In my opinion, I agree that the past and present offer guidance for the future. Lessons learnt from the past, as well as from our everyday lives allow us to prevent such incidents from happening again as well as make us better prepared to tackle similar obstacles faced in the future.
Take for example the case of the The National Kidney Foundation Singapore scandal which happened in July 2005, whereby the Chief Executive Officer T.T Durai and its board of directors misused the funds donated to the NKF for their own benefits. This caused a massive backlash and fallout of donors to the charity, and subsequently resulted in the resignation of Chief Executive Officer T.T Durai and its board of directors. A similar case happened recently whereby th former head of Ren Ci Hospital, Venerable Shi Ming Yi, a Buddhist monk, has been charged with forgery, conspiracy and misuse of funds.
These incidents caused widespread feelings of outrage, anger, and betrayal among the public. Moreover, the scandals raised questions about the level of transparency in other institutions in Singapore. This has led to better awareness on the public’s part as to where funds donated go to and hence the public would be more careful when donating money to charities in the future.
Another example would be the Maria Hertogh riots of 1950, sparked by a court decision to return custody of Maria, then aged 13, to her biological Catholic Dutch mother after she had been raised as a Muslim by her adoptive Malay family. Eighteen people were killed in those riots. In addition, what happened in India in 1947-48, just three years earlier when the British Raj began to be dismantled and people long suppressed found utterance. Singapore's founding generation witnessed Jawaharlal Nehru - a much admired figure in the anti-colonial movement and a forceful advocate of secularism - being stunned by the absolute ferocity of the Hindu-Muslim riots that accompanied the partition of British India. An estimated one million people died.
As stated in the article Secularism - not from theory but bloody history, “And in 1992, the Ministry of Education reminded mission schools of Article 16 (3) of the Singapore Constitution, which states: 'No person shall be required to receive instruction in or take part in any ceremony or act of worship of a religion other than his own.' Students cannot be compelled to attend religious service, mission school principals were told. Why is it necessary to send such strong, unambiguous signals? Because religion is 'a very profound and fundamental tectonic divide', as MM Lee put it once. He did not learn that from Prof Rawls.” This has showed that Singapore has learnt from the past that religion is a very sensitive issue especially for the survival of peace in a multi-racial and multi-religion country in Singapore.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that the past and present offer precious lessons and guidance for us to follow and not to make similar mistakes again.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Discuss the importance of religion in the society today.
I believe that religion in the society plays an important role.
According to Adolf Hitler, "This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the practical existence of a religious belief. The great masses of a nation are not composed of philosophers. For the masses of the people, especially faith is absolutely the only basis of a moral outlook on life." (Taken from: Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 10). I do agree with him that religion would help to teach the human race moral values, just as lichun have said too. Religion would will help to educate the masses on how to be a better person, not to have evil intention on others. It also guide us to turn over a new leaf when we go onto the wrong path. An example in Singapore. The believe in Christianity( a faith) has allowed Glenn Lim (a former drug addict), to turn over a new leaf. He has now become a counseller and uses his own experience to help troubled teens.
Religion also plays an important role in marriage. Most marriages would be held in religious place such as church, temples etc, in the presence of a higher power. Different religion would have different ways of going through the ceremony and thus the ceremony holds much significance to a couple. It is a promise made between the two with the higher power.
Religion may dictate a set of acceptable standards and those who wish to remain in that society must adhere to those standards, within acceptable limits. Therefore, I believe that religion plays in important role in the society today.
According to Adolf Hitler, "This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the practical existence of a religious belief. The great masses of a nation are not composed of philosophers. For the masses of the people, especially faith is absolutely the only basis of a moral outlook on life." (Taken from: Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 10). I do agree with him that religion would help to teach the human race moral values, just as lichun have said too. Religion would will help to educate the masses on how to be a better person, not to have evil intention on others. It also guide us to turn over a new leaf when we go onto the wrong path. An example in Singapore. The believe in Christianity( a faith) has allowed Glenn Lim (a former drug addict), to turn over a new leaf. He has now become a counseller and uses his own experience to help troubled teens.
Religion also plays an important role in marriage. Most marriages would be held in religious place such as church, temples etc, in the presence of a higher power. Different religion would have different ways of going through the ceremony and thus the ceremony holds much significance to a couple. It is a promise made between the two with the higher power.
Religion may dictate a set of acceptable standards and those who wish to remain in that society must adhere to those standards, within acceptable limits. Therefore, I believe that religion plays in important role in the society today.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Discuss the importance of religion in the society today
With science and technology getting more advanced, more people, especially the younger generation, choose to worship the wonderments of technologies rather than Gods. As such, the importance of religion in today’s society has begun to pale. However, this does not mean that religion does not have a stand in society today. Religion plays important roles of teaching us moral values and governing people’s thoughts and beliefs. Hence, we still cannot neglect the importance of religion in our society today.
Firstly, religion is important for nation building and individual development. It teaches us moral values, to change the way we live in the world, not for our own sake but for the sake of others. Buddhism, for example, teaches us morality, abstaining from unwholesome deeds of body and speech. Likewise, Christianity teaches atonement, to repent one’s sin. Hence, religion helps us to clarify ethical and moral issues, especially in today’s fast changing world where we need something concrete to hold. Therefore, religion is important in incorporating human good in our society as the society progresses.
Secondly, religion is important as it wields a powerful influence over people’s life. As Karl Marx says, “religion is the opiate of the masses”. Religion plays a role of governing people’s taught and belief, helping people to seek solace and to reflect on the meaning of life. Hence, since religion is usually a reflection of one’s belief and therefore, people are willing to go all the way out to protect their religion. Evidence can be seen from past divisions caused by differences in religion, one of which is the Maria Hertogh riots of 1950 in Singapore. It was sparked by a court decision to return custody of Maria, then aged 13, to her biological Catholic Dutch mother after she had been raised as a Muslim by her adoptive Malay mother. Although it happened long ago, it is because that Singapore has kept in mind such a painful lesson that we have managed to maintain peace in today’s society. As such, religion still cannot be neglected from today’s society.
In conclusion, we cannot neglect religion as it plays a very important role in ensuring human good and has a strong influence over people’s lives.
Firstly, religion is important for nation building and individual development. It teaches us moral values, to change the way we live in the world, not for our own sake but for the sake of others. Buddhism, for example, teaches us morality, abstaining from unwholesome deeds of body and speech. Likewise, Christianity teaches atonement, to repent one’s sin. Hence, religion helps us to clarify ethical and moral issues, especially in today’s fast changing world where we need something concrete to hold. Therefore, religion is important in incorporating human good in our society as the society progresses.
Secondly, religion is important as it wields a powerful influence over people’s life. As Karl Marx says, “religion is the opiate of the masses”. Religion plays a role of governing people’s taught and belief, helping people to seek solace and to reflect on the meaning of life. Hence, since religion is usually a reflection of one’s belief and therefore, people are willing to go all the way out to protect their religion. Evidence can be seen from past divisions caused by differences in religion, one of which is the Maria Hertogh riots of 1950 in Singapore. It was sparked by a court decision to return custody of Maria, then aged 13, to her biological Catholic Dutch mother after she had been raised as a Muslim by her adoptive Malay mother. Although it happened long ago, it is because that Singapore has kept in mind such a painful lesson that we have managed to maintain peace in today’s society. As such, religion still cannot be neglected from today’s society.
In conclusion, we cannot neglect religion as it plays a very important role in ensuring human good and has a strong influence over people’s lives.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Do your think that human rights are universal???
The answer is no. The very first reason is that the interpretation of human rights is different in every countries.
Human rights viewed by westerns are different from those viewed by Asians. Also, in some other countries, human rights are not even granted. An example is in Afghanistan. Even today, women today are denied the vote and the right to drive cars in several Arab states. Also, women are not given the right to leave home except when accompanied by a brother or husband and forbidding them all access to public education. These are basic human rights everyone should be entitled to. Therefore, human rights are not universal.
Even in US, which is supposed to be liberal, Florida's government, after frying several prisoners in a faulty electric chair, has only reluctantly turned to other methods of execution to conform to the U.S. Constitution's prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment." Yet when America's Western allies tell it that the U.S. system of capital punishment is barbaric, local politicians and courts reply that it is their way and no one else's business. This shows that even within the same country, human rights are defined differently, let alone universal.
Cultural differences also differently defined human rights in different countries. In Asia, people have a different set of values are are more conservative, making their idea of human rights different from their western counterparts.
References:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20010101faessay4253/thomas-m-franck/are-human-rights-universal.html
http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/4142.php
Human rights viewed by westerns are different from those viewed by Asians. Also, in some other countries, human rights are not even granted. An example is in Afghanistan. Even today, women today are denied the vote and the right to drive cars in several Arab states. Also, women are not given the right to leave home except when accompanied by a brother or husband and forbidding them all access to public education. These are basic human rights everyone should be entitled to. Therefore, human rights are not universal.
Even in US, which is supposed to be liberal, Florida's government, after frying several prisoners in a faulty electric chair, has only reluctantly turned to other methods of execution to conform to the U.S. Constitution's prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment." Yet when America's Western allies tell it that the U.S. system of capital punishment is barbaric, local politicians and courts reply that it is their way and no one else's business. This shows that even within the same country, human rights are defined differently, let alone universal.
Cultural differences also differently defined human rights in different countries. In Asia, people have a different set of values are are more conservative, making their idea of human rights different from their western counterparts.
References:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20010101faessay4253/thomas-m-franck/are-human-rights-universal.html
http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/4142.php
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Do you think human rights are universal?
Till date, many efforts have been put in to enforce universal human rights – human rights groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union aims to protect human rights, claiming to 'fight violations of civil liberties wherever they occur', while the Human Rights Watch is dedicated to preserving and promoting human rights around the world. Despite that, there are still many people in the world suffering under inhumane treatment. So, I do not think that human rights are universal.
Human rights cannot be achieved in every country due to the different policies followed by different government systems. The government plays an important role of determining treatment received by the people. For instance, there are countries which followed the Sharia or Islamic law, which possible penalties includes amputation of limbs and stoning. Meanwhile, there are also countries which governments are endorsing a variety of interrogation techniques, dubbed 'torture lite', of which include rough treatment or psychological techniques to induce fear and confusion. Such are examples of how governments are enshrining the practice of torture into law although such cruelty clearly violates human rights legislation. Even if human rights groups try to intervene and stop such acts, the taint of hypocrisy still remains. As one official put it, "if you don't violate someone's human rights some the time, you aren't doing your job." Hence, despite efforts to enforce universal human rights, such efforts will still become futile as long as the government is not willing to support it and since there are many governments who are not willing to support such efforts, human rights are not universal.
In addition, universal human rights are still not guaranteed due to the inability to manage conflict, natural disasters, poverty and healthcare. In many parts of the world, the welfare of the people is not protected due to social problems. For example, having enough to eat is basic human right but every day, one in five of the world's population goes hungry. These can be due to epidemics, war, natural phenomena or bad government. While bad governance and war can still be dealt with, epidemics and natural phenomena are far beyond our control. Unfortunately, until we are able to solve all of these problems, universal human rights would not be achieved.
In conclusion, human rights are not universal because many people in the world are still suffering under inhumane treatment and there is still a long way before human rights would be universal.
Do you think there are circumstances where human rights may be curtailed?
The issue of human rights has been a much debatable topic recently, not only in Singapore but worldwide as well. However, what exactly are human rights? As quoted from Wikipedia, “Human rights refers to the basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled. Examples of rights and freedoms which are often thought of as human rights include civil and political rights, such as the right to life and liberty, freedom of expression, and equality before the law; and social, cultural and economic rights, including the right to participate in culture, the right to food, the right to work, and the right to education.”
In my opinion, I think that it is rather impossible for human rights to be achieved by everyone worldwide, mainly due to the fact that different people have different unique perceptions of human rights. Hence, I feel that there are circumstances where human rights may be curtailed, especially so when the rights of a particular group harm those of another.
Let’s take for example the right of freedom of expression, which according to article 2 is most commonly championed by human rights groups in relation to Singapore. Freedom of expression is the right to express information, ideas, and opinions free of government restrictions based on content. However, this right is often abused by some, and exercised at the expense of someone else’s reputation. In such a multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural society as Singapore, freedom of expression must be limited in order to ensure the strong existence of racial harmony. For example, recently in Singapore, there has been a case whereby a Chinese made racist comments on the basis of freedom of speech. His action led to the unhappiness of many, especially those of the race he criticized. As such, in this circumstance, I feel that the right of freedom of expression should be curtailed so as to prevent people from getting hurt.
In conclusion, I re-emphasized my point that there are circumstances where human rights may be curtailed, especially so when the rights of a particular group harm those of another. It is justified that humans deserve basic rights, however, this should never be done at the expense of others.
Do you think that human rights are universal?
In my opinion, I think that human rights are only universal to a small extent. Firstly, what are human rights? Human rights are the basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled, often held to include the right to life and liberty, freedom of thought and expression, and equality before the law. (http://www.answers.com/topic/human-rights?nr=1&lsc=true). The ‘universality of human rights’ is a concept. This concept holds that human rights belong to all human beings and are fundamental to every type of society. In this way, everyone has the same basic human rights. Individuals may exercise different rights, or exercise the same rights differently, depending on which group they belong to within society. (http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/4142.php)
Human rights are not universal because in some countries some groups of people are not granted their himan rights. One of the example would be Afganistan. The talibans which rule most of the Afganistan, denys women the right to leave home except when accompanied by a brother or husband and forbidding them all access to public education. Education is a basic right of a human. They should have the freedom to access to knowledge. Therefore I would say that the group of woman are not given human rights. Hence they human rights are not universal.
In Singapore, we have yet to sign the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights. As an Asian country, we claim that social and economic rights take prcedence over civil and political rights. We assert that civil and political rights are immaterial when people are destitude and society is unstable. Thus we can see that on Singapore is only supports human rights to a certain extent.We can also see that how a country view different human rights differently affects whether human rights are universal. Therefore, I believe that human rights are not totally universal.
In conclusion, we cannot say that human rights are totally universal but it is universal only to a certain extent.
Human rights are not universal because in some countries some groups of people are not granted their himan rights. One of the example would be Afganistan. The talibans which rule most of the Afganistan, denys women the right to leave home except when accompanied by a brother or husband and forbidding them all access to public education. Education is a basic right of a human. They should have the freedom to access to knowledge. Therefore I would say that the group of woman are not given human rights. Hence they human rights are not universal.
In Singapore, we have yet to sign the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights. As an Asian country, we claim that social and economic rights take prcedence over civil and political rights. We assert that civil and political rights are immaterial when people are destitude and society is unstable. Thus we can see that on Singapore is only supports human rights to a certain extent.We can also see that how a country view different human rights differently affects whether human rights are universal. Therefore, I believe that human rights are not totally universal.
In conclusion, we cannot say that human rights are totally universal but it is universal only to a certain extent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)