Notice: Imposing Stricter Rules & Regulations for the Forum
-
Just to bring up an expired posting, as a reminder:
Rules & Regulations
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=202797
1) Treat all posters with respect. Always check your karma and its fruit from participating in this forum.
2) No posting with multiple identities (clones).
3) ~Buddhism: Wisdom Bliss~ reserves the right to publish, republish, delete or modify all discussions without asking for permission to do so.
4) Do not use offensive or vulgar language. Any postings of insulting texts, urls, images will be removed by moderators without any notices.
5) Do not engage in personal attacks. Posts of such nature will be removed by moderators without any notices.
6) Everyone regardless of religions or beliefs are welcome to post in our forum, but there shall be no promotion of Non-Buddhism materials, products, or religions/spiritual practices unless exceptional cases and received permission by moderators. All URLs related to the various traditions not recognised by our forum will also be removed without notice. (See: Schools/Traditions/Sects NOT Recognised In Our Forum)
7) Chit chat topics should be posted in “Lounge” threads in the forum, in order to reduce off-topic replies in various threads.
from now onward, as i discussed with AEN, you'll be seeing things such as:
MESSAGE FROM Administrator: ALL INSULTS WILL BE DELETED FROM THE FORUM STRAIGHTAWAY. NO TROLLS SHALL BE TOLERATED.
If not it's going to gradually get out of hand. i've work with other forums, we still need some "law" around here. They are like precepts in Buddhism practice. Give more Respect to others, please.
Don't want people to create speech karma in this forum, now do we.?
Help Make this a harmonize Buddha-Dharma/Sangha forum.
/\ -
Yes, these rules are very important and shldnt be overlooked. It is my hope that all forummers have a fine time here and at the same time be considerate in your postings.
-
about time too.....Originally posted by sinweiy:Just to bring up an expired posting, as a reminder:
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=202797
from now onward, as i discussed with AEN, you'll be seeing things such as:
MESSAGE FROM Administrator: ALL INSULTS WILL BE DELETED FROM THE FORUM STRAIGHTAWAY. NO TROLLS SHALL BE TOLERATED.
If not it's going to gradually get out of hand. i've work with other forums, we still need some "law" around here. They are like precepts in Buddhism practice. Give more Respect to others, please.
Don't want people to create speech karma in this forum, now do we.?
Help Make this a harmonize Buddha-Dharma/Sangha forum.
/\
we all have our personal beliefs and while we all want to nice folks, there are those who would abuse this virtue.
... but better late than never. -
I detect "SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS" here.Originally posted by Chin Eng:about time too.....
we all have our personal beliefs and while we all want to nice folks, there are those who would abuse this virtue.
... but better late than never.
Its about time you be honest and answer these questions unequivocally here too:
1) Is this forum private or public? Does anyone needs an invitation to post in any thread?
2) Does one have to 'belong' to the same colour, race, creed, religion in order to make a post, especially in this thread?
3) Is a different viewpoint considered vulgar?
4) How do you define condescending?
5) If one does not agree with me, can I ask the poster to shut up, get out, move away? -
Should be Moderator rather than administrator.
-
Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:
Administrator is one level higher, in other forum(esangha) i visited.
Should be Moderator rather than administrator.
so AEN is the Administrator, me and neutral_onliner are the moderators.
/\ -
you know what? you think everything is about you?Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:I detect "SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS" here.
Its about time you be honest and answer these questions unequivocally here too:
1) Is this forum private or public? Does anyone needs an invitation to post in any thread?
2) Does one have to 'belong' to the same colour, race, creed, religion in order to make a post, especially in this thread?
3) Is a different viewpoint considered vulgar?
4) How do you define condescending?
5) If one does not agree with me, can I ask the poster to shut up, get out, move away?
my post was merely commenting that it is high time for this forum to be a little more strict, in full agreement of the TS and the rules... obviously you don't see the need to observe the rules...
anyway i've answer those questions already lah... unfortunately you haven't those answer those question asked to you... therefore you really have no right to question me.
time to enforce these rules, mods. -
AEN is chief moderator.Originally posted by sinweiy:Administrator is one level higher, in other forum(esangha) i visited.
so AEN is the Administrator, me and neutral_onliner are the moderators.
/\
as far as I know only Jason is administrator.
we're probably being picky here.... sorry. -
Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:
1) Neither. No need.
Its about time you be honest and answer these questions unequivocally here too:
1) Is this forum private or public? Does anyone needs an invitation to post in any thread?
2) Does one have to 'belong' to the same colour, race, creed, religion in order to make a post, especially in this thread?
3) Is a different viewpoint considered vulgar?
4) How do you define condescending?
5) If one does not agree with me, can I ask the poster to shut up, get out, move away?
2) No.
3) Depend on how vulgar. Remember someone in Singapore ever insulted another religion and was prosecuted.
4) go check dictionary or the law of Singapore.
5) You can embark on a "friendly" debate.
/\ -
Originally posted by Chin Eng:
you are right.
AEN is chief moderator.
as far as I know only Jason is administrator.
/\ -
Originally posted by Chin Eng:
rules were already there all along, but seldom there are actions taken.
time to enforce these rules, mods.
too bad there's no button for banning people.
/\ -
unfortunately this is true. I think you will agree with me when I say that we really have no problems who enter a religious forum and genuinely ask well-intended questions.Originally posted by sinweiy:rules were already there all along, but seldom there are actions taken.
too bad there's no button for banning people.
/\
however, in the midst of some of these real folks, there are others will attempt to stir up trouble but going all out to make things difficult.
what sets this folks apart from the real seekers are the manner in which questions are asked, and the fact that they do not attempt to agree to disagree. -
for info:
Religious Offences in the Penal Code
To add teeth to the constitutional right to practice and propagate religion, the Penal Code (Cap224) criminalises certain acts that militate against that right. Chapter XV of the Code is captioned ‘Offences Relating to Religion’. Section 295 criminalises the act of injuring or defiling a place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class. It includes destroying, damaging or defiling any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion. On conviction, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with a fine, or with both.
Disturbing a religious assembly may result, on conviction, to an imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with a fine, or with both (s 296). The same punishment awaits those who trespass on burial places with the intention of wounding the feelings, or insulting the religion of any person, with the knowledge that such a person would likely to be wounded or his religion insulted (s 297).
Section 298 lays down similar punishment for anyone who deliberately intends to wound the religious feelings of another by uttering any word, or making any sound in the hearing of that person; or making any gesture in the sight of that person, or places any object in the sight of that person.
http://www.lawgazette.com.sg/2007-7/thinking.htm
/\ -
Nice.Originally posted by sinweiy: -
This site owned by UK company
So using UK materials to sue SG people possible?
-
Disturbing a religious assembly may result, on conviction, to an imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with a fine, or with both (s 296). The same punishment awaits those who trespass on burial places with the intention of wounding the feelings, or insulting the religion of any person, with the knowledge that such a person would likely to be wounded or his religion insulted (s 297).
Is this statute newly promulgated? I wish this was in force back in the days where my school pastor was having field days calling Buddhism and Taoism all sorts of names during weekly school assemblies. -
No worries, as long as you got any evidence admissable in a court of law and the suspect is still alive, still prosecutable.Originally posted by Beyond Religion:Is this statute newly promulgated? I wish this was in force back in the days where my school pastor was having field days calling Buddhism and Taoism all sorts of names during weekly school assemblies. -
one person complained to the SG police on posts by another individual. Police got involved, individual (i believe) was warned and has disappeared from sgforums (possible that he has a new nick).Originally posted by maggot:This site owned by UK company
So using UK materials to sue SG people possible? -
The site that sinweiy quoted is from the Law Society of Singapore.Originally posted by maggot:This site owned by UK company
So using UK materials to sue SG people possible?
What UK materials are you referring to? -
PENAL CODEOriginally posted by Beyond Religion:Is this statute newly promulgated? I wish this was in force back in the days where my school pastor was having field days calling Buddhism and Taoism all sorts of names during weekly school assemblies.
CHAPTER XV
OFFENCES RELATING TO RELIGION
Injuring or defiling a place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class.
295. Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons, with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons, or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years, or with fine, or with both.
Disturbing a religious assembly.
296. Whoever voluntarily causes disturbance to any assembly lawfully engaged in the performance of religious worship or religious ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Trespassing on burial places, etc.
297. Whoever, with the intention of wounding the feelings of any person, or of insulting the religion of any person, or with the knowledge that the feelings of any person are likely to be wounded, or that the religion of any person is likely to be insulted thereby, commits any trespass in any place of worship or on any place of sepulture or any place set apart for the performance of funeral rites, or as a depository for the remains of the dead, or offers any indignity to any human corpse, or causes disturbance to any persons assembled for the performance of funeral ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person.
298. Whoever, with deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes any gesture in the sight of that person, or places any object in the sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
<-------- From http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/html/homepage.html and search under the Penal Code.
This is in the statute all along but like the Seditiou Act, it seems like it is seldom used. I did hear on some "interesting" treatment from people who were once in missionary schools. If I remember correctly, there were letters posted to ST Forum regarding these issue as well.
But law and enforceability are seperate issues already.
Just take buddhists as example, like AEN had mentioned in another thread, the right way to dispose buddhist material, for this example we shall use a Buddha statue, is to burn it. But for the general joss-sticks buddhists, they might be offended. This would have come to under caption 295 and 298.
So the definition is not easy to draw.
Or a more extreme illustration, someone from a particular religion go and tell a buddhist that Buddha is the Devil instead. To him, he would have genuinely believe in it but to the buddhist, he might feel insulted. The definition becomes subjective and difficult to draw because the bottomline of the various religion are fundamentally different to begin with. -
The website we are using nowOriginally posted by yamizi:The site that sinweiy quoted is from the Law Society of Singapore.
What UK materials are you referring to?
Just look below
Copyright © 1999-2007. A quality website by Jeyel Media (UK) Limited. All Rights Reserved.
Advertise popup: none timeflag: 01.01.70, 7:30:00.
Cached: shoutcast, sessions-sgForums.com.
0-body-0-x 0. gSafe:1Singapore Online Advertising -
Yamizi,
No lah... I don't really want to enforce this and make police report against anyone. For far too many years, Buddhism and Taoism represent "soft" targets to all malicious detractors. These people would attack, badmouth or redicule Buddhism and taoism (as well their adherents and practices) at will without fear of any legal or social consequence. I just wish for this statute to be widely known so that these people will know that they are violating the law. -
Oh good question.Originally posted by maggot:The website we are using now
Just look below
Copyright © 1999-2007. A quality website by Jeyel Media (UK) Limited. All Rights Reserved.
Advertise popup: none timeflag: 01.01.70, 7:30:00.
Cached: shoutcast, sessions-sgForums.com.
0-body-0-x 0. gSafe:1Singapore Online Advertising
I think, I think lah, technically cannot lah, because this site doesn't belong to Singapore.
However, it can easily trace down that who and where the forummers are right?
Hmm.
Good question, maybe I can ask my colleagues about it. -
Couldn't agree with you more!Originally posted by Beyond Religion:Yamizi,
No lah... I don't really want to enforce this and make police report against anyone. For far too many years, Buddhism and Taoism represent "soft" targets to all malicious detractors. These people would attack, badmouth or redicule Buddhism and taoism (as well their adherents and practices) at will without fear of any legal or social consequence. I just wish for this statute to be widely known so that these people will know that they are violating the law.
We are "soft" targets because many of the "targets" are taught to be "soft". Probably buddhists will think that speaking up for their own faith is not a behaviour of buddhists?
I met non buddhists who can tell me Buddha will not refute false views and say others wrong. If so, the Buddha really cannot become Buddha liao cos He would have just simply guai guai accept what His previous 2 gurus and taught Him before He went for acestics.
But the fact is that Buddha often taught that we should establish and expound the Truth. So I always encouage buddhists around me when they face such "insults" by people of other beliefs, we shouldn't be disheartened but see it rather as a chance to practice determination and resolute against obstructions. And that we should remain calm and mindful and tell them how come Buddha is not a Devil! (or any other matters of Buddhism that have been misunderstood or misrepresented). -
I disagree that Buddhism is a soft target as Buddhist adherents have be targetting atheists and irreligionists as soft targets. (Please go read what AEN posted in the Aethism forum. )Originally posted by yamizi:Couldn't agree with you more!
We are "soft" targets because many of the "targets" are taught to be "soft". Probably buddhists will think that speaking up for their own faith is not a behaviour of buddhists?
I met non buddhists who can tell me Buddha will not refute false views and say others wrong. If so, the Buddha really cannot become Buddha liao cos He would have just simply guai guai accept what His previous 2 gurus and taught Him before He went for acestics.
But the fact is that Buddha often taught that we should establish and expound the Truth. So I always encouage buddhists around me when they face such "insults" by people of other beliefs, we shouldn't be disheartened but see it rather as a chance to practice determination and resolute against obstructions. And that we should remain calm and mindful and tell them how come Buddha is not a Devil! (or any other matters of Buddhism that have been misunderstood or misrepresented).
As it is well-known, science and religion don't mix but AEN and bohiruci believe otherwise and insist that all other people acknowledge the superiority of Buddhism.