Tag: homosexuality

  • Homosexuals are Delusional

    Azman Ivan Tan Shariff

    lgbt cross dresser gay ladyboy

     

    I spent some time reading the posts on a gay group. Sadly I am beginning to realize…

    They are all delusional. They have perverted sense of what is right. They all have this mentality that their “love” is bigger than EVERYTHING else in this world. They really sound like very very depressed people. I think one of the reasons why they are doing this lifestyle is to escape from reality.

    They are in fact empty inside. Their hearts do not really feel much. The pain they have in them. The feeling of incompleteness. The feeling that everyone is against them. They are just looking for escapes. Like a addict is looking for the fix.

    Maybe they really need to be more TRUTHFUL to themselves. What really are they for on this earth? Do they think they are invincible and will live forever?

    They are “supporting” each other to ensure they have people around they who are homosexuals. If they don’t have, they are lost.

    My advise to those of you homosexuals reading this, think about the moment when you are about to die. Were you truthful to yourself? Did you really seek the truth? Or were you just finding the escape so that you can make yourselves have the moment of feeling fulfilled? The fulfillment is artificial and does not last. You know it yourselves. Why torture yourselves?

    Authored by Azman Ivan Tan 

     

    EDITOR’S NOTE 

    The divide between the LGBT and WearWhite camps are getting more obvious. Increasing tensions felt between the two groups.

    Are you supporting the Freedom to Love or are you supporting the Traditional Values of Marriage and Family? Which side are you on? Share your opinion with us at Rilek1Corner.

    letters to R1C banner

  • Perlukah Kempen Pakai Baju Putih Untuk Tangani Isu LBGT dan PinkDot?

    https://www.facebook.com/aryne.jann
    https://www.facebook.com/aryne.jann
    https://www.facebook.com/aryne.jann
    https://www.facebook.com/aryne.jann

    Salam

    Apa ada pada warna? Berbaju puteh bukan bermakna kita suci dan bersih dari sebarang dosa.. Dan berbaju pink tidak bermakna, kotor dan jijik…

    Pelajar-pelajar Madrasah AlMaarif hari2 menggunakan warna pink dan putih? Adakah bermakna mereka menyokong LBGT dan pink dot kah?

    Sedangkan warna putih juga symbol penyokong fanatik PAP…

    Selagi kita berpegang kepada Syahadah kenapa pedulikan tentang warna pakaian sangat dan terkejar2 stop mereka? .. Cukupla sekadar spread awareness di acara forum. Tak perlu bertanding akan warna dan berkejar2..

    Perlu ke copycat cara mereka sibuk sgt soal warna?

    Saya sebenarnya ada membuat comment di salah satu posting…

    White tu ikut sejarah Islam memanglah asal warna kesukaaan Rasulullah saw.
    Dan ia juga warna favourite fanatik PAP juga..

    Susahkan kita mahu tegakkan besarkan “soal warna” ni? Adakah kempen berwarna baju puteh gara2 ingin berlumba isu LBGT dan Pink dot dan hadirnya Ramadan saje?

    Jika mahu dapat pahala sekalipun kenapa tidak mulakan hari ini setiap solat dan mengapa perlu tunggu Ramadan untuk bertaubat?

    Bagi saya tak perlu a berkejar all out dan stop LBGT ni semua.. Yang mulakan ni semua siapa dan siapa mereka semua? Bukan orang Islam kita.. Sedangkan ramai orang Islam kita sendiri bukan perfect dan byk buat dosa juga. The most kita boleh nasihat jika berlaku depan mata kita saje.. Berdoa… Jika ikut cara Nabi saw, beliau tidak berkejar orang sampai mcm tu sekali.. Pernah tidak kita terbaca cara Nabi berdakwah seperti mahu serang atau “confrontional”?

    Bagi saya mengadakan acara forum atau syarahan dan spread awareness, seperti biasa tu lebih baik..

    Sumber: Arbaah Haroun

    READ ARTICLES ON LGBT-RELATED ISSUES HERE

    letters to R1C banner

  • Dr Mahatahir: If You Understand Your Religion, You Will Never Be Gay

     

    Credit: Reuters
    Credit: Reuters

    KUALA LUMPUR, June 4 — Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad suggested today that homosexuality would not exist if people were strong in their religious beliefs.

    The former prime minister said homosexuality is now prevalent because the gay and lesbian communities have been following their emotions and lust.

    “If you understand your religion, you will never be gay,” the 88-year-old said after a lecture in the International Islamic University Malaysia  here.

    “If you strengthen your faith, your iman, then you’ll never be gay,” he added.

    Dr Mahathir was answering a question by a student — a nephew of former New Straits Times group chief editor Datuk A. Kadir Jasin — who asked for a way to curb the spread of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) movement in Malaysia.

    Dr Mahathir said that one of the dangers posed by the LGBT community is that they cannot have children, despite religion prescribing sex as a way to procreate.

    “It is good that they are having gay marriages, very soon they will disappear,” Dr Mahathir added, referring to the Western world.

    Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak objected to the inclusion of LGBT rights when signing Asean’s first human rights charter in 2012, saying Malaysia could not accept principles that went against the order of human nature.

    In the same year, the Education Ministry was forced to deny endorsing any guideline on spotting homosexuality symptoms among schoolchildren, following its then deputy minister’s apparent support for a controversial list that has triggered widespread disapproval.

    Mohd Puad Zarkashi, who was the then-deputy education minister, also said in March last year that his ministry may look into extending a parenting seminar on how to curb LGBT activities, to all districts in order to reach out to a wider group.

    International news wire Reuters reported the federal government as acknowledging last year that it has been working to curb the homosexuality “problem” prevalent among Muslims who form 60 per cent of Malaysia’s 28 million population.

    Homosexuality in itself is not a crime in Malaysia but is taboo in the religiously-conservative society, including among followers of Islam.

    Source: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/those-with-strong-faith-wont-ever-be-gay-dr-m-says

    letters to R1C

  • American Mistress Spills Sexcapades With Sultan of Brunei and His Brother, Broke Sharia Law

    Ahim Rani/Reuters
    Ahim Rani/Reuters
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jillian_Lauren
    Jill Lauren, the escort for the Sultan of Brunei and his brother. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jillian_Lauren
    As a teenager, I was the mistress of his brother—who ‘gave’ me as a gift to the sultan. And in just one night, we committed at least two offenses under his newly implemented penal code.

    On Tuesday, I was greeted by a familiar face when I read through the morning’s news: the sultan of Brunei. He looks older now than when I knew him, of course, his face doughier and more careworn.

    When I was still a teenager, I was the mistress of the sultan’s brother, the prince of Brunei. My usual stance is that they weren’t bad guys, really. Just human and impossibly rich. I have often wondered what I would have done in their place, given all the power and money in the world. I’ve never come up with a satisfactory answer.

    Now the sultan is making headlines for implementing Sharia law in Brunei, including a new penal code that includes stoning to death for adultery, cutting off limbs for theft, and flogging for violations such as abortion, alcohol consumption, and homosexuality. There’s also capital punishment for rape and sodomy.

    articles300414-AY-Syariah_Panel_Code_Declaration-017.transformed

    I am no expert in international human rights. My only qualification in commenting on this issue is that one drunken evening in the early ’90s, the sultan and I committed at least two of the aforementioned offenses as we looked down on the lights of Kuala Lumpur from a penthouse suite.

    Let me back up a bit.

    I had barely turned 18 when I found myself at a “casting call” at the Ritz-Carlton in New York for what I was told would be a position at a nightclub in Singapore. When I got the job, I learned that the job wasn’t in Singapore at all. Instead, it was an invitation to be the personal guest of the notorious playboy Prince Jefri Bolkiah, the youngest brother of the sultan of Brunei. At the time, the sultan was the wealthiest man in the world. I was a wild child consumed with wanderlust. I was hardly an innocent, but I was—when I accepted the invitation—very, very young.

    When I arrived in Brunei, I found out that the prince threw lavish parties every night, in a palace with Picassos in the bathrooms and carpets woven through with real gold. At these parties there was drinking (which was not legal in public), dancing, some fairly hilarious karaoke, and, most important, women—about 30 or 40 beauties from all over the world, comprising a harem of sorts.

    The prince was rakish and clever and yes, even charming at times. I spent the next year and some change as his girlfriend. For a time, it was an adventure both glamorous and exciting. It was also lonely and demoralizing, and full of constant low-grade humiliations, including being given to the prince’s brother as a gift (see: the Kuala Lumpur hotel suite). Although I was by no means a prisoner, I wasn’t free to come and go as I pleased. By the end of my time there, I felt 10 years older and still not wise enough. It took me a long time to regain my footing, though I did find my way eventually. My struggles were internal and they were my own. In this context, they were a privilege.

    Stoning is practiced or authorized by law in 15 countries now. It is disproportionally applied as a punishment for women, often as a penalty for adultery. Human rights groups, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, consider it cruel and unusual punishment and torture. According to the international rights organization Women Living Under Muslim Law, stoning “is one of the most brutal forms of violence perpetrated against women in order to control and punish their sexuality and basic freedoms.”

    And yet it is the privilege of the prince and the sultan to misbehave. The picaresque escapades and legendary extravagances of the brothers are indulged with a collective wink. For everyone else residing within Brunei’s borders, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, freedoms are curtailed, and those limitations now are potentially enforced by brutal violence.

    Cast stones at me if you will for my past improprieties—plenty have. Of course, those stones will be metaphorical. As the citizen of a free society, it is my right to transgress, as long as I don’t break any laws or impinge on the freedom of others. It’s my prerogative to sleep with all the princes I damn well feel like. I live with my choices.

    As the citizens of Brunei face the erosion of their rights, I imagine the man I once knew, holed up in a posh hotel suite somewhere, maybe with another American teenager in his lap, making laws that legislate morality.

    Authored by Jill Lauren*

    *Jillian Lauren is the author of The New York Times bestseller Some Girls: My Life in a Harem. 

     

     

  • The Internet and the Culture of Public Lynching

    The Internet takes on an important function in maturing democracies with an under-developed civil society. Citizens see the cyberspace as an important avenue to perform checks and balances. This have led some to call for a rethinking of the rules of engagement.

    A couple of years ago, Singapore’s Minister for Information, Communication and the Arts called for the crafting of an Internet code of conduct. Attempts to regulate the cyberspace through the suggested “netiquette” and the recent passing of the MDA regulations to legislate online news were met with disagreement on the part of the netizens. About 1,500 people registered their discontent against this new implementation and an Internet Blackout Thursday saw more than 130 bloggers trading their web pages with black screens carrying the slogan ‘Free My Internet’.

    The complexity of the issue is compounded by the ambiguity as to whether social networking sites such as facebook represent the private or public sphere. Comments posted on personal capacities are often shared among hundreds or thousands of people. With this development, the phenomenon of public lynching on the Internet is becoming more common in Singapore. The cases of Amy Chua’s comments on the Malays, a PRC Chinese student’s remarks on Singaporeans, Anton Casey’s observations on the poor and Dr Aljunied’s views on homosexuality are some examples.

    Consequently, the opportunity to engage deeper on contentious issues such as race, nationality, religion and social class are lost due to the manner in which these discussions have placed too much emphasis on the personalities. Surely, the strategy of removing or silencing the protagonist cannot be a better alternative to addressing the root of the concerns in open discussions. More important questions such as who represent these views, how pervasive these views are, and who are discriminated, remain unanswered. If there is one rule of engagement on the internet, it is this – every contentious point should be engaged in a civilized and respectful manner, regardless of age, hierarchy or any other social divisions.

    An accompaniment to the culture of public lynching is the culture of online petitions. The petitions against and for Dr Aljunied circulating online over the last week denouncing or championing their professor is neither the first nor will it be the last that we will see. Certainly, for every social group that feels aggrieved, there will be another that feels validated. Such is the complex cosmopolitan society that we live in today.

    However, if university students were to start petitioning against every disagreeable point spouted by their professors, the university will lose its critical edge and become an undesirably monotonous place. These points of views should be debated in a mature, open and inclusive manner taking on board views from all sides.

    The problem with the culture of public lynching is that living in a state where there are many punitive measures to sanction the citizenry against making contentious comments that may potentially cause public disorder, it will be more convenient to slip back to an era where people are governed by a culture of fear and not speak on critical issues, anxious that they will tread on the wrong side of vague OB markers. This will surely retard Singapore’s progress and quest for a more consultative society.

    Written by Kamaludeen Mohamed Nasir

    Kamaludeen Mohamed Nasir

    Kamaludeen Mohamed Nasir is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at the Nanyang Technological University. He is the author of The Future of Singapore: Population, Society and the Nature of the State (Routledge, 2014).