The Aware saga: Views of a Buddhist monk
May 1st, 2009 | 
Author: By Venerable Dhammika from dhamma musings
Singapore is a pretty boring place. By ‘boring’ I mean no school massacres, no ‘no-go areas’, no corruption scandals, no gang warfare and not much crime. Even elections are low-key, unexciting and predictable affairs. But of late Singaporeans have been treated to a bit of real excitement.
People are talking about it, it is getting wide coverage in the media and the internet is positively humming with opinions about it. And because all the excitement has a religious element to it I’m dealing with it on my blog today. I will return to the promised subject of the five and ten Precepts in two days.
For 26 years an organization called AWARE has promoted women’s rights, birth control, lesbian self-respect, everything you would expect from a modern progressive women’s advocacy group.
Last month AWARE had their annual general meeting and to everyone’s astonishment a large group of members who had only joined during the previous month, voted out all the old members and took over. Interesting in itself, but even more interesting is that six of the 11 new office-bearers all just happen to be members of the same religious organization.
In its reporting of this matter the media has mentioned the new offices holders’ have a particular ‘religious affiliation’, that they have a ‘faith-based’ outlook and that ‘certain beliefs’ are involved, seemingly unable to bring themselves to actually use the word – Christian; or more precisely, fundamentalist Christian; or to be exact the Church of Our Savior.
On the side-bar of the church’s web site, the fourth item after ‘Home’, ‘Welcome’ and ‘About Our Church’ is ‘Position Statement on Homosexuality’ so presumably what homosexuals do in the privacy of their own bedrooms is of particular interest to the COS. The church even run an operation called Choice Ministries which ‘cures’ homosexuals.
Apparently COS also has close links with the controversial Hillsong Church in Perth, Australia, characterized by its many critics, including Christian critics, as having an abusive, cohesive, mind-control approach to religion (see http://dogemperor.livejournal.com/147779.html). I always refer to these types of setups as Taklakamakan churches – ‘go in, can’t get out’.
The new AWARE committee have publicly stated that they did not know each other previous to their election, that they haven’t yet decided whether there will be new policies on gender issues, and that they intend to keep their religious views in the background.
Many people in Singapore of late have reported seeing pigs flying. After all this got in the papers, the new committee appointed the mother of a former MP as its ‘feminist mentor’. Within days, alleged ‘private and confidential’ emails between this woman and some of the new committee appeared on the internet and these suggest very strongly that there had been a carefully planned, religiously motivated, conspiracy to take over AWARE because of its stance on matters relating to sexuality.
Religious fundamentalists of all persuasions are pretty much the same, aren’t they? While claiming to promote the highest moral standards, they are quite willing to use underhand, dubious or even immoral means to promote those standards.
Typically, they also want to impose those standards on everyone else. Because of their excellent organizational abilities and fierce determination, fundamentalist Christians in Singapore have a profile and an influence far beyond their numbers.
If your neighbor, fellow student, boss, work colleague, local shopkeeper or the driver of the taxi you just hired, is a Christian, you’ll know it because he or she will very soon tell you. They may even tell you so often that you start to feel as if you are being verbally harassed. And they are very determined to use each and every opportunity to promote their particular view of things.
Some observers maintain that they are also prepared to do almost anything to stifle or suppress opposing or different views.
Whether the AWARE saga turns out to be an example of this, we should know within a few days. The ousted committee has called an extraordinary general meeting for the 2nd of May and both sides are urging sympathizers to quickly join AWARE, attend the extraordinary general meeting and give their support.
For more on this, have a look at http://www.we-are-aware.sg/
[EDITORS' NOTE: Venerable Dhammika has been a Buddhist monk for 32 years and am the spiritual advisor to the Buddha Dhamma Mandala Society in Singapore. He has kindly allowed us to reproduce his article posted on his blog here]
Posted in Opinion
23 Responses to “The Aware saga: Views of a Buddhist monk”
Loading ...
Alex Tan Allan Ooi AWARE Chee Soon Juan Chiam See Tong Claire Lee David Widjaja DBS Dr Allan Ooi Dr Silviu Ionescu Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Foyce Le Xuan highnote5 Hong Lim Park Jack Lin Xinli Jack Neo Jack Neo affair Jack Neo scandal Josie Lau Josie Lau Meng Lee Lee Kuan Yew Lehman brothers Lighthouse Evangelism MAS minibonds Miss Singapore World NTU stabbing PAP Pastor Rony Tan Ris Low Romanian diplomat in hit-and-run Rony Tan S-League silviu ionescu Singapore Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games Tan Kin Lian Thio Su Mien Tiger Woods affair Tong Kok Wai Top 8 Vivian Balakrishnan Wendy Chong Y O G Youth Olympic Games
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
“Now the Church of Our Savior is – how can I put this? – let’s just say XXX is a moderate by comparison.”
Not funny.
Today (1 May 2009), the Newpaper reported that Senior Pastor Derek Hong of the Church of Our Saviour reportedly said that his church has no agenda against gays and that COS did not initiate or instigate any campaign to take over the leadership of Aware.
I think he was trying to impress upon the public, especially those who will be going to vote in the EOGM on 2nd May, that the new Exco of Aware is “not a pawn of the church”.
However, based on the emails that he has been alleged to have sent out to his congregation, his public statement of words seems to be in contradiction of his deeds behind the scene.
With such public denial, we the ordinary citizens of Singapore are not in a position to ascertain the actual truth. It must be the task of the ISD now to investigate deeper into all his and his church activities and involvements over the past two to three years in order to provide the public a measure of surety that the church (COS in general) and Pastor Hong (in particular) have been true to their words and intentions.
I strongly think that the people in general (both Christians and non-Christian Singaporeans) must not be allowed to be deceived into believing words that do not meet with behind-the-scene deeds.
I belong to no religion at all and will not join any religion.
It is sad to see that this Aware issue has taken on a religious tint.
As an ordinary human, I am deeply pained to know about abnormal erotic practises, particularly by males and males. I am sure many, which I think is still the majority at this moment, regardless of their religion, share my feelings about this issue.
Thus to me, this issue has nothing whateoever to do with one’s religion. Any ordinary thinking human can tell that the anus orifice, though useful, is not meant by the creator of humans for erotic penetration, with or without a man-made condom and regardless of cultural and social status.
To me, a preferred practice, be it a particular erotic activity, like any popular sport or pastime, is an acquired and cultivated activity.
If an activity is unwholesome, rather than follow one’s urging inclination to develope that inclination even more, one can consciously and responsibly use one’s mind and reasoning faculties to re-channel that unwholesome urge to other wholesome alternatives. This is what choice is about. Choice is not simply choosing to follow something even if it is bad.
Perhaps Venerable can enlighten on this?
Hi, Admin,
Whilst it may sound funny and attention capturing to use the descriptive words “Ang Moh” in daily ordinary conversation amongst local Singaporeans, it is a little discriminating in its primitive context.
I think we should not encourage coining such a name for especially a senior buddhist monk. Like it or not, we should have respect for their presence as they are above our normal people’s station in mind, soul and spirit. Exceptions apply only to those who lower their own standard by allowing their church premises and pulpits to be used as a nest to promote their secret agenda through underhanded, dubious or even immoral means.
Buddhism have been known to be non-combative, and tolerant to the extent of self sacrificial. I am prepared to listen to more of what Venerable Dhammika has to say in his later preachings.
But to start with, please do not mock.
Hi. Don’t know what church you have issue with in Perth but it cannot be Hillsong. Hillsong does not have a church in Perth.
Hi Judy. I think he was referring to the Metro Church in Perth, which is part of the extensive Hillsong Christian network.
Agape Xue <<
Relax, Venerable Dhammika is a very humorous person. I am sure he can see the humor in this. Well, in a sense the Ang Moh notation is admittedly slightly racist in some context but it is just some light humor IMO.
Outsider <<
I do agree with you in the sense. But you are making the same mistake many people are making. It is never just about “teaching” or “promoting” homosexuality. It is about reaching out to the homosexual kids, to tell them it is ok and normal to be a homosexual. They what they are experiencing is normal, and they should not feel guilt or hate themselves for being different!
There are no universal views. And tell the kids that there are some people who are attracted to people of same gender, and it is a normal. Just like some people are born left handed. Some people are born attracted to those of the same gender. And we should not discriminate against them because they are different.
This is a secular CSE programme for kids of all races, religions (or non-religion), and sexuality. And as it is a very sensitive topic, no biased views should be presented.
And this stand that homosexuality is a normal behavior is endorsed by all major medical association, even in China. Homosexuality is not a choice, and cannot be taught. You are either a homosexual or you are not.
Lets imagine back to the time when you are just a teen. Can you imagine yourself attracted to someone of the same gender? Making love to that someone? Even after your teacher tell you that it is ok to do it? And it is cool to do it? Mostly likely not.
Because sexual orientation, unlike vices like smoking is not addictive, nor optional. You probably can force yourself to do it under peer pressure, but you will never like or enjoy it.
Judy <<
I think he meant the Faith Community Church.
http://www.coos.org.sg/resource/index.php?sectnum=p10&coospg=churchlist.html
However I do not know if there is any Hillsong link with the Church. But the following article claimed that the FCC is part of the Hillsong network of NAR churches.
http://dogemperor.newsvine.com/_news/2009/04/24/2729992-a-steeplejacking-of-a-womens-ngo-in-singapore-a-rare-glimpse-at-how-joels-army-groups-work-in-practice
#
Archbishop Desmond Tutu of Anglican Church in South Africa who won the Nobel Peace Price in 1994 for preaching tolerance , has this to say.
In an interview with BBC Radio 4 on 18 November 2007, Tutu accused the church of being obsessed with homosexuality and declared: “If God, as they say, is homophobic, I wouldn’t worship that God.”[77]
Dear readers, if you have the time please read the chapter on church reform in this ,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Tutu
The COOS is under the Anglican archdiose in Singapore.
Isn’t what Archbishop Desmond Tutu said in 2007 exactly what is happening in COOS which Josie LAu belongs to . The COOS church is obsessed with homosexuality.
We should ask the X tians , is GOD homophobic ??
And to add salt to the wound of COOS, the Anglican Church itself is not in agreement in its ranks about the homosexual issue. Progressive churches in the west like the Anglican Church of England, The North American Anglican church and the South African Anglican Church have a more tolerant view on homosexulality . Read more at
http://schools-wikipedia.org/wp/r/Rowan_Williams.htm
refer to chapter on homosexuality
Just look at how people of responsibility in the Anglican Church in the west frame their arguments with sensible reason, fair logic and thinking. and humility unlikethe new aware Exco’s curt and closed argument type of mentality.
Why the difference you may ask , because in the west like UK and USA , the media will ask you very pertinent questions to as to how you defend your views about homosexuality.
If they sense a persoanl view involve they will rip your defence to shreds and force you to say it is purely a persoanl view and should not be applied to society in general.
Society is secular and should remain so.
Why is it so hard for the New Excos of AWARE with members from COOS to admit to themselves that the old EXCO of Aware did carry out their duties with an awareness that Singapore is a secular place with people from a multi religious background and an even bigger majority of people who are secular in their outlook, they may have a religious view but they keep it to themselves knowing that society in general have a market place of pluralitic views about religion.
After all the intellectual argument and fighting is over, the most intimidating thought undermining our happiness as a society is the hideous spectre of male-male intercourse becoming commonplace as a result of so much favourable public support being given to homosexual activities.
It may turn out eventuality that women marrying women may not be that bad a thing in the context of guaranteeing non-exploitation of womenfolk by male lust.
Furthermore, women and women making out, no matter outrageous, is not at all clinically repulsive and dangerous. But the same cannot be said for male-male marriage and intercourse.
Male-male anal intercourse is repulsive, unhygienic and dangerous under any circumstances.
Thus, the real underlying issue of contention may not be just one of wrongly influencing young girls. The real issue could well be that of male-male intercourse eventually becoming an acceptable norm in our society. And this will be saddest day for not just Singapore, but the whole world.
It is necessary then, for the two contending sides to take cognizance of this distinction and optimize their arguments with it in mind.
>> Male-male anal intercourse is repulsive, unhygienic and dangerous under any circumstances.
Your opinion or a scientific fact?
>> The real issue could well be that of male-male intercourse eventually becoming an acceptable norm in our society.
It should be if it is a genuine relationship between 2 males. And I don’t think any normal heterosexual males would even want to think about it, not to say performing the act itself.
Does accepting the relationship between homosexual is normal, meant that there will be more homosexual in this society? Does it means more heterosexual males will want to have intercourse with other males? Or does it mean more heterosexual will decide to be a homosexual instead?
You are still basing your argument that homosexuality is a personal choice, as such, a person can choose to be a homosexual. This is incorrect.
And the fears are unnecessarily true – that there will be more gays because homosexuality is accepted by the society.
Other than this sole reason, I cannot think of any other reasons why it would be sad, that homosexuals are finally accepted by the society? That discrimination is eliminated.
It is not sad that the society is no longer homophobic. But perhaps it is sad because some values are no longer accepted by the society? Such as homosexual acts are sins? And thus happiness is undermined.
I would say, it would be the saddest day if no one speak up against discrimination.
Penal Code Section 377a has not been revised. Previous AWARE exco are also against it, so are most people. There is no favourable public support being given to homosexual activities. Gay marriage will never be legitimatised in S’pore by our government if PAP still wants the public mandate.
Many people are giving their support to the previous exco leaders because they are honest and open-minded about helping all kind of women from different background. Please don’t take this support as giving approval to the gay rights movement as accused by TSM and her gang to confuse the public.
Dear Outsider, can I assume that you are a straight male( correct me if I am wrong) meaning heterosexual male and then write my piece based on that assumption okay. It is about what you say about two women making out with each other and you think it is not clinically repulsive and not dangerous and etc etc.
If you ask me I don’t find it repulsive too ,if they are really into each other, and there is consent involved and they have feelings for each other that the opposite partner is the best thing that came into their lives.
Human love is a complicated thing, right.
Do people who come together to have sex always do it under the most ideal conditions?
1) Can one say I am totally in love with this person so that I am doing it with this person because I am 100 % in love and I will 100% spend the rest of my life with this person. I don’t think so.Maybe 90% sure but people still go right ahead and do it with some they like , or just met or the conditions were right , like mum and dad is not at home and we ahve the hose to ourselves foe the next 5 hours. Believe me if you think about it , we are sexual opportunist ( the men).
2) Human sexuality is more diverse than that, we don’t all wait till we are married to have sex. Some may want to wait till they are legally married to do it , some may want religious sanctification before legal sanctification before they will put body part A together with body part B.Some can’t wait to do it after the first date.
3)When two women decide to do it to other , they want to express love, trust, they want to create fireworks for their partners.The reasons may be more emotional rather physical, But for some lesbians their physical urge for sex maybe as strong as a men’s urge for physical urge for sex with a voluptuos sexy female.
There is a thinking and explanation for why heterosexual men find it less intimidating to imagine two women doing it to each other because they are women after all they don’t have penises. haha
Eterna2, Thank you for reminding me to relax and feel the humour over the less than appropriate words, I am sure Venerable Dhammika will too laugh at the humour, like many of my localised expariate friends who always refer themselves as “Ang Moh” in jest to make themselves feel more at home with the locals.
Sit is right to bring home a very important lesson for all people holding leadership position at public places, be it Aware, charitable organisation, town councils, Management Corporations or even a society like SPCA, one must be able to keep a societal view, a worldly mindset all the time, and be able to place organisational or societal interest over and above self interest when moving an agenda. If one should sense a persoanl view involved which is stronger than global interest, then it is only fair to disclose that conflict of interest, and unless that personal interest happens to be also a global interrest, it should not be applied to society in general. Yes, Society is secular and should remain so.
Having said that, it is not likely that the new committee members of Aware can uphold this view. They come in with a biased mindset, they have been manupulated for a hidden agenda, and they are too young and too naive, too inexperienced to tell what is right and what is wrong.
They are just a bunch of innocent lambs following the direction seemingly brighten by the lambs held by a blind sphepard and the misguided guard dogs.
Dearest Outsider
You and I share the same degree of intolerance for things that we find disgusting. There is one negligible difference though – instead of gay sex, I find old people having sex hideous, clinically repulsive and dangerous.
Imagine two old people with missing teeth kissing. Rubbing their shapeless, unfit, wrinkly bodies against each other. I shouldn’t go on, you must be vomiting like me right now. It doesn’t matter that they are probably couples who love each other, and are having consensual sex in the privacy of their own bedrooms. We cannot accept such disgusting behavior even if we cannot see it. It would be the saddest day for not just Singapore, but the whole world if elderly sex eventually become an acceptable norm in our society.
I am planning to stop this by hijacking an society for the elderly, and use it to educate the elderly that their form of sex is unnatural and disgusting. If God had meant for the elderly to have sex, He wouldn’t have made them old, weak and ugly. Please join me in my pro-family agenda. Together we can make this world a better place by making elderly sex criminal. My ultimate goal is to ensure that our future generations don’t even know the existence of elderly sex.
Outsider, I think there’s quite a bit of false assumptions and confused thinking on your part.
First, let us not confuse sexual orientation with sexual practices. Anal sex is not a synonym for homosexuality. It is practised both by homosexuals and heterosexuals.
In fact, such is the enjoyment of anal and oral sex by our heterosexual population that our government has legalized your so-called “abnormal erotic practices” for their benefit.
If you (and those like yourself) have so much objection against “abnormal erotic practises”, why do we not see you raising any objection at all to the legalization of such practices for heterosexuals? Can you explain?
Red and green are colours. Which is the more godly colour? Which is the more saintly colour? Which is the more “righteous” colour?
Just as red and green are words to describe colours, “homosexual” and “heterosexual” are words to describe a person’s innate sexual orientation.
When something is innate, it means that it arises from deep within, spontaneously. It is not consciously chosen, it is not something you can learn, it is not a habit, it is not an addiction, it is not contagious, it is not a “lifestyle”. It exists whether you like it or not, whether you promote it or not. You either are, or you are not.
You don’t have to look far to believe that sexual orientation is innate. Just look at your own experiences. Assuming that you are a heterosexual male, when you see an attractive girl, did the feeling of attraction arise spontaneously, deep within yourself? When you see an unattractive girl, did your feeling of aversion arise spontaneously, deep wthin yourself?
Are you able to switch your sexual response at will, so that you feel sexually aroused by the unattractive girl and repulsed by the pretty girl? Do you agree with the common saying that “love cannot be forced”?
Hopefully this “thought experiment” gives you some insight into your own sexuality. To understand others, you must first know yourself.
Like heterosexual affection, homosexual love is expressed in a myriad of ways. It betrays your misconceptions and ignorance to reduce homosexuality to anal sex, because love – whether gay or straight – is more than sticking your penis into another person’s orifice. Not to mention the fact that there are many gay men who neither enjoy nor practise anal sex.
If Adam and Steve deeply love each other but do not have anal sex, will you give them your blessings? Your answer will reveal the source of your own prejudices.
Lastly, the AWARE issue, as the new Ex-co claims, is about the old guard’s alleged “promotion” of lesbianism. As far as we know, lesbians are not exactly a group of people who routinely practice anal sex. So why are you talking about anal sex here?
Lastly, I find it rather unusual for someone like you to use the word “creator”, because just as you would assume that homosexualiy = anal sex = abnormal, I would assume that someone who is non-religious wouldn’t think so spontaneously about a “creator”. Of course, I’m just making an assumption. Assumptions can be quite false, so you shouldn’t also assume to be speaking for the “majority”.
I wish AWARE all the best in the EGM today and may everything turn out for the best for every woman in Singapore.
Outsider,
you said “Male-male anal intercourse is repulsive, unhygienic and dangerous under any circumstances.”
What about male-female anal intercourse then? Is it equally “repulsive, unhygienic and dangerous” or do you have clinical evidence to prove that female anuses are more hygienic?
So are you more repulsed by anal sex, or by homosexuality? Would you support homosexual relationships without anal sex?
Very often what we say reflect our own prejudices more than the truth.
Outsider,
you said “Any ordinary thinking human can tell that the anus orifice, though useful, is not meant by the creator of humans for erotic penetration …”
May we know what an “ordinary thinking human” would tell us about the oral orifice being used for erotic penetration?
Oral sex is a widespread activity enjoyed by millions of heterosexual couples all over the world. There is even a name for it, it’s called a “blowjob”. Even President Bill Clinton supposedly enjoys it.
If you believe that the female oral orifice is meant for penile penetration, please provide us with a logical explanation.
It is my personal view that that male-male anus intercourse is a literally dirty taboo which we should not encouraged so as not to create a literally dirty society in the near future.
But licking the clit and sucking the cock is different. It is not dirty because no smelly excrement is involved. I do know that there are even people who eat excrement in this beautiful world of ours.
It is also my personal view that any female-female practice and marriage is not as depraved as males deeply penetrating each other’s dirty and smelly anus and colon.
I tend to think that though I despise male-male activity, I am not against female activity and marriage by comparison. Thus I don’t believe in equality of the sexes in this instance, since females do not penetrate, by virtue of their physiology.
All said, I do respect all your very scholarly knowledge or experience in such matters.
OMG, Outsider, you hate the lower back half of your God given body! You can’t stand your own shit, probably find your own anus revolting. Better get an operation and remove all these dirty parts.
Outsider, I come to the conclusion that you would have been pure and sexless had you not been taught by someone, some agency or some materials that you came across accidentally, innocently or had foisted on you or tricked into contact ith … Am I right ?
>Eterna2:
> Other than this sole reason, I cannot think of any other reasons why it would be sad, that homosexuals are finally accepted by the society? That discrimination is eliminated.
>>>
Males people who genuinely love other male/s and penetrate each other’s anuses and colon (excuse my crudeness) are perfectly okay for the minority of ‘genuine’gay gentlemen in existence. We must all understand and accept them as they are.
But there is a difference between understanding and exceptance, and the way the lifestyle (and thus the associated act) is widely publicised with an accepting or favourable stance, because this can be misconstrued by the masses that society is deeming such acts as acceptable behaviour for all to go for, whether they are gays or not. And this is the sad part.
Acts of sodomy can easily be the norm in future for the simple reason that such an act is also pleasurable, and people are prone to get pleasure in every way open to them. Thus, ordinary men (married men and singles of any religion, etc) need not be gay to use sodomy purely for their sex pleasure, especially when there’e no stigma to discourage it. And this will be the modern society we will conceivably live in.
Can you conceive of adolescent male students commonly sodomising each other in shopping center male toilet cubicles after schools in Singapore?
The reality is nearer than you think!
fennix:
>>>OMG, Outsider, you hate the lower back half of your God given body! You can’t stand your own shit, probably find your own anus revolting. Better get an opeeration and remove all these dirty parts.>>>
So I assume you are an arse-banger, right? Then so be it!
I do understand and will definitely not hate you for it. But at the same time, I will not unintentionally promote your acts just because you, as a minority, luv it! If I have to, I will probably counsel you privately on how to manage your peculiar condition, without any prejudice. But you will probably have to pay me a fee.
I believe you are only the minority in today’s society. But I don’t know about tomorrow. If I ‘champion your minority cause’ too much, more and more people, young and old, may be tempted to seek and possibly later be addicted to your particular forbidden pleasure too.