Christian Militancy In AWARE Saga

One of the positive outcome from the recent AWARE saga is the exposure of Christian militancy in Singapore. The idea of Christian militants in Singapore is no longer a hypothesis. It has shown its ugly head in the takeover of AWARE. It is up to us now, the real conservative majority to decide on the action we are going to take to protect our nation from their domination.

When I use the term “militants”, I am referring to a group of people who will resort to any means to achieve their objectives. In this case, the “Christian militants” are those who think that they are the only true Christians and they have the right to demand the entire nation to obey their rules. They will resort to any means and sink to any level to achieve their aims. Like the Crusaders in the past, they will not allow morality to stand in their way.

Some people may wonder whether I am over reacting on the whole issue. Maybe those are just a bunch of over enthusiastic and harmless fanatics. In this article, I am going to present my proofs. Please consider the following:

Taking laws into their own hands.
The Ministry of Education in Singapore has recently suspended AWARE’s Comprehensive Sexual Education (CSE) program from schools after it has found some inappropriate words in the instructor’s handbook. This is the respond to parents’ complaints on the issue.

This event tells us that the government system is working fine here in Singapore. If the parents think the schools are teaching wrong things to their children, they can lodge their complaints and the ministry will look into them. If the contents are really bad, the ministry will take action like suspending or even banning the program. There is absolutely no need to stage any coup.

If those “concerned parents” are really concerned about the CSE program, why did they not lodge their complains in the first place? Why did they start the coup first and then complain later? How much common sense does it take for them to realize that complaining to the government is the right move to address their concerns? Why would they participate in the coup to resolve a problem that can easily be solve through a simple complain?

Is it because it is more glorious to have a crusade than a complaint? This episode tells us that their real motive goes beyond the program itself.

The crusaders accused AWARE of promoting homosexual lifestyle. Technically homosexual lifestyle is illegal in Singapore. This means promoting it must also be illegal. So, if those crusaders have proofs that the organization is doing it, why can’t they make a police report or take legal action? After all, they have a page 73 lawyer on their side.

So, why can’t the members of the particular church take the necessary legal action for the ministry staff and police to do their job. It is because they don’t trust the ministry staff and police? Or, are they operating in militant mindsets? They want to take their own actions? They want to fight their own war? They want their own crusade?

Lack of personal morality.
Since they had completed their coup, the new exco explained to the public that their agenda was to bring the organization to its original focus as their predecessors had strayed from it. This sounds very innocent. The old guards may disagree but it is only a matter of opinion.

When the media pointed out that there was a surge in members and most of the new exco members worship in the same church which suggests an organized coup, they insisted that there wasn’t any. So, it must be a statistical anomaly. Out of all the women in Singapore, most of the elected exco members must come from the same church. This alone can arouse some suspicion.

Unfortunately for them, they did something really stupid to break their cover. They elected an advisor to their team and this advisor called herself the feminist mentor. She openly declared that she was the one who planned the entire takeover to stop AWARE from promoting homosexual lifestyle. This is a slap on the faces of the elected exco. This is the equivalent of the Feminist Mentor publicly called the newly elected exco liars and they did not deny it. So, there was a planned coup after all and the reason is about homosexual, nothing to do with losing focus.

The above events had clearly shown that these women had openly lied and they cannot be trusted.

Not only that, their church too became involved. Initially, both the team and their church had publicly denied the link between them. This is still possible because church members can organize their own activities without approval from their church leaders. However, a pastor had openly asked the female church members to support the team. He later apologized but the damage had been done. The link was shown. So, the statement that denies any link between the church and the new exco is proven to be false. The new exco and the church leadership had lied.

I have put up the above events to show that those participants of the coup have no regard to personal morality. They can talk a lot on how immoral homosexuals are but they themselves do not have much morality at all.

If we are to put the above two factors together, we can see that these people have no regard to both the law and personal morality for the sake of their anti-homosexual agenda. So far, they have been very peaceful which I am grateful for. However, what if somebody else who have the same level of morality resorting to violence? After all, I am trying to save the entire generation of citizen from being turned into homosexuals by those godless liberals. What is wrong in killing a few people? It is all for the greater good.

The mask of conservative majority.
One of the reasons given by the crusader to justify their anti-homosexual attitude is it is against the values of the conservative majority. I don’t think I need to convince you that this “conservative majority” is only a cover. They are against homosexuality because the Bible says it is a sin. It has nothing to do with the values of the conservative majority. The “conservative majority” is a ploy to mislead to the public into thinking that these crusaders have the support from the majority of the population. The dumb part here is the crusaders really believe in their own lies.

The truth is the conservative majority are not comfortable with homosexuals. However, they don’t go witch-hunting for them. They don’t take over organizations that are friendly to the homosexuals. So, the attempt to present themselves as the representatives of the conservative majority is a futile attempt to cover up their real agenda. This is another proof of their deceitfulness.

Fight for our Christian rights.
There are blogs out there calling for Christians to fight for our Christians rights as we can no longer depend on the conservative government to protect us. Since when has there been such a thing called the “Christian rights” in Singapore? It seems that there are some misguided Christians who see the AWARE saga as the fight between Christians and the rest of humanity. The act of voting out and booing our Sisters-In-Christ is an act of war on Christians. All Christians must unite to fight against our enemies (meaning every one else).

It seems to them that Christians have the right to impose our values to the entire humanity. We Christian view homosexuality as a sin. Anyone who is friendly toward the homosexuals is violating our Christian rights. So, don’t blame us for declaring a holy crusade on you.

Christian militancy is real in Singapore. I am not referring only to the participants of the coup alone. I suspect there is a larger community out there who shared the same agenda and had the same level of morality. How low can they sink to? I don’t know and I hope it is not too low.

3 Responses to “Christian Militancy In AWARE Saga”

  1. Lucy Says:

    Funny that the words “militant” and “crusades” appear many times in your post.

    Firstly, there is nothing illegal about how they found themselves as the ExCo. They are working toward a cause for AWARE and they did it by following its constitution. How is that taking the law into their own hands? How is that being militant? Did you look up the meaning of “militant” in the dictionary first before you use the word in this context?

    Secondly, who has the right to judge their morality? The media? People getting their information from the media? The members of the ExCo? AWARE members? God? Or you? Why didn’t the media do an expose of the current AWARE ExCo members the way they did to the ExCo which was voted out? Who was guilty of throwing up the religious beliefs of the ousted ExCo members in the first place? Can you define “anti-homosexual” agenda and provide evidence of how the ousted ExCo were being anti-homosexual?

    Thirdly, Singapore is still largely a conservative majority. The unsuccessful repeal of Section 377A of the Penal Code is one indication. MOE’s statement about its suspension of the CSE programme is another. Further proof? Films depicting homosexual and lesbian love themes are banned from being shown on the mainstream media. It is not a cover as you have purported.

    Your conclusion is a sweeping statement, including the use of the word “militant”. — Project Lucy

  2. Yeap Chee Seng Says:


    I have narrated on how those church members lied from the moment they completed their coup until the final press conference after they were defeated. They entire world can witness on how deceitful they are.

    Their approach may be technically legal but entirely immoral. The entire nation knows that.

    You don’t like people calling you anti-homosexual but you can freely calling others pro-gay or promoting homosexual lifestyles. Is that moral?

    Finally, Singapore is very conservative but we are not so conservative to the point of ganging up with church members to take over an NGO.

    Ask yourself this question. Are you against homosexuality because you are a defender of conservative values or because the Bible says it is a sin?

    It is very clear that which party is trying to impose their religious beliefs on others.

  3. ChrisitanityR Says:


    Before you reply to Yeap, you might wish to consider the evolvement of morality in relation to sexual ethic based on the following:

    1) Polygamy which was practised by men, including men in the old testament
    2) Incest (Incestuous relationships had to occur if reproduction could subsist; tribes and clans had to have somewhere to start); Lot and his daughters committed incest in the old testament
    3) Laws pertaining to sexual slavery: when a woman was raped, she had to marry the man who raped her, never to divorce

    Are such practices which have proven to have existed “alright” with the conservation majority? If so why? How can the conservative opposed homosexuality based on their conservative values and yet tolerate these practices?

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: