Views on the repeal of 377A

The debate over the 377A in penal code has reached what is properly considered "fever pitch" in Singapore as of the time of writing.

As a Christian living in Singapore I find myself in some sort of a dilemma. Some sort, because I don't really feel the pressure of the dilemma, neither do I consider both sides equally compelling at the point of writing.

The caveat is practical, not in principle. I think that I do not comprehend the extent to which persecutions will come and how my life could change as I turn to weather the obstacles (or to surrender, gasp) and so for now I am inclined to say that it should be repealed.

My reasons for not going against the repeal are simple:
1. There is no basis for a secular society to consider homosexuals as criminals. Even the bible does encourage the church to ensure that they are considered as such.
2. The church should not be too eager to avoid coming persecution by branding persons as criminals as they are not.
3. Following from that, it is not our right to worry about the rest of the slippery slope either, if the solution is to continue to keep the law that criminalizes homosexuals.

On the other hand, in the midst of these discussions, I do want to say that there is a tendency for the society to patronize religious people.

Regarding the repeal and the slippery slope, it has merit because we are witnessing it unfold in other countries, where Christian bakers, pastors, all forms of service providers are being penalized for refusing homosexual business.
The thing that irks me the most is homosexuals insisting to have a wedding in a church, and for a pastor to solemnize it for them. Behind it all there's this simple skeptical attitude that the existence of God has already been decided (or rather, non-existence) and that religious people are just having their little parties, believing in fancy things in their own leisure, and should not take their religious convictions too seriously.

And why the hell should anyone be allowed to think or talk like that.

I really hope that the Singaporean government will have a bigger mind to see that this is going to be an issue and take serious precautions to not walk in the path of Canada and America.

But seriously, why should anyone have such confidence in a secular institution.

Review of "A Quiet Place"

This movie is set in a dystopian future where jaded teachers have evolved into sound-sensitive murderous monsters.

Although incredibly blind, they have a very keen sense for unnatural sounds, which draws them towards their prey.

The sheep and the goats

Pastor Goh preached a sermon on Matthew 25:31-45 yesterday at the last service of the year.

As he was preaching, I was led to discover one thing about the verses that I had not noticed before. In these verses both the righteous and the unrighteous responded to Jesus "When did we see you..." and previously I thought the similarity was just a device to draw the parallel and never thought too much about it.

Reading it yesterday I noticed that the statement actually exquisitely expressed the respective attitudes of the righteous and the unrighteous.

For the righteous they were really puzzled. They are searching their memory and simply did not have an inkling of when they had served Jesus personally. Sure, they had served many people in their lives, but surely none of them could have been the Lord?

For the unrighteous the question betrays their false piety. The statement "when did we see you" really means "if we did see you we would have served you", revealing that they had a willingness to serve the Lord, but a willingness that was an abomination because it did not accompany a willingness to serve people in need.

And so Jesus interestingly concludes that whatever they did not do for the least of his brothers, they have not done it for him. If we do not serve the people around us, we do not serve the Lord.

This point came through saliently when Pastor Goh reminded us that God has no need for us to serve Him. If we think about it, most of what He has commanded us to do is to serve His people. Therefore, people who would "reserve" themselves to serve the Lord, abstaining from helping his neighbour so as to devote himself to his religious duties, such as the levite and the priest in the good Samaritan story, is actually not serving the Lord... you could say they were just serving themselves.