Christian Ethics Expert - Aware involvement legitimate

The Christian Post SG article on 19 may 2009 entitled "Ethics Expert on Aware and Buddhist Revivalism" reaffirms that the Christian involvement in Aware passes the ethical test because "Ms Josie Lau and the Christian ladies took office legitimately", and that "AWARE had been promoting with regard to homosexual practice". The media was said to be siding with the gays, and the New Guard was said to be successful in highlighting the alleged homosexual slant of the sex education.

(1 Cor 5:9,10 NKJV) I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people.Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.

The notion of Christian versus Secular space was clearly highlighted by the Apostle Paul who clearly separated what the church could insist within its four walls, against what it could demand outside of the church space. We have mixed the two and now demand the Government to ascend to our wishes based on our Christian interpretation. This was not on a core fundamnetal issue but a highly debated non issue of a group outside the church ie gays. When Christians agressively lobby the Government and insist in the public space, it causes trouble especially when it is unfairly targeted to a specific minority group and the ethical nature is doutful and bounded by hypocrisy which Jesus highlighted so many a times as the yeast of religion contaminating the truth. When we go outside our gates and fortress to send our calvary to hunt down gays, when we are supposed to preach Christ, we loose our morality and credibility. What happened at Aware by the new Guard and their Christian supporters was considered so out of bounds and unethical though legal that the media was given a relative freedom to report the truth as they see fit. And the truth was exposed to the entire nation over 3 weeks of nail biting drama - bit by bit - building up a case to show the unethical motives of the New Guard and letting themselves be contradicted by their own comments.

"Christian ethics in general has tended to stress the need for grace, mercy, and forgiveness because of human weakness. With divine assistance, the Christian is called to become increasingly virtuous in both thought and deed, see also the Evangelical counsels. Conversely, the Christian is also called to abstain from vice" Wikipedia. The Aware saga has shown that the Christian groups were lacking much in this area:-

1) Little mention is made of the Old Guard who has built, and the Christian Extremist made it a Conservative vs Gay battle, at the expense of the Old who built this space up not for these kinds of promotion but to advance women's right. is this ethical?

2) The new Guard hid behind the notion that they wanted to bring back Aware to its original roots, when they were not part of the original team nor was involved in the life and function of Aware for the past 24 years! Imagined an outside group taking over COOS on the account that it has not been faithful to the Christian message (in their opinion). Is this ethical?

3) The "evidence" concerning the alledged gay promotion by Aware was retrieved only after the event ie after the take over. The only evidence prior was the showing of a lesbian movie . Like an unfaithful witness in the court, the New Guard shifting positions. The media is criticised for highligting the inconsistent stories of the New Guard (Prov 14:5 NKJV) A faithful witness does not lie, But a false witness will utter lies. Is this ethical?

4) The Trainers Manual was private and confidential.and not given out as course materials. It is "after the event" and not legally permissble evidence as it was only found out after the takeover when searching for justification and reason for the takeover. They were trying to built up a case after the coup but their testimony had too many inconsistencies for it to be credible and they finally exposed their champion, Mdm Thio (Mark 14:56 NKJV) For many bore false witness against Him, but their testimonies did not agree. Is this ethical?

5) Strong allegation of "promotion" of gays were used, when it was only a neutral one liner in the entire manual. The context of a 3 hour seminar, a 1 minute side line? There were no complaints to MOE when the courses were held. Do we are consciously think what we are doing is right rationally? The Old Guard would have no case to answer for in a court of law (1 Tim 4:2 NKJV) speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron,Is this ethical?

6) Is being legitimate legally equates to being right ethically? For example, those who caused the banks to default billions and investors losing their life savings still demanded their "legitimate" and contractual retention bonuses? This is 100% legit but it is right? "Sometimes it can be so right, yet can be so wrong". If it is correct according to the letter of the law, even though the intentions and the methods were unethical, is it still right? Does God look at the letter of the Law, or the intentions and motives of the Heart? Jesus reminded us that we have committed adultery, if we lust after a woman, since we have committed the action in our hearts! (Mat 5:28 NKJV) "But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Is this ethical?

7) Do we have to break a man made law to be unethical or is there a genuine God ordained boundaries of what is right or wrong? It was a well organised takeover, with more than 80 new people overwhelming the 40 existing members!. They took over the organization, the name, the reputation, the work and all the efforts put in by one single legal action. What about breaking God's laws - Is stealing a violation of the 10 commandments? (Exo 20:15 NKJV) "You shall not steal. Just because one is unhappy with their neighbour's house color does not mean they could repaint it esepcially when they owned the whole estate and he has only one house, a small space. Is this ethical?

8) The new Guard had never been in Aware? the 80 new members did not actively served there, and wanted to take over in order to change the policies? Why cant they start a new Aware rather than be envious of the work already done? Why do we need to covert the secular space that belong to these feminist women and take over for our own aggenda? (Exo 20:17 NKJV) "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's."Is this ethical?

9) Is it ethical to say that someone is "promoting" something when he/she is totally unawares, has no good reason to believe that they are doing so, and even those whom the promotion would apparently benefit (ie gay rights groups) do not know about it. Is it ethical to make up a story and insist on it being true even though the evidence point otherwise. There were also no complaints to MOE indicating otherwise when the courses were held.(Jer 8:8 NKJV) "How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us'? Look, the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood. "Is this ethical?

It was claimed that key supporters of Aware were Homosexual men who were rowdy at the EOGM. These men did not know about Aware until the Christian extremist raised the issues. It would be unethical for gays to stand by the sideline when an organisation who was not guilty has been taken to tasks solely on their account. Could they not act when Aware was innocent of all the accusations against them. Aware was never a Gay organization as 99.9% of the issues were women's right issues and not about men having sex with men!. Gay men would be staying well away from any wome's organization because they like men and not women!. But when Aware was overtaken, they overcame their natural inclination and came and support the women because they had to do the right thing.

(Prov 6:17,18 NKJV) A proud look, A lying tongue, Hands that shed innocent blood,A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that are swift in running to evil,

Too much blood has been spilled, too many Gay men and women have died because of the condemnation and discrimination and persecution by the Christian Church. The Church have been proud of their own righteouness, unaffraid to make up rethoric, and took action by their hands to cause great harm. There were no "Homosexual Aggenda", but only a "Christian" aggenda and plan to blame gays for all the sins of the straight population and to stir up fear and trouble. We may try to rationalise our actions as ethical and moral, but one day, we have to answer to God in heaven. May there not be gashing of teeth.

It does not matter whether we attempt to rationalise our stance is ethical, because there is judgement here on earth and in heaven. It is Christians who first took out the sword from the sheath as they invade the spaces of others! If they can do it for gays, why can't they do it for other kingdoms and secular spaces. Their "marketplace" evangelism called agressive penetration of such space where once they were confirned to their own religious space. Finally, as we continue to perscute the weakest and smallest people group, in the process we too become the religious pharisees who knew the bible too well to see the truth and was correct in the sight of the law, even though they crucified the Lord. We may have crucified Gays, then Aware,... , but in the process cross the line of no return, the losing of all moral conscience, and reasonableness. Are we forgetting that our primary role is to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ?


Locations of visitors to this page