Sinkie Taoists offended by ceremonial robes used on catwalk

[Rogue Trader]

Religion kenna mocked? Not happy? Call police lah!

Taoist ceremonial robes used in catwalk: Devotees riled

Shin Min Daily News - 5 mins ago

<cite style="display: block; font-style: normal; font-size: 10px; margin-top: 4px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 4px; margin-left: 0px; ">The model clad in Taoist ceremonial robes and holding a Ru Yi, a sacred artifact. (Pic / Internet)</cite>
Local Taoists are unhappy that religious artifacts were used in a catwalk segment at a recent event.

This comes barely a week after the 'Escape chapel party', which cancelled after it offended Catholics. See the story here.

The latest such incident involved a model strutting down the catwalk clad in Taoist robes while holding a religious artifact.

The catwalk segment was staged as part of an event by the Floral Designers Society Singapore on 30 March, at Furama RiverFront Hotel.

The model donned different kinds of flora during the show, with one donning a red Taoist robe and holding a 'Ru Yi'.

This model was wearing floral hair accessories, theatrical make up and held a pose with her arms spread to both sides during her walk.

The Taoist robe used during the show consisted of elaborate weavings and is only allowed to be worn by high-ranking Taoist priests during major religious functions.

The 'Ru Yi' is considered a sacred Taoist artifact and is not to be used callously.

Many Taoists have since expressed offence with the act after a photo of the model was posted on the internet.

Taoist Federation has received a number of complaints about the incident and has decided to seek help from the authorities.

The organisation is also considering whether to seek intervention from the police.

Its head, Chen Tian, felt that the act was very disrespectful to Taoism, especially after the furore over the 'Escape chapel party'.

Mr Chen feels that people still lack sensitivity towards religion.

A spokesperson from the Floral Designers Society Singapore explained that the robe was brought by a designer who was in charge of dressing up the models.

The society is unaware that the robe is used for religious purposes and wishes to extend sincere apologies to those offended as a result of any misunderstanding caused by its usage.


Source: Shin Min Daily News, 9 April 2012.

 

[Jah_rastafar_I]

In singapore the only religion that cannot be offended is islam. Other than that it's ok for the rest.

 

[Rogue Trader]

In singapore the only religion that cannot be offended is islam. Other than that it's ok for the rest.

Not only singapore.. rest of the world as well. they are people with no sense of humour.

 

[Scrooball (clone)]

Why no one call polis?

 

[looneytan]

Why no one call polis?

They're scared of Nicole's lum par

 

[drifter]

thats why i always said never give respect to religion ...

respecting religion, religious beliefs, and religious believers does not and cannot include treating them with kid gloves. if believers want respect, then they must be treated as adults who are responsible and culpable for what they assert , for better and for worse. this means that their claims should be treated seriously with substantive responses and critiques, if criticism is warranted. if believers are willing to present their position in a rational, coherent manner, then they deserve a rational and coherent response , including critical responses........ if they are unwilling or unable to present their views in a rational and coherent manner, then they should anticipate being dismissed with little afterthought.

 

[drifter]

an increasing source of conflict in the world today is centered around religious believers’ demands for respect. muslims demand “respect” that would forbid criticism, satire, or mocking of their religion. Christians demand “respect” that would amount to something very similar. nonbelievers are caught in a bind when it’s not clear what “respect” is supposed to entail and how it is supposed to be achieved. if respect is so important to believers, they need to be clear about what they want.
sometimes, a person who wants respect is simply asking for tolerance. the minimal definition of tolerance is a state where one has the power to punish, restrict, or make something difficult but consciously chooses not to. i may tolerate the barking of a dog even if i have the ability to stop it. when it comes to non-violent, consensual behavior, religious believers’ demand for tolerance is usually reasonable and should be granted. It’s rare, though, that this is all that is desired.
Going Beyond Tolerance?
respect and tolerance are not synonyms; tolerance is a very minimalist attitude whereas respect involves something more active and positive. you can think very negatively about something you tolerate, but there is something contradictory about thinking very negatively about the exact same thing you are also respecting. thus, at the very least, respect requires that one have have positive thoughts, impressions, or emotions when it comes to the religion in question. this isn’t always reasonable.

there seems to be a popular impression that beliefs deserve automatic respect, and therefore that religious beliefs should be respected. why? should we respect racism or Nazism? of course not. beliefs don’t merit automatic respect because some beliefs are immoral, evil, or just plain stupid. beliefs may be able to earn a person’s respect, but it’s an abdication of moral and intellectual responsibility to automatically accord the same respect to all beliefs.
just because a belief is immoral or stupid doesn’t mean that there is no right to believe it. belief may be unwise or irrational, but a right to belief must cover such beliefs if its to have any meaning at all. therefore, a person’s right to believe things and to hold their religious beliefs must be respected. having a right to a belief, however, is not the same as having a right to not hear criticism of that belief. the right to criticize has the same basis as the right to believe.

The most significant problem with believers’ demands for respect for their religions and/or religious beliefs is that “respect” too often amounts to “deference.” Deferring to religion or religious beliefs means according them a privileged status — something understandable for believers, but not something which can be demanded from nonbelievers. Religious beliefs merit no more deference than any other claims and religions do not merit deference from nonbelievers.

The increasingly raucous demands from religious believers that their religions be accorded more “respect” in the public square and from non-adherents is a sign that something very serious is going on — but what, exactly? believers apparently feel that they are being slighted and insulted in a significant manner, but is this true, or is it instead a case of mutual misunderstanding? it may be that both are occurring at various times, but we won’t get to the root of the problem without being clear about our terminology , and this means that religious believers must make it clear what sort of “respect” they are asking for.
in many instances, we will find that religious believers are not asking for something appropriate , they are asking for deference, positive thoughts, and privileges for themselves, their beliefs, and their religions. rarely, if ever, are such things justified. in other instances, we may find that they aren’t being accorded the basic tolerance and respect which they deserve as human beings, and they are justified in speaking out.

 

[Clone]

曲则全 枉则直.

I don't see what the fuss is about.

 

[Devil Within]

thats why i always said never give respect to religion ...

respecting religion, religious beliefs, and religious believers does not and cannot include treating them with kid gloves. if believers want respect, then they must be treated as adults who are responsible and culpable for what they assert , for better and for worse. this means that their claims should be treated seriously with substantive responses and critiques, if criticism is warranted. if believers are willing to present their position in a rational, coherent manner, then they deserve a rational and coherent response , including critical responses........ if they are unwilling or unable to present their views in a rational and coherent manner, then they should anticipate being dismissed with little afterthought.

It's about time "respect for religion" should be thrown into the rubbish bins where it belongs! Respect for mentally challenged idiots' believes is laughable.

I'll give religious bigots the same respect as I give those who believe that Harry Portter is a real historical person!

 

[Jah_rastafar_I]

It's about time "respect for religion" should be thrown into the rubbish bins where it belongs! Respect for mentally challenged idiots' believes is laughable.

I'll give religious bigots the same respect as I give those who believe that Harry Portter is a real historical person!

only 1 religion is super anal about respect.

 

[Rogue Trader]

LOL! Really call mata over this...!

Police reports filed over Taoist robe in fashion show

AsiaOne
Thursday, Apr 12, 2012

Two Taoists filed police reports over the use of a Taoist priest's sacred robe in a fashion show.

The two men - a businessman and a Taoist priest - said they were offended when they saw the photo of the robe being used at the fashion show organised by the Floral Designers Society Singapore (FDSS) last month, reported The Straits Times.

Netizens who saw the photo uploaded onto the society's Facebook page had reported the photo to the Taoist Federation.

Federation chief Tan Thiam Lye had earlier told devotees to refrain from making police reports until after his meeting with the FDSS.

Leaders of the FDSS apologised to the Taoist community after the meeting with Mr Tan on Wednesday.

FDSS president Christopher Lim told The Straits Times they were not aware of the religious significance of the robe. He added that the society would be more cautious about the use of costumes during future events.
The designer behind the outfit, who is also a Taoist priest, could not be reached for comment.


[email][email protected][/EMAIL]