Death penalty is murder and should be abolished. Do you agree?

By sentencing a person to death, it is tantamount to putting a stop to his life journey. His life and death lie in the hands of the judge and miscarriages of justice are irreversible. Any error in the decision-making can cause the wrongly accused to lose his head. I feel that humans should not play God by governing any thing that has to do with the taking of lives such as abortion and animal rights. Moreover, as stated by Voltaire, a French philosopher in the seventeenth century, “it is better to risk saving a guilty person than to condemn an innocent one.” In addition, death row can take years and are very costly especially to taxpayers. It is definitely unfair as they are indirectly getting punished for a crime they are not guilty of. Capital punishment may also encourage copycat crimes if the prisoner is seen as a martyr for example Mr Cho from Korea. Thus we can see that not only the individual is affected, the public is not let off either. More problems are being created instead of being solved.

Two wrongs do not make a right. Thus, I believe that rehabilitation should be favoured over the death penalty. Felons will be made to reenact the crime they committed. By seeing themselves as the third party, many would suddenly realize their grave mistake and willingly turn over a new leaf. After all, to err is human. Nobody is perfect and I am sure everyone deserves a second chance.

However, should there not be the existence of capital punishment, the national security will be at stake. With no fear of putting their heads on the chopper board, criminals such as terrorists, murderers and revolutionaries will roam the streets and strike terror in many innocent people’s hearts. Only with the death penalty put in place, can the national security be preserved and the public assured that their peace is not threatened. Moreover, it is technically sound to execute the prisoners than to keep them in life incarceration for they will be living off taxpayers dollars. Death is quick and causes less suffering than a long jail term as freedom is restricted. Hence capital punishment acts as a deterrent warning to others against the consequence of crime and also to prevent repeat offenses.

In conclusion, I disagree that death penalty is murder and should be abolished. Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of one human by another. Certainly capital punishment is lawful. We all know that the anticipation of death is definitely more fearful and painful than death itself. Therefore, my stand is that so long as the methods of execution are not cruel and humane, for example pulling the trigger of a pistol pointed at the back of the head (death is quick and the likelihood of human error is very minimal), the death penalty should not be abolished. I personally feel that all criminals should be given a chance to reform. Only those that crossed the line of moral/conscious, those that show no sign of remorse nor a single tinge of regret, should face the death penalty.

The Mass Media

With reference to the article titled " Singapore swimmers in hot water" on 3 April 2007.
How does the media and its subjective perception affect he way this incident was handled?

I believe that the reporting of events in the mass media more accurately reflects subjective perception rather than objective truth. Since perception involves all the senses and also giving meaning to all information a person takes in, different people can get different meanings from the same media. Perception is also affected by our belief systems, attitudes and needs.
In this incident, just a smile which the media perceived as a sign of mockery caused much controversy around the globe. It was even published in Sports Illustrated magazine, Californian newspaper Whittier Daily News and The Statesman in India. This matter became so serious that should the boys be found guilty, an official apology would be submitted. The reputation of Singapore and her friendship with America were put at stake.

However, we have no one to blame but ourselves for all these “false” reports. We are all guilty of wanting to know juicy news and more often than not, accurate information provided rarely satisfies the public. To worsen the situation, this industry has grown to become profit-driven due to the strong competition. Hence, journalists may well owe his or her professional regard for truthful reporting to everyone’s need for news – a critical element in a democratic society. So, instead of basing journalistic ethics in the fashionable moral philosophies of the modern era, it is better to argue that it grows out of the special nature of the craft, as imbedded in a more venerable notion of self fulfilling social responsibility.

Different people have different ways of expressing their emotions and reactions, let alone interpreting them. My stand is that one should not jump to conclusion but instead gather more information from different sources in order to learn the “whole” truth.

Do you think professional parenting is the way to go for S'pore?

Professional Parents are foster parents who have been carefully selected, licensed, and specially trained to raise other people’s children. Over the last few decades, our culture has become less and less clear about its messages to parents and other guardians and educators of its children. Parents often experience doubts or guilt regarding the decisions they make for their children’s sake because they receive so much conflicting advice from various “experts” in the field of child rearing. Much of this confusion is a result of the rapid changes our society as a whole has been going through. Thus, I feel that parents should do without role models and scripts, let alone pushing their parental responsibilities to strangers, and let their hearts be their guide.
The life of the family is a learning experience for both the parents and children. The idea of family is to go through trial and tribulation together. I believe that parenting is about the process and not the end result. Natural parenting allows the parents to rein in their own expectations. This is because professional parenting is based on certain fixed philosophy. For an example, it could be based on the western idea of nursing and nurturing babies which may not be suitable for the Asian ways.
It is not an uncommon sight in Singapore to see both parents out working, leaving their children in the hands of the maids. While I agree that professional parenting makes parenting more efficient, family life is not about efficiency. There is a saying that “a home should be clean enough to be healthy but dirty enough to be happy.” Moreover, there has also been much focus on work-life balance. The five-day work-week and flexible work arrangements such as telecommuting and part-timing have made it much easier for officers to fulfil their responsibilities outside work, as well as to engage in other pursuits. Thus having insufficient time to take care of their children is not an excuse for parents to turn to professional parenting.
Journeys into unknown territory often involve taking two steps forward and one step back. Parents swell with pride in seeing their young ones make their first baby steps. Why not, then, take a little pride in their own? At the end of the day, would they want their babies to call them mummy or nanny?

Alumni Donations

With reference to the article from The Straits Times on 23 February, more alumni are donating to the National University of Singapore (NUS) bursary fund although they are aware its bursaries have been going to foreigners too.

NUS had confirmed that four in ten students who were awarded bursaries last year were foreigners. Some critics felt that foreign students were already subsidised by the Government to a large degree. Hence the bursary fund should benefit local students instead of the foreigners.

Personally, I feel that as long as they are needy students, whether or not they are local or foreign, it does not matter who receive the bursaries. Moreover, NUS took pains to stress that Singapore students were catered to first, before the funds went to the foreign students who are in need. However, as the saying goes, “Action speaks louder than words.” Thus I feel strongly that NUS should practise the principle of transparency by showing the public the process of selection of students for the bursaries, for an example. We have to look at the big picture. There is a higher probability that local students will contribute back to our society as compared to the foreign students. Therefore my stand would be NUS must "invest" in the right group of people and take care of all the local students first.

S'pore and Thailand

Referring to the article from The Straits Times on January 21, I dare say that I am proud of Singapore. This is because despite the souring of bilateral relations, Singapore is still going ahead with the programme of training Thai doctors for the first time.

Many Singaporeans travel to Thailand for holiday or business. So Thailand’s Accident and Emergency expertise will benefit us too. As for Thailand, with more trained doctors in the medical line, there is a glimpse of hope in the improvement of the country’s level of healthcare.
The training programme went ahead as scheduled although last Tuesday, the Thai government, as part of its response to its former premier Thaksin Shinawatra’s recent visit to Singapore, cancelled an invitation to Foreign Minister George Yeo to visit Bangkok. It also suspended the Singapore-Thailand Civil Service Exchange Programme (CSEP). To make matters worse, unhappiness engulfed in most of the Thais with Singapore’s win in the recent soccer match. All these certainly heightened the diplomatic tension between the two countries.

However, Singapore and Thailand are very close friends. And just like teeth and tongue or husband and wife, sometimes there will be quarrels. But I just hope that it will not last for long.

Family plays a critical role in our society. Do you agree?

The family is a universal and irreplaceable community, rooted in human nature, which is the basis for all societies at all times. As the cradle of life and love for each new generation, the family is the primary source of personal identity, self-esteem, and support for children. It is also the first and foremost school of life, uniquely suited to teach children integrity, character, morals, responsibility, service, and wisdom. Thus I agree that family plays a critical role in our society to a large extent.

Family provides the natural framework for the emotional, financial, and material support essential to the growth and development of its members, particularly infants and children.

It remains a vital means of preserving and transmitting cultural values by providing a loving environment where children can flourish; and they help ensure that cultural traditions and timeless values are passed on to future generations. These roles of transmitting culture and socializing children make the family indispensable to civil society, as families transform helpless, dependent babies into responsible, independent adults.

Strong families play a critical role in developing the character of our nation. They teach children important standards of conduct such as accepting responsibility, respecting others, and distinguishing the difference between right and wrong. By helping youths to grow into mature, thoughtful, and caring citizens, families help make our communities and our nation safer and more civilized.

I believe that a decline in the family will lead to a decline in our democracy. Indeed, the family is where children should learn self-government, basic moral values and the beliefs that determine the future of democratic institutions. Thus, it stands to reason that without stable families, we can have no hope of producing self-reliant, responsible citizens.

Hence I recognize the irreplaceable role the family plays in the health, development, and well-being of children, adults, and the communities in which they live.