2003-08-14T21:14:00.000+08:00

I am a great admirer of Colin Goh, one of Singapore's premier satirists ever since his days of drawing Orchard Road the Restricted Zone. I managed to stumble upon his website at www.colingoh.com and followed a link there to some other sites. Why do I mention this? Well, this afternoon, I also read one of my sister's friend's tag board. Her friend was extremely offended by someone telling her that the National Day Parade was nothing more than propaganda. She went on to chastise the offending party, saying that the government does many things "FOR YOUR OWN GOOD".

Now, I will not write here about whomever is right or wrong in this matter. If one feels that the little girl is right in flaring up over something so close to her heart like patriotism and her government's integrity, then so be it. But as Colin Goh mentioned in ThinkCentre's website, should there not be space for alternative points of view? For example, I do not espouse the Gay lifestyle as it is against my religion and in fact everything I stand for. But can I not allow them to live? What if they want to have meals together, watch movies, go to school, find a job, shoot pool, get a after work drink, go clubbing, etc. Should I thump them over the head with my religious beliefs? the answer as far as I am concerned is a resounding NO. I have a right to live and be left alone as much as they do too. After all, once we say the Pledge in school, we already commit ourselves to by identifying ourselves as "We, the people of SIngapore". Who is the one who puts limits on who a Singaporean can be? While I was going to school in the US, someone once said to me, "The trouble with this country is that while an individual's rights are sacrosanct, these same rights end where they begin to infringe on the rights of others. Simply put, you are free to swing your fists anywhere and in any direction you wish. This right ends where my nose beings." A truer statement I have not heard.

SO where does this leave us? Especially since boundaries of any kind are constantly shifting like sand in the wind. All boundaries are relative and so who then sets these boundaries on rights? The left insists that the state or a recognized and democratically elected authority sets these rights, and the right states that these rights are best left to an agreement amongst individuals. Personally, I would take neither path since it does not conform explicitly to what I believe in. I believe that a variety of views should be out there with individuals having free and equal access to it as well as having the freedom to discuss and argue these points. It's hard to argue these points in a country where staring at another person gets you stabbed though. But nevertheless, these are my beliefs. Think NDP is nothing but Uncle Lee's crap? Say it. Think NDP is a National Celebration and recognition of what one's country of birth has achieved over its trying history? Speak it. As JB Jeyaretnam once said, there is an environment of fear in Singapore and honestly, (and here he got it wrong) it comes not from the top anymore but from the bottom. People who govern should keep in mind that they are there not because of their ability to shift electoral boundaries and keep values of public housing up but rather from the consent of the governed. SOme may say that there is no government on earth that does that and I say, why can't MY government in MY country show the world how it is to be done? Do we as Singaporeans constantly need someone else to do it first? So if we fail, then we fail but it sure beats following others down the same dark pit blindly.

Ramblin Thots