National University of Singapore – Page 7

Pastor Lawrence Khong Weighs In on LGBTQ vs NUS Professor Saga

I watched with dismay as a Malay Studies Professor was insulted and intimidated by two alumni and a student for posting his personal views regarding “alternative modes of sexual orientation” on Facebook.

This action constitutes an attack on free conscience and free speech. It aims to terminate debate on a highly controversial issue. It hampers the expression of diverse viewpoints. If left unchallenged, it will harm academic freedom and democracy in the long run.

This is not the first time an academic is being maligned by LGBT activists. In 2007 when our leaders were debating whether to repeal or retain Section 377A of the Penal Code, two NUS law academics were subjected to abusive, lewd emails from LGBT activists for their cogent arguments supporting 377A. Be warned: the chief danger of the LGBT movement is its political agenda to take away freedom from anyone who disapproves their alternative lifestyle.

Academics have the right to express their religious and professional convictions on public morality. What Dr Khairudin Aljunied said on Facebook is the very essence of academic freedom, not beyond academic freedom. It is intolerant and offensive for the alumni and student to demand that he undergo counselling.

At National Day Rally 2009, Prime Minister said: “We are not against religion… religious groups are free to propagate their teachings on social and moral issues and they have done so on the IRs, on organ transplants, on 377A, homosexuality… And when people who have a religion approach a national issue, they will often have views which are informed by their religious beliefs. It is natural because it is part of you, it is part of your individual, your personality. But you must accept that other groups may have different views, informed by different beliefs and you have to accept that and respect that. And the public debate cannot be on whose religion is right and whose religion is wrong. It has to be on secular rational considerations, public interests—what makes sense for Singapore.”

The petition against Dr Aljunied makes no sense in Singapore—a secular society with conservative roots where all citizens are free to address public issues based on their moral convictions secular or sacred or both.

We hope Dr Aljunied will not lose his job over this incident. It will be a very sad day for Singapore if he does. It will derail the future of a moral man with a brain and a spine. It forebodes the end of freedom and our decline as a nation.

NUS must not allow an undemocratic minority to vandalise our consciences, defy our shared values, degrade our virtues, and terrorise our collective well-being by forcing homosexual credo on a conservative society. NUS must draw the line between truth and error, right and wrong, good and bad. Or we might end up as a mere footnote in history instead of the shining red dot our Prime Minister hopes for.

Source: Lawrence Khong (FCBC)

Read the ENTIRE chronology of saga in category ‘AGAMA’:

March 7, 2014

NUS professor acknowledges ‘poor judgment’ in posts on sexuality

SINGAPORE — The National University of Singapore professor at the centre of an online controversy has acknowledged that his recent Facebook posts discussing his views on homosexuality caused offence, said NUS provost Tan Eng Chye.

In a circular sent out this morning (Mar 5), Prof Tan said that Associate Professor Syed Muhd Khairudin Aljunied’s comments on his views of lesbianism “contained provocative, inappropriate and offensive language”.

“I have counselled Associate Professor Khairudin, who has acknowledged that whilst his only intention had been to convey his point of view, his original posts reflected poor judgment in the tone and choice of words. He has since amended or removed these posts,” said Prof Tan.

Two alumni and a current student had earlier lodged a complaint to NUS over Professor Khairudin’s Facebook posts, claiming that Professor Khairudin had described “alternative modes of sexual orientation” as “wayward”, and as “cancers” and “social diseases” to be “cleansed”.

The circular emphasised NUS’ commitment to diversity, regardless of “gender, ethnicity, religion, nationality, political beliefs or sexual orientation”, and highlighted the need to respect this diversity when communicating with others.

Both staff and students were reminded to “show restraint, due care and respect with their words and actions, particularly when communicating online.”

Source: TODAYonline

Read the ENTIRE chronology of saga in category ‘AGAMA’:

March 5, 2014

Homosexuality and Liberal Islam are Dangerous to Singapore

I was recently made aware of the uproar over my dear friend Prof Dr Syed Khairudin Aljunied and his post on the wall of his personal Facebook account.I do not see why is there a need to make a big fuss over his post in the first place. There were some who took offence as they see it as him replying in his official capacity just because the word “prof” appeared. I find it daft really. It was the questioner who addressed him as “prof”. Prof K was replying in his personal capacity and nowhere did he say he is replying in his official capacity. (note that I too personally address him as Prof K)

Next, there are those who took offense at the words “diseases”, “cancerous” and “cleanse”. The ones starting the petition are being mischievous when they took those words out of context. It is literally putting words into his mouth when they angle it the way they are doing it now. The hypocrisy……

And if he edited the post, isn’t it good in some sense as perhaps he did see value in some of the complaints brought forth and corrected it accordingly. Or perhaps he realised it himself. I am just speculating here.

Most seem to fail to note who the post was addressing it to. Prof K was addressing it to the Muslim faithful. A Muslim not adhering to the teachings of Islam can’t be called the faithful can he? Nor can a Non-Muslim be part of the Muslim faithful. He is addressing to the in-house crowd. (though what Prof K is suggesting can be used by the other religions in their own religious context).

He is replying to a Muslim. How do you expect him to reply then? There is no way we can compromise on the issue. Islam abhors homosexual acts and we can’t condone nor compromise on it. As a scholar, he is obligated to stand up to deviant ideologies and practices. Read below:

“Scholars and religious teachers (asatizahs) must speak up and write against these ideologies and practices. They are obligated to explain to the public the true meaning of what Islam is and sexuality as defined by the Quran and Sunnah. When the scholars and asatizahs are silent about these issues, corruption will spread like wild fire.”

Same goes to Liberal Islam as they bring about a dangerous ideology that runs contrary to the teachings of Islam. They discard 1400++ years of scholarly research, debate and rulings and bring in instead deviant interpretation of the religion claiming that theirs is most up to date. And most of them who are advocating it are not even learned enough in the knowledge of Islam in order to make any new rulings. The ideas and ideals brought forth by the proponents of these ideologies and practices brings about many social ills and it is detrimental to the well being of any society. Any part of the body that is not normally there and brings diseases to it is cancerous. Then there is a need to cleanse it. Cleanse not in the sense of killing them but to do it spiritually in the context put forth by Prof K.

If we do not make a stand, society will degenerate faster that it is now. What next? If the pedophiles decided to form a lobby and lobby for the age of consent to be lowered further, what do we do? Do we let them be coz it is their rights? Freedom to love mah…Some European countries approve of Bestiality and some in fact have animal brothels. If ever we have a bestiality lobby here, do we allow them through also?

Where do we draw the line on the morality of society?

Many too failed to notice the words that come before and after those words mentioned above. They also fail to see the overall meaning he is conveying. Put it in context people! Nowhere is he spouting hatred for a certain group of minorities. It is conveniently angled in such a way by the authors of the petition. He is in fact advocating early detection and seeking early treatment. Read below:

“Parents and school teachers must be made aware of these challenges. They must detect early signs of waywardness from their children and students. Give advice, send them to proper religious classes and seek help from counsellors, if necessary. Win over the hearts of the misled youths and explain to them what’s right with knowledge and wisdom.”

We condemn homosexual acts but we do not condemn those who have homosexual tendencies or those who are transsexuals. We welcome them with open arms,always ready to listen to them and offer them advice if need be. We will accept them as who they are but we will never fail to remind them to return back to the true path. Coz we love ’em.

Peace.

PS. To all those who support Prof K can like his fan page created by some supporter out there. Haters need not come.

Source: Written by and taken from Mohamed Saiddhin Abdullah

Read the ENTIRE chronology of saga in category ‘AGAMA’:

March 1, 2014

Homosexual Lobby, Bullying Tactics Gone Too Far

Yesterday was an interesting day.

For sometime, we hear the homosexual lobby play the victim card. They claim they just want to be heard. That their sexual proclivities should be recognised. That their immorality should not be questioned.

They demanded for their choices to be accepted and normalised. When anyone questions their claims, the questioner is seen as being intolerant. Their lifestyle and choices are seen as given. The victim card is played repeatedly.

But today, we see how vicious the homosexual lobby really is. How intolerant they really are. How vindictive their tactics.

When Assoc Prof Khairudin Aljunied wrote his Facebook post on the need to cleanse society of homosexual behaviour, homosexual advocates launched a campaign against him. “Benjamin Seet, a graduate student in Political Science; Melissa Tsang, a former Law student who is reapplying for admission into Arts; and Khairulanwar Zaini a final-year undergraduate in Political Science and Philosophy” are organising a petition to be submitted to the Provost of NUS against Khairudin.

For these homosexual advocates, their behaviour is beyond reproach.

Anyone who dares to question their immorality is targeted.

Anyone who seek to return society to family values would be attacked.

Anyone who raise any objection to their attempt to make homosexuality normal is abused.

We need to be clear that the homosexual lobby is not about creating safe spaces. They are not interested in engagement. They have no interest in debates. They do not care about morality or positive conduct.

All they want is for their behaviour to be recognised. And anyone who speak against it is an enemy that need to be removed.

Lets not kid ourselves. They are not a tolerant group.

The question for us is a simple one. What do we do about these intolerant, militant and self interested homosexual lobby?

Do we keep quiet and cower while they attack anyone who dare to speak?

Or do we finally say that this enough?

How we respond define not only how our society will be.
It also defines who we are. Are we social cowards who realise the homosexual lobby is taking advantage of our silence and continue to keep our mouths shut?

Or do we finally respond and take back the ground and stop these bullying tactics they employ?

Are we going to do what is right?

Are we finally going to say that the homosexual lobby has gone too far?

Are we finally going to say this is enough?

Source: Zulfikar Shariff

Read the ENTIRE chronology of saga in category ‘AGAMA’:

February 28, 2014

Singapore Murtad Association Pokes Fun at NUS Prof Syed Khairudin Aljunied on LGBTQ Issue

A friend of mine from NUS alerted me on the post below which was written by a FASS Associate Professor who teaches Malay Studies at her school.

Please bear in mind that this is an influential person who is supposed to educate students without foisting his religious beliefs on them. However, he has evidently transgressed his boundaries.

So here is my reply to Mr. Syed Muhd Khairudin Aljunied:

Dear Prof, are you aware that lesbianism has existed way before Islam? A religion which only began existing in the 610 AD? In the Code of Hammurabi, written circa 1750 BC, it was mentioned that women who were allowed to marry other women were called the “salzikrum” (“daughter-men”). If you think that this is an isolated case, let me further support it by mentioning that homosexuality has been observed in 1500 species, ranging from large marine animals to insects. It is clear from nature that there is more to sexual behaviour than one that is solely geared towards reproduction.

However, even if you are still convinced that homosexuality, especially lesbianism, is a choice, how does this relate to it being morally-incorrect? In what way does someone’s sexual preferences harms or infringes upon others’ rights? If I were to prefer asam pedas to curry and eat my food in solitude, while you on the other hand, prefer the latter and forces me to only eat curry because that is what the majority prefer, wouldn’t your action be considered as a form of bullying?

Yes, you will then proceed to rebuff my points by quoting anti-homosexuality verses from the Quran, but so what? I, as an ex-Muslim, question the book’s credibility since it is rife with incoherent chronological order for historical events (Quran states Virgin Mary as Aaron and Moses’s sister, when in actuality, both of them were born 1500 years apart), scientific inaccuracies (Earth is flat and Sun and Moon orbits around it) and mathematical errors (the calculation for the inheritance law did not amount to a whole number, it resulted in an improper fraction instead).

Are you sure you want to openly claim that lesbianism is a “wrongful ideology and practice” when your religion, Islam, is in fact, made up of layers upon layers of lies? But then again, in Islam, taqiyyah is totally “halal” and permissible in order to beguile the ignorant from the flaws of Islam. Not only that, your religion, Islam, preaches hate and intolerance in the name of Jihad.

In Surah 2: The Cow
1. Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. 191
2. War is ordained by Allah. 216

Can you now see the difference, Prof? Being in a fulfilling relationship with a woman is not harming others but actively persecuting others who don’t agree with your beliefs, is.

As evident from its violence-inducing scripture, Islam has no place in a multi-religious and secular country such as Singapore. But of course, not many non-Muslims or even Muslims, for that matter, know about their own religion, which is why I find it appalling that even when Muslims themselves are mired in ignorance of the true Islam, they have no qualms dictating others on how they should live. And how they should love.

Wake up. This is 21st century Singapore, if you prefer to bound your life rigidly to the teachings of the Quran, please time-travel back to 7th Century Saudi Arabia. I’m sure with your parochial mindset and stalwart need to assert what you believe as “morally-correct”, you will definitely “gel well” with the barbaric and tribal Arab men of that epoch.

Let’s face it: Lesbianism isn’t cancerous, your religion is.

Source: Singapore Murtad Association, Syed Khairudin Aljunied

Read the ENTIRE chronology of saga in category ‘AGAMA’:

February 27, 2014

Tag: National University of Singapore

Pastor Lawrence Khong Weighs In on LGBTQ vs NUS Professor Saga

NUS professor acknowledges ‘poor judgment’ in posts on sexuality

Homosexuality and Liberal Islam are Dangerous to Singapore

Homosexual Lobby, Bullying Tactics Gone Too Far

Singapore Murtad Association Pokes Fun at NUS Prof Syed Khairudin Aljunied on LGBTQ Issue