A Story

“You certainly go to the Church quite often,” one person said.

“I usually go very early in the morning and leave sometime later that afternoon,” said the second.

“Lots of people?”

“No, not really. Most of the time, I’m usually sitting by myself.”

“Really? Then you must have lot of things that you pray for,” said the first.

“No, nothing at all.”

The first man was shocked. “Well, then, what do you do?”

The second man shrugged. “Mostly I just sit and look at God.”

“And what does God do all this time?” the confused man asked.

“Well,” said the man, “Mostly, He just sits and looks at me.”

Women in the Church

“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing – if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.” (I Timothy 2:11-15)

There are many churches nowadays that are readily condemning homosexuality (which only mention very briefly, in passing, in the Bible) and claim they are following scriptures. These churches ordain women pastors and have many women leaders leading men. This is a clear violation of the above scripture. In fact, there are more scriptures in the Bible telling women to keep silent and submit to men than saying homosexuality is a sin. However, how many women in church nowadays are following those scriptures? Why pick and choose scriptures that are convenient to practice?

The above is my response to one of the letters in Malaysiakini (http://malaysiakini.com/letters/142706). I don't think I want to argue with evangelical Christians about whether homosexuality is biblical or not because they have already made up their minds that it is a sin. However, just as Jesus says about a plank in your own eye, the evangelical Christians don't seem to see the inconsistency in the way they interpret scriptures. The role and position of women in church is the best example. If one just read the Bible and let the Bible speaks for itself, one basically will come to the conclusion that women should submit to men because God created them as helpers to men. In fact, if you look at out Muslim women in Malaysia, they follow the biblical guidance of how to be a godly woman much better than many evangelical Christian women.

Why no one says anything about that violation of the Bible? First, there are still few Bible believing denominations that are keeping their women in line with the biblical teaching (Brethren, Presbyterian etc) so that kind of become like a denominational thingy. Second, women nowadays have a lot of power and not easily bullied (LGBT don't have that kind of power so they are easily targeted). I bet these church women will be up in arms if any of the church minister were to preach that women should keep silent and submit to men. Thirdly, this basically reflect the homophobic prejudice of the church.

These Evangelical Protestants may not realize that Protestantism is about diversity. Look at the number of denominations in the Protestant community. For an evangelical to actually claim he/she has the correct way to interpret the Bible is basically a bunch of bull. They can't even agree among themselves what is the right way to interpret the Bible. Women's role in the church is one. Throw in speaking in tongues you will have these evangelicals tongue and cheek arguing with each other.

This is the folly of people who think they have already found the truth and have the correct way to interpret the truth. They can only see the saw dust in others' eyes but can't see the plank in their own eyes.

BLISS

Response From My Darling

After reading Pang's thoughts published on Malaysiakini (and elsewhere), I think I have to agree with one of the comments in response, namely "I really do not believe the average Malaysian is homophobic".

I am older than Pang and I come from a severely Christian / Protestant background, from a baby (not even a convert at an older age). Christianity has always been a part of my life.

Yet, at the age of 11, I accepted that I could be bisexual, and by the age of 13, I knew I was gay. Not once was there ever a conflict with my faith. Of course, by the time I was in my teens, I kept away from church, not because of Christ, but because of the people. If I may be 'authentic', in my eyes (and this is something I still believe to a lesser extent) church people are boring, square, narrow minded and have little imagination. I guess I instinctively recognised this when I was younger.

At the age of 13, I became friends in 2ndary school with a guy who became my best friend. He too was gay. We'd discuss Dynasty and the scenes with Stephen (the gay son). He'd read Danielle Steele and tell me about the the gay son who invariably appeared in the storylines. We'd ogle boys, and he conquered the school. I would cover up for him during recess, when he was 'busy' with a hockey player or with a softball player etc. All this took place in the mid to late 1980s.

We'd have crushes and infatuations and eventually, we pulled in a 3rd friend, whom we both knew had to be gay. And he was. After SPM, when we were 17, we crashed into Blue Boys and met so many wonderful people. Those were fun times.

Life then was all about cruising, because there was only Blue Boys. In pre-Uni, we ended up in the same college and continued our escapades. We fell in love with men, we had plenty of sex, but we eventually expanded our wings, with me making trips to Europe, and our 3rd friend eventually moving to the USA.

All the while, mind, I prayed. I read the Bible. It seems odd to me even now that some people keep on saying that the Bible doesn't allow homosexuality. By the time I was 21, I had read the Bible, from Genesis all the way to Revelations, in Good News (easy start), King James, New King James, NIV and finally the Catholic Bible (the Apocrypha is so cool!).

My best friend and I moved to the UK and our 3rd friend, as mentioned, ended up in the USA. Now and then, we'd make trips back to KL. I was delighted to find more and more venues popping up. But my best friend wasn't.

In fact, along the way, I found there are many older gay men who are not happy that we have plenty of other gay venues. They are not happy that we don't have to hide (we don't really, if you think about it). Why? Because they liked the way things were. Gay life was forced underground, and that lent it a sense of danger, a sense of naughtiness, who knows? Up to now, you'll find older 'veterans' unhappy about the change.

Now, in our 30s, the three of us have grown apart. My closest friend is now anti current state-of-affairs and living the life of cruising and picking up boys at bus stops. In fact, he wasn't happy at all about my union. That was 'joining the straight world', treason to the 'gay world'. My friend in the US has become a militant pro-gay activist. I guess the LGBT in the USA have to be this way, considering what they're fighting. And I? Well, I have settled down happily, and I couldn't ask for a better spouse than BLISS.

And these are the journey of three people.

Of course, I knew people and heard of stories of their families kicking out their children because they were gay. But I also knew of parents who kicked out their daughters for unwanted pregnancies. I also knew of families who abandoned their children for no reason. To my mind, this has nothing to do with homosexuality.

It has to do with PARENTING. And the social pressure for people to get married and have children even if they aren't even proper human beings. How can they be parents?

So what's the issue about this whole issue?

To my mind:

1. Everyone has their own journey. I didn't go through what Pang went through. But I never immersed myself in church life. The church can be a dangerous place.

2. Even the boring narrow-minded unimaginative people in church have their own journeys. Some make it out of church alive, and learn how dangerous church is. Some don't. Some convert to other religions, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. The church attracts broken people. And society is full of broken people. Broken people make even more broken people. This needs to be addressed, but I'm not sure how...

3. The reaction of people in response to situations depends on their journey. I actually don't believe Malaysians are homophobic. Some dumb churches are, especially the hyper fundamentalist or charismatic types, usually exported out from the USA. The lesson? Don't go to a US-based church. My recommendation - try the Eastern Orthodox church.

4. A response which works in one country does not necessarily work in another country. Before sexual rights, there is the ISA. There is the OSA. There is the Sedition Act and the offence of criminal defamation. If you take these away, fighting for sexual rights will be that much easier. Throughout my writing here, I have committed sedition against the church countless number of times!

5. To crush out the imagination is to crush out one of God's greatest gifts. That's the blasphemy taking place in churches today.

And those are my rambling thoughts...

Strain out a Gnat but Swallow a Camel (Matthew 23:24)

An openly gay pastor publicly announced he wanted to start an inclusive church that welcome everyone including gays and transsexuals, what do you think he might be inferring? How do you think the Malaysian public will think? Even the gay community is telling each other it's a gay church.

There are a lot of passages in the Bible against women being leaders and teachers in the church but why is there not a single debate in the public about that? Why is there not a single theologian or priest or pastor making any statement against that practice that is clearly a violation of biblical principles. There are lots of women pastors and leaders teaching and leading in many churches (not the Roman Catholic Church though, thank God!).

What have gay people done to make all these religious people up in arms against them? What evil have gay people done in human history that cause such violence reaction toward them? Gay people have no political power, civil rights and recognitions in many societies in the world including our lovely country Malaysia. They are in constantly danger of being humiliated, discriminated, rejected, jailed, persecuted, and even killed. We can learn all about it in history. Oscar Wilde was a good example.

All these people have against gay people is what written in the Bible and the Qu'ran, the infamous story of Sodom and Gomorrah. However, is there any archaeological or scientific evidence or proof that these two cities were destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality? Have there any other solid examples other Sodom and Gomorrah, that a country or city was destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality?

How could anyone against a people group based on writings that they believe is the word of God? Can they scientifically and objectively prove that the Bible or the Qu'ran is the word of God? There are so many injustices and immoralities in our Malaysian society which are clearly against the Bible or the Qu'ran but I don't see any of these religious people up in arms against them.

In the Gospels, the only people whom Jesus got angry with were the religious people. And these religious people were the ones who nailed him on the cross.

There are so many ethical principles written in these two holy books but very few are being practiced. Perhaps, before we point our fingers to anyone whom we think may be violating the word of God, we should first ask ourselves whether we are practicing those principles so perfectly that we can march into the Kingdom of God without fear and trembling.

"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" Matthew 7:3

BLISS

So Scary

By Agence France-Presse, Updated: 9/3/2010

Malaysia to monitor Internet for 'harmful' blogs

Malaysia has formed a task force to scour the Internet for blog postings deemed harmful to national unity, authorities said Friday in the latest of a series of actions against new media.

Home ministry deputy secretary general for security Abdul Rahim Mohamad Radzi said the unit would involve the police, Internet regulators, the information ministry and the attorney general's chambers.

"It is a mechanism that will coordinate these various agencies to help monitor what is being said in cyberspace and to take action against those that are trying to stoke racial tensions and disunity," he told AFP.

Abdul Rahim said the group would also monitor alternative and mainstream media for similar content.

"There is a disturbing trend now appearing on the Internet where some people are inciting racial unrest and causing confusion and this will damage the peace we have in the country," he added.

Abdul Rahim cited the recent case of a Facebook page that insulted Muslim Malays. They make up the majority of Malaysia's multicultural population, alongside large ethnic Chinese and Indian communities.

Police are also investigating ethnic Chinese rapper Wee Meng Chee for sedition, after he posted a three-minute rap on YouTube criticising a Malay headmistress accused of making racial slurs against minority students.

The government has ordered a probe into the case which caused anger among Malaysia's minorities, who complain their rights are being eroded as the country becomes increasingly "Islamised".

In another case, Malaysian journalist Irwan Abdul Rahman was charged this week over a satirical blog which made fun of the state power firm Tenaga, and faces a year's jail if convicted.

The prosecution caused a stir because unlike the mainstream press, the web and online media in Malaysia have remained relatively free, despite occasional raids, bans and government criticism.

Major newspapers and broadcasters are closely linked with the ruling coalition, so the Internet has become a lively forum for dissent and debate.

The government in 1996 pledged not to censor online content as part of a campaign to promote its information technology sector.