• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Rony Tan vs the 3 boys arrested for racism - Double standards

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Both are unacceptable behaviour but Rony Tan did more damage to many Singaporeans and the way that it was done is worse. I am sure the 3 boys would have preferred a chat with ISD rather than being arrested. Is this inconsistent behaviour or that the 3 boys are nobody in this country. As far as I am concerned Rony should have been arrested like the 3 boys and given both barrels.

Maybe because the 3 boys are from Kampong HDB while Rony is staying in bungalow and therefore a chat is sufficient.


The authorities need to explain. The laws must apply to all Singaporeans fairly.
 

lockeliberal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Dear Scroobal

The law as it is currently written is to wide and encompassing covering anything from three boys on facebook to insensitive evangelical idiots like Dorothy. Some of the submissions to the "internet censorship" forum suggested an intermediate step a form of community inspired moderation, where a stupid remark need not necessarily automatically lee to a police investigated offence.



Locke
 

SneeringTree

Alfrescian
Loyal
Both are unacceptable behaviour but Rony Tan did more damage to many Singaporeans and the way that it was done is worse. I am sure the 3 boys would have preferred a chat with ISD rather than being arrested. Is this inconsistent behaviour or that the 3 boys are nobody in this country. As far as I am concerned Rony should have been arrested like the 3 boys and given both barrels.

Maybe because the 3 boys are from Kampong HDB while Rony is staying in bungalow and therefore a chat is sufficient.


The authorities need to explain. The laws must apply to all Singaporeans fairly.

I can only think of three possible reasons:

1) Rony is well-connected
2) Fear of agitating the Christian bloc (as though these people are all so dumb as to support Rony and would base their vote on this one incident).
3) ISD/Government is waiting to see how the ground reacts to such an (non)action. In other words, to see how extreme both sides are (i.e. those supporting" and those against Rony).
 

SneeringTree

Alfrescian
Loyal
Dear Scroobal

The law as it is currently written is to wide and encompassing covering anything from three boys on facebook to insensitive evangelical idiots like Dorothy. Some of the submissions to the "internet censorship" forum suggested an intermediate step a form of community inspired moderation, where a stupid remark need not necessarily automatically lee to a police investigated offence.



Locke

It still begs the question on what grounds does the ISD decide that no further action is needed on Rony?
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
I looked at it and the many laws that cover these sort of events. Rony should have certainly been charged. I can only think that PAP decided that their votes count. Its despicable. I hope MPs in parliament raise this for debate just like GCT did in regard to Nassim Hill - Lee Family - HPL affair.
Its the job of ISD to monitor subversive behaviour and deviant religious teachings across all religions. But this was done in broad daylight and it falls squarely in the arms of the Police Force and AG Chambers.

Why bother to charge, prosecute the overzealous couple but not this chap. His damage was much worse, many times over.

It reeks of poor judgement.



I can only think of three possible reasons:

1) Rony is well-connected
2) Fear of agitating the Christian bloc (as though these people are all so dumb as to support Rony and would base their vote on this one incident).
3) ISD/Government is waiting to see how the ground reacts to such an (non)action. In other words, to see how extreme both sides are (i.e. those supporting" and those against Rony).
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
I would not worry about the breath of the law in this instance. Its obvious that the Pastor's act was worse than 3 boys and the overzealous couple who went to jail. What will it take for this Pastor to be charged. That video was officially released to the general public.

The President of Singapore not only has a role in looking after the financial assets of the country but he is the official custodian of race and religious rights and its protection. I wonder if he acts appropriately. What the hell are members of the Presidential Council for Religious Harmony doing.


Restraining orders against officials or members of religious group or institution
8. —(1) The Minister may make a restraining order against any priest, monk, pastor, imam, elder, office-bearer or any other person who is in a position of authority in any religious group or institution or any member thereof for the purposes specified in subsection (2) where the Minister is satisfied that that person has committed or is attempting to commit any of the following acts:

(a) causing feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different religious groups;



Both are unacceptable behaviour but Rony Tan did more damage to many Singaporeans and the way that it was done is worse. I am sure the 3 boys would have preferred a chat with ISD rather than being arrested. Is this inconsistent behaviour or that the 3 boys are nobody in this country. As far as I am concerned Rony should have been arrested like the 3 boys and given both barrels.

Maybe because the 3 boys are from Kampong HDB while Rony is staying in bungalow and therefore a chat is sufficient.


The authorities need to explain. The laws must apply to all Singaporeans fairly.
 

cheekenpie

Alfrescian
Loyal
Both are unacceptable behaviour but Rony Tan did more damage to many Singaporeans and the way that it was done is worse. I am sure the 3 boys would have preferred a chat with ISD rather than being arrested. Is this inconsistent behaviour or that the 3 boys are nobody in this country. As far as I am concerned Rony should have been arrested like the 3 boys and given both barrels.

Maybe because the 3 boys are from Kampong HDB while Rony is staying in bungalow and therefore a chat is sufficient.


The authorities need to explain. The laws must apply to all Singaporeans fairly.

NO NO NO... you misunderstand

Yes its double standards. Police no standard (arrest small boy) and ISD got standard (make such a bigot apologize like a virgin caught by her father sleeping with the bangla gardener).
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
I am so mad about this case. The more I look at it, the existing laws, the past practices and the case of the boys and the couple and then this pastor, the the inconsistency is apparent.

I have no doubt that the couple and the boys were handled or are being handled appropriately. But not this case. I am aware that ISD has a role and responsibility but why have laws for race, religion, why give the President custodian roles for race and religion. Why bother to go through the trouble of creating a Council for Religious Harmony when a chat at the old Orchard Rd Police Station by ISD is all that is needed.

It still begs the question on what grounds does the ISD decide that no further action is needed on Rony?
 

cheekenpie

Alfrescian
Loyal
I am so mad about this case. The more I look at it, the existing laws, the past practices and the case of the boys and the couple and then this pastor, the the inconsistency is apparent.

I have no doubt that the couple and the boys were handled or are being handled appropriately. But not this case. I am aware that ISD has a role and responsibility but why have laws for race, religion, why give the President custodian roles for race and religion. Why bother to go through the trouble of creating a Council for Religious Harmony when a chat at the old Orchard Rd Police Station by ISD is all that is needed.

Cannot dont have law one. Otherwise they will set up religious police like Malaysia!
 

HellAngel

Alfrescian
Loyal
scroobal,

To make comparison now would be inconclusive as the 3 boys' case as it has not been concluded yet. If you look at it, the 3 boys and the couple were toying with racial and religious issues in an open domain. Whereas, Rony had intended his silly drama show to a close group of his followers. If Rony had made his comments in an open domain like the others. I'm sure the police would be the one handling his case.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
It was in open domain until ISD called him. Its was an official release by his church. It created thousand of posts in local forums. In comparison, the couple that went to jail impacted a few.


scroobal,

To make comparison now would be inconclusive as the 3 boys' case as it has not been concluded yet. If you look at it, the 3 boys and the couple were toying with racial and religious issues in an open domain. Whereas, Rony had intended his silly drama show to a close group of his followers. If Rony had made his comments in an open domain like the others. I'm sure the police would be the one handling his case.
 

cheekenpie

Alfrescian
Loyal
so you saying islamic laws are the worse kinds? :biggrin:

Aiyoh danger lah this kind of comment :smile:

Im saying the policing of religion is wrong cos interpretation is so varied. If one pastor suddenly say you cannot touch your wife when she is menstruating cos she is dirty... then AWARE will kpkb!

Even in religion got diversity. Rainbow of opinion.
 

cheekenpie

Alfrescian
Loyal
It was in open domain until ISD called him. Its was an official release by his church. It created thousand of posts in local forums. In comparison, the couple that went to jail impacted a few.

That couple harass people leh.... rony only do standup comedy in church.
 

HellAngel

Alfrescian
Loyal
The act was done in a private event, whereas the rest were done openly.

It is like if you were to make jokes about religious issues with your friends in your house and then one of the idiot recorded it and posted it on Youtube as a joke because he found it so funny. Get it?


It was in open domain until ISD called him. Its was an official release by his church. It created thousand of posts in local forums. In comparison, the couple that went to jail impacted a few.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Which part you can't comprehend - video officially posted by the church on their website for public release. The youtube version was also loaded by the church.

The act was done in a private event, whereas the rest were done openly.

It is like if you were to make jokes about religious issues with your friends in your house and then one of the idiot recorded it and posted it on Youtube as a joke because he found it so funny. Get it?
 

SneeringTree

Alfrescian
Loyal
The act was done in a private event, whereas the rest were done openly.

It is like if you were to make jokes about religious issues with your friends in your house and then one of the idiot recorded it and posted it on Youtube as a joke because he found it so funny. Get it?

EVEN if it is meant to be a private utterance, it is done in a place of worship to thousands of people. That alone is troubling and seditious enough. Ever wonder how normal people become religious nutcases? By listening to indoctrination like this day in and day out.

And by the way, as Scroobal has indicated, the church totally intended to broadcast the video in the public domain.
 
Top