Tag: liberals

  • MDA To Take Action Over Same-Sex Kiss In Les Miserables

    MDA To Take Action Over Same-Sex Kiss In Les Miserables

    A kissing scene between two male actors has been removed from the musical Les Miserables after complaints from members of the public.

    In a statement to The New Paper today (June 11), a spokesman for the Media Development Authority (MDA) confirmed that action will be taken against the production for the breach of licensing conditions.

    The spokesman said: “The inclusion of the same-sex kiss was not highlighted in the script when it was submitted to MDA for classification.

    The performance was thus given a ‘General’ rating.

    Upon receiving feedback from members of the public, MDA reviewed the performance and confirmed that the scene was present.

    MDA advised the applicant that the inclusion of this particular scene meant that the performance had exceeded the ‘General’ rating issued.

    Under our classification code, such a scene would fall under an ‘Advisory’ rating.

    The applicant decided to remove the scene so as to keep the ‘General’ rating for the rest of its run.

    MDA will take action against this breach of licensing conditions

     

     

    Source: www.tnp.sg

  • Singapore Should Not Fall Prey To Demands To Be ‘Liberal’

    Singapore Should Not Fall Prey To Demands To Be ‘Liberal’

    I write to express my concerns over the content and themes of Madonna’s Rebel Heart Tour.

    Although Madonna’s concert organiser has agreed to comply with the Media Development Authority’s (MDA) terms of licence to not offend any race or religion, it has maintained that “Madonna will have the final say in how the show turns out”.

    Historically, Madonna has consistently abused her artistic licence to stir political and religious controversy abroad, invoking lawsuits, and police and government concerns.

    Licensing such performers undermines the fundamental values upon which our nation is built, such as that of safeguarding racial and religious harmony, public decency and building strong families. This is harmful to our society.

    The exploitation of religious symbols and themes in provocative ways, such as the use of an adulterated cross as a stage, is disrespectful and wounds religious feelings. It grieves a community that appreciates that social cohesion rests on religious harmony and mutual respect.

    I am particularly concerned about our youth and the bad example this sets. In my capacity as a humanitarian doctor, author and active speaker on several youth platforms, I was honoured to receive the Young Outstanding Singaporean Award. Society has given much to me and I consider it my responsibility to give back by inspiring our youth to be socially and morally conscious future leaders. This is why I am raising this matter.

    The MDA has a responsibility to protect the delicate balance of Singapore’s multireligious, multiracial society and uphold values of respect and harmony. I am grateful for the times the MDA has withstood the pressures of those preferring more liberal approaches to censorship, and urge it to keep faith with the public by discharging its role with due consideration to our local mores.

    We should not fall prey to demands by a vocal sector to be “liberal” and “progressive”, as many of us consider public indecency and blasphemy to be regressive. Singapore has received global admiration for our ability to maintain a prudent equilibrium in preserving our multireligious, multiracial society.

    I urge the authorities to act with principled resolution to uphold those values cherished by many Singaporeans, which have been so critical to our past, and will be key to our continued success. Let us not compromise these values for the sake of entertainment that seeks to provoke and divide, rather than to uplift and unite.

    This opinion by Tam Wai Jia was published in Voices, Today, on 25 Feb 2016.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • Ustaz Noor Deros: Liberals Are Cherry-Picking The Quran To Justify LGBT Lifestyle

    Ustaz Noor Deros: Liberals Are Cherry-Picking The Quran To Justify LGBT Lifestyle

    1- You can see clearly in this misTafsir of the Secular and Liberal Muslims an astonishing similarity with ISIS and other extremist groups with regards to the methodology they employed in reading the text of the Quran and Sunnah, clearly both used the same unacademic, out of context, cherrypicking and incomprehensive reading of the sacred texts. We can say either the liberals employed Tafsir Daeshiy or Daesh employed Tafsir Libraliy.

    2- Ask any lay Muslim who actually have read the whole Quran, with technology they would easily quote you these three verses. Does these verses sound like a prohibition of rape? :

    إِنَّكُمْ لَتَأْتُونَ الرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّن دُونِ النِّسَاءِ ۚ بَلْ أَنتُمْ قَوْمٌ مُّسْرِفُونَ

    “Verily, you practise your lusts on men instead of women. Nay, but you are a people transgressing beyond bounds (by committing great sins).” (7:81)

    أَئِنَّكُمْ لَتَأْتُونَ الرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّن دُونِ النِّسَاءِ ۚ بَلْ أَنتُمْ قَوْمٌ تَجْهَلُونَ

    “Do you practise your lusts on men instead of women? Nay, but you are a people who behave senselessly.” (27:55)

    أَتَأْتُونَ الذُّكْرَانَ مِنَ الْعَالَمِينَ وَتَذَرُونَ مَا خَلَقَ لَكُمْ رَبُّكُم مِّنْ أَزْوَاجِكُم ۚ بَلْ أَنتُمْ قَوْمٌ عَادُونَ

    “You go in unto the males of the ‘Alamin (mankind), and leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your wives? Nay, you are a trespassing people!” (26:165-166)

    3- The wife of Lut a.s and the people of the city were punished due to their complicity and tacit approval of the crimes, it is that simple, really.

    4- The word ‘transgression’ (عادون and مسرفون) in the verses encompasses both sexual and non-sexual sins which includes rape as well as consensual sodomy and lesbianism. There is no evidence whatsoever to exclude consensual sodomy from the transgression of the people of Lut a.s, in the contrary, the textual, thematic as well as semantic evidences actually point to it as being one of the main reason that led to their destruction.

    وَلُوطًا إِذْ قَالَ لِقَوْمِهِ أَتَأْتُونَ الْفَاحِشَةَ مَا سَبَقَكُم بِهَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ مِّنَ الْعَالَمِينَ إِنَّكُمْ لَتَأْتُونَ الرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّن دُونِ النِّسَاءِ ۚ بَلْ أَنتُمْ قَوْمٌ مُّسْرِفُونَ

    “And (remember) Lut (Lot), when he said to his people: “Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Alamin (mankind and jinn)?

    “Verily, you practise your lusts on men instead of women. Nay, but you are a people transgressing beyond bounds.” (7:80-81)

    5- The liberals were known to oppose literal reading of texts, but in this case it appears that they will only accept the criminal status of sodomy when there is a clear cut prohibition laid down in a verse with an explicit description of the act. Again, Tafsir Daeshy at work.

     

    Source: Noor Deros

  • MDA Bans Pink Dot SG Ad

    MDA Bans Pink Dot SG Ad

    Over the weekend, the seventh edition of Pink Dot SG saw its largest turn-out yet, with more than 28,000 people coming together. This was despite the organisers facing several challenging situations from the community.

    According to a statement from the Pink Dot SG organisers, a 15-second pre-event advertisement for Pink Dot that was meant to be screened in cinemas  was refused a rating by the MDA last Friday after a two-month wait, effectively banning it. The statement said that the MDA cited the reason that “it is not in the public interest to allow cinema halls to carry advertising on LGBT issues.”

    Responding to Marketing‘s queries, MDA said it had “carefully considered” Cathay Organisation’s application on 12 May to screen a Pink Dot 2015 promotional trailer in its cinemas.

    “This is the first time MDA has received such an application. MDA has concluded that it is not in the public interest to allow cinema halls to carry advertising on LGBT issues, whether they are advocating for the cause, or against the cause. MDA has therefore rejected Cathay Organisation’s application to screen the trailer,”the spokesperson added.

    The ad is currently running on Pink Dot SG’s social media channels. Here’s the full ad:

    Nonetheless, the Pint Dot SG organisers added that this year the event saw its largest-ever list of corporate sponsors. Social media giant Twitter, local entertainment giant Cathay Organisation, as well as financial software, data and media company Bloomberg, join returning sponsors Google, Barclays, Goldman Sachs, BP, J.P. Morgan and The Gunnery.

    This year’s Pink Dot focused on the message, “Where Love Lives,” and invited the community to reflect on the progress that has been made towards dispelling the discrimination and prejudice that face lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, as well as the many challenges that still remain. People were encouraged to take part in Pink Dot’s social media campaign, #WhereLoveLivesSg. The campaign was powered by local social media agency, Campaign.com.

    Paerin Choa, a Pink Dot SG spokesperson added, “After the setbacks that we had experienced over the last 12 months, giving up and losing hope would have been the easy thing to do. But we also know that Singapore’s LGBT community are a very resilient bunch, and in view of these challenges, we still have much to celebrate.”

    Among the major challenges the community had faced over the past year, probably the biggest was the verdict in October last year by the Court of Appeal upholding the constitutionality of Section 377a of the Penal Code, which criminalises physical intimacy between men.

    Locally, furniture brand IKEA also recently came under fire for partnering up with Faith Community Baptist Church (FCBC) controversial pastor Lawrence Khong who has been in the limelight for openly opposing homosexuality.

    Meanwhile last year, The National Library Board (NLB) came under intense fire from netizens after it decided to pull off two children’s book titles off its shelves. The books were removed after the board received complaints from a member of the public stating that the titles And Tango Makes Three and The White Swan Express were not in line with traditional family values. The first book depicts two male penguins acting like a couple raising a young penguin and the latter talks about a single mother, adoption and a lesbian couple.

     

    Source: www.marketing-interactive.com

  • Kirsten Han: The Hypocrisy Of The Wear White Campaign

    Kirsten Han: The Hypocrisy Of The Wear White Campaign

    Kirsten Han is a Singaporean blogger, journalist and filmmaker. She is also involved in the We Believe in Second Chances campaign for the abolishment of the death penalty. A social media junkie, she tweets at @kixes. The views expressed are her own.

    “I want to pray that we will continue to wear white as long as there is pink, and we will wear white until the pink is gone, and even if the pink is gone we will continue to wear white.”

    The above statement comes not from some sort of ill-conceived advertisement for laundry liquid, but from conservative magician-pastor Lawrence Khong of the Faith Community Baptist Church.

    Khong and his fellow anti-LGBT followers have once again revived the Wear White campaign, positioned as a counter to the annual gay rights rally Pink Dot.

    This vocal conservative group are incensed by what they see as a threat to the “Natural Family” posed by the LGBT equality movement. More than adultery, more than domestic violence and problem gambling, it is for some reason LGBT rights – or, as a commenter on a previous blog post put it, “Gayism” – that threatens heterosexual family units and the fabric of society. Presumably because once LGBT rights are recognised, a big glittery tidal wave of gay will wash over Singapore, leaving nothing but tight leather and Grindr in its wake. Because hey, who doesn’t want to be gay, if only they could?

    The Wear White campaigners and folk over at We Are Against Pinkdot in Singapore (WAAPD) are deeply committed to their cause. Nothing, not compassion, not kindness, nor facts can stand in their way.

    They are willing to yell until they are blue – or white – in the face about foreign interference in domestic debates, while conveniently ignoring the origins of their own brand of right-wing evangelical Christianity. In fact, the term “Natural Family”, featured so prominently in Khong’s letter, was itself borrowed from American anti-gay rhetoric. Their version of blessed “Asian Values” is as Singaporean as mee siam mai hum: IT’S NOT ACTUALLY A THING.

    Wear White and WAAPD are up in arms over foreign interference because the US embassy congratulated Pink Dot on Facebook, and because some pink-clad white people were spotted in Hong Lim Park on Saturday. They say that these foreign elements (because, obviously, there is no such thing as a white Singaporean or Permanent Resident) should butt out of “domestic affairs” – what Singapore does within our borders is none of their concern.

    They, unfortunately, appear unable to take their own advice: LGBT people have for years been trying to tell conservatives to butt out of their domestic affairs, because what two consenting adults do within the four walls of their bedroom is none of their concern. But I guess that would bring us back to the leathery Grindr glitter tsunami of gay.

    According to mothership.sg, Khong ended his Dynamo sermon over the weekend with the promotion of his upcoming totally-not-gay magic show, which promises to transform “illusion to reality”. Perhaps he will bring a same-sex family onstage and try to make them disappear.

    Jokes aside, the activities of Wear White and WAAPD cannot be dismissed. Both LGBT activists and conservatives might be vocal, but it would be a mistake to imagine that there is balance in the way the government is dealing with the issue.

    The government is willing leave enshrined in law state-led discrimination and prejudice against LGBT people. This means that LGBT people are largely blocked from public health initiatives that might teach safe sex or provide counselling for mental health issues. Gay youth – particularly boys – are taught in schools that they are technically lawbreakers. By not allowing same-sex marriage, LGBT people are by default excluded from the many social benefits that the state ties to marriage: HDB grants, childcare subsidies, or even the power to act as next-of-kin for their partners in case of injury or illness.

    According to Khong and his followers, the rights of the heterosexual family unit *include* these oppressions against others, even though the existence of these oppressions have zero impact on the lives of heterosexuals. The government, for all its insistence on compromise and balance, appears to agree. After all, it is more than willing to erase LGBT stories and experiences from the media, even while it professes neutrality in the debate.

    But all is not lost, and we who believe in equality and acceptance should take heart. This bigotry has an expiry date: we’re seeing it around the world, from Ireland to Mozambique to Mexico.

    Despite what Khong says, you cannot white out the pink; it merely creates more pink.

     

    Source: https://sg.news.yahoo.com