<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Old guard's statements reveal misconceptions
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I AM not a member of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware), but I am surprised by some of the statements made by old guard members.
For instance, when Ms Nancy Griffiths asked if the new executive committee accepted homosexuality, and newly elected honorary secretary Jenica Chua stood up and said 'no', Ms Griffiths said she was 'flabbergasted'. What is there to be flabbergasted about? Whether one accepts a certain condition or not is a personal choice - even if Ms Griffiths accepts homosexuality, she should not be offended that Ms Chua does not.
Acceptance of homosexuality is not an Aware membership criterion, nor is it in its mission statement. Surely, Aware can accept diversity of views among its members.
Next, the old guard's statement referring to DBS Bank's credit card campaign last year supporting Focus on the Family is tainted with misconceptions. Focus on the Family is not an evangelical Christian organisation; it is a social charity and evangelism is not on its charter. Merely because Focus on the Family was founded by an evangelical Christian does not make it evangelical Christian.
The issue of sub-committees being overhauled is one faced by all elected societies. These sub-committees should never be under the illusion that their terms are entrenched. Once there is a change of management, they face potential change.
Similar misconceptions were revealed by Ms Margaret Thomas on vice-presidents often going on to become presidents. While that may have been a practice, it should never be taken as a given.
Perhaps it is time for the old guard to examine its own motives and be aware of organisational behaviour. Tan Suan Tiu
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I AM not a member of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware), but I am surprised by some of the statements made by old guard members.
For instance, when Ms Nancy Griffiths asked if the new executive committee accepted homosexuality, and newly elected honorary secretary Jenica Chua stood up and said 'no', Ms Griffiths said she was 'flabbergasted'. What is there to be flabbergasted about? Whether one accepts a certain condition or not is a personal choice - even if Ms Griffiths accepts homosexuality, she should not be offended that Ms Chua does not.
Acceptance of homosexuality is not an Aware membership criterion, nor is it in its mission statement. Surely, Aware can accept diversity of views among its members.
Next, the old guard's statement referring to DBS Bank's credit card campaign last year supporting Focus on the Family is tainted with misconceptions. Focus on the Family is not an evangelical Christian organisation; it is a social charity and evangelism is not on its charter. Merely because Focus on the Family was founded by an evangelical Christian does not make it evangelical Christian.
The issue of sub-committees being overhauled is one faced by all elected societies. These sub-committees should never be under the illusion that their terms are entrenched. Once there is a change of management, they face potential change.
Similar misconceptions were revealed by Ms Margaret Thomas on vice-presidents often going on to become presidents. While that may have been a practice, it should never be taken as a given.
Perhaps it is time for the old guard to examine its own motives and be aware of organisational behaviour. Tan Suan Tiu