misconceptions were revealed by Ms Margaret Thomas on vice-presidents often going on to become presidents. While that may have been a practice, it should never be taken as a given.

Perhaps it is time for the old guard to examine its own motives and be aware of organisational behaviour.

Tan Suan Tiu

I am not anti-gay, but I am not pro-gay either. Yet I do not and cannot condone homosexuality.I’ll be a hypocrite if I say I do.

But does this mean that I condemn homosexuals? No.

People have to be respectful of each other’s beliefs.

Some people believe that homosexuality is okay. That’s fine.

Some people believe that it is not. That’s fine too.

What is NOT fine is when people start imposing their views on each other. Or act in a bigoted manner because of prejudices and biases.

Why can’t people see that?

I agree with what Tan Suan Tiu wrote (the part I underlined). All these self-proclaimed liberals like to think that they are ‘liberal’ than others, but how ‘liberal’ can one truly be when one cannot accept a diversity of opinions? Sometimes, talking to my self-professed ‘liberal’ friend, it surprises me how narrow-minded he can be. okay well, i don’t know. ‘Liberal’ is such a loaded and misunderstood term.

Diversity in opinion.

Anyway anyway, yay for civil society.

Advertisement