identity
thoughts
history
chatbox
readers
members
wishes
exits
kudos
The impression forces itself upon one that men measure by false standards,
that everyone seeks power, success, riches for himself, and admires others
who attain them, while undervaluing the truly precious thing in life.
~ Sigmund Freud
:: Best viewed with Internet Explorer 6.0 or 7.0 ::
Initial: Frederick
Profession: Psychology Undergraduate
Birthday: -6025 days left
Height: 1.76m
Weight: 63kg
Blood Type: A+
Waist size: 29-30 inches
Hobbies: Blogging; Reading; Songs & Movies; Chill out
Most Disliked Food: Anything crustacean - due to allergy
Favourite Songs to Sing to: For You (self-composed) & The Promise
Favourite Body Parts: Nose; Jaws
Schools: Pei Chun Public School (1989 - 1995); Chong Boon Secondary School (1996 - 1999); Nanyang Polytechnic (2000 - 2003); Monash University (2006 - )
HAHAHA.. something to keep you guyz entertained while I am away for these few days. I'll be taking a short break for my exams that is about to come in 4 days' time.
Anyway, here's my hero, Bill Maher discussing about the Vatican's approved image of the late Pope John Paul II.
Have a good laugh and a great weekend!
*editted* ...while enjoying your weekend when I am away preparing for my exams, here's the link to the news article for the above video just in case anyone misunderstood my intention.
When I return, I shall post more of my thoughts about religion on the whole...
*back to study mode*
October 22, 2007
This could be one of the lesser bit of entries which I write about love. I've been reading up on a number of blogs with topics on love and basically every one of them says about the same thing. Well, I hope I could be more unique tonight. The fact that I wrote little about love is perhaps due to its wide implications and meanings that could be subjected to the perception of different individuals. Once again, there is no absolute truth about love. It is how one sees it. Because there is no measurement for love, therefore, there is no fixed truth about it. As I have mentioned before, anything that cannot be measured or is personal, is not an absolute entity. But on second thought, it can be absolute when it in fact, does exist in its purest form.
Today, I received a very touching message from my girl. She told me that 'love is not about religion; it is not about scientific theory; but it is about the both of us.' It is something which I've always wanted to write in this entry, and I've waited for this day to come. As every readers of mine has already come to realise that I'm pretty much against religion, and the way it is being exploited or manipulated to suit an individual's ideals. However, the notion that love, which is preached within the religion itself, is something I admire, especially the Christian's messiah, Jesus.
I do not hate Christianity in it's altruistic form. Rather, I despise Christianity when it is being commercialised, exploited, and manipulated by swaggering authority of the church. In its most altruistic form, Christianity, a dogma some Christian individuals adopt, is a way for them to extend their love and care for others, in turn, making a difference in the lives of other people. However, it is the evangelical motives behind such act (if ever there is), is something which I do not respect. In fact, I would say that the way to make a difference in other people's life is in doing so not for the sake of God; not for the sake of others; neither is it for himself or his glory. An act of love or kindness should be voluntary, not because of any other ulterior motives or any hope for eternal or heavenly rewards.
Jesus is a very caring person, who is a respected historical figure that clearly made a difference in the lives of others. In my opinion, he is someone whom I admire for his deeds and his altruism. The way he was is the reason why some Christians are motivated or inspired to be more and more like him. This is something which I have nothing against. His love was known, to many Christians, as unconditional and eternal. It is something which many are inspired to develop. And that includes me. I love my girlfriend a lot. And knowing that I have difficulties believing in God, I strive to be a more loving and caring person, using Jesus as someone whom I can model after. My motivation and inspiration is not to bring people into believing in God, but rather, I am inspired to make a difference in other people's lives. This does not make me a Christian (cos I do not want to be classified but to be a unique individual in fact), but it will make me a better person as I grow to be one.
It doesn't take religion or any other faiths in order for one to love others. Because love is voluntary. One does not need to love others because God or Jesus, or even the bible tells you so. One does not need to love others just because one is told to love or how to love. It is in-built in us, the altruistic gene that is inside each and everyone of us, which motivates that spirit of loving and being kind to others. It is this altruistic gene in us (despite some selfish genes) that helps us discern the rights from wrongs. They are all in-born desires from the day of our birth, that helps us in our moral decisions, loving kindness, thoughtfulness, and helpfulness. Our desire to love, to care, to share, and to have sexual intimacies are within us from the very beginning. We do not need religion to tell us how to love others, especially teaching us to love for the sake of God. The verses: "When you do unto others, you are doing unto me" says Jesus. And "When you are serving others, you are serving me". says Jesus. These verses are comforting in the way they sound, which motivates believers to do as they are told because if they do not do so, they do not actually serve Jesus or being kind to Jesus, the person they worship. I don't think this is the right way to love others.
Love cannot be forced. Love cannot be told what to do. It must come naturally, and it must exist when there is initiation. Love must not desire fame, glory, or carry ulterior motives. It must be responsible, voluntary, independent, and straight to the point.
Finally, love includes commitment. In every aspect, commitment is a driving force towards the success of any dreams and ambitions. It is commitment that brings success to every aspect of life, much less in relationships. It doesn't take much strength to commit. All it takes, is one's decision to do so. It doesn't take one's life away in order to commit within a relationship. All it takes, is one's decision to love that person no matter what. Many intellectuals whom I used to know are afraid of commitment, especially within relationships. It doesn't take so much strength to decide whether one desires to spend the rest of his or her life with another party. It just takes an action and firm decision to make the relationship work. That is all there is to it. The rest of the relationship depends on how one chooses to maintain.
My ex-girlfriend left me out of a sudden, not because of an involvement of a third party, but rather, she felt she couldn't commit. Although I couldn't believe that this is an answer to the real reason behind her decision, but I feel sorry for her. She need not come back to tell me how sorry she was, because I've forgiven her. She need not avoid me either just because she has no face to face me after all the hurt she inflicted upon me back then. Because now I realise that unless she gets to truly understand the meaning of love and commitment, she would never enjoy the bliss of having a significant other. Even if she chooses to be single all her life, that would never solve her problem of being afraid to commit. I find her rather childish and immature, also rather shameful. This is because it is a great pity that she does not understand what it takes to be a decisive person in the area of loving somebody, except herself. This is rather selfish as well. Love is not selfish. It is a decision, and it takes two person for it to show. What life's difference would it make if one only love him or herself? It doesn't make a stark different at all. It is plain selfish.
To love is to risk not being loved. To commit is to risk not achieving success. But it is still better than not putting in any effort through one's decisiveness. I rather open myself to loving and committing to the areas of my own life, such as my family, relationships, friends, and studies, than to sacrifice one of them which is rather unfair. If I knew at first that I would have no time for a certain commitment, I would have rejected it anyway, why wait till the very last minute?
No relationships can be formed without any amount of commitment. A relationship without commitment is a relationship within oneself. The loner. The most selfish, stingy, and self-centered bastard ever lived on earth... or is it Mars or Saturn?
In sum, I do not think religion, tradition, or education is the answer to loving others or being committed to a significant other. It takes a willing heart and a firm desire to be committed in a loving relationship, or friendship with others. All these boils down to one's upbringing and parental attachment, which I don't think my ex-girlfriend has. That's why i feel sorry for her.
The Petition for Penal Code 377A in the latest news of Singapore have stirred a nation-wide debate upon the support for as well as the discriminating sentiments against gays in Singapore.
Adopted from Mr.Brown's blog, this is the definition for that particular law: 377A : Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years.
This archaic law was left behind by the British who abolished it years ago. Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia and even China have also passed laws decriminalising such acts.
Personally, I am not a gay and certainly will never be one. This is not because I am homophobic, but rather, I know myself that I am straight, I do not fancy guys or have any affectionate feeling for guys, and am definitely NOT attracted to men. I love women so much you see... However, I do not approve the fact that gays should be discriminated by the law, much less the people, whom I consider them to be rather ignorant.
Though I'm not gay, I do have friends or acquaintances who are gays. And I heard so much from them - the things they share to me, especially their struggles in relationships (with guys of course). I don't see them as criminals. I don't see what they are doing is wrong because I believe that inasmuch as the tendency for humans to be nurtured environmentally or some who are brought up in a way that led them into this state, there are also biological causes such as birth defects or differences in the levels of testosterones when these group of nice people are born.
Well, Mr.Brown has linked me up to Mr. Wang who is more eloquent in his debate on this issue.
Anyway, I do not see the point for Singapore to add on to so many people's misery by enforcing an additional law this time. This adds more pressure to everyone. It stirs up fundamentalists like many Christians who thought that gays should be condemned because of their sexual origins or preferences. Yes, I've read the bible and indeed, the bible says that homosexuality is sin. But what if a person just happens to prefer something that is different from others? Do we stone them to death? Do we condemn them by setting them on fire and burn them at stake for being rebellious against god? NO! Certainly not! There are more humane procedures such as liberating them to do what they are able to discern themselves.
The law is there to guide the people, not to control the people.
One can do anything according to what he or she discerns is right in their own beliefs. Everyone is entitled to do as they pleases as long as there are no potential harm inflicted on the psychological or physical aspects of any individuals. That should be the way to go. Let's not be biased against others who are different from us. If the gays should be discriminated, just because they are the minorities, then should Eurasians be segregated in our nation as well? HUH??? Anyone? Reply me please.. Should Eurasians be segregated because they are different from us and they are the minority of the four distinct races?
Singapore is a nation who pledges itself to have equality and justice. What justice will it make if gays are discriminated because of their minority and differences but not Eurasians, or Lesbians.. or donkeys? By the way, Eurasians ARE being prejudiced as being called "ANG MOS" for that matter. Also, Lesbians ARE being prejudiced as being nicknamed "BUTCHES", or "TOMBOYS" as well. What about donkeys? They are asses. Plain asses who think that condemning homosexuality with their tiresome whines just because it goes against their closed-minded faith. Thank goodness they are the minority in my context. What equality will it be if there is none in the first place, since Social Darwinism is the philosophy of our young meritocratic society? YES, survival of the fit indeed. Equality? More like a Christian's fantasy of a new born society.
Anyway, I've signed the petition for the repeal... hopefully it's not too late. Even if it is so, the site is still up and alive. So I'd just post my thoughts up there for the nation to see.
I understand that Singapore is a conservative nation with a small view of so many issues yet to be discussed and brought up. It is time for it to stop being a dormant ignorant dog and start being a faithful one to itself. Let's be more open-minded, but of course, not being too open-minded until our brains fall out. But nonetheless, if everyone is more accepting in terms of being rational and use their brains to think, rather than to stick to traditions, customs, religions, and other non-thinking dogmatic beliefs, the world would be free and liberated from the tyranny of such tragic ignorance.
