Sedition! - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Charlatan · 06-10-2009, 11:14 PM

A local couple have had the honour of being the first to be charged under the sedition law (see story below). To my eyes this has a number of layers that we can discuss here.

On the one hand, we see all sorts of seditious talk happening in the US media, on boards, etc. Do you think that a law like this would work in the US (or the West in general)?

What do you think of the religion angle to this story? The charges were brought against a couple who were proselytizing others not of their (Christian) religion. There is a healthy balance and respect for the various religions here and they were deemed to be stirring the pot where it wasn't welcome. Do you think people who engage in these sorts of practises in the West should be held to account?

It looks like Chick Publications have made it out of the US and into other nations. How do you feel about this?

Quote:

se⋅di⋅tion
1. incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.
2. any action, esp. in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.
3. Archaic. rebellious disorder.

LINK

Quote:

Couple sentenced to 8 weeks jail for distributing seditious publications
By Teo Xuanwei, Channel NewsAsia

A couple, found guilty last month of distributing seditious or objectionable publications, has been sentenced to 8 weeks jail each.

50-year-old SingTel technical officer Ong Kian Cheong and his 46-year-old wife, UBS associate director Dorothy Chan Hien Leng, had been found guilty on four charges each of sedition.

For two decades, the couple spread their faith by handing out religious pamphlets, and then by dropping tracts into random HDB letterboxes.

From around 1998, however, the couple, both Protestant Christians, mailed them to addresses picked out from the telephone directory - those of Muslims included.

They "clearly did so with the intent of convincing the Muslim reader to convert to Christianity", a district court found.

For distributing and possessing seditious and objectionable publications, husband and wife were sentenced to eight weeks' jail each on Wednesday.

Such "intolerance, insensitivity and ignorance of delicate issues concerning race and religion" in Singapore "clearly warranted" a custodial sentence, said District Judge Roy Neighbour.

In the first full trial heard under the Sedition Act, the married couple of 24 years was found guilty on May 28 of the charges.

In 2007, Mr Irwan Ariffin, 32, and Madam Farhati Ahmad, 36, received an evangelistic comic-style booklet titled The Little Bride through the mail while Mr Isa Raffee, 35, was sent Who Is Allah?.

After a complaint to the police, an ambush was laid and the pair was arrested on Jan 30 last year.

Found in their condominium in Bukit Timah were 439 copies of 11 seditious tracts.

During the 11-day trial, it emerged that the SingTel technical officer and his wife, sent out about 20,000 publications in seven years.

Produced by an American firm called Chick Publications, the fundamentalist Protestant materials were "not only offensive for religious content but also have a tendency to promote feelings of ill-will or hostility between Muslims and Christians in Singapore", said Judge Neighbour.

By distributing tracts with "callous, denigratory, offensive and insensitive statements on religion with aspersions on race", the pair had committed "serious" offences that "have the capacity to undermine and erode the delicate fabric of racial and religious harmony in Singapore".

Common sense, he said, dictated that religious fervor to spread the faith, "in our society, must be constrained by sensitivity, tolerance and mutual respect for another's faith and religious beliefs".

Ong and Chan were expressionless when sentenced.

Their lawyer Selva K Naidu told the court that they had filed a notice of appeal against the conviction last Friday. He was awaiting instructions to proceed.

The pair faced two charges of distributing seditious publications each, and one each of distributing an objectionable publication and possession of seditious tracts.

They got four weeks' jail for each charge - two of them running consecutively and the remaining to run concurrently.

They could have been fined up to $5,000 and/or jailed for up to three years for each of the two charges.

The possession charge carries a maximum fine of $2,000 and/or jail for up to 18 months. Distributing objectionable publications is punishable with a fine not exceeding $5,000 and/or up to one year behind bars. - CNA /ls

I am pretty sure that law against sedition would be deemed un-constitutional in the US as it would come up against issues around Freedom of Speech. You should understand that Freedom of Speech is not exactly ingrained in the public law and discourse here. That said, I can see how this law could be abused and would not want to see it in use as a political tool (as it is in Malaysia for example).

Where I see the value in this is how it was used in this instance. Evangelists are a scourge and they do more rabble rousing than anything. I would rather religions be like the Jewish faith and have it ingrained that you don't spread the good news. Keep it to yourself.

As for Chick Publications... I think my previous paragraph tells you how I feel about Chick.

n0nsensical · 06-10-2009, 11:39 PM

Yeah this is what happens when you live in a police state.

Charlatan · 06-11-2009, 12:17 AM

That's a good one...

Marvelous Marv · 06-11-2009, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

A local couple have had the honour of being the first to be charged under the sedition law (see story below). To my eyes this has a number of layers that we can discuss here.

On the one hand, we see all sorts of seditious talk happening in the US media, on boards, etc. Do you think that a law like this would work in the US (or the West in general)?

What do you think of the religion angle to this story? The charges were brought against a couple who were proselytizing others not of their (Christian) religion. There is a healthy balance and respect for the various religions here and they were deemed to be stirring the pot where it wasn't welcome. Do you think people who engage in these sorts of practises in the West should be held to account?

It looks like Chick Publications have made it out of the US and into other nations. How do you feel about this?

LINK

I am pretty sure that law against sedition would be deemed un-constitutional in the US as it would come up against issues around Freedom of Speech. You should understand that Freedom of Speech is not exactly ingrained in the public law and discourse here. That said, I can see how this law could be abused and would not want to see it in use as a political tool (as it is in Malaysia for example).

Where I see the value in this is how it was used in this instance. Evangelists are a scourge and they do more rabble rousing than anything. I would rather religions be like the Jewish faith and have it ingrained that you don't spread the good news. Keep it to yourself.

As for Chick Publications... I think my previous paragraph tells you how I feel about Chick.

Yes, it's a great idea to lock up people with whom you disagree. Gays, for example. They are a scourge, and they do more rabble rousing than anything. i would rather people be like the military and have it ingrained that you don't ask and don't tell. Keep it to yourself.

mixedmedia · 06-11-2009, 12:39 AM

I understand your point about this kind of law being used as a political tool, but I really despise evangelism. Eight weeks...I won't lose any sleep over it.

gongy518 · 06-11-2009, 12:44 AM

good news for me

Charlatan · 06-11-2009, 12:48 AM

That is an interesting point Marv and I think that is what lies at the heart of the law as it exists here.

Personally, I find to be a completely loaded law and I have trouble understanding how it gets used. In this case, the couple in question were upsetting a balancing act between the religious communities here. There is an ongoing tension below the surface between the three main cultures that make up this nation (Malay, Chinese and Indian). There is a history of race riots, etc. And it is felt that anyone messing with this balance is likely to cause problems for everyone.

One thing you need to understand is the context of this place. It is much closer to Chinese thinking than tradational Western thought. Here, the individual is second to the nation and the community and the family. American "individual first" doesn't fly here.

mrklixx · 06-11-2009, 04:20 AM

It would be way too much trouble to toss the pamphlet in the trash. After all one's rabble had already been roused.

MSD · 06-11-2009, 12:12 PM

If they had been charged with harassment or something along those lines after bothering people, it wouldn't be so bad in my mind. If someone tries to convert you, you should be able to simply walk away and be done with it. Speech should be free, and people who get something they find offensive in the mail are free to throw it out.

The fact that this kind of law exists anywhere disgusts me, and my views on religion are pretty well known.

Zeraph · 06-11-2009, 02:41 PM

This bodes ill based on principle not act.

Bill O'Rights · 06-11-2009, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

I understand your point about this kind of law being used as a political tool, but I really despise evangelism. Eight weeks...I won't lose any sleep over it.

I understand.
While I publicly denounce this action...I secretly hope that they "lose" the key.

Evangelists and telemarketers.

thespian86 · 06-11-2009, 09:33 PM

How much longer are we going to "respect people's feelings" before it gets ridiculous?

Oh, wait...

IdeoFunk · 06-11-2009, 09:47 PM

Yeah I definitely see this as a pretty scary tool for any government to have. Sure the US Government is better than any of those other outright despot governments, but they're definitely miles away from being immune to corruption. Plus I don't see how this could ever stand up in the Supreme Court, this doesn't even look remotely constitutional to me...

Bill O'Rights · 06-12-2009, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IdeoFunk

I don't see how this could ever stand up in the Supreme Court, this doesn't even look remotely constitutional to me...

It doesn't need to. This did not take place in the U.S. It happened in Singapore.

06-10-2009, 11:39 PM	#2 (permalink)
n0nsensical Junkie Location: San Francisco	Yeah this is what happens when you live in a police state. __________________ "Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." --Abraham Lincoln

06-11-2009, 12:17 AM	#3 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	That's a good one... __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

06-11-2009, 12:39 AM	#5 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	I understand your point about this kind of law being used as a political tool, but I really despise evangelism. Eight weeks...I won't lose any sleep over it. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

06-11-2009, 12:48 AM	#7 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	That is an interesting point Marv and I think that is what lies at the heart of the law as it exists here. Personally, I find to be a completely loaded law and I have trouble understanding how it gets used. In this case, the couple in question were upsetting a balancing act between the religious communities here. There is an ongoing tension below the surface between the three main cultures that make up this nation (Malay, Chinese and Indian). There is a history of race riots, etc. And it is felt that anyone messing with this balance is likely to cause problems for everyone. One thing you need to understand is the context of this place. It is much closer to Chinese thinking than tradational Western thought. Here, the individual is second to the nation and the community and the family. American "individual first" doesn't fly here. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

06-11-2009, 04:20 AM	#8 (permalink)
mrklixx President Rick Location: location location	It would be way too much trouble to toss the pamphlet in the trash. After all one's rabble had already been roused. __________________ This post is content. If you don't like it then you are not content. Or perhaps just incontinent. This is not a link - Do not click here I hate animated avatars.

06-11-2009, 12:44 AM	#6 (permalink)
gongy518 Upright	good news for me

06-11-2009, 12:12 PM	#9 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	If they had been charged with harassment or something along those lines after bothering people, it wouldn't be so bad in my mind. If someone tries to convert you, you should be able to simply walk away and be done with it. Speech should be free, and people who get something they find offensive in the mail are free to throw it out. The fact that this kind of law exists anywhere disgusts me, and my views on religion are pretty well known.

06-11-2009, 02:41 PM	#10 (permalink)
Zeraph Banned Location: The Cosmos	This bodes ill based on principle not act.

06-11-2009, 09:33 PM	#12 (permalink)
thespian86 change is hard. Location: the green room.	How much longer are we going to "respect people's feelings" before it gets ridiculous? Oh, wait... __________________ EX: Whats new? ME: I officially love coffee more then you now. EX: uh... ME: So, not much.

06-11-2009, 09:47 PM	#13 (permalink)
IdeoFunk Crazy Location: to	Yeah I definitely see this as a pretty scary tool for any government to have. Sure the US Government is better than any of those other outright despot governments, but they're definitely miles away from being immune to corruption. Plus I don't see how this could ever stand up in the Supreme Court, this doesn't even look remotely constitutional to me...