Yawning Bread. February 2006

Liberty League Part 3

source: Widely-circulated email, Straits Times Forum

     

  

 

 
Here is a widely-circulated email dated 26 January 2006. 

Greetings Brethrens,

Last night I was invited to the launch of Liberty Leagues. I want to make a plead to all of you to support this movement that I see the forces of darkness working actively.

This is a social group led by Leslie Lung - some may have read his book Freedom of Choice. This group is supported by Church of our Savior where Leslie worship, other churches including Trinity Christian Centre, City Harvest, and Willie Cheng, a RC brother who strives to further many social courses - he just step down from National Philanthropy Society [1] as past Chairman (You may remember him as the retired CEO of Accenture) and he managed to convince the Government to put in seed money of $90k for LL. Objective of this group is to hold talks in schools, support groups, elderly groups; talks on homosexuality - that it is not something one cannot overcome and those stuck in it have FREEDOM OF CHOICE.

You may also read in yesterday Today paper [2] on how the gay group reacted - just a beginning as their movement will gain momentum! In fact their reaction has been so "violent" brother Leslie Lung ended the launch in a surprising twist - he is taking 2 weeks off to re-think the course - letting us know that he may not want to proceed with this course.

Brother Willie came to me at the end of the "twist" launch, seeking my support in raising funds for LL. I feel the calling of God to support this brother. Now I seek your prayer and seeking God if He want you to participate in this. We want to raise funds by end next week before Leslie make up his mind - to encourage him and to let him know that we truly support him - that he has a course that we Christians believe in and are committed to.

Can you please come back to me quickly.

Wishing you Shalom in this coming Chinese New Year.

Lye Fei

* * * * *

 
Foreword by Yawning Bread

Note the following sentences:

"Objective of this group is to hold... talks on homosexuality - that is NOT something one cannot overcome"

"We want you to raise funds by end next week..."

It only proves that their agenda is what we've always said it was - a clinically discredited approach to homosexual orientation.

Why they suddenly need to raise money is not clear. Perhaps People Like Us' point that going by NVPC's own rules, Liberty League has to be able to fund 30 - 50% of its own programs has finally registered. Of course, it is surprising that this point had not been settled before NVPC approved the grant, and only now is there a scramble to raise funds - within one week.

Why didn't NVPC do due diligence about reciprocal funding before approving the grant?

You may also have noticed the email's rather apocalyptic language -- "forces of darkness" and how "reaction has been so 'violent' ". Are these people mentally stable?

 
2 Feb 2006
Straits Times Forum (Lead letter on letters page)

Don't resolve social issues dogmatically 

Since the beginning of the new year, there have been several press reports about various charities and organisations receiving government funding to conduct talks and workshops in our schools. 

The people who run these programmes are quick to stress that their programmes are secular, objective and factual. Yet, these are thinly-veiled religious organisations that often have links with overseas fundamentalist religious movements and whose views are often controversial, sometimes factually wrong and seldom secular. 

Organisations like these recently in the news include Family Life Society and the Liberty League (which was given $100,000 funding just two weeks ago).

The case of the Liberty League is particularly mystifying as it is registered as a private limited company. Regardless of its aim, why should public money be used to fund a profit-seeking private company? 

Moreover, for the Liberty League, among other things, its penchant for advocating reparative methods to 'straighten' homosexuals is without sound scientific rationale. The mainstream international scientific community has unambiguously condemned such practices as dangerous and irresponsible.

Organisations similar to the Liberty League have also attempted to moralise and demonise other social issues, like abortion. 

Worrying as it may be, that such organisations are propagating implicit religiously-rooted rhetoric to our young, multi-ethnic students is really besides the point. As a concerned citizen, the problem for me is twofold.

First, complex social issues are summarily declared as 'evil' and 'undesirable' without any room for discussion or deeper reflexivity.

Second, blatant falsehoods are passed off as facts (for example, such organisations often negate the efficacy of condom use without any sound basis). 

In this regard, I am particularly disappointed with some of these organisations' dogmatic stance against stem-cell research and in-vitro fertilisation. 

Is that how we want to teach our students? Are there no critical checks and qualitative evaluations of what these organisations say and do?

I urge the government agencies concerned to be completely candid about their stance on the issues I have raised. 

Harvey Neo Choong Tiong 

* * * * *

 

 

 
4 Feb 2006
Straits Times Forum 

FUNDS FOR LIBERTY LEAGUE
Grant only for secular causes 

I thank Mr Harvey Neo for his letter, 'Don't resolve social issues dogmatically' (ST, Feb 2). 

The National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) supports secular causes that benefit society at large. Regardless of the religious background, if any, of an applicant, the work done in the context of the grant must be strictly secular. 

It is on this basis that NVPC offered the New Initiative Grant to Liberty League in January last year, in support of its secular social projects.

Liberty League has so far not drawn on the grant. NVPC will assess the efficacy of its proposed programmes before disbursing any funds. 

Tan Chee Koon (Mrs)
Chief Executive Officer 
National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre

 

This reply does not address 3 points in Harvey Neo's letter:

(a) that Liberty League is not a non-profit organisation;

(b) that it promotes a professionally discredited program

(c) where are the "critical checks and qualitative evaluations"?

Item (c) points to evaluations of content, not merely whether it's merely secular or not.

There is some vague reference to "efficacy" whatever that means, in the reply's sentence: " NVPC will assess the efficacy of its proposed programmes before disbursing any funds", though it also begs the question of why NVPC didn't do assessment BEFORE approving the grant.

 

Footnotes

  1. I think the "National Philanthropy Society" referred to in the email is the "National Volunteer and Philanthropy Organisation" (NVPC). Willie Cheng was the past Chairman of this body.
    Return to where you left off

  2. See Why Liberty League was offered funds 
    Return to where you left off

Addenda

None