Anti-gays’ new online platform launched

Thio Li-An questioned why Christians were not angry. Matthew Yap, a church elder, launched Singanews telling The New Paper that it would be written from the perspective of mainstream family values. Gordon Brown apologies for homophobic treatment of Alan Turing. Full essay.

18 Responses to “Anti-gays’ new online platform launched”

  1. 1 gambit 13 September 2009 at 17:17

    she’s desperately trying to rise from her humiliating ashes with an obvious personal agenda.

    ironic that the church is at queen street

  2. 2 sloo 13 September 2009 at 20:49

    why is it that all these fundies push so hard for family values and procreation and TLA is still unmarried and single. She should, as the chosen spokesperson of the anti-gay movement, first get her act together and get hitched and have a child? If she is so pro-family, why oh why is she still single? (is she even attached?)

  3. 4 singlahnews 14 September 2009 at 00:18

    one would assumed that singanews is all about singa-pore, be it news on politics, entertainment, home news, heartland news etc etc news of singapore. the fact that this portal was launched in a church, with the key speaker(s) openly touched on, with much conviction, the subject of religion, particularly the christian faith is indeed a little worrying. Thio and gang have all the rights to their own belief but to use a very singapore-ly name as singa to prefix the portal name is very misleading.

    i wonder what are the views of the regulators since anything singa is usually associated with singapore. and singanews is not about singapore per se, it is about christianity. i am not anti-christian. i am very much of the opinion that singa has been misuse here. lets hope it will not be abused.

  4. 5 Paul 14 September 2009 at 02:41

    “…which focuses on procreation”

    these people are sex obsessed! really, they do rather lower the tone of public discourse, don’t you think?

  5. 6 Lee Chee Wai 14 September 2009 at 13:12

    Heh, Alex, you should check out the news on the BBC more frequently :). I had been expecting you to mention Alan Turing for a few weeks now, ever since a petition was submitted to the British government asking for a formal apology. The petitioners had not expected the government to respond positively, so I bet they are thrilled about it.It was symbolic, of course, as Turing had no living descendants. Still, I guess I (and many others) can consider him a “father” since my calling in Computer Science was given form by Turing. The Turing Machine, believe it or not, is a model for computation that still defines (and limits) what a modern computer can or cannot do.

  6. 7 George 14 September 2009 at 13:45


    Highly unlikely that the Singapore govt
    would ever apologize for anything, least of
    all what it did wrong -morally or ethically-
    to tons of Singaporeans.

    To the PAP any admission of wrong tantamount
    to losing the next GE.

    We can only be patient but should not wait to write
    and record our history as it should be written. LKY
    is already attempt to pre-empt that using the ST
    to write a book on HIStory of Singapore! LOL!

  7. 8 Robox 15 September 2009 at 10:16


    That’s the word that those starting up Singanews are using to describe themselves; that’s also the word that another Christian, Lui Tuck Yew – who helped craft the new Penal Code singling out gay men only for discimination in the law together with his co-religionist Amy Khor – used to [self]-congratulate the ‘mainstream media’ (or MSM) for an imaginary competence.

    Now, isn’t “mainstream” also what extremists who occupy the ultraconservative-to-fascist band on the political spectrum always like to claim they are? (I know this for a fact from being N America from the early to mid-1990s at the height of gay activism, stemming from the AIDS crisis and the Reagan-Bush (Sr) years.)

    This is actually not inconsistent with an aspect of ultraconservative ideologies (which include conservatism, ultraconservatism, and fascism but *not* right-of-centre conservatism, who would be considered liberal democratic) where its proponents tend to hold up one group – usually themselves – as the ones whose values the rest of society should aspire to.

    By taking a nice-sounding word like “mainstream” for themselves, what they attempt to do in effect is to leave the rest of us with no nice names to call ourselves; mainstream people are well balanced, and even perfectly-centred individuals not given to extremes.

    Or so the mythology goes.

    There are four fact-based reasons we should be rejecting Singanews claim of being ‘mainstream’, and I say “fact-based” because I will be making use of the objective criteria used in political science here:

    1. The PAP does in fact subscribe to a political ideology despite pious protestations to the contrary. That ideology is anywhere between ultraconservatism-to-fascism exactly like the Thio Li-ann Christians – this is a strictly academic view.

    2. Though he is hardly the first to do so, Lui Tuck Yew refers to the SPH and mediacorp stables as “mainstream”. However, the ‘MSM’ has only ever reflected PAP thinking. The PAP does this because it has always wanted to shape the thinking of Singaporeans in its own image with the result that its thinking would become the statistical norm in the Singapore population. That way, the PAP can then go on to claim that that statistical norm is also the “mainstream” view, which oh, just so happens to coincide with their political ideology, ultraconservatism-to-fascism on the political spectrum.

    3. Singanews has so far drawn their writers only from the Christian community and the ‘mainstream’ media, the latter which I call the Hindu smokescreen. The people who are starting up Singanews have all of that same sense of arrogance about their moral superiority, “moral superiority” being the true subtext of “mainstream”.

    4. However, ultraconservatism-to-fascism can by no stretch of the imagination be considered to be political *centrism*, which is the word we should actually be using instead of ‘mainstream’ in law, politics, political and socio-political news and commentary; centrism is *the* word that professional journalists use.

    (One way to know if you are politically a centrist is to ask yourself if you are appealed to the practises of constitutionalism, the rule of law, and rationality in legislation and its enforcement. Does any of the above describe the PAP and its scions?)

    We would all do ourselves and Singapore a favour by refusing to refer to the SPH and Mediacorp stables as the mainstream media (MSM). I’m going to start by referring to them as the UCM (or ultraconservative media when they are ultraconservative) or FM (or fascist media when they are being fascist); I hope others will join me.

    We should not even be feeling bullied that we are ‘less than moral’ for not espousing any of the views of the ‘mainstream’ Singanews – the contempt that ‘mainstream’ people have for those not like them, and the punitive ill treatment that awaits their victims *cannot* be called moral.

    I’m proud that I’m a political liberal with some social democratic leanings.

    I’m proud to be a centrist.

    • 9 Z 15 September 2009 at 23:31

      Sounds grand and nice, your sermon, but it begs the crucial question as to what you would consider then to be mainstream media? From the way I see it, the phrase “mainstream media” is simply a claim on the majoritarian view/preference of medium; and to dispute this you would simply have to adduce empirical evidence to prove the contrary, no? But you seem more interested in debunking the concept of what is “mainstream”, only to replace it with your personal, substantive, political philosophy of “centrism”. However, political centrism is in itself a flexible label, its content determined by those professing it based on their (arbitrary?) selection of two political ‘extremes’. The Bolsheviks in the 1920s, for example, claimed to be centrists. If that is so, then there is nothing inherent in political centrism which compels one to favour ‘the practises of constitutionalism, the rule of law, and rationality in legislation and its enforcement’ in my opinion.

      • 10 Martha de Beest 16 September 2009 at 16:47

        Z, you have an unfortunate habit of copying what the fundamentalists do : asserting something as fact, then demanding someone else prove it’s not so, instead of adducing evidence to support the claim in the first place.

        ” the phrase “mainstream media” is simply a claim on the majoritarian view/preference of medium; and to dispute this you would simply have to adduce empirical evidence to prove the contrary, no?”

        For such a website to incongruously apply to itself the word “mainstream” is simply an immature, playground way of saying “everyone agrees with me, so there!” Playground bullies with funding.

      • 11 Z 17 September 2009 at 09:55

        Err…since when did I assert that Singanews is mainstream? All I’m doing is to question Robox on whether there in fact exists a “mainstream media” in his opinion, or whether he believes this phrase is just a farce to legitimize an otherwise parochial view.

  8. 12 yawningbread 15 September 2009 at 11:01

    Well said, Robox. I shall try to avoid using the word “mainstream” in future to refer to these groups. We’ll need a catchy alternative term though. Rightwing?

    • 13 Me 15 September 2009 at 17:22

      Probably not a coincidence that the extremist “Anglican” anti-gay religious group in UK, America etc is called “Anglicam Mainstream”: “strengthening the faith; Anglo-Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox, Charismatic, Maintream”


      • 14 Me 15 September 2009 at 17:28

        This is one appalling quote from the site, commenting on Elton John and David Furnish’s proposed adoption of a toddler:

        “All would agree that seeking to adopt a child simply to sexually misuse and abuse him or her is beyond the pale. But one must ask whether such things as homosexual adoption rights are much better, when the wellbeing of the child is at stake.”

        Sounds like a potential lawsuit to me, and rightly so!

    • 15 Robox 16 September 2009 at 07:06

      Hi Alex,

      It’s agree that we do need a something catchy to describe the once mainstream media; maybe something that is a play on “mainstream”. And one that resonates well with people.

      But right wing media is not altogether unusual usage either.

      In the US, the conservative media (eg. Washington Post, ABC, Fox, etc.) are sometimes referred to as “the conservative media establishment”, while the equivalent is true for the liberal media (NYT, NBC, CBS, etc.).

      Interestingly, both media factions are considered mainstream.

      Singapore’s once mainstream media is similar only in the sense that it is national and has substantial circulation; but both are manufactured qualities because any alternative was deliberately excised.

      In the meantime, the best that we might be left to do is, for someone like you whom I consider to be the quiessential centrist, to respond by taking on nice names for yourself.

      Suggestions anyone?

  9. 16 Past their cell-by-date 15 September 2009 at 23:20

    The eunuchs of the demonically possessed Empress Homofobia having a last fling before being cast to the depths.

  10. 17 dyno 16 September 2009 at 01:06

    oh great. another platform for religious fundamentalists to spew out their hate and showcase their ignorance. just what singapore needs!

  11. 18 yawningbread 17 September 2009 at 10:26

    One comment, submitted at 10:26 pm on 16 September, was barred because it called another comment-maker a “Christian snake”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: