Is there a militant gay movement in Aware?

When the Ministry of Education launched the Sexuality Education Programme, a colleague and I attended a seminar that Aware had organised for teachers who were teaching a new subject. We signed up thinking that Aware was providing help such as media resources to teachers who were going to teach a subject which all along was either taught by parents or science teachers. One hour into the seminar, we realised that we had been fooled by the information on the flyers which had been sent to the school inviting teachers to attend the seminar.

Speaker after speaker spoke about his or her experiences as a homosexual. Yes, there were booths put up by organisations that presented the majority view but they were overwhelmed by the amount of maetrial on homosexuality. We came away feeling that Aware had not lived up to their promises as laid out in the promotional flyer. On hindsight, I felt Aware had lacked transparency in their motives for the seminar.

The controversy surrounding the old and former new guard had raised some questions. Did the women challenge the old guard at the AGM because their views about the direction Aware had taken in the past ten years been ignored by the old guard?

Did the journalists stir up public sentiments against the "new guard" by focussing on the race and religion of the "new guard" because they had an axe to grind themselves? The journalists kept harping on the "new guard's" lack of transparency but lacked transparency themselves.

NMP Siew Kum Hong claimed he had no hard feelings against the former "new guard". However, if you were to read closely what he had said against the women in his interview with the press, you would realise that this man is not honest and transparent about his views. Should a man apparently lacking transparency and integrity be an NMP? I'm a taxpayer. Why should my taxes support such a lack of charater?

Were schools vigilant and informed about the speakers engaged to talk to the students? Did the schools inform the parents about outsourcing the teaching of a very important subject?

DPM Wong Kan Seng says it is important to keep religion and politics separate. Are the views about the teaching of sexuality education driven by any particular religion? Aren't all the major religions in Singapore concerned about how our impressionable young people are being influenced by the views of a small but increaingly strident minority who are inspired by militant gay rights groups in the west? Did the hate mail that some members of the former new guard receive come from a similar gay rights group in Singapore?
http://www.informz.net/pfm/archives/archive_779848.html

Look at what happened to Miss California when she gave an honest answer to a question about her views on same sex marriage. They plan to strip her of her title.

Will there come a day when our religious freedom and our jobs are threatened by homosexuals in positions of power? Look at what's happening in the USA.

Can we say "Live, and let live" anymore?