OMG, What Kind of Person is this...?
-
Hmm... visited an old folks home recently? Plenty of stories like that as well...
This is certainly a social issue that needs to be dealt with. -
I must send their souls to the devil... The devil shall rape his wife and cut teh cock of this bastard....
Never will they have peace but will only find maggort and moth in the wealth... they will be fill with tired, weariness, thirst, shame... For all will be avoid them in everyone , even the loved them one by one will leave them... Never will they enjoy a day of peace.. The soul will be totally condemn unless they REPENT!!! For they will be clothes with peace, hope and love... No one shall judge or bully them.... so fo now, they belong to the devil. demon and evil spirit.... 
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
It seems that the one who rants more than having any valid points of value being posted - is more likely to be you, and you easily will win the vote - hands down - by all participants in this sgForums, even without mine being included.
You have no points, only rants. Since when has the moral failings of an individual been just the fault of the government? Yang bu jiao, fu zi guo. Jiao bu yan, shi zi duo. It is mostly the fault of his parents and teachers.
LKY had once commented that GCT was woody, or wooden despite GCT's high education that brought him through some stellar career path.
Perhaps this description fits you perfectly for not being able to discern the finer points of a debate that has been put forth, but preferring to address the peripheral issues that are of no consequence, and avoiding the crux of the matter with some uselessly pompous dismissive remarks.
For once we stand on common ground - 'that it is precisely the lack of sufficient grounding in confucian ethics that is the root cause of such behaviour'.
If you have had any teaching in Confucianism at all, you will appreciate that it is precisely the lack of sufficient grounding in confucian ethics that is the root cause of such behaviour.
Unfortunately you seem to have a wonderful knack of putting your foot in your mouth - a habit carried from your days in the cradle ?
Was it not the creative mind of LKY to implement the study of Confucianism in the syllabus of Singapore schools ?
What possibly could be his purpose when he seems to expect Singaporeans to follow the teachings of Confucianism, but will not have himself or his government to accept their responsibilities according to Confucianist ethics ?
Is it not typical of this Government and its Agents to place the blame on some one else's table except their own, when it has always been clear that it is the Government that set the pace of development in any society ?
How could LKY claim that Singapore has arrived to be a member of THE FIRST WORLD, when we have highly educated morons turning on their parents - especially towards a mother who bore them into this World ?
Confuscianism has charted the responsibility of the Individual's conduct towards one's parents, towards the Ruler and the State.
Similarly, Confucius had also insisted on the reciprocal responsibility of the Ruler and the State towards the welfare of the populace whom they govern.
Unfortunately, this Government has preferred to place priority on the accumulation of wealth in the Treasury of the State, by creaming off the wealth held by the population through a variety of state policies - beginning with development costs, retail of the state properties and public housing, subjugating the individual's enterprise to that of the MONOPOLISTIC State Owned Enterprises, entire population made to carry the burden of the cost of social, economic, financial progress despite paying a high price for living and working in Singapore, as well as to own any assets.
What could possibly be the cause that have prompted hard pressed Singaporeans to abandon their parents, and forcing the government to pass a Bill that force the children to look after their Parents ?
Was there a choice for Singaporeans other then to be pressed up against the wall ?
Has Oxbridge deviated from its original goals to produce stunted autocrats, who are sadists and masochists at the same time ?
Young people nowadays ought to be given a heavier dose of confucian ethics, supplemented by good old caning on the backside.
Whether the Hippocratic Oath - or the Medical Oath - is 2000 Years old or not, many doctors have maintained faith in it, unless you have taken the Oath with insincerity in your heart ?
How should the Medical Profession deal with such persons having a flaw in character ?
At least 'honest debate' has persisted but with most Doctors fulfilling the Oath taken - without harboring thoughts of inflicting injury towards others - whether they maybe a criminal or not. -
Cool man Atobe...
That was heavy artillary exchanged...!
-
Massively complicated!
Don't really agree with some parts, but if I say something I'll get blown to pieces. -
I hve no religion,but believe in our own family teachings that r never 2 do harm n hurt others and put ourselves into the other ppls' shoes to think next course of actions.Originally posted by saffron60:I think some people here misunderstand the meaning of 'karma' and they use it in an oversimplified, inaccurate way in relation to what has happened to the old lady and her son.
In Buddhism, karma is not the only cause of anything that happens. The following are the five "Niyama Dharma" that cause effects.
Karma Niyama - Consequences of one's actions
Dhamma Niyama - Laws of nature
Irthu Niyama - Seasonal changes and climate
Biija Niyama - Genetic inheritance
Chitta Niyama - Will of mind
The last four cover 'conditions' or 'circumstances' in which karmic potential can ripen as result
quoted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma
I hope people will not continue to misuse such a well-known concept of buddhism; the term 'karma' should not be misused to explain simple terms of 'reward' and 'punishment'.
We take the word Karma as "cause n effect"" in life and also carry and fufill the reponsibilty but we will never care about the end results which will turn out to be!!! -
Originally posted by fymk:
Still, I feel that Silliporeans have become corrupted by classism. I don't want my offspring to grow up in such a terrible environment.
If the wife cannot get along with the mother-in-law , that's between them - not for us to comment. I know how much my paternal grandmother made life very very miserable for my mom , i.e. nitpicking on her for every trivial matter, so I don't think we should interfere in that matter. And how often do we hear forumners complaining about their mother in laws- quite a few times actually.
As for someone who commented on sg women being heartless , how would you know if the daughter in law is a singaporean lady? I would refrain from making such remarks.
There are many ways to deal with such matters - but making a mother, one who had provided care and support for him all the way, homeless is indeed heartless regardless of all the reasons. We should stop and look at it this way.
If they cannot live together, the onus falls on the son to provide his mother with alternative living arrangements and allowances necessary for her survival to accommodate both sides , NOT throw his mother out and make her homeless.
If the old woman [b] chooses to be homeless to protest against her son not wanting to live with her ,regardless of any reasonable alternatives provided to her , then it is her choice - nobody asked her to play pity patty.
There are alot of factors not known in this case. I would not throw a judgement yet. [/b] -
no offence, why Chinese guys always like to listen to Wife? Most of my Chinese friends are like that, always give in to their gf/wife even when their request is ridicolous. U cant abandon ur mum just coz ur wife has issue with her
-
Because they are like a son to their fathers-in-law.Originally posted by valentinoo:no offence, why Chinese guys always like to listen to Wife? Most of my Chinese friends are like that, always give in to their gf/wife even when their request is ridicolous. U cant abandon ur mum just coz ur wife has issue with her
-
more like a door matOriginally posted by iveco:Because they are like a son to their fathers-in-law. 
-
I don't know what the Chinkish mother-in-laws have against the "Gua Keh". Many times, the other family is innocent.Originally posted by valentinoo:more like a door mat -
its just that some guys have no balls, they dont know how to say No to wife. Not sure what they are scared of. Some of my friends has really become slaves to their wife/gf. So why does this happen?Originally posted by iveco:I don't know what the Chinkish mother-in-laws have against the "Gua Keh". Many times, the other family is innocent. -
Maybe the "Gua Keh" side more powderful than the "Lai Keh".Originally posted by valentinoo:its just that some guys have no balls, they dont know how to say No to wife. Not sure what they are scared of. Some of my friends has really become slaves to their wife/gf. So why does this happen? -
Speak for yourself, I don't agree with your points, some of what you said reflects a myopic view of the world, such as this:Originally posted by Atobe:It seems that the one who rants more than having any valid points of value being posted - is more likely to be you, and you easily will win the vote - hands down - by all participants in this sgForums, even without mine being included.
How could LKY claim that Singapore has arrived to be a member of THE FIRST WORLD, when we have highly educated morons turning on their parents - especially towards a mother who bore them into this World ?
Having highly educated morons turning against their parents is a sign of a developed country, not the other way around. Developed countries have got their fair share of social problems, if their children get into trouble, it is quite common to have parents blaming the school and the gov, but not themselves.
What could possibly be the cause that have prompted hard pressed Singaporeans to abandon their parents, and forcing the government to pass a Bill that force the children to look after their Parents ?
The gov did not force the children to look after their parents, they only provided an option for the old folks and it is up to the old folks whether they want to take action or not. Anyway, according to the article:
''Last year 347 enquiries were made at the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents (TMP), up from 248 in 2005 and 295 in 2004.
But only 79 applications for maintenance were filed last year, the lowest in the Tribunal's 11 years, said TMP secretary Penny Tham. There were 99 in 2005 and 105 in 2004. ''
Only 347 enquiries in 2006? That's an average of 1 enquiry a day! 79 applications in 2006, that's an average of 6.5 applications a month!!!!!!
And you see that as a threat and you want to blame the gov? How petty is that? Now that's what I call a lack of perspective. Whether you realize it or not, you may actually be a typical product of a nanny state; too dependent on the gov to solve all problems because you refuse to accept any responsibility. -
wow even in this kind of parents/son issues, "government" will be mentioned
-
You confuse me with your statements, you also said in your earlier posting:Originally posted by foomwee88:I hve no religion,but believe in our own family teachings that r never 2 do harm n hurt others and put ourselves into the other ppls' shoes to think next course of actions.
We take the word Karma as "cause n effect"" in life and also carry and fufill the reponsibilty but we will never care about the end results which will turn out to be!!!
''Hence,dont do harm or hurt others then u will be blessed!!!otherwise, bad karma may not happen to u now but it sure be occured at a later date!!!''
It should be occured at a later date? And you say that we will never care about the end results????? You are contradicting yourself.
Anyway, in buddhism, karma is only one of the causes within a group of causes in the chain of 'cause and effect'. It is true that:
''the basic ethical purpose of karma is to behave responsibly, and the tenet of karma is essentially 'if you do good things, good things will happen to you - if you do bad things, bad things will happen to you''
quoted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma
In my opinion, the use the term 'karma' should be used with a more 'neutral' tone rather that to use it as entity that would eventually 'punish' those who deserve it. 'Karma' is not a 'thing' that you can push all your responsibility on so that you yourself will be absolved of all responsibility. -
Originally posted by saffron60:
During the festive period, I m wishing U to hve a good Karma!!!
You confuse me with your statements, you also said in your earlier posting:
[b]''Hence,dont do harm or hurt others then u will be blessed!!!otherwise, bad karma may not happen to u now but it sure be occured at a later date!!!''
It should be occured at a later date? And you say that we will never care about the end results????? You are contradicting yourself.
Anyway, in buddhism, karma is only one of the causes within a group of causes in the chain of 'cause and effect'. It is true that:
''the basic ethical purpose of karma is to behave responsibly, and the tenet of karma is essentially 'if you do good things, good things will happen to you - if you do bad things, bad things will happen to you''
quoted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma
In my opinion, the use the term 'karma' should be used with a more 'neutral' tone rather that to use it as entity that would eventually 'punish' those who deserve it. 'Karma' is not a 'thing' that you can push all your responsibility on so that you yourself will be absolved of all responsibility. [/b]
Doing bad thing in life will end up with poor Karma but doing good thing in life may not reward with the expected result but u may just enjoy the process of doing it!!! is it contraditing with each others???
I m not a Buddhist but we follow and work towards the good teachings of all the religions.
My advice is that to know the word of Karma n not practice it,worst still twisted it will not do good to one self!!!
Thank U!!! -
[quote]Originally posted by foomwee88:
[b]
During the festive period, I m wishing U to hve a good Karma!!!
Doing bad thing in life will end up with poor Karma but doing good thing in life may not reward with the expected result but u may just enjoy the process of doing it!!! is it contraditing with each others???
You contradicted yourself when you made the two separate statements. But when you put it this way, it does make sense. To me, it's just not right to simply use the term 'karma' to explain rewarding good behaviour and punishing bad behaviour. 'Karma' has always been neutral and it just is ( if you know what i mean).
[b]I m not a Buddhist but we follow and work towards the good teachings of all the religions.
My advice is that to know the word of Karma n not practice it,worst still twisted it will not do good to one self!!!
Thank U!!!
Well, i'm glad that you finally understood the true meaning of karma and the term 'karma' is not to be used maliciously to wish 'bad karma' on to others. -
Originally posted by saffron60:
If my views are myopic, are you not viewing the Singapore situation with tinted glasses, preferring to see specific color spectrums and ignoring those that affect your nerves ?
Originally posted by Atobe:
It seems that the one who rants more than having any valid points of value being posted - is more likely to be you, and you easily will win the vote - hands down - by all participants in this sgForums, even without mine being included.
Speak for yourself, I don't agree with your points, some of what you said reflects a myopic view of the world, such as this:
How could LKY claim that Singapore has arrived to be a member of THE FIRST WORLD, when we have highly educated morons turning on their parents - especially towards a mother who bore them into this World ?
Having highly educated morons turning against their parents is a sign of a developed country, not the other way around. Developed countries have got their fair share of social problems, if their children get into trouble, it is quite common to have parents blaming the school and the gov, but not themselves.
Are you being simplistic and mixing the various issues together with a simple statement 'highly educated morons turning against their parents is a sign of a developed country' and believing that 'developed countries' are the only ones with parents blaming the system except themselves ?
It is a fact that it is the Government that provide leadership with policies and social and moral standards that mould the population. If social and moral standards of a population declines, it basically is a reflection of the social and moral values of the State.
Is it not a fact that the high handedness of NKF's Durai is a mirror image of the manner in which the Ruling Party a.k.a this Government conduct business - intimidating anyone who dare challenge them with law suits that bankrupt them into oblivion, and allowing them to maintain the status quo ?
It took an even bigger force to deflate Durai's grip over NKF - only to reveal all the skeletons that have been carefully kept away from public view.
What has this Government and Ruling Party to hide from Singaporeans ?
If Government's behaviour can mould the likes of Durai, and its policies that press Singaporeans to the wall, should we not hold this Government responsible for the decline in social and moral values in Singapore ?
Such an opaque system is hardly the norm in more developed countries that are recognised as the First World, and which Singaproe has tried to emulate.What could possibly be the cause that have prompted hard pressed Singaporeans to abandon their parents, and forcing the government to pass a Bill that force the children to look after their Parents ?
You are quite a comic if you have such views that with this Parent Maintenance Bill, the 'gov did not force the children to look after their parents, they only provided an option for the old folks and it is up to the old folks whether they want to take action or not.'
The gov did not force the children to look after their parents, they only provided an option for the old folks and it is up to the old folks whether they want to take action or not. Anyway, according to the article:
''Last year 347 enquiries were made at the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents (TMP), up from 248 in 2005 and 295 in 2004.
But only 79 applications for maintenance were filed last year, the lowest in the Tribunal's 11 years, said TMP secretary Penny Tham. There were 99 in 2005 and 105 in 2004. ''
Only 347 enquiries in 2006? That's an average of 1 enquiry a day! 79 applications in 2006, that's an average of 6.5 applications a month!!!!!!
And you see that as a threat and you want to blame the gov? How petty is that? Now that's what I call a lack of perspective. Whether you realize it or not, you may actually be a typical product of a nanny state; too dependent on the gov to solve all problems because you refuse to accept any responsibility.
What is the intention of the Parents' Maintenance Bill - if not passing the responsibility of looking after the aged Singaporeans back to the economically hard pressed Singaporeans - young and old ?
Most of Singaporeans - young or old - have been made paupers by a slew of government economic and fiscal policies that continuously cream off the wealth from the citizens to the State Treasury
This Parent Maintenance Bill will widen the schism in the relationships between parents and their children - who are unable to reconcile their relationships, resulting in their predicament being made worse by enforcement of an arbitrary law.
The increasing statistics that you have quoted - '347 enquiries were made at the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents (TMP), up from 248 in 2005 and 295 in 2004' - clearly shows that the economic situation is pushing younger Singaporeans into a hopeless situation of abandoning their parents to State care. Meanwhile the Government has nothing to offer to assist in looking after the Aged, despite the Government relentless efforts in squeezing whatever funds that the individual has, leaving most average Singaporeans without much cash reserves for retirement - let alone to look after the parents.
The fact that only 347 applications were made, and the manner in which the Parent Maintenance Bill has been implemented reflects the Government's own 'panic' to the situation.
Instead of responding to help this group - which is mostly from the lower economic strata of Singapore - the Government had responded with a sledge hammer to a small prick of a problem.
Have I lost perspective to this problem, or did the Government lost its perspective in responding to a minor social problem ?
Have you lost perspective of the entire social problem - and the lop sided and irresponsible policies of this Government- with your petty interpretation of my post, without understanding the underlying issues ? -
Maybe, the farker married a Dominatrix... ..tortures him everynight or once a week kind of thingy, and his mom around makes it difficult for the seessions... -
[quote]Originally posted by Atobe:
[b]
[col
or=darkred]
''If my views are myopic, are you not viewing the Singapore situation with tinted glasses, preferring to see specific color spectrums and ignoring those that affect your nerves ?
Are you being simplistic and mixing the various issues together with a simple statement 'highly educated morons turning against their parents is a sign of a developed country' and believing that 'developed countries' are the only ones with parents blaming the system except themselves ?''
Care to explain WHY my statement was simplistic and that it mixes the various issues together? It seems that making non-sensical statements like that to refute my points is your trademark, no proper points or reasons to counter my explanations, just accuse it of being simplistic and that's it! Now who is being simplistic?
And I said that it is quite common for parents to blame the school and gov, i did not say that they are the only ones who blame, you really jump to a lot of conclusions, don't you?
All your tedious ranting about the gov and durai, what does that have to do with the topic at hand? Can you draw a connection with gov leadership and durai with the implementation of the parent's maintenance bill? You are totally off mark, if your main objective is stir up propoganda, by all means go ahead, but don't do it in a context where your propoganda does not fit.
let me ask you, who's responsibility is it FIRST to take care of old folks in the first place? Their adult kids, right? Who has secondary responsibility? The gov and NGO institutions, right? So, what is wrong if the gov hands back some of the responsibility back to the adult kids? i'm sure the bill was set to protect the interests of old folks rather than to burden working singaporeans. Anyway, you are still myopic and seriously lack perspective. How can you be so threatened by a bill that has yet to prove to be effective in solving the problems of old folks? Just look at the statistics for goodness sake!!!!!!!
You can even go as far back as to blame decades of gov rule as the reason for this problem today. If you believe that most singaporeans have been made paupers because of the gov, that's your opinion and it may be relevant in a totally different context. But what does that have to do with the social problems afflicting old folks today? Is it because singaporeans are so poor that they cannot afford to teach filial piety to their children? Or is it because the citizens are so poor that they can't afford to take care of their parents and the gov doesn't want to share the burden of responsiblity?
The responsibility should be shared between the people and the gov; for people who practice filial piety, the help should come from the family first rather than from outsiders. Instead you are lobbying for the gov to 'take over' this problem, what does that mean? Create more old folks homes so that adults can dump them there and expect the gov to foot the entire costs? For some people, if this were an option for them, they would still do that even though they can afford to foot the bill.
You said that:
''Instead of responding to help this group - which is mostly from the lower economic strata of Singapore - the Government had responded with a sledge hammer to a small prick of a problem.''
If it really is a small group and they really need the help, even if it is from their own children by the means of the law, what is wrong with that? Are you implying that because of the blanket ruling, another group of old folks will emerge to take advantage of the system? You seem to have such a low faith in old folks.
You also said:
''This Parent Maintenance Bill will widen the schism in the relationships between parents and their children - who are unable to reconcile their relationships, resulting in a situation made worse by enforcement of a Law. ''
That is laughable, you can even go to the extent of blaming the bill as a 'destroyer' of parent-child relationships. My guess is that the parents see the law option as a last resort. You are talking as though it is a general problem afflicting singaporeans as a whole, but in reality, only a small number of people are affected, just refer back to the statistics in the article.
You asked:
''Have you lost perspective of the entire social problem - and the lop sided and irresponsible policies of this Government- with your petty interpretation of my post, without understanding the underlying issues ?''
Yes, you have completely lost perspective on this issue. This may be irrelevant, but you have a funny way of writing, you like to structure some of your statements as though you are asking a question when what you really mean to do is to make criticisms of other people's points. Why do you feel the need to take such an indirect route? Maybe because you don't have many points that are logical and that you think that it is a 'clever' way of writing. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
The increasing statistics that you have quoted - '347 enquiries were made at the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents (TMP), up from 248 in 2005 and 295 in 2004' - clearly shows that the economic situation is pushing younger Singaporeans into a hopeless situation of abandoning their parents to State care. Meanwhile the Government has nothing to offer to assist in looking after the Aged, despite the Government relentless efforts in squeezing whatever funds that the individual has, leaving most average Singaporeans without much cash reserves for retirement - let alone to look after the parents.
I don't get what you mean, there is such a thing as 'state care' right? Then why do you say that the gov has nothing to offer to assist in looking after the aged? anyway, if you actually read what happened to the old lady and her son who is a doctor, clearly the son is not in a hopeless economic situation. And that's why, as i have said before, your propoganda is completely out of context in this topic.
Anyway, this news article dates back to year 2000 but is still relevant to this topic:
''PRIVATE NURSING HOMES: At least 10 plots of land will be set aside over the next 10 years for the building of private homes for the elderly.
STATE-FUNDED HOMES: A new and more generous subsidy scheme from July to help defray part of the annual operating costs of state-funded homes. This will cost the Government about $25-$27 million a year in the first year, and hit $40 million by 2010.
INSURANCE: To be introduced in two to three years' time to cover severe disabilities, the new insurance scheme will help Singaporeans pay their share of nursing-home care.''
quoted from: http://www.dpa.org.sg/news/news_january_2000-4.htm#moreprivategroups
And you still think the gov is doing nothing to help? -
i read atobe and saffron60's arugement with great interest:
to atobe:
instead of the critisizing the present government and linking NKF durai with this issue (do i see any link?) why not offer alternatives solution and useful feedbacks in this case? your arugments gives me an impression that, oh, it is the government's fault for this trend, including education that our government has influenced it in such a way that the present situation today are shaped by the government?? i hav cross-ed fired with atobe a few times in different topics (haha, i think only one topic, cant rmb which topic it is) and reading his arugmenst,i think dat his opinion are slightly biased against the government policies and the way things are run. i wont say that you offered a myopic arugement but i would like to appeal to you to be fairer in your opinion. linking everything back to NKF durai or other incidents is not going to work because, the link isnt dere, or there is no direct link. i do see your point but there are many factors that causes it to happen.
government has done something, as wad saffron has stated, in dat case of the son and that mum's incident, the old aged mum is not completely helpless.
why not reflect back, why the son has such thoughts? why has he changed in such a way that he is so heartless?? is the government's fault, juz like what atobe has said? u spend more time with your parents or the government? we do go to school but atobe, please dun tell me school are influenced by education ministry and in turn influenced "by the style our government". this is just like how u link this case with NKF durai.
if his mum has taught him better, his son would not have turn back against her?? AGAIN, this is another problem, wad a parent can teach is limited, parents need the help of school. school nvr teach properly?, sch needs the help of parents to guide the child! not juz the school's responsiblity.
every party has done their part, or rather, every party just needs to do their part. -
Originally posted by saffron60:
Thank U 4 teaching me wat is Karma!!!
[quote]Originally posted by foomwee88:
[[b]b]
During the festive period, I m wishing U to hve a good Karma!!!
Doing bad thing in life will end up with poor Karma but doing good thing in life may not reward with the expected result but u may just enjoy the process of doing it!!! is it contraditing with each others???
You contradicted yourself when you made the two separate statements. But when you put it this way, it does make sense. To me, it's just not right to simply use the term 'karma' to explain rewarding good behaviour and punishing bad behaviour. 'Karma' has always been neutral and it just is ( if you know what i mean).
[b]I m not a Buddhist but we follow and work towards the good teachings of all the religions.
My advice is that to know the word of Karma n not practice it,worst still twisted it will not do good to one self!!!
Thank U!!!
Well, i'm glad that you finally understood the true meaning of karma and the term 'karma' is not to be used maliciously to wish 'bad karma' on to others.
[/b]
May God bless u !!!!do more good deed will help u 2 clear yr sin!!!!! -
You are most welcome, likewise, i wish the same for you too.Originally posted by foomwee88:Thank U 4 teaching me wat is Karma!!!
May God bless u !!!!do more good deed will help u 2 clear yr sin!!!!!