When I Was Young

This news is raising doubts on the veracity of feng shui ‘masters’… or is anything shrouded in mystery and doubtfulness bound to be uncovered on its appointed day of reckoning?

Read the story here.

Time is GMT + 8 hours

Posted: 30-May-2009 06:24 hrs

Wikipedia has blocked the Church of Scientology from editing entries at the communally-crafted online encyclopedia due to an unrelenting battle over the group's image.

Wikipedia has blocked the Church of Scientology from editing entries at the communally-crafted online encyclopedia due to an unrelenting battle over the group's image.

A "longstanding struggle" between admirers of Scientology and critics of the group prompted Wikipedia on Thursday to bar online edits from computer addresses "owned or operated by the Church of Scientology and its associates."

An array of editors believed to have taken sides in a Scientology public-image war at Wikipedia have also been barred from tinkering with topics related to the church.

"Each side wishes the articles within this topic to reflect their point of view and have resorted to battlefield editing tactics," senior Wikipedia editors said in arbitration committee findings backing the decision.

"The worst casualties have been biographies of living people, where attempts have been repeatedly made to slant the article either towards or against the subject, depending on the point of view of the contributing editor."

A church spokeswoman downplayed the development, saying the Wikipedia arbitration committee is part of a routine process for handling conflicts at the website.

"Do Scientologists care what has been posted on Wikipedia? Of course," said Karin Pouw. "Some of it has been very hateful and erroneous. We hope all this will result in more accurate and useful articles on Wikipedia." — AFP

From TODAYOnline.com; see the source article here.

May 26, 2009 -- Updated 1058 GMT (1858 HKT)

The Church of Scientology's bookshop in Paris is part of the case being heard in France.

PARIS, France (CNN) -- The Church of Scientology went on trial this week in France, accused of fraud in a case that sheds light on the group.

If found guilty, the church could be forced to shut down in France, though appeals could see the case continue for years.

"This is a process in heresy," Daniele Gounord, the spokeswoman for Scientology in France, told reporters.

The two plaintiffs, both women, say they were defrauded by the organization, which is classified as a sect in France.

Their complaints focus on the use of a device that Scientologists say measures spiritual well-being. Members use the electropsychometer, or E-Meter, to "locate areas of spiritual duress or travail so they can be addressed and handled," according to Scientology's Web site.

The women say that, after using the device, they were encouraged to pay for vitamins and books. They say that amounted to fraud.

The first plaintiff, Aude-Claire Malton, is a housekeeper at a Paris hotel who says she spent about €21,000 ($29,000) in "sauna therapy" and classes to "heal the mind," according to French media.

Her fellow plaintiff is Nelly Reziga, who has told French media that her boss fired her because she refused to attend classes at the Scientology church.

Reziga's boss, Max Barbault, was originally a defendant but has died, according to French media.

Six Scientology members are now on trial, along with two corporate entities -- the church and the bookshop it runs in Paris.

If found guilty, the Scientology members would face a maximum of 10 years in prison and fines of as much as €10 million ($13.9 million) each.

The church and the bookshop could be liable for as much as €5 million ($6.95 million) in fines and could be forced to shut down if found guilty.

The trial began Monday and is scheduled to last until June 17. The defendants are expected to appeal if found guilty.

From CNN.com; see the source article here.

SEX EDUCATION

Letter from Joseph Wong

DUE to the Aware saga, the topic of homosexuality has gotten the public's attention.

Having read the views of self-declared "conservative" parents who expressed concern about the openness with which this topic is being discussed — especially in schools — I think these parents need to take a step back and reconsider the big picture.

First of all, stopping a child from attending a talk on homosexuality does not protect the child.

The fact remains that homosexuality exists, whether or not you prevent your children from learning about it through sanctioned talks and discussions.

In fact, you should be thankful that your children are learning about it from experienced professionals and not from misinformed sources.

Secondly, one must learn to consider the religious views on homosexuality and understand why the stand some people take can be so uncompromising.

Thirdly, education is key. Whether this lifestyle is regarded as a choice or a condition, homosexuality is something we cannot deny as a society.

The more we understand it, the better equipped we are to make the decision that conforms to our beliefs and principles without treating the topic as taboo.

From TODAY, Voices – Wednesday, 06-May-2009

AWARE SAGA

Letter From Sabina-Leah Fernandez

I REFER to 'What Women Really Want' (May 2). While it is true that we have the recession and Influenza A (H1N1) outbreak to worry about, I hope the 2,000 people who showed up at last Saturday's Aware's EGM, queueing for two to three hours and sitting in a room for several more, are testament to the fact that this issue matters to Singaporean men and women.

While the debate has centred on homosexuality, the crux of what we was discussed on Saturday by men and women of every race, religion and sexual orientation was this: There is a place for religion and a place for secularism, and while those two spaces can live harmoniously side by side, they must be kept separate. It is not acceptable for anyone of any religious affiliation to enforce their beliefs on others, particularly in a secular environment.

If the new exco had not been voted out, if 1,000 people had not shouted and screamed to have ex-president Josie Lau's executive committee removed, it would have set an unhealthy precedent to others with strong opinions. It would have sent the message that it is okay to steamroll into any organisation and enforce your personal beliefs.

Singaporeans standing up for what they believe in is a win for civil society, for Non-Governmental Organisations, for keeping secular organisations secular and religious organisations, religious.

Most of all, it shows people care enough to fight for what they believe is right. And this beats an apathetic I'm-too-busy-worrying-about-my-bottom-line society any day.

The implications of the Aware issue concerned not only women, but men too. It encouraged mature, professional open-minded engagement between various groups of differing opinions.

From TODAY, Voices – Tuesday, 05-May-2009