Does SPH promote theophobia (intolerance/ paranoia of religion)?

[bic_cherry]

Does SPH promote theophobia (intolerance/ paranoia of religion)?
Re-post here for fear of HWZ forums theophobic moderator possibly deleting my threads/ banning my account....

(Pls DO NOT transfer this post to the religion section because it pertains to this gahmen linked companies (SPH) treatment/ response to religion in Singapore): with acknowledgement or hostility+ paranoia?: I await their response.

HWZ feedback channel @:
http://forums.fuckwarezone.com.sg/o...eligion=-theophobia-5082489.html#post94604654

HWZ member's paranoia against religion= theophobia???!!!

Dear admin,

Somebody says that I am 'overtly evangelising' called me 'sad' and then asked me which church I attend in the following private message and I have never encountered such hostile theophobic behaviour in Singapore/ in forums before.

hey cherry6, it's a sad thing to say, but outright and overt evangelists are few and far between (I just happened to read your post at http://deluxeforums.fuckwarezone.com.sg/94553533-post3.html). So I'm just curious: which church do u go to?

As a matter of comparison, SPH sister service: AsiaOne forum rules says:
- "Offensive messages to do with race and/or religion will not be tolerated." http://forums.asiaone.com/announcement.php?f=66
- the discussion of religion in a mature and peaceable way is very much kosher.

Singapore is geographically located between 2 majority monotheistic (Abrahamic) religious countries (Indonesia and Malaysia to the south and north respectively) and yet some people in this forum seem allergic to religion and want to pretend that it doesn't exist: which is BTW, in contradiction to the Singapore constitution which gives everyone the right to advance one's religion, provide one does not cause religious offence to other people.

Could the kind forum member 'jf' please explain how I have misused HWZ forums to 'outright/ overtly' evengelise since I believe that the study of comparative religion is very important if at least to understand (and interact with) the citizens of our neighbouring countries better or why I have to declare to him exactly which church I go to???!!!

It is sad that after having welcomed multireligious ASEAN to the 28th SEA games on our shore, such theophobic conduct should return to damage the goodwill. HWZ forums shouldn't morph into an aethist paradise to maliciously bash anyone claiming to profess any mainstream religion in Singapore.

Inter-religious understanding/ progress in Singapore CANNOT be advanced by theophobic bias and taunts against religious profession/ thought or the censorship of everything with the slightest religious element involved.

Even in every court of law in Singapore, bibles are provided to Christians to swear their affidavits by; the benefits of mature/ well considered religion to society in Singapore remains a well accepted fact.

Please convince me that HWZ invites serious academic discussion and is not just a breeding ground for theophobia, gossip, rumour baiting / hearsay.

Thanks for investigating the said user's prejudice/ theophobia in this regard.

Yours sincerely,
Cherry6.

 

[bic_cherry]

My response to one member's question (same thread):

And you point being ? Please dont jjww make so much noise over such small matter la.

My point is that HWZ should not just allow, but also encourage interactions not least discussions of a religious nature so that knowledge pertaining to religion can developed into a mature, harmonious and stable resource: which will naturally happen with intimate discussion, whilst not causing offence to others, while everyone maintains a tolerant disposition: NOT to be OVERSENSITIVE or theophobic at everything pertaining to religion discussion or talk.

It seems to me like the said person 'jf' also has a 'moderator' badge which is even more shocking for the degree of theophobia/ paranoia he harbours.

If religious/ racial integration wasn't important, then why did LKY mandate different race singaporeans in public housing to mingle together in army and in school, obviously, LKY's far sighted efforts have been wasted on theophobia people the likes of 'jf' who are not shy to display their intolerance at any discussion broaching on religion even if it is just a passing comment.

I hope that 'jf' whom I don't recall having had any interaction with prior isn't a real moderator in HWZ forums because his private message to me seems to betray his intolerance of Singapore's multi-religious beginnings and is likely to bring the reputation of HWZ forums down.

Singapore NEEDS open discussion about religion for the population to mature just as 'our Singapore conversation' help narrow the gap of understanding between people and the leadership. If religious concerns are swept under the carpet, it can only blow up later on in terms of terrorism and extremism/ misunderstandings/ suspicions between the followers of various religious schools of thought, none of which would happen if forums like HWZ had mature and non-theophobic moderators to begin with.

I believe that Temesek holdings is the major share holder of SPH and so HWZ thus owes a duty to all Singaporean's to shape a mature, knowledgeable and insightful population. The promotion of tunnel-vision, intollerent/ navel gazing agenda through the theophobic actions of moderators is unproductive in this regard. HWZ should be more careful in its selection of moderators or issue clearer guidelines to them because sweeping all discussions pertaining to religion into silos/ under the carpet cannot possibly be in the best interest of a maturing, cosmopolitan Singapore.

 

[bic_cherry]

For safe keeping here in case a rogue moderator deletes my post there:

Ts, you also need to question why it seems only Abrahmic religions are targeted here. :X

Because of the insecurity felt by followers of two certain East Asian religions?

I prefer not to speculate if certain religions are selectively being targeted at this point, suffice to say that HWZ forums, if it is to be accepted as a serious discussion platform (esp current affairs lounge) should not be moderated by moderators with a theophobic bent. A majority of Singaporean's profess to be religious so the attempt to sanitise HWZ forums of religion is disingenuous if not a disammenity (if not a travesty) to society in itself.

There is much social good in the discussion and comparison between religions to be earned but this benifit seems lost on the administrators of HWZ forum in their remit to moderators (volunteer or otherwise) to let their own personal biases get the better of them. In this regard, the forum rules of HWZ will need re-examination if it is to be a credible national discussion platform rather than a flippant forum site serving business/ sectarian interest denying the existence of religion (which is an extremist 'religious' (i.e. aethistic) position in itself) or just trying to out do other forums in terms of threads/ post counts at the lowest possible minteinence costs (hire biased, illiterate moderators/ bots to moderate forum).

HWZ forums thus has to clarify its rules and regulations to not disallow all discussion of matters religious or make religion a crime but to allow all relevant discussion EXCEPT where malice is obvious. As for evangelism, I agree that 'current affairs' section isn't a suitable platform and categorically deny any intent at evengilism in the post concerned, even if it originated in another forum site.

Moderators should also be limited to moderating only certain forums in which they profess special knowledge / experience and I believe that current affairs lounge needs moderators of special temperament (BTW, I believe that 'kiwi' has thus far done a good (even-handed) job): forum sections should thus state clearly exactly whom the designated moderators are, if not a certain hirechy of authority, so that in protest of an infraction/ deletion, a user could appeal to the next level of authority. The lack of clarity of moderator areas of control allows rogue/ random/ trigger - happy moderators to exceed their authority to bully forum users to advance their own selfish self-interest (by fact that they possess some 'moderator' powers/ badge (by omission to make clear that a post/ message had been sent in their own personal capacity (not moderator role)).