A Christian solution to the AWARE conundrum
May 2nd, 2009 | 
Author: By Gwee Li Sui
[This article is reproduced with kind permission from the author's facebook here]
But I have also received less appreciative messages. Some of these charged me with having sown discord and embarrassed Christianity in front of non-believers. The irony did not escape me, but then I began to wonder whether I did make one too many assumptions. These comments were probably knee-jerk reactions, meaning that some Christians may actually not have thought it possible that other Christians, a whole lot of us, could be this appalled with the episode.
For this reason, as a brother-in-Christ, I feel that I need to believe that the new ex-co’s sadness over its negative reception and its willingness to heal the social rifts it caused are genuine. There has already been too much distrust, and somewhere trust has to re-begin. My appeal for non-support is not about humiliating or condemning any group of individuals on either side. Those who have hoped that I came out in strong condemnation of one, emailing me links to sex education and “the gay agenda”, or in clear support of the other, initially mistitling my view as “supporting the Old Guard”, know that I won’t.
This is not being wishy-washy; it is staying focussed. The simple disagreement is with a course of action pursued by a group of Christians that has caused suspicion between communities and fear within each. If everyone is to set aside his or her own fixation — gay, anti-gay, faith in practice, fundamentalism, etc. — and trace back to the source of our current unhappiness, he or she will see that it all started with a single fateful decision. One ought not then to doubt that these Christians intend good from their point of view, but one has every reason to doubt that things could be restored and relationships healed by going down the same road.
As the party involved is Christian, the most amicable solution may well also be the most obvious. In fact, how could we not have seen it? We Christians believe in a God who gives every person second chances in life. Every chance after the first two is still the second: that’s how gracious we believe He is! When one makes a mistake or realises that one has followed a bad choice, there is no shame in admitting wrong, so long as one is sincere about changing. The choice to turn back is never a Christian defeat; it is our triumph!
Indeed, paradoxically in this situation, one can also only move on, move forward, by going backwards to the point where the wrong choice was made and choose rightly this time. This is a versatile truth I learnt from C. S. Lewis a long time ago. If the new ex-co will, without contest, give up its seats for a more inclusive shape of leadership in AWARE, it will have regained, I dare say, the faith of many Singaporeans and the admiration and support of every Christian in full measure. These individuals can then go on to pursue in earnest their concern over homosexual teaching in schools and related issues with the right authorities. I want to believe that everyone in that later business will be cooperative and respect the eventual findings, whatever the outcome is.
If the AWARE Christians in current leadership and those gearing up to vote tomorrow will choose this infinitely less harmful route, they will have made us all who are Christians proud of them. Do consider the option seriously: it is as practical and as Christian as it can get. Realise that fellow believers like me who are outraged want peace too and have been praying for it. But, when it comes to making peace a reality, only specific individuals are able to effect it. The ball is in their court alone. We can all avoid a confrontation. We can stun the nation with one simple move that affirms love, faith, and hope, all at once.
Yours Truly,
Gwee Li Sui
Posted in Headlines
14 Responses to “A Christian solution to the AWARE conundrum”
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.
任何宗教都不应该插手这种非宗教组织。
Prof Gwee said: “These individuals can then go on to pursue in earnest their concern over homosexual teaching in schools and related issues with the right authorities”
Yes, Prof. The problem with them is that even if the new exco win the EGM, public will still perceive them as not having the right authorities. They should seriously listen and consider Prof Gwee’s suggestion to step down gracefully and stop engaging lawyer and do more wayangs. Even if they win in the court of appeal one day in the near future, no one will trust their authority. Remember, the war is not won on the papers and courts but at the heart of the people be it christians or non christians
What women really want?
If AWARE is specifically a women organization. I think it is not right to include religion in their agenda. They should be dealing with matters and issues related to women.
issues like: women rights, family violence, working mothers, lesbian and homosexual, gay marriage…
If AWARE is a Christian organization, I think… they should dissolve AWARE because there is no need to have a women organization in Christ.
“If the new ex-co will, without contest, give up its seats for a more inclusive shape of leadership in AWARE, it will have regained, I dare say, the faith of many Singaporeans and the admiration and support of every Christian in full measure.”
It takes amazing grace and faith in God to be ale to do this.
Why does a Church need to disguise itself as a women’s organisation? Why the sneaky business? What’s next? The government?
[...] the rest here: A Christian solution to the AWARE conundrum : The Wayang Party … This entry is filed under Christian, Object. You can follow any responses to this entry through [...]
Well put. Less tactics and tags, more humanity please.
To Dennis
“If the new ex-co will, without contest, give up its seats for a more inclusive shape of leadership in AWARE, it will have regained, I dare say, the faith of many Singaporeans and the admiration and support of every Christian in full measure.”
It takes amazing grace and faith in God to be ale to do this.”
And yet never more christian, never a better example.
But this is moot now, since they have been voted out.
to STRONGHOLD:
“What’s next? The government?”
what makes you think they’re not already planning their move?
I respected the new ex-co for stepping down. I am learning a lesson on humility in this saga.
The women had voted. I think AWARE should put “who’s the boss” all behind, now that the dust settled.
Focus the attention back to women issue again.
Women do have a lot of problems. Back to the question of what women really wants? Maybe let AWARE focus on what women really need?
Talking abt $90,000 spent…
Women….
Gwee
While I applaud your even treatment to the issue. I cannot help but detect a hint of discrimination and a bit too condescending for you to think that homosexual need to live up to your image of your believes.
May be that’s the real issue.
Many Christians I spoke too say they love homosexuals as God loves them but like to see them given a second chance and become normal again. Conservative Christian adherent to their book-of-faith, treating homosexual as an aberration and their activity as a sin does not provide a middle ground for them to accept homosexual as they are… and when such views are taken to the extreme create deviants such as Thio Su Mien and Josie.
If only we can look at our own imperfections, stop been so self-righteous, may be then, we can have a truly inclusive society, instead of providing lip-services with hidden agenda.
Even the rogue or most vile will be touched by humility and ultruism ultimately. For every human being respects such values eventhough he or she may yet to be. Or even the opposite of these things.
When one is so GungHo about a believe, though good in sense of it, we would have done that good believe values a dire diservice by being protubrant of it eventhough done in probity. For such actions are nothing less then imposing one’s own upon another one’s own to be devalued and discarded for the wrong reasons than with humility and ultruism in loving ways.
The Holy Bible may be full of stories of wars and discords of our human kind. But never does it teach us in any way to be otherwise, except to be even loving to our enemies. The more self determine a person’s conviction, themore a person’t self-righteous half will become predominant.
Hello!
Straight Guy, I think you misunderstood this 2nd note. It first appeared in the wee hours of May Day morning. It was reproduced here on 2 May, day of the EGM. If you’re replying on 4th May, then the note’s “new ex-co” is your OLD ex-co. Where is the hint that “homosexual[s] need to live up to your image of your believes”?
To kingsgrove, matchmaker (both from other blog on TSM) was just trying to draw some kind of parallel comparison of condiscending behaviour. We all know how MM can be like now and then – like pompous, exuberant, flambouyant, even demeaning of those whom he sees who differ from him as threats. And to the extend of also to bankrupting whom he sees are his adversaries who don’t see eye to eye with him.
Q. IS A PERSON WHO DIFFERS STRONGLY FROM OUR VIEWS – NECESSARILY OUR DEAD ENEMY? OR FOR THE MATTER, IS IT RESPECTABLE LEADERSHIP IN STRENGTH AND WISDOM TO RAIN BLOWS ONE’S PERCIEVED OPPONENT AS AN ENEMY.
Contrary, the strength in a Truly WISE person never cause him to have to be a BULLY! The simple reason is that, the wise is Fearless as he has wisdom to clarify and enlighten W/O ever resorting to unrespectable Force and Centric Means to achieve his goal. Example: If a footballer or a basketballer use unfair actions to get a goal, esp. by injurying his opponent – Won’t he get a Red Card? Or at least an Yellow one for a start?
And would you respect such a guy afterwards. Esp. if he keeps repeating such negative acts?
That said, this is the parallel I believe matchmaker is trying to convey.
MM of course gets away with them all for the most obvious reasons. The highest executive power of office and PAP’s economic success here. Though we can’t say the same in many other areas too.