I’ve never given much thought to the burqa, or the fascination which religious fundamentalists and human rights groups have with it, dismissing the views at both extremes for most part as an idiosyncrasy of culture and / or faith.  Until yesterday, when I watched CNN’s documentary (yes, CNN actually produces documentaries) - "Lifting the Veil" - on the life of Afghan women, post-9/11.

What got me was how the person - a woman - whose face is hidden under a veil appears as nothing more than a formless piece of cloth swaying in the wind.  You can scold her, mock her, beat her, maim her or even rape her, but see none of her tears or her scars, her sad eyes, downturned mouth and face wrinkled in pain.  She would not appear human to you; you would not be able to connect with her pain.  You would have no reason to stop abusing what you cannot see is human.  You would see only a piece of cloth, telly tubby-like, clumsily dancing to avoid the physical abuse of her husband who beats her, or wraith-like, floating from one corner of your visual field, to another.

I can see why human rights groups condemn the burqa as a symbol of oppression.  I cannot disagree.

Photograph : Copyright © Phil Sparrow

It’s the birthday time of the year for our family.  More celebrations coming up !

In my job, I often come across the "elites" of Singapore society.  The cream of Singapore society - those who are wealthiest, brightest or from the most influential families - gravitates towards the profession whose work I find myself connected with as part of my job.  These people are rich, accomplished, well-connected, admired, sometimes reputedly arrogant, and often feared.  It is interesting to see how a phone call from one of them can send ripples through the organisation.

The most recent case was a person who earned in half a year what I am not certain I would earn even if I worked for 250 years.  Googling his name, I find not unexpectedly accolade upon accolade heaped on him for being a visionary and volunteer, trailblazer and philanthropist.  (Which is a little at odds - an understatement - with the criticism I have also heard levelled against him).

God has not given me similar ability or drive, or caused me to be born into similar wealth.  Still sometimes I speculate - if I had that much talent or money, would I be just be another pretty face gracing the Tatler ?  Or would I work towards something more enduring ?

I don’t know, and dare not speculate that I would live any differently.  The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure.  Who can understand it ?

Turning to the Scriptures, I am reminded of what Jesus thinks of all these.

Firstly, Jesus would prefer that Christians identify with the poor and the have-nots.  For this reason, the King of kings was born into a humble family that could afford no more than two small doves for the traditional sacrifice at the temple (Luke 2:24), instead of the royal family ruling at that time.

Secondly, wealth can pose a formidable obstacle to a more complete faith.  The rich young man whom  Jesus encouraged in Mark 10 to give his wealth to charity, in order complete the "one thing" that he lacked in his faith, could not bear to do so and walked away.

Thirdly, the poor person who sacrifices the little which he has, will be given special honour exceeding that given to a rich person who gives out of his abundance.  Mark 12 : 41 - 44 records the account of the poor widow’s offering in honour of such sacrifice.

Finally, there is a transience to human wealth and talent, and our confidence should therefore not be placed on these.  James reminds us, very graphically, that "the sun rises with scorching heat and withers the plant; its blossom falls and its beauty is destroyed.  In the same way, the rich man will fade away while he goes about his business" (1 : 11).

On Tomorrow.sg, Yawning Bread blasts the Church of Our Saviour for warning against a "gay agenda", while commentors ask if there is a "Christian agenda".

To be brutally honest, both parties obviously have agendas - a conservative Christian one at one end, and a homosexual one at the other.  Is there a need for anyone to be feel shocked or offended (or pretend to be) ?

The conservative Christian agenda is, rightly or wrongly, to promote its conservative values, which unfortunately encroaches on whatever little space that gays have in society.

The homosexual agenda is to create a bigger space in society for homosexuals to lead the type of life which they wish to lead, also unfortunately at the expense of the values which conservative Christians embrace.

As the values of conservative Christianity and the practice of homosexuality are mutually exclusive, is it any surprise that conservative Christians and homosexuals are at odds with one another ?  And, in order for the views of one to trump the other, isn’t it expected that the people leading both groups would get more organised over time ? 

Christianity initially had the advantage of being more organised because it had the institution of the church through which it could broadcast its views.  Pro-gay groups, on the other hand, have only more recently turned to the media to air their views.  Hence the proliferation of websites such as yawning bread, fridae, trevvy, etc. and, even more subtly, homosexual themes in mainstream TV and movies (eg. Veronica’s Closet, Will & Grace, Brokeback Mountain).

We place blinkers over our eyes when we ignore the fact that both conservative Christian and pro-gay groups have agendas which they are advancing through increasingly organised and sophisticated means.  By doing so, we allow ourselves to be subtly influenced (if not brainwashed) into thinking that a particular idea or value which is being projected through institutions (including the media) is right or at least not wrong, without giving ourselves the benefit of thinking carefully through the issues. 

More than ever, the man is the street needs to exercise discernment as to what he sees and hears.

——- Postscript ——-

While I have tried to be as neutral as possible in the above post, I have to concede that I am hard pressed to find that the Bible is supportive of non-celibate homosexual relationships.  Therefore, I have to respectfully disagree with scholars who argue otherwise.  This, of course, does not change my view that God calls all Christians to identify with the struggles which gays go through, and love them as He would.

So it’s not going to be Jess or Jade, but Josh or Jake.