今天基右們投白票,反基就用選票把立場反基的侯選人送入立法會!
Press Invitation 
週一, 四月 12, 2010, 11:05 PM - English
Organiser: “Concern Group for Hong Kong Religious Hegemony” and “Alliance for returning to Christ’s values” –
Action against religion pandering to the people in power
Date: 17 April 2010 (Saturday)
Time: 11:00 am
Venue: Rm 602, Silocon Tower, 88 Larch Street, Tai Kok Tsui, Kowloon
Action: Press conference

Details:
The “Action against religion pandering to the people in power” (The action group)will read out our statement in response to the recent remarks made by Rev. Daniel Ng of the Chinese Evangelical Free Church Kong Fok Church regarding democracy, the attitudes to the rulers and justice.

The action group comprises of Christians and Non-Christians who have great objections to the remarks of Rev. Ng.

We will also provide details on the action on 18 April 2010 (Sunday), which included gatherings near Kong Fok Church.

A press release will be issued.

Concern Group for Hong Kong Religious Hegemony:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=47471402827

Alliance for returning to Christ’s values:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=88398428924

Inquiry: Virginia Yue Spokesperson for “Concern Group for Hong Kong Religious Hegemony”)
發表回應 ( 1預覽 )   |  0 引用   |  permalink   |  related link   |   ( 3 / 20 )
SCMP(04/18):Group warns on biology guideline 
週五, 四月 17, 2009, 06:09 PM - English
Creationism in class 'makes HK a joke'

A group backed by hundreds of supporters has called on legislators to press the government to scrap curriculum guidelines it says make Hong Kong "a world-class laughing stock" by condoning the teaching of creationism in biology lessons.

The group was launched on Facebook in February after four leading scientists accused the Education Bureau of tacitly encouraging schools to promote creationism in biology through its guidelines on teaching evolution.

More than 350 people have already joined the group, whose leaders are urging the Legislative Council's education panel to lobby for the guidelines to be changed.

Under the biology and curriculum assessment guide for the new senior secondary curriculum, students are encouraged to explore "other explanations for evolution and the origins of life", in addition to Darwin's theory, to help illustrate the dynamic nature of scientific knowledge.

At least 30 aided secondary schools already teach creationism or intelligent design as an alternative explanation for evolution in biology lessons under a similar clause in the existing curriculum guidance.

The Concern Group for Hong Kong Science Education submitted a paper to the panel on Thursday, calling on it to demand a full review of the secondary school science curriculum.

It posed five questions that it asked legislators to put to the bureau. These included:

Have and will the bureau and its advisers consider the definition of science/ scientific theory/scientific methods in drafting the curriculum for science?

Are there any criteria as to what type of explanations other than evolution teachers can cover under the new biology curriculum?

Are teachers allowed to offer alternative explanations that do not fit the definition of science?

"The way they have drawn up the biology guidelines for the new Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education is allowing the teaching of non-scientific ideas and therefore falls short of the objective of modern, quality science education," said the group's founder, Virginia Yue Wai-sin, an auditor from Tsuen Wan.

"They are letting go of a very important principle in education - what constitutes scientific knowledge and what doesn't. It is a dangerous direction. We are letting our education system go back at least 200 years to a time when the methods of science had so many influences from people in power."

Ms Yue said it was a recipe for undermining Hong Kong's development as a knowledge-based society and could result in students accepting "all kinds of untested ideas".

She said most international scientists had reached a clear consensus that the theory of evolution was the only established scientific theory regarding biodiversity on Earth and that pseudo-sciences should not be taught in science classes.

Ms Yue said the questions put by the group used a definition of science drawn from the National Academy of Sciences in the US and an InterAcademy Panel on International Issues statement, backed by 68 learned societies including the Chinese Academy of Sciences. "The government has to do something to clear up this gaping loophole in its curriculum guidance. It is essential that the changes are introduced before the new curriculum is launched in September."

The bureau should also consider adopting the IAP statement and consulting the Chinese Academy of Sciences and local scientists on revising the guidelines, she added.

The groups' members include academics, teachers, professionals, university students and secondary school students. Member Adrian Mok Kwai-lung, a research assistant at the Hong Kong Institute of Education, said the guidelines would give biology teachers the false impression that creationism was a valid scientific alternative to the theory of evolution.

The bureau indicated in February it would not revise the biology curriculum guidelines following criticism by the four scientists at the University of Hong Kong, including science dean Sun Kwok and science faculty board chairman David Dudgeon.

Legislator Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee urged the panel to discuss the paper at its April 30 meeting.

發表回應 ( 1預覽 )   |  0 引用   |  permalink   |   ( 3 / 83 )
Press Release: 'Indecent' Bible Animation from Atheist disappear from YOUTUBE without a trace 
週六, 一月 17, 2009, 09:01 AM - English
Press Release

Original: 2009/1/16
Translated 1/18
'Indecent' Bible Animation from Atheist disappear without a trace


A pastor has made slanderous and defaming comment about GLBT in the discussion of Domestic Violence Ordinance,so the original initiator of Bible complain OhmyGod make an animation of "Bedtime Bible --the Fall of Sodomites and Lot's Incest" to demonstrate the quoted passage from the Bible is actually a story promoting incest. However, this popular Bible animation doesn't stay in YOUTUBE more than half a day, it is removed and his account is immediately banned WITHOUT ANY REASONS GIVEN WHATSOEVER.

Since the last Bible complain incident, TELA of Hong Kong already classified Bible as Category I which is suitable for all ages,to protest the act of censorship against 'material deem disrupting the social harmony' by YOUTUBE, we started this 'Flood the Youtube with Indecent Biblical Animation campaign'; Does the behavior of YOUTUBE exemplify what will happen after the renew of "Obscene and indecent article ordinance" (censorship system in Hong Kong) ?


Biblical condone Incest in its passage?

For what Christian see as a story to demonstrate the fall of Sodomites due to presence of Gay and Lesbian, what we actually see in the story is much more than that. The so-called good guy Lot in the story, suggests that the mob may rape their virgin daughters in order to preserve the angels' safety. Moreover, he later impregnates his two daughters, allegedly to preserve the seeds of his bloodline. Within 3 days, truthbible website has receive more than 10k hits for this Bible animation.


Netizen demands the rationale behind the removal of Bible animation by YOUTUBE
What YOUTUBE did was removing the Bible animation,along with any trace of its existence, including banning Ohmygod's YOUTUBE account within half day. The rude behavior of YOUTUBE caused much furor among Hong Kong Netizens. It is a big cause for concern since TELA has already classified Christian Bible as category I -- suitable for all ages, why YOUTUBE abuse its authority to remove any material that may deem offensive to Society of Truth and Light -- a Christian Right organization in Hong Kong? Since the inception of this campaign, many Netizens opened new accounts just for the sake of uploading this Bible animation. It has been uploaded more than 30 times.


The censorship system has a record of biased against minority and unpopular voice,would such incident of self-censorship become commonplace in future?

Now in the Review of the Control of Obscene and Indecent Articles Ordinance, HKSAR suggests to mandate all ISP to provide filtering system to users, many akin that to be a Hong Kong style Great Firewall. If we review the judgment made by censorship bodies of HKSAR,we can find evidences violating common sense and logic, while in favor of established religions. For instance, the world famous CUSP questionnaire is classified as Indecent by the mere question over incest fantasy,while the reproduction of the same content in the website owned by Christian Right flagship Society of Truth and Light, TELA refused classification. In another case, Broadcasting authority STRONGLY URGE 'Gay Lover' in its alleged biased toward gay marriage; however, it refuse to process complains against TV program promoting Christian Right's 'Family Value' and Creationism. The judgments in both cases are later overthrow in expansive Highest Court that few can afford. Now, when Internet filtering is implemented, what could webmasters do to protest when their website is blocked? How could Netizens know what information are they deprived from? As 'indecent' content disappear before anyone know it!


The banned animationn:"Bedtime Bible --the Fall of Sodomites and Lot's Incest" http://truthbible.net/bloodybible/bible ... ble1.shtml

Contact:ohmygod@truthbible.net

Click here for this in pdf format

[1] Unfairly complain processed by censorship bodies:
2006 Netizen complained about 星火飛騰 promoting superstition but the case is dropped from investigation.
2007 Netizen complained《Hour Of Power (ENG/CANT)》making miracle claims without scientific investigation and seeking professional explanation from Psychiatrist. Some consider it being unfair since it lack naturalistic interpretation. The case is dragging on until now.


[2] The status of the Bible animation uploaded to YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZFCsWxsWEw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1A6XZDeZtw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es1ZnyfsRjc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp-mNSlX_74
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPhBqRccT7I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8K2KLT20Ic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03WMtWgHDLY Removed by YOUTUBE
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=wbWjhxqHuAI Require Age verification
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf9pa17UOpI Require Age verification
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPLhBRClsNU Removed by YOUTUBE
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=cPkBrHJcUcQ Removed by YOUTUBE
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 3856534131
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qu-cydeuVso Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWgFkjcpXvo Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgr-0zMRB8U Removed by YOUTUBE
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=wTvWTV0uGSQ Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5e38QzqhwY Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRq7sS9zwo4 Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DpGhKKqGPs Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eE-t9oUf_4 Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Y-UhIGQlb0 Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWo8z61R-E4
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=83MLMaIlAI0
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=0-MjMNlBUyI
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=SvpD2raznCI Require Age verification
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMYC_biuqkM Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Lhx_m-UpjcRemoved by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBnMYIQxf6QRemoved by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiPOh0LntdERemoved by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSQDLyEdDgQ Removed by YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyplVOZOaaA Removed by YOUTUBE

[3]Quotes from Netizens:
mm104337 (youtube)
Does that mean conservative Christian prefer Incest over 'Go Gay'?


mcdon1978 (youtube)
Protest self-censorship by YOUTUBE, return my freedom of information!
When the censorship system is place, what can we see in the Internet :'(
Speech freedom and NO CENSORSHIP!!


hac129 (youtube)
Against fundamentalist! Against censorship! We love justice!


ballballpen89 (youtube)
It is not a joke. If one day this preemptive mechanism is applied, will any of us able to see this comment?

Fai (Golden)
If Christian think Indecent Bible is an outdated concept, so why not Gay blasting in according to the outdated Bible?

Should we maintain the concept that Bible is always right?(since Bible is God's word!)


Troublesome(Golden)
This story is about the good guy in the Lord's eye, which he send angels to save him from the falling city, which become the ancestor for the whole Shiite race. From what I see, it is a good ending for this 'good' guy(who committed incest.)
Now when we read rape cases in newspaper, however sensational is the story; it always end up the suspect is being arrested or prosecuted. In the worst case s, the case is being investigate by the police. Comparing them two, how can we avoid making the conclusion that the Bible is 'encouraging' incest in the layman's eye? How would you define 'encouraging' otherwise?

發表回應 ( 1預覽 )   |  0 引用   |  permalink   |  related link   |   ( 3 / 105 )
From eulertruthbible:On the Public's reaction to Edison Chen's public annoucement 
週一, 三月 17, 2008, 07:26 PM - 轉載, English
(From:
http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/20 ... noucement/)

I will have to admit that my estimation of public sentiment on Edison Chen’s public announcement made in Hong Kong is erroneous. Maybe my guess is accurate only on the segment of Netizen rallying for the release of Netizen first charged by Hong Kong Police, but I fail to capture the popular sentiment of the population in Hong Kong.
My general impression of the popular sentiment in here concerning Edison Chen’s scandal is they accepted his apology, believe in his sincerity and some even willing to stop the flow of indecent photos. So the public is much more Pan-Moralist than I thought. In the Pan-Moralist framework, Edison Chen is wrong to have causal sex as a young celebrity, and has bad influence on the society as a whole. However, in the same framework, it is emotionally moral to accept an sincere apology, regardless of the logic behind it. So it is like he had opened a can of worm, and now he feel sorry for it, and even want to take action to capture the worm, and compensate the public of the harm that the worm has caused. It all fitted in the Pan-Moralist framework of thinking. Beside, since Pan-Moralist love to judge one on his/her intentionality, some are willing to believe Edison Chen is the real victim. There just happen to be indecent woman who use sex as a favor to exchange for jump in career. My thought is, he is a much better actor than Gillian, and he understand the framework of thinking by the population here. He successfully employ the guilt tactic, so the population would felt as if they have wronged the wrong person. It is not morally sound to harbor indecent photos, and it is even worst to spread them. At the height of moral orgasm incurred by Pan-Moralism, people has completely forgotten that Edison is abusing copyright, maybe exploiting female for sexual advantage, has setup an extremely bad precedence of arresting Netizen without sound legal foundation. Does it mean that, because we are feeling guilt about hurting Edison Chen’s sex partner, so we could just forgot about the freedom of information? So we could also forgot that EEG has lied about the photo? So we could also forgot that HK Police has removed all indecent photos in HK domain WITHOUT a sound legal basis? We could also forgot that many poor Netizens are victimized in this case?
From this incident, we could just see how easy is Pan-Moralism to be abused for personal gain, or to minimize the personal lost by any good actor/actress. Pan-Moralism itself carry a Psychological-Thought system that is ripe for abuse and manipulation. People could easily forsake logic for emotional satisfaction, which is why that is the ideology of choice by oligarchy in Hong Kong and China.
No Universal Suffrage, doesn’t matter! Just pretend you are caring about us like an upright gentleman! No Justice, doesn’t matter! Just pretend you are caring about the morality of society. No Freedom, doesn’t matter! Just pretend that freedom is bad for the moral of our next generation.
No wonder Einstein once said: He can’t be certain about Cosmo expansion, but he could be certain about human stupidity!

(From:
http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/20 ... noucement/)

發表回應 ( 4預覽 )   |  0 引用   |  permalink   |  related link   |   ( 2.9 / 104 )
From eulertruthbible:The Final Analysis of Edison Chen’s mind 
週一, 三月 10, 2008, 06:33 PM - 轉載, English
(From:
http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/20 ... hens-mind/)

(WARNING: THIS links below contain MATERIAL WHICH MAY OFFEND AND MAY NOT BE DISTRIBUTED, CIRCULATED, SOLD, HIRED, GIVEN, LENT, SHOWN, PLAYED OR PROJECTED TO A PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF 18 YEARS 警告: 以下連結內容可能令人反感; 不可將本物品派發、傳閱、出售、出租、交給或出借予年齡未滿18歲的人士或將本物品向該等人士出示、播放或放映。)


Since the inception of Edison Chen’s scandal, many in Hong Kong society has tirelessly look for expert opinion of the state of mind of Edison Chen. I am curious as to why is that ever necessary? Why must we assume that those reported in newspaper headline must be psychologically different from all of us? Shouldn’t we refer Donald Tseung to psychiatrist in his ‘re-election’ campaign for the post of CEO of Hong Kong of the terms 2007-2012? What really should be of curiosity to all is how come such a common happening in USA or Europe would turn into such a massive socio-political circus? How is it related to the state of mind of citizen here?
I think the behavior pattern of seeking the headliner for expert opinion is an unique social-psychological phenomena in Hong Kong. People either love to imitate the headliner, or believe they share similarity with those in the headline, or seek expert assurance that those in headline are such a rare so the same thing wouldn’t happen to be. That certainly felt odd to me.
Back to the topic, Edison Chen is just happen to be a rich celebrity with powerful backing. In the reality of entertainment-economic-political monopolization here, an unavoidable fact is many man on top love to take sexual advantage from young female actress. Therefore, sleeping with the powerful boss almost become the implicit norm here. Therefore if I were him, I would not hesitate to use this opportunity to assist the young female actress to discover their sexuality. It certainly doesn’t sound moral either as Pan-Moralist or as a liberal, but what really immoral is the social-political system which made this exploitation a rule rather than exception. Apparently, this is what Chinese Communist Party understand capitalism is: Exploitation without restraint, winner take all!

(Final Analysis is the title of a USA movie.)

(From:
http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/20 ... hens-mind/)

發表回應 ( 2預覽 )   |  0 引用   |  permalink   |  related link   |   ( 3 / 91 )

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 下一頁> >>