The recent hatred against Thio Li-Ann which surfaced online after news broke about the invitation extended to her to be visiting human rights professor at New York University School of Law is ridiculous.
One accusation that has been levied her way is that she is responsible for repressing the homosexuals in Singapore. That is a presporterous notion. She has not done any repressing of any sort. Lest anyone forgets, the little piece of law Section 377A has been around for quite some time and although she made a vile contemptible speech in Parliament when arguing for the retention of Section 377A, she did not advocate the active enforcement of that law.
Some might argue that the mere advocacy for retention is tantamount to oppression. That would only be seeing half of the picture. It was Parliament as a body that decided not to repeal Section 377A.
Any discontent that needs to be shown, should be expressed at the elected members of Parliament. Compared to Thio Li-Ann, they are having it too easy from the same community that would demonize Thio Li-Ann. It would be naive to think that none of them share similar views as Thio Li-Ann.
And if they don’t then, discontentment at them is even more justified, because what sort of leaders do we have if they are the sort who do not stand by their own personal convictions.
Ah …yes, the sort who listen to the majority and represent those views.
It sickens me when our leaders use the majority as an expedient wall to hide behind when it suits their political agenda. It sickens me that during the debate we had members of Parliament who sat on the fence by saying that the law was only retained because of the existence of a conservative majority.
Yes, the members of Parliament are our elected representatives, but there are times when they have shown the capacity to lead by their convictions, to make the tough decisions and then convince the public they are right (strangely, recently, this usually happens when they are trying to burden us more financially or trying to be coy about the nation’s finances).
The debate for the repealing of Section 377A was one such time where they should have led by personal convictions. The law stood. And this begs the question, are they individuals who are incapable of making a stand or do their convictions lie in a different direction from which they profess. These are the individuals we should be giving a tougher time.
Hounding Thio Li-Ann serves no purpose. It is merely vindicative. Childish and useless.
The Singapore Daily » Blog Archive » Daily SG: 28 Jul 2009 | 28-Jul-09 at 11:34 am | Permalink
[...] AWARE Aftermath: Thiology Goes to NYU – Singapore Law Watch: Nuance, a so-called memo and threats: Letter from Thio Li-Ann – Ian On The Red Dot: The Amount Of Hatred Against Thio Li-Ann Is Dumb [...]
Ds | 28-Jul-09 at 12:30 pm | Permalink
I think all hatred towards TLA is justified because it seems that she harbours the same amount of hatred and discrimination at homosexuals.
iantimothy | 28-Jul-09 at 1:00 pm | Permalink
How can hatred ever possibly be justified?
What makes us different from the people who hate us if we hate them back?
Eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind.
xtrocious | 28-Jul-09 at 1:08 pm | Permalink
Is it why they say the “one-eyed is king in the land of the blind”? hahah
But seriously, using religion (which not everyone subscribes to the same doctrine) to turn us “blind” is also no better than asking for an eye for an eye…
Callan Tham | 28-Jul-09 at 4:12 pm | Permalink
Hounding? Hatred? I for one am laughing at her. Taking the NYU invitation as an example, her hypocrisy is clear for everyone to see. The NYU students have a right to object, she has her rights to defend her point of view. She chose to play victim, which is very weak and not a worthy defense of any kind. She chose to say she was victimised because the students criticised her instead of intellectually arguing her points, which is what was expected of a legal scholar.
The NYU students’ response says it all: her classes were woefully undersubscribed.
When a person is in a position of authority, and is a public figure, they better handle the heat, because there is no pleasing everyone. If she is as staunch in her beliefs as she claims, then she should stand up and defend them. She can’t choose to publicly air her views and expect others not to publicly refute them.
V | 28-Jul-09 at 4:33 pm | Permalink
Yes, the fault for not repealing 377A lies squarely on Parliament as a whole. But do remember that what TLA said on that podium was very offensive to some people and she is now reaping the rewards.
It is wise to call for temperence when dealing with people like that, but the fact of life is that there will be a variety of responses. Some people will counter with their intellect, and some will react with their emotions. To say that we shouldn’t hate her is like asking for world peace.
And may i just point out that the “conservative majority” was against having casinos, but we have them now anyway. Majulah Singapura.
Rach | 28-Jul-09 at 9:16 pm | Permalink
And I thought I was the only odd one out.
Dumb and Dumber | 28-Jul-09 at 10:55 pm | Permalink
If she dosent know that what she said caused offense and hurt to others, how can she ever understand what it is to be offended and hurt by what others say?
To say something like “diversity is no excuse for perversity” and not realised that it is offensive, judgemental, intellectually dishonest, stereotyping and morally imperialistic, is clear evidence that she is like a blind person trying to tell others how to walk.
For one perversity is not at all a monopoly of the non mainstream and the fringe, but rather is as common as people themselves, perhaps even more so by those who think themselves mainstream, and particularly the moral imperialists and militants themselves.
Jesus said look at the beam in your own eye before condemning the speck in your brother’s eye. So if there is any good in all this, is that Ms Thio learn to see and recognise the beam in her own eye – and see the perversity all around, everyday, in everyone – and understand why people reacted to her they way they did, and to stop going on and on and on saying she is victimised, abused, hurt, etc etc etc ad naseum!
PS: Hatred is an emotion, a gut reaction, nothing to do with being smart or dumb, and there’s nothing intellectual about it.
Marketplace Thiologist | 29-Jul-09 at 1:29 am | Permalink
Btw 10 Parliamentarians actually spoke for the repeal of Section 377A. The Parliamentarians who spoke against the repeal at Lee Hsien Loong and Thio Li-Ann.
Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=F7E6986EBBDEF252
PAP MPs Alvin Yeo, Lim Biow Chuan, Seah Kian Peng, Muhd. Faisal Ibrahim, Zaqy Mohd. and Ho Peng Kee making supportive statements
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imXwHL8q44A
PAP MP Hri Kumar highlights legal inconsistencies of 377A –
Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHTohvcPRXQ
Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4Dfuku6M0Ihttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0GXdWHkM3M
PAP MP Baey Yam Keng on complications of retaining Section 377A – Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MJHHxPDmgQ
Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAgEi_y3Gjo
PAP MP Charles Chong Supports S377A Repeal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0GXdWHkM3M
Marketplace Thiologist | 29-Jul-09 at 4:29 am | Permalink
The reason why Thio Li-Ann is targeted because she is the poster-child of the self-confessed moral vigilantes and the Christian Conservatives. I am sure other moral vigilantes and Christian Conservatives will be targeted if their identities are made public.
Sebastian | 29-Jul-09 at 8:15 am | Permalink
If “The Amount Of Hatred Against Thio Li-Ann Is Dumb”, then surely the amount of hatred against Hitler is ridiculous. You have to be in the same self denial boat as the nutty professor.
iantimothy | 29-Jul-09 at 10:37 am | Permalink
Apologies for the late response to the comments. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Sebastian, there is a scale to be used when comparing the actions of Thio Li-Ann and Hitler. You do great disservice to yourself by implying that Thio’s actions are similar in magnitude to Hitler’s.
Hello ‘Marketplace Thiologist’. What is a ‘moral vigilante’? I don’t see Thio running around in a cape punishing the evil-doers or advocating the govt do more to punish homosexuals.
It would be impossible to address whether homosexuality is moral or immoral in the comments and I won’t. But I would like to point out just as there are reasons why I and some may believe that it is not immoral to be a homosexual, we need to see why people like Thio have their moral compass oriented to a certain direction.
Targeting her and other Christian Conservatives is vindictive. On the flip-side, I do not see her actively victimizing any one single homosexual advocate. I do not see Christian Conservatives hounding any 1 particular vocal homosexual advocate in the public sphere although I do concede I am not omniscient and if you do have links to point to, please share them. Notwithstanding evidence to the contrary, I still think we should not behave like them (i.e. imperialistic Christian Conservatives).
On another note, thanks for highlighting which members of Parliament took the stand to repeal Section 377A.
@V – good point about the casinos. Like I said, our government hides behind the ‘conservative majority’ only when it is to their political advantage. I do not want my leaders to be like that.
@Callan. I agree with you. Her response was weak especially for one who chose to be in the public sphere. Your point is also not in conflict with mine. How she chose to respond does not remove the fact that there were rather dumb hatred expressed online (and possibly offline too).
@’Dumb and Dumber’. I agree about hatred being an emotion, a gut reaction. But we can use our intellect to control it especially its expression. To say we can’t is to say we are not human. I would like to think humans have evolved to a sufficient stage where we can master the tempest within our souls.
The Singapore Daily » Blog Archive » Weekly Roundup: Week 31 | 01-Aug-09 at 11:05 am | Permalink
[...] Law Watch: Nuance, a so-called memo and threats: Letter from Thio Li-Ann – Ian On The Red Dot: The Amount Of Hatred Against Thio Li-Ann Is Dumb – the kent ridge common: Under scrutiny: Thio Li Ann – TOC: Mis-informed demonisation of LGBTs? – [...]
Marketplace Thiologist | 02-Aug-09 at 6:57 am | Permalink
Hi iantimothy,
This is political competition. It is not being nice or vindictive. The goal is to subdue your opponent’s will and minimise your opponent’s ability to promote his interest / opinion. Christian Conservatives are only victims of their own advocacy. Just look at how well Chee Soon Juan manages the heat and public pressure. She should learn something from him. At least no one is seeking to bankrupt her at the moment.
loupgarou | 03-Aug-09 at 12:35 am | Permalink
lols.. her speech uttered in parliament under the license of parliament immunity is HATE SPEECH in any other first world jurisdiction.