Daily Discourse – Discrimination

“Seems you are ok with discrimination as long as you are not the target.”

This is the allegation leveled against me in a comment to my previous post. And I am really sick of such comments.

For starters, let’s talk about discrimination. These are several types of discrimination which I know of:

  1. racial – e.g. against the African Americans back in the U.S. in the 60s, the Jews in Nazi Germany and the Chinese in the early 20th century;
  2. gender – e.g. females denied the right to vote, glass ceiling for female employees in organisations, jobs and promotion given in priority to males, or expecting sexual favors from a female employee;
  3. caste – e.g. the untouchables in India;
  4. age – e.g. rejecting a job applicant solely because of his age;
  5. disability – e.g. refusal to render to a person a medical aid because of his disability;
  6. religion – e.g. refusal to hire a person because of his religious beliefs;
  7. language – e.g. to disgrace the people speaking a certain dialect, such as those from Ryukyu Islands in early 20th Century Japan; and
  8. reverse – in my opinion, a fine example would be the Woman’s Charter of Singapore, which originally was used to protect the disadvantaged (i.e. lower educated, unemployed) women – usually home-makers – in the early days of post-colonial Singapore from abusive husbands. Sadly, it has become more of a bane to the modern man today.

Gender, age, disability, language and religion are also usually seen as a part of employment discrimination. That is why these days consultants advices interviewers never to ask questions related to them to avoid getting the company sued by the interviewee.


However, there is also another kind of discrimination – perceived discrimination. And it reminds me of an ex-colleague, who is in the opinion that our head of department looks down on him. It doesn’t matter that the real issue was the attitude and the lack of interest he displays towards his work. In the end he deliberately not do the things which our boss would consider him a good worker and a team player, and that goes onward to reinforce the boss continual dislike of him and his working attitude.

And so when I looked at the allegation leveled against me, I asked myself if there is any real discrimination in place against homosexual people, or is it all perceived as such. Are homosexuals in Singapore denied the right to vote? Are they denied the use of certain public services like health care or the buses? Are they getting thrown out of restaurants? Or are they denied employment even when they are more than qualified for the job?

Fortunately, I haven’t heard of such blatant acts of discrimination in Singapore. But the first thing that come to mind is Section 377A of the Penal Code, which I believe was necessary to protect the populace from certain sexual predators. However, before anyone screams about me drawing comparisons between male homosexuals and sexual predators, don’t put words in my mouth and consider this analogy: A prostitute may dress scantily, but is everyone who dress scantily a prostitute?

Then, there is also the ‘302’ classification and the straight downgrade of homosexuals to PES C in the army. I was reminded of this by fellow blogger Michael Cheng [aka Botak Cheng]. Personally, I have heard about incidents where those who are allegedly classified as such were bullied in camp by fellow soldiers. I am not sure if those classified as such are upset, but I do not see nor really understand the reason to the segregation. If homosexuals do not oppose those duties, then put them on duty like the rest of the men, until they do something against military regulations.

Anyway, parallel is continually being drawn in the U.S. between the homosexual community with that of the movement against discrimination of African American in the 1960s. But a quick check with a dozen of my friends who happens to be online in Windows Live Messenger showed that most cannot name any discrimination against homosexual here in Singapore. In fact, only 2 out of the dozen people I asked pointed me to this link to get myself duly informed.

Now, while I may oppose them, I have no issues with the homosexual community’s efforts to deal with the items listed on the Wiki page. But what has that got anything to do with DBS tie-in with FOTF? It was pretty obvious to me that it is nothing more than the fight against FOTF U.S. spilling over to FOTF Singapore. Has this ‘victory’ done anything to improve the situation of the homosexual community here in Singapore?

I won’t be surprised that in the near future, there is this opinion that all of these action groups are nothing more than small pompous groups presuming to speak for a larger community. In fact, I am in the opinion that the homosexual community by and large did not even give these ‘loud mouths’ the authority to speak on their behalf, nor are they very interested in the agenda.

It maybe possible these groups will raise the profile of those who claims to speak for the community, but it is doubtful it would have any real effects for the plight of the community or bring about any positive action. In fact, I am not even surprised if it actually galvanises the opposition.

To put it in the words of my friend, “Some people do nothing until they are called the enemy.”


Comics:


Recommended Reads:
Cobalt Paladin: Diary of an Entrepreneur – Money Saving Tip #2
Cobalt Paladin: Diary of an Entrepreneur -Signs of our times #4
Endoh’s Dungeon: Do you represent me… really?
Isaiahc: Seven Things to Love About WordPress 2.7

Daily Discourse – DBS & FOTF

I read with a little annoyance the following news [see below]:

Online campaign leads to rethink at DBS
Siow Li Sen
Fri, Dec 05, 2008
The Business Times

DBS Bank has removed all references to Focus On The Family (FOTF) in its advertising, after its credit card promotion supporting the evangelical Christian organisation provoked some angry reactions.

Since the bank’s Nov 13 credit card promotion where DBS said that it would donate money to FOTF, ‘a charity dedicated to helping children and families thrive’, members of the gay and lesbian community have called for a boycott of the bank.

FOTF in Singapore is an affiliate of a US-based organisation of the same name founded in 1977 by evangelical Christian James Dobson who campaigns against gay rights.

Last month, FOTF in the US retrenched some 200 staff after it spent US$600,000 to defeat marriage equality in California. Mr Dobson has also railed against US President-elect Barack Obama, who has countered that Mr Dobson ‘makes things up’.

DBS spokeswoman Karen Ngui said that it was never the intention of the bank to alienate any particular group. ‘DBS supports children and learning in Asia . . . it’s the cause that we are supporting and not FOTF, and or what it stands for,’ she said.

She added that DBS believes in diversity and inclusion.

‘We have since removed all references to FOTF in our advertising . . . however, we still support the cause . . . and thus will be contributing a small amount to their New Learning Centre for children with learning disabilities, due to be opened in March 2009.’

The bank’s earlier move had sparked an online campaign. Jean Chong, a gay activist with People Like Us, said that to date, 1,063 people, including non-gays, had signed up with a Facebook group attacking the bank’s support for an FOTF cause.

While some gay activists concede that DBS may not have known about the anti-gay agenda of FOTF, they felt that it still should not give to the charity because the donation could indirectly benefit its cause.

‘It is my view that unfortunately, DBS did not realise that FOTF has a lot of baggage. It is also unclear how by funding one part of an organisation’s activities, how much you also indirectly help another of its activities because money is fungible,’ said Alex Au, People Like Us gay activist.

Ms Ngui has said that its credit card team checked on FOTF and proceeded as they are endorsed by the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports and National Council of Social Service (NCSS). ‘Going forward, the bank will conduct more extensive background checks,’ she said.

Why does it annoy me? First of all, it apparently doesn’t matter what the objective of the campaign was. It doesn’t matter FOTF is supporting a children and learning project. All that mattered to some group of people is this: FOTF was anti-homosexual.

By the same way they attempt public opinion against DBS’ association with FOTP, I wondered whether they are even aware that it also can used to ‘show’ homosexuals are anti-community? I am quite amused to see how they shot themselves in the foot, by going against a pro-community action.

Now that this has worked to cow DBS, I won’t be surprise that very soon, churches and the Christian community will have a hard time to work with secular organizations for community projects and activities, because such projects and activities are going to get boycott by ‘many in the [homosexual] community who have expressed outrage over’ the association.

In fact, I won’t be surprised that one day, when there’s a Christian bleeding to death – with a crucifix hanging obviously around his neck – homosexuals will just walk by and let him die, and would justify it because the dying man is anti-homosexual. After all, why aid a guy who is well, with the anti-homosexual groups? It doesn’t matter that it is my belief that most Christians would render aid to a homosexual in need.

Where, is such senseless reverse discrimination, going to lead us?

As a Christian, I can perfectly leave homosexuals alone and let them do whatever they want behind close doors, and even ignore what I see in public. As to how I personally felt about it, the leaders of the Church have already made their statement clear and I do not need to repeat it here. My stand has always been this: God is the ultimate moral judge and I do not pretend to speak His Judgement.

Beyond that, I would even champion for universal suffrage, health care, job opportunities for them if I see any discrimination in any of those areas in spite of my faith in Jesus Christ. But I will not stand for any form of reverse discrimination against my community as a matter of faith and differing views on morality.

And according to what I have read, Focus on the Family (FOTF) is also a voluntary welfare organisation (VWO) endorsed by the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports. So, shouldn’t the ministry, and by extension the government gahmen of the Republic of Singapore, be boycotted by the homosexual community as well?

So, all homosexuals should quit their jobs in the civil service now because our gahmen is an evil organisation promoting an anti-gay agenda! If not, take what you already have and keep it, and stop agitating for more.

Enough, is enough already.


Comics:


Recommended Reads:
Cobalt Paladin: Diary of an Entrepreneur – Money Saving Tip #1
Endoh: Boycott DBS for being anti-family?


Addendum: Comment section for this post has been closed. Further comments in other parts of this blog on this issue will be indiscriminately deleted.