I couldn’t resist writing about Sulthan Niaz’s letter which bordered on sexism and what looked liked an attack on women in Singapore to the ST Forum.
I would have fully agreed with Mr Niaz if his letter was about my future generation . But I certainly do not agree with his comments about women in his generation. Why my future generation? Let me explain.
I was walking past a primary school one fine day. There were school kids with their maids, or mothers sitting outside the school. Upon closer observation, I realised, to my surprise that the maids and mothers were FEEDING the kids. Mind you, these school kids look like they were in Primary 5.
As I walked away, it suddenly dawned on me that these kids were going to be the next generation. They are going to be replacing my generation. Yes, horrifying. Contrary to Mr Niaz’s observation, kids these days are the true spoilt princes and princess.
Look around. Kids as young as 7 years old, or younger are already using sophisticated gadgets like iPhones and BlackBerries. In my time, I only got to play with trucks and figurines. I’m not trying to complain about the ‘boring’ childhood I have. I’m just saying that kids at that age should be learning about manners and being prepared for the harsh realties of the world, instead of being treated like royalty.
So whose fault is it that kids are so spoilt these days? Ultimately, its the parents. Because everything is taught at home. I therefore, would like to take take this opportunity to thank my parents for not spoiling me and giving in to my whinings whenever I desired something that I shouldn’t be having at my age.
I will confidently say this. If parents continue to spoil their childern, then there will be more uproar and arguments if a letter like Mr Niaz’s appears again in the future.
I have been extremely busy the past week as I have been working. And I have missed out on many many important issues to blog about. But I’m really glad that my blogger friends have been really busy, well, blogging. So, here are the links of their posts and other interesting links:
- Kristen Han is pissed with Singapore’s Judicial system
- Dr Goh Keng Swee, one of the founders of the PAP, has gone home to be with the Lord.
- Callan Tham warns Singapore’s government not to treat bloggers like ‘chopped liver’
- Singapore’s theatre community lambasts the National Arts Council
- Texas schools board rewrites US history
- Singapore is grabbing Cambodia by its neck for sand
- Pinkdot 201o was held over the weekend. Mohd Hisham blogs about the event.
- Alex Au is ‘in the sea of red‘. Literally.
Pardon me for my lack of of updates. Will be back after the 6th of June.
Tan Chin Aik’s rebuttal to Law Minister K. Shanmugam that the Government should go after drug barons instead of punishing at times clueless drug traffickers:
While the death penalty is applied rightly to crimes such as murder and kidnapping, it is applied with strict liability on drug trafficking, and often, against drug addicts who are themselves victims of the drug barons.
It is certainly difficult to get the drug barons. But they are also the ones breathing easier when drug traffickers get the death sentence as ‘their mouths are sealed’ upon their execution.
While I do not argue against the tough stance of a death sentence, to have it as a mandatory sentence against a strict liability offence can be most unwise.
Some of the offenders’ culpabilities may not be such as to deserve a death penalty, and some of the less culpable ones deserve to have their lives spared and be rehabilitated. They could even possibly rat on the drug lords.
Now, if only K. Shanmugam can see this issue the way Mr Tan sees it.
It is official. Gordon Brown has stepped down as Britain’s Prime Minister and paving the way for the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats to form a coalition government. It also means that the Labour Party’s reign as the ruling party in Britain has ended after 13 years. David Cameron will be the new Prime Minister and Nick Clegg will be the Deputy Prime Minister.
Singapore’s Law Minister K Shanmugam defended the mandatory death penalty in an article in TODAY:
People assume you can have this safety and security without this framework of the law; that you can change it, and yet your safety and security will not be affected,” he said. “But there are always trade-offs. The difficulty the Government has sometimes in explaining this is that the trade-offs are not apparent. The damage to a large number of others is not obvious.
“You save one life here, but 10 other lives will be gone. What will your choice be?
If a drug mule escapes the death penalty. drug barons will think the signal is that young and vulnerable traffickers will be spared and can be used as drug mules, argued Mr Shanmugam.
“Then you’ll get 10 more. There’ll be an unstoppable stream of such people coming through as long as we say we won’t enforce our law
I feel he’s missing the point here. He’s not nipping the problem in the bud by going after the drug mules who sometimes have no idea what they are doing. He should be going after the drug barons instead.
If he say that there are trade offs, which also means that he’s willing to sacrifice the drug mules ‘for the greater good’, then my question is, by doing that, will the drugs stop coming?
This is a very weak and heartless argument for keeping the death penalty.
Gwee Li Sui’s comment on this post:
Christians expressed shock and ready apologies during the Rony Tan affair and even City Harvest members called for clarification over church investment. The sharing in public anxiety feels a bit healthier than what we got a year back, and it is a move in the right direction. Every Christian — or person with a faith, for that matter — must learn to do this: it’s a responsibility that just can’t be passed on or put on hold, pending permission. Nobody else owns your voice of conscience.
A report on March 9th, 2000 about the Singapore government pumping US$29 million over the next five years to transform the staid city-state into Asia’s “Renaissance City,” teeming with artistic activities.
“We want to position Singapore as a key city in the Asian renaissance of the 21st century and a cultural center in the globalized world,” said a report released by the Ministry of Information and the Arts on Thursday.
“We should aim to reach a level of development that would be comparable to cities like Hong Kong, Glasgow and Melbourne in five to 10 years.”
“The longer term objective would be to join London and New York on the top rung of cultural cities,” it said.
Local theatre company Wild Rice has had its annual grant from the National Arts Council cut by $20,000.
This was confirmed to MediaCorp by the council, which is a statutory board of the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts (Mica).
Artistic director Ivan Heng claims that the cut – which still leaves the theatre company with $170,000 in Government funding – was because Wild Rice had staged productions which ran contrary to mainstream societal values and which were critical of the Government.
NAC arts development director Elaine Ng said the council’s guidelines state clearly that “we will not fund projects which are incompatible with the core values promoted by the Government and society or disparage the Government“.
It’s amazing how MICA changed it’s tune in a period of 10 years. I’m sure that theatre companies in the countries that MICA wants to emulate, have made fun of their own governments countless times too. They certainly didn’t climb up the ‘cultural rung’ by being censored and having their work lambasted in public by their own government.
Where’s your sense of humor, MICA?
Filed under Arts, Singapore