Rilek1Corner

Tag: LGBT

  • Ireland Votes Overwhelmingly To Approve Same-Sex Marriage

    Ireland Votes Overwhelmingly To Approve Same-Sex Marriage

    Ireland has become the first-ever country to approve same-sex marriage by referendum, voting overwhelmingly to approve it despite opposition from clergy in the heavily Catholic nation, according to official results announced today.

    Reuters says in Friday’s vote “more than 60 percent of eligible voters cast their ballot, the highest turnout at a referendum there in over two decades.”

    Earlier, both sides in the debate acknowledged that the “yes” vote had succeeded.

    Leo Varadkar, Ireland’s health minister who came out as gay in January just as the campaign was getting underway, said Dublin appeared to have voted 70 percent in favor of the measure.

    “We’re the first country in the world to enshrine marriage equality in our constitution and do so by popular mandate,” Varadkar said. “That makes us a beacon, a light to the rest of the world of liberty and equality. It’s a very proud day to be Irish.”

    NPR’s Ari Shapiro, speaking with Weekend Edition Saturday host Scott Simon, says that although Ireland is a predominately Catholic country and many clergy urged a no vote, “the Church has had a lot of scandals” in recent years. Without a doubt, he says, the Church is “one of the losers in this vote.”

    The head of the Iona Institute, which ran the No campaign in Ireland’s vote to legalize same-sex marriage, has tweeted his congratulations to the yes campaign.

    Here’s the tweet from Iona Director David Quinn:

    Ari says that conservative areas that voted against legalizing divorce in the 1990s have come in with a Yes vote for same-sex marriage.

     

    Source: www.npr.org

  • Muhammad Fadli Mohammed Fawzi: Religion-based Ideas In Public Sphere Must Face Scrutiny

    Muhammad Fadli Mohammed Fawzi: Religion-based Ideas In Public Sphere Must Face Scrutiny

    The writer of “Don’t let secular fundamentalism be the norm” (May 15) makes a simplistic argument for the unqualified acceptance and veracity of ideas based on religious or moral convictions in the public domain.

    While we can accept that religious sentiments have a role to play in public discourse, this does not mean that all views based on religion or morality are therefore legitimate and deserving of consideration.

    First, to play a constructive role, religious claims must be transparent and not be hidden behind vague assertions of common good, public interest or family values. Second, religion-based views must be subjected to the same analytical rigour and scepticism we extend to non-religious claims.

    The writer seems to agree that any value, religious or otherwise, “must be open to scrutiny and critiques once they enter the public domain”. This is often difficult, however, since many of the proponents of religion-based views would allege offence against their faith when these views are criticised.

    Third, we should distinguish between making a religiously inspired contribution to public discourse and simply making a religious demand.

    For example, the former involves articulating support for certain policies in line with one’s religious convictions but simultaneously being cognisant enough to offer other public reasons in support of said policies.

    These public reasons are those that people from different faiths and backgrounds could endorse, whereas making a religious demand limits itself to translating religious dictates into public policy demands.

    Such demands are generally articulated in a non-negotiable manner and usually seek to confine the scope of freedom for others. This approach impedes further conversation and can potentially be divisive.

    The role of religion in the public sphere is indispensable. Many progressive causes in history, such as the abolitionist and civil rights movements, have been spurred by religion.

    We should also realise, however, that not all religious views are legitimate for public discourse, even if religion is dear to many people.

    It is thus simplistic to rail against “secular fundamentalism” when the greater danger comes from those trying to narrow public space and conversation with their religious demands.

     

    This article written by Muhammad Fadli Mohammed Fawzi, was published in Voices, Today, dated 19 May 2015.

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • Bryan Kwa: Stop Stigmatising Sexual Minorities

    Bryan Kwa: Stop Stigmatising Sexual Minorities

    Last Friday’s letter (“Distinguish between helping gays and supporting an agenda” by Mr Leo Hee Khian) cautioned against affirming same-sex attraction.

    Mr Leo wrote that in Denmark, where there is same-sex marriage, “married homosexuals have been found to die at an age about 20 years younger than their heterosexual counterparts”.

    This statistic is disputed. It is drawn from a paper published by the Family Research Institute, a partisan organisation associated with the Christian right and branded as a hate group.

    Its founder Paul Cameron has been censured by numerous professional organisations. He was also dropped from membership in the American Psychological Association for violating its ethics code.

    The American Journal of Public Health published a study of mortality among Danes in same-sex marriages, which concluded that “claims of drastically increased overall mortality in gay men and lesbians appear unjustified”.

    In fact, supporting gay rights improves public health.

    The New England Journal of Medicine published an editorial last month supporting same-sex marriage.

    The doctors highlighted that “a fundamental tenet of all medical care is the acceptance of patients as they are, for who they are, with respect and without prejudice or personal agendas” and posited that “same-sex marriage should be accepted both as a matter of justice and as a measure that promotes health”.

    Make no mistake, this is not about ideological standpoints. This is a public health issue; homophobia kills.

    A study by Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, published in the journal Social Science & Medicine, found that LGB (lesbian, gay, bisexual) individuals who lived in communities with high levels of anti-gay prejudice have a shorter life expectancy, compared with their peers in the least prejudiced communities. The same study also found that the rates of suicide, homicide/violence and cardiovascular diseases were all substantially elevated among sexual minorities living within high-prejudice communities.

    Considering such findings, how may the Government reconcile its heteronormative and heterosexist policies with the stated vision and mission of the Ministry of Health?

    The science is clear. It is imperative that we stop stigmatising sexual minorities and start upholding their rights.

    For all the moral grandstanding, surely we can agree that literally driving people to their death is unquestionably amoral.

    Bryan Kwa Jie Wen

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Not Just About Munah And Hirzi – Look At The Invisble Hands Behind Pink Dot

    Not Just About Munah And Hirzi – Look At The Invisble Hands Behind Pink Dot

    R1c,

    I just to share with you further on how insidious Pink Dot is.

    Pink Dot does not just choose their ambassasors. These individuals hope to get something back for themselves either for their careers or their publicity. Pat Mok earned herself a lot of hate within the gay community when she drunkenly accused a GAY PERSON of molesting her at a GAY bar, Daren Lee is desperate to get fans because who has really heard of him and of course the 2 Youtubers will do anything to get more fans. Hirzi can pretend all he wants but at the end of the day he is just another gay boy desperate for attention and get laid.

    But who is behind all this?

    The connections the organizers have are very enticing for those who want the limelight. Boo Junfeng one of our so called critically acclaimed local directors in charge of the sappy Pink Dot videos every year and in charge of taking the video for the dot formation at night. Alan Seah who works in Mediacorp as a senior VP of creative services and is one of the main organizers. How about Izzie Ali who leads their PR team and loves embarrassing Singapore every to the international media (he also works in Fulford PR the agency that represented Anton Casey) and also the son of President Tony Tan’s Head of Media and Communications Saleh bin Ali?

    The ambassadors are just a convenient decoy for the real people moving behind the scenes.

    Do not be duped.

     

    Anonymous

  • Counsellor: Distinguish Between Helping Gays And Supporting An Agenda

    Counsellor: Distinguish Between Helping Gays And Supporting An Agenda

    Some people, including some university student groups, have assumed that the solution to help youth with same-sex attraction is to push for the cause of affirming their alternative sexual identity at all costs.

    These groups include The G Spot (Yale-National University of Singapore College), tFreedom (Tembusu College, NUS), Gender Collective (University Scholars Programme, NUS), Kaleidoscope (an independent Nanyang Technological University group) and Out To Care (Singapore Management University).

    Yale-NUS College also organised an Ally Week in March to support the ideology that alternative sexual identities must be affirmed.

    As a counsellor with more than a decade of experience helping youth with same-sex attraction, I urge caution against such an assumption.

    Even in countries where same-sex marriage laws have been passed – for example, in Denmark – the quality of life of homosexual individuals has not improved.

    Rather, married homosexuals have been found to die at an age about 20 years younger than their heterosexual counterparts.

    This statistically significant difference cannot be ignored by anyone who truly cares for homosexuals.

    It makes all sense to ask: Why do homosexuals affirmed in their alternative sexual identities, and even those who are married, not enjoy the same quality of life as their heterosexual counterparts?

    This should eventually lead us back to question the starting assumption: Does helping an individual with same-sex attraction equate to pushing for the same-sex marriage agenda or affirming his alternative sexual identity at all costs?

    Many of my friends with same-sex attraction live healthier, more fulfilling lives today not because they have been affirmed of an alternative sexual identity, but because of loving support rendered that enabled them to work on their social-emotional difficulties and to accept themselves.

    Their specific sexual dispositions should play little role in their identity.

    They are not pushing the same-sex marriage agenda.

    This is especially important for society to understand, so that we do not confuse the goal of loving homosexuals with an agenda to change the moral laws of society.

    We should love homosexuals and ensure they are not bullied or discriminated against.

    But to link this to a need to push the same-sex marriage agenda would be a wrong conclusion.

    It is, hence, of grave concern to see the developments in our student campuses.

    Expertise in navigating through this sensitive issue holistically and factually is sorely missing.

    Leo Hee Khian

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com