Local Animals Worried Fanatics Will Take Over SPCA


This is so funny it’s not even cute when you think about the foundation it is built on, because there may just come a day this comes to pass, ala the AWARE saga.

Fanaticism and the self-righteous drive to make everybody convert or perish is not something new to me. I have passing awareness of the NARasitic plague inflicting the US. But I would never have thought it would be happening on any level worth worrying in staid old Singapore. How wrong I am.

Read this to the end, including the comments (which have very informative links, circulated correspondences, plus thoughts by proponents on both sides): The AWARE steeplejackers and their deep connections to Joel’s Army and American dominionists

A partial steeplejacked church checklist, which apparently started in the 1940s:

  • Features overtly anti-gay.homphobic stance/doctrine
  • Promotes publications by NAR authors/leaders
  • Forbids ancestral worship, traditions – collectively “generational curses”
  • Intercessory prayers
  • Promotes and encourages takeover of societal pinions like Government, Arts, Culture
  • Association or links in any way with Focus on the Family

Nobody’s safe from the insanity. Since I became aware of FotF (thanks to Josie Lau), I am highly disturbed that the TODAY tabloid has been featuring a column by Focus on the Family in its Voices section for ever. Even worse, FotF is actually a registered non-profit organisation in Singapore, apparently claiming itself non-religious. How did this ever come to pass?

For additional supporting references:

Note: I know, I know, I said the trilogy was the end of the affair but I just had to get this off my chest. So while I may come back to revise and update this, with this post the minionly focus on human affairs is closed. But while we attend to some real-life issues and try to juggle them with the kitty services, please bear with our slackerly rate of REAL updates.


4 responses to “Local Animals Worried Fanatics Will Take Over SPCA

  1. Two questions to those who are for, and to those who are against – Dana Lam AWARE’s insistence that there is nothing wrong in teaching school students that homosexualism is “neutral”.

    That is, there is nothing negative in same-sex marriages, in same-sex sex acts in same-sex parenting – and, in the “joy” and the “pleasure” of jerking the male human’s penis in and out of the rectums and faeces-stuffed large intestines of male or female human, before ejaculating into them.

    The two questions:

    1. Which of the above two factions will be highly more likely to support the view that any “consensual gentle” sex act, between any “consenting” human and any “consenting” animal – is a “neutral” act of love making and bonding, between the “consenting” human and the “consenting” animal?

    2. Which of the above two factions will be highly more likely to condemn any “consensual gentle” sex act, between any “consenting” human and any “consenting” animal – to be a perversion; and a most vile assault against human decency and morality, and animal?

  2. With thanks to trailnuts’ below Mon, 4th May 2009 9:09 pm post in Wayang Party’s “BREAKING: Leaked emails from COOS members showed that AWARE take-over was pre-planned in advance!!”

    “Turns out Shawn Tay himself claims to be an ‘ex-gay’.. umm…. take a look here..



    Yah. Interesting.

  3. animals cannot consent to sex with a human. therefore, all your wild fantasies are irrelevant.

  4. anonymous,
    LOL that’s the whole truth of it all right!

    Putting aside the fact that you are borderline spamming all and sundry in your quest to anchor the christian right aka fundie bigotry against AWARE and education, your comments demonstrate extremism, and your follow-up questions is a very loaded survey. Inspired by what Karl Rove might have used in running his George W. Bush presidential campaigns?

    I got to hand it to you for couching your spam in terms you deem fit the theme of the blog you’re spamming. But putting aside the fact that it is all purely skewed “kindlyexplain” speculation, it doesn’t wash at all, just as anonymous has said.

    You are positing and trying to get people concerned with animal-welfare to stand on your so-called pro-family” side with your outrageous assumptions because you are assuming homosexuals are without ethics and moral and you can rile people concerned with animal-welfare by your crude wordplay.

    But hey, two can play speculative propositions. Kindly answer, substantiate and kindly explain your answers to 2 questions, kindlyexplain:
    – can you say FOR SURE homosexuals are more likely to support pedophilia and corruption?
    – can you say FOR SURE homosexuals are more likely to commit pedophilia and corruption?

    Apart from the high-handedness of the Josie Lau AWARE exco, cases like pastors molesting children and lining their pockets from church coffers show only that morality and ethics (or lack thereof) are color, creed, belief and even profession-blind, kindlyexplain.

    It will disturb your fundie psyche but awareness, education is better than the head-in-the-sand approach, and homosexuality does occur in nature.