Term 3 List of Comments

Comment 1:
A True Gentleman #3 by Loh Wei Kiat
http://2i3-12.blogspot.com/2011/06/true-gentleman-3.html?showComment=1310030376480#c7235734742269749782
Comment 2:
Deepening of Reservoirs Under Review by Chua Cheng Tat
http://chuachengtat.blogspot.com/2011/08/deepening-of-reservoirs-under-review.html?showComment=1313758608807#c8237057761344511741
Comment 3:
My CCA T3P9 by Chuang Fu Yuan
http://2i305lablog.blogspot.com/2011/08/my-cca-t3p9.html?showComment=1313759618308#c9138581205455015885
Comment 4:
Why? by Gaw Ban Siang
http://bansiang2i3.blogspot.com/2011/08/why_15.html?showComment=1313760142437#c2329240434439830118
Comment 5:
Should A Leader Be Judged According To His Personal Life? Yes! by Koh Yi Da
http://2i3numbereight.blogspot.com/2011/08/should-leader-be-judged-according-to.html?showComment=1313761146338#c1035512858632045401
Comment 6:
Euthanasia by Lee Liak Ghee
http://leeliakghee2i310.blogspot.com/2011/07/euthanasia.html?showComment=1313761677064#c2095637729267744425
Comment 7: Home schooling - Pros and Cons by Lee Wei Ren
http://lolz-teddy.blogspot.com/2011/07/home-schooling-pros-and-cons.html?showComment=1313762063594#c1684828417187422057
Comment 8: Was Portia being merciful or driving Shylock to ends? #8 by Loh Wei Kiat
http://2i3-12.blogspot.com/2011/08/was-portia-being-merciful-or-driving.html?showComment=1313763180166#c6589930039199934295
Comment 9:
Should leaders be judged by their private lives? by Samuel Wong
http://2i321.blogspot.com/2011/08/should-leaders-be-judged-by-their.html?showComment=1313764071181#c3562909990314721809
Comment 10:
Russian ship capsize by Clarence Tan
http://1i3-22.blogspot.com/2011/07/russian-ship-capsize.html?showComment=1313764382087#c5642981138959342427

Links to the Facebook Profiles of characters in MOV ACE Task

Bassanio: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002785655968&sk=wall
Portia: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002771586199
Gratiano: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002771706221

Book Review - The Lost Symbol

  I had read the book The Lost Symbol quite sometime ago, but I approve of the book greatly as well as think that it might be described as a timeless classic someday, so I will strongly recommend this book to all of you, with the reasons stated below.

  This book is set in Washington D.C., United States of America. Set in the present day, the story’s main characters include Robert Langdon, Katherine Solomon, and Zachary Solomon.

Robert Langdon, the protégé of Peter Solomon, a Freemason and billionaire philanthropist, was called to the U.S. Capitol to give a lecture, apparently invited by his mentor. However, upon his arrival, Langdon discovered that it was in fact Solomon’s kidnapper, Mal’akh, who had summoned him, who contacted him and ordered him to find the Mason Pyramid and the Lost Word in exchange for Peter Solomon’s life.

  Langdon is then met by Inoue Sato, the Director of the CIA Office of Security. Together, they found an Unfinished Pyramid with a carved inscription. Sato then demands an explanation from Langdon for the small capstone sealed in a box in his backpack, which Solomon had entrusted to Langdon years ago. Because of this, Sato attempted to apprehend Langdon, but Langdon was rescued by Warren Bellamy, Architect of the Capitol and another Freemason.

While the duo was on the run from Sato, Mal’akh, who had infiltrated the Freemasons, and with tattoos on his whole body, destroys the Smithsonian laboratory of Peter Solomon’s younger sister, Noetic scientist Katherine Solomon, and nearly kills her. Katherine fled and later joined Langdon.

However, Mal’akh captures them, severely injuring Katherine Solomon, and places Langdon in a tank of breathable oxygenated perfluorocarbons. Then, Mal’akh forces Langdon to decrypt the bottom of the stone pyramid for him, and then absconds with Peter Solomon to the House of the Temple, a Masonic building of significance, which is depicted on the bottom of the stone pyramid.

Mal’akh then forces Peter Solomon to tell him the Lost Word by threatening to release to the news media a modified video of senior governmental officials participating in ancient Masonic ceremonies. Peter Solomon tells him that the Lost Word is a circumpunct, which Mal’akh then tattoos on the top of his head.

  However, Langdon and Katherine were rescued by Sato and her subordinates, who rushed to the House of the Temple and EMPed Mal’akh’s laptop, thwarting his plot and gravely injuring him, who was discovered to be Peter Solomon’s thought-to-be-dead son, Zachary Solomon.

Peter Solomon then tells Langdon that the circumpunct Zachary tattooed on his head is not the Lost Word. Peter leads him to the room atop the Washington Monument and tells him that the Lost in fact lies in the Monument's cornerstone, buried. Langdon realizes that the symbols on the stone pyramid's base spelled out the words Laus Deo which translate to “Praise God”.

  Like most of Dan Brown’s books, The Lost Symbol’s central theme is once again religion and science. However, unlike other books, in this book, religion and science are not at odds and instead was closer, with hints that the two combined will “bring humanity to a new era of enlightenment”.

  

  In my opinion, the author successfully achieved his purpose. The Lost Symbol includes a thrill of discovery as readers follow Robert Langdon through a masterful and unexpected new landscape, churning forward with brutalist energy. The author’s writing is elegant and yet practically delivering at the same time, powerful vocabulary encompassing the readers in the scenario and thus helping them to understand it. However, at certain moments, I feel that there is a little too much explaining which may leave people bored. Still, I have found the book interesting and surprising, well-deserved assessments for the thriller genre’s Grandmaster. 

  The Lost Symbol had left me with the impression of a page-turner of tremendous proportions and dramatic showdowns, positive side-effects of Dan Brown’s unstoppable plotline. I would strongly recommend it to fans of the mystery and thriller genres-this will satisfy their wildest dreams.

Being Gentlemanly

  "To be a gentleman does not depend upon the tailor or the toilet. Good clothes are not good habits. A gentleman is just a gentle-man,—no more, no less; a diamond polished, that was first a diamond in the rough." -William Croswell Doane had said in his address at Burlington College. Personally, I agree with him, although I would like to make several corrections. First, although being a gentleman does not depend on the price or material of your clothes, you have to dress at least neatly and cleanly to show your respect to people you are interacting with. Also, I would like to add that a gentleman also have to be cultured and well-mannered, as being well-mannered and cultured is a form of showing respect to the other party as well as being essential to 'being respected by society', which is one of the dictionary definitions of being a gentleman.
  I agree also that being a gentleman means that you are a gentle-man, but I think that being gentle is not the only virtue of gentlemen - they also should have more virtues to hold themselves to, such as respect, tolerance, compassion, et cetera, just like Atticus Finch in To Kill A Mockingbird. More importantly, they should hold themselves to those virtues at all times, instead of only at some occasions to give the fake illustration of being a gentleman while being hidden under a mask.

  To summarize, I think that being a gentleman means being decently and neatly dressed, have good moral virtues, and being cultured and well-mannered, and I hope everyone in society would strive towards becoming a gentleman (or lady) to make the world a better place.

Euthanasia

  According to Wikipedia, euthanasia is the practice of intentionally ending a life to relieve pain and suffering. There had been much debate surrounding this topic, focusing mainly on the ethical, human rights, religious, and moral aspects of the topic. Personally, I support the practice of euthanasia, for several reasons which I would state below.
  Firstly, since the most basic human right is 'the right to live', then it implies that any human being should also have the right to die as well. Also, on moral grounds, euthanasia did not violate the rights of anyone, but instead is in their best interests by ending their pain and suffering. 
  Secondly, from the practical viewpoint, simply outlawing euthanasia will not stop it from happening, as people with terminal illnesses will still end their own lives on their own or with the help of close friends.Instead, outlawing euthanasia will make the number of euthanized people increase, as the euthanasia laws in most countries which legalized euthanasia allows euthanasia only for patients with a terminal illness that allow them only 6 more months or less, but if euthanasia is illegal, far more patients that don't fit this criteria will euthanize themselves.
  Opponents of euthanasia often argue that euthanasia will hurt the people around the patient as well, such as his friends and relatives, as well as that euthanasia gives too much power to doctors. However, I disagree, as if euthanasia is illegal, patients will just do it secretly, but if it is legal, the relatives of the patient will doubtlessly be notified, and they will have some time to adapt to and accept the patient's decision. Furthermore, tighter regulations and supervision can be placed on doctors to make sure that they don't abuse their power.
  In conclusion, personally, I support euthanasia on moral, ethical and practical grounds, but I am open to other views. After all, this is a disputed topic.

Racial Harmony Day CIP Activity

  On Racial Harmony Day, I took part in a CIP Activity organized by Mdm Shirley Lim. In this CIP Activity, we went to an elderly care centre in Toa Payoh to bring them back to our school for a piece of the Racial Harmony Day celebrations. Then, we brought them to The Space to keep them company as well as converse with them as they enjoy their breakfasts at The Space. After they finished their breakfast, we brought them to the Auditorium for them to enjoy the wonderful Racial Harmony Day performance put up by our school as well as other collabarating schools. After the end of the performance, we brought them back to the elderly care centre again.

  I feel that this CIP Activity has a very good purpose, as those elderly are usually lonely and have nothing to do without a spouse or children to keep them company in their friends, and therefore it is a very good idea to bring them to our school and get a piece of the happy atmosphere of our Racial Harmony Day celebrations, as well as give them a happy memory to treasure in their waning days, which is rare enough given how lonely they are. When the CIP Activity ended, the staff at the elderly care centre also attributed their thanks to us, which gives me a warm feeling in my heart that comes with contributing to the community. I feel that this is a very enriching experience, as it gives me a peek into the less fortunate part of society.

Antonio: The Merchant of Venice

  As the protagonist of the Merchant of Venice, as mentioned in the title, Antonio is a well-liked and wealthy Venetian ship merchant. Like Shylock, Antonio's character is also debatable; he could be said to be either noble and loyal, or cruel and weak.
  One of Antonio's best attributes is his willingness to sacrifice all he has for his friends, especially Bassanio, including his wealth, his reputation, even his life, which is shown when he told Bassanio, "My purse, my person, my extremest means, lie all unlock'd to your occasions." Also, he does not blame Bassanio for the consequence of his bond, and even after all the torment he endured, he does not seek any compensation for himself, and instead leaves his share of Shylock's wealth to Lorenzo and Jessica.
  Antonio also shows mercy to Shylock by saying "...To quit the fine for one half of his goods, I am content;". Also, he aided Bassanio in his courtship of Portia, despite knowing that he would probably lose his good friend if Bassanio marries Portia.
  However, Antonio's image of a compassionate person is tainted by his open contempt of all Jews, especially Shylock, labeling him a "misbeliever, cut-throat dog" and insulting his religion due to religious piety. Also, even when he is attempting to borrow money from Shylock, he taunted Shylock by saying that he will "call thee so again, to spit on thee again, to spurn thee too." Also, he damages Shylock's business merely for that he hates Shylock's religion and occupation.
  Despite his strong resentment of Shylock in the earlier scenes, he still try to flatter Shylock in order to get mercy, calling him "good Shylock", exposing his weak nature. Also, Antonio resigns himself to his fate and becomes depressed, unlike Bassanio, like when he says, "I am a tainted wether of the flock, meetest for death:"
  At the end of the day, the crisis that Antonio finds himself in is a result of his overconfidence and his religious hatred, proving himself to be a weak hero that resigns himself easily in the middle of his crisis instead of standing up and fighting to the last man.

Shylock:Victim Or Villain?

  Whether Shylock's role is that of a victim or a villain is one of the most debated topics in Merchant of Venice. Although most casual readers would agree that Shylock is the primary villain in Merchant of Venice, as well as an "evil" person, a more in-depth and analytically reading would reveal more positive aspects of Shylock's character, such as his obsession for Jessica, as well as hint at some reasons for Shylock's behaviour, and to this day no consensus had ever be reached on whether he is a victim or a villain, but all will agree that he is the most noteworthy character in Merchant of Venice.
  In Merchant of Venice, Shylock is portrayed as a classic Jew in the anti-Semitic context during the Elizabethan times. He is caricatured as miserly, greedy, evil, mad, and selfish - the classic Jewish stereotype. However, he is not merely a two-dimensioned character, but rather have more human qualities than the classic villain.
  Firstly, Shylock's behavior is a result of the circumstances he is in as one of the persecuted minority-Jews. Suffering from abuse and insults from the Christians, especially Antonio, who threatens his business, and mock him, even in times of vulnerability, such as when Jessica eloped with Lorenzo.
  Shylock's villainy is also apparently taught to him by the Christians, making his desire for revenge natural, as shown when Shylock said, "The villainy you teach me, I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction." Also, he lost everything he had at the end to Christian; his property, his money, his valued ring from his wife, his daughter, even his religion. Under this kind of suffering, Shylock's villainy attributes seem only natural when viewed through his eyes.
  However, Shylock's cruel nature could not be blithely overlooked either. Although Antonio shows some mercy in the sentencing of Shylock, Shylock refuses even to have medical treatment standing by for Antonio. Also, Shylock curbs the will of his daughter, Jessica, much like how Portia's father curbs her will, but minus the good intent, as he refuse to approve the marriage between Jessica and Lorenzo because Lorenzo is a Christian, despite the true love between them.
  Shylock mistreats his servant, Lancelot Gobbo, as well, by starving him and insulting him, leading Lancelot Gobbo to call him "the very devil incarnate" and him calling Lancelot Gobbo "that fool of Hagar's offspring". Also, Shylock is conniving as well, as he scheme to kill Antonio by pretending to be magnanimous, shown when he says, "To buy his favor, I extend this friendship: If he will take it, so; If not, adieu;".
  Depicted in both positive and negative lights for modern theatergoers, the true nature of Shylock is controversial to this day, and it would be up to the individual reader and theatergoer to decide on Shylock's true face.

Verse and Prose

  Verse and prose are the two main techniques of written and spoken language, and Shakespeare often uses the two in the same work, such as the Merchant of Venice, where verse and prose have different usage to express different things.
  In Merchant of Venice, verse, with a more formal metrical structure, is usually used by characters with high social status. reflecting the character's class, refinement, education, et cetera. For example, Portia's mercy speech is written entirely in verse, probably to reflect the refinement and insight of the topic. 
  Verse is also sometimes used by all characters to express their strong emotions, such as in Act One, Scene Three, when Shylock criticizes Antonio ("How like a fawning publican he looks!"), when he is feeling bitter and spiteful. Verse, the traditional form of poetry, is also used often to perform a poem or song in Merchant of Venice, such as the song that is sang in Act Three, Scene Two, as Bassanio contemplates which casket to choose ("Tell me where is fancy bred,").
  In contrast, prose, with an ordinary grammatical structure and normal flow of speech, is generally used in Merchant of Venice by commoners and "aliens" such as Shylock, as it contains coarse language and rude topics. Shylock, considered an "alien" for his religion in Venice, often speaks in prose, such as when he gives his famous "Have not a Jew eyes?" speech.
  Also, prose is also used to express coarse observations as well as one-line replies, and to show drunkenness.
  However, the usage of verse and prose can also be reversed sometimes to let the commoner characters use verse and the nobility characters use prose, to reflect their emotions as well as the true personality of the character, such as in Act One, Scene Two, when Portia comments on all of her suitors in a very arrogant manner, using prose.

Iambic Pentameter

  The term iambic pentameter describes a line made up of five groups of syllables, or "feet", each of which is made up of an unstressed syllable followed by a stressed syllable. It is used in many major poetic forms, including sonnets and plays, such as the Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare.
  Iambic pentameter will make the lines in the play sound smoother and more elegant without risk making it sound artificial. A speech delivered in it sometimes will end in a rhyming couplet to add an emphasis or a dramatic finish to it, such as in Act One, Scene Three, when Antonio says to Bassanio, "Come on: in this there can be no dismay; My ships come home a month before the day."
  Shakespeare also makes extensive use of blank verses, which is poetry written in unrhymed iambic pentameter. He uses blank verse for irregular speech, such as  in this exchange from King John, where one blank verse line is broken between two characters:
My lord?

A grave.

He shall not live.

Enough.

Symbolism of the Three Caskets

  In the Merchant of Venice, Portia's father asked the suitors who wanted Portia's hand in marriage to choose a casket from three caskets: gold, silver, and lead, and the one who chooses correctly will marry Portia. However, I believe that the three caskets have a deeper layer of symbolism.

  I think that the casket test represents Belmont, where the casket test is held. Belmont is a cosmopolitan society, more accepting of foreigners, and the casket test is based solely on the wisdom of the suitors, with a little luck thrown in, and not on their nationality, race, language, religion, et cetera. 

  Also, the casket test seem to be representative of Bassanio, a Christian and a risk-taker. The gold and silver caskets are inscribed with "Who chooseth me shall gain what many men desire" and “Who chooseth me shall get as much as he deserves" respectively. Those inscriptions are also Christian values, such as that desire is something undesirable and that humans does not deserve the blessings from God. In Shakespeare's times, the idea of not judging something by its appearance is also common, hence the humble lead casket. The lead casket is inscribed with "Who chooseth me must give and hazard all." In my opinion, this carry the meaning that the suitor must be willing to risk all that he has for love, and hope for Portia even though he may not deserve her. Bassanio is the perfect example of that, as in his heart, he knows that he does not deserves Portia, but he's still willing to risk all he has (admittedly, not much) on one hand of cards.  

  Lastly, the three caskets also seem to represent the three main types of people present in the play - greedy, materialistic people, such as Shylock; cautious, confident people, such as Portia; and risk-takers and gamblers, such as Bassanio. 

Ministerial Pay

  Recently, there had been a lot of public debate and a wide range of opinions on the topic of Ministerial Pay, which many Singaporeans feel is too high. Therefore, I shall attempt to express my opinion on the topic of Ministerial Pay.

  In my opinion, I think that the current high ministerial salaries are necessary, as although the top talent in the private sector may not be attracted to public office that has high salaries, they will definitely not be attracted to public office with much lower salaries.

  In the current economic situation, and especially in the materialistic Singaporean context, money is a very significant factor that affects the job that top talents choose. In Asian societies, people are typically very materialistic, and the top talents with usually have a wide selection of different paths and occupations to choose from, and one of the most important, or even the most important, factor would be money. In many other countries, both developed and developing, the salaries of the politicians and civil servants are much lower compared to those in their private sector, which is one of the reasons that in those countries, much less people are attracted to public service and politics.

  Therefore, government salaries must be competitive with the salaries of the private sector. The current ministerial pay is derived from a formula that pegged the salaries of ministers and civil servants  at two-thirds the average principal earned income of the top four earners in six professions: accounting, banking, engineering, law, local manufacturing firms and multinational corporations. Government jobs are mainly about governing, which is a form of management. The six professions’ top earners all have excellent management skills, especially banking, manufacturing and multinational corporations. To serve the people of Singapore better, the government has a necessity to attract the best talents from the private sector, and then to keep them.

  Although some people in the private sector may not want to join a government with salaries that are comparable to the ones of the private sector, they will definitely not want to join one with salaries that are far beyond those in the private sector. The ministers of Singapore’s pay had already been cut to two-thirds of the private sector’s high flyers’ salaries, as a sacrifice of entering public service. It had been cut even further in the economic crisis of 2008-2009, and even further in 2010. Personally, I feel that that amount would be suitable for government ministers of a country with one of the most efficient and corruption-free governments in the world, as a reward for the work they had done for Singapore. Currently, Singapore is the second-richest country in Asia after Japan, and after all, the ministers’ salaries tie in directly with the work they’ve done; if they do a bad job, Singapore’s economy suffers, the pay of everyone in the private sector falls, and so their salaries fall too if they do a bad job, and rise if they do a good one. And in order to obtain ministers that perform well and do good jobs, government salaries must be competitive. After all, it’s a simple logic; you’ve got to pay to get them and you've got to pay to keep them, and you’ve got to pay them well to prevent them from resorting to taking bribes, like poorly-paid ministers in developing countries and even some developed countries do. To use the words of Defense Minister Teo Chee Hean, "We don't want pay to be the reason for people to join us, but we also don't want pay to be the reason for them not to join us, or to leave after joining us."

  In view of the recent economic crisis, the salaries of the ministers had already been cut twice. Furthermore, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had formed a committee to review ministerial salaries, headed by National Kidney Foundation (NKF) chairman Gerard Ee. To use the words of PM Lee, salaries must reflect the values and ethos of public service. And there is no doubt that being a top minister is inferior to being a top lawyer or top engineer, so the pay shouldn’t be inferior either.

  Therefore, I think that the current ministerial pay is the correct one, and will encourage the high flyers in the private sector like me to join government service and so better serve the people of Singapore. You pay the best, you get the best, and I think that a virtually corruption-free and extremely efficient government is worth fifty cents more from each taxpayer each year. 

Truth of Mississippi Burning

Q1. For minor crimes, most states have a “statute of limitations” that prohibits bringing charges when a certain period of time has elapsed since the crime. When it comes to serious crimes, is it right for the justice system to pursue criminal charges several decades after the crime is said to have occurred?
A1.  I feel that it is right for the justice system to pursue criminal charges several decades after the crime is said to have occurred, as justice have to be carried out, and as they say, better late than never. The purpose of convicting a criminal in court is to punish him for his mistake and prevent him from making that mistake again, and if criminals that aren't caught will be safe decades after the crime is committed, that would conflict with the purpose of convicting criminals. Also, it would be deeply unfair to the victims, as they would still have to live with the physical and psychological wound of the crime.
Q2. Reporting for The Times on the conviction of Edgar Ray Killen in 2005, Shaila Dewan wrote, “While some in Neshoba County [Mississippi] said it was too late and too painful to revisit the episode, others thought that in doing so, the county might find redemption.”
What do you think: was the state’s image “rehabilitated”?
A2. Yes, I feel that the state's image was "rehabilitated", as although in the past, the criminals were not charged and/or acquitted because of the supremacy of the whites over the blacks and the prejudice of the public and the jury at that time, those criminals were now caught and acquitted, and will be punished by the law. Others will now be safer from this kind of crimes, showing that justice will eventually prevail in the face of racism.
Q3. How much do you know about the civil rights era in general?
 In general, the civil rights era is an era of massive changes and milestones in the American society, primarily due to the Civil Rights Movement, a movement consisting of both blacks and whites, calling for every American, regardless of race, to have equal human rights and protection before the law, as opposed to the extremely racist society before, which treated blacks as being inferior to whites. Although the movement is successful in many areas, in some other areas it is not very successful, and as a result, racism still exist in America today in much of the same way as neo-Nazism in Germany.

General Elections 2011

  Singapore General Elections, 2011 - Analysis

  Singapore’s 16^th Parliamentary Elections were held on 7^th May 2011. The Constitution of Singapore states that the maximum term of Parliament is five years, after which it must be dissolved by the President and the General Elections must be held by the elections department within three months. The 2011 General Elections had been described as a ‘watershed election’ by many, and marks the most furious political fight in the history of Singapore, with 82 out of 87 seats being contested, and the presence of three-sided fights. Below, I would like to analyze two of the ‘hot’ areas, Marine Parade Group Representation Constituency (GRC), and Potong Pasir Single-Member Constituency (SMC).

  Marine Parade GRC: Goh Chok Tong, Tin Pei Ling, and Nicole Seah

  Marine Parade GRC is probably one of the hottest contested GRCs in this year’s General Elections. As most parties had realized the weight of the young voters, they had begun to introduce more young politicians to contest in the General Elections. In the case of Marine Parade GRC, both the People’s Action Party (PAP) and the National Solidarity Party (NSP) had sent in their youngest candidates; Tin Pei Ling, 27, and Nicole Seah, 24.

  Without question, Nicole Seah is by far more suitable to become a Member of Parliament (MP) than Tin Pei Ling, both in reality and in public opinion.

  Tin Pei Ling, PAP’s candidate, had been criticized as being immature and lackluster. She was especially unpopular among young voters, who made use of social media to criticize her experience, her image and her maturity. She had also faced ridicule in the public media, due to her statement of supporting all present PAP policies, leading the comments about her being indecisive and weak.

  Tin Pei Ling had also faced an online backlash of her ‘acting cute’ with a Kate Spade bag, an image which had become both infamous and popular in a negative sense among Singaporean netizens. She had also been accused of exploiting her husband Ng How Yue’s position as the Principal Private Secretary of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to enter politics.

  On the other hand, Nicole Seah is an extremely popular figure among all aged groups, surpassing Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew as the most popular politician in Singapore. She could connect with both younger students by her extensive use of social media such as Facebook, her home visits reached out to older lower-income residents, and empathized with them over their predicament, even moved to the point of crying in one of the videos, thus displaying that she cared for the welfare of the residents. Her well-organized speeches also managed to convince a large chunk of voters to switch to the NSP.

  Of course, the determining factor in Marine Parade GRC is PAP’s heavyweight, Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong. SM Goh is the ace card that allowed PAP its victory despite incompetent candidates like Tin Pei Ling. As the former Prime Minister of Singapore, Goh Chok Tong’s long experience and excellent track record, as well as his good reputation, image and respect commanded in the Marine Parade residents is what convinced 56.7% of them to vote for the PAP.

  Without doubt, if Marine Parade GRC had been a one-on-one between Tin Pei Ling and Nicole Seah, Nicole Seah would emerge as the victor with a large margin of votes. However, it is SM Goh that salvaged the PAP team and led to its ultimate win. Even so, Tin Pei Ling had caused a plummet in potential voters for the PAP, with it winning by a mere 13.3% as opposed to the previous contest.

  In the end, what had the voters voted for is PAP, and not Tin Pei Ling. The majority of Marine Parade residents that had voted for the People’s Action Party did so because of the solutions and policies it proposed, its long-standing track record, its political ideology – not because of Goh Chok Tong, and certainly not because of Tin Pei Ling.

  Potong Pasir SMC: Lina Chiam and Sitoh Yih Pin

  This year, the People’s Action Party, fielding candidate Mr. Sitoh Yih Pin, had finally breached the opposition stronghold of Potong Pasir, after 27 years of its occupation by the opposition after its 17-year MP, Mr. Chiam See Tong, left to contest Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC and leaving his wife, Lina Chiam, to take his place as the Singapore People’s Party (SPP) candidate for Potong Pasir.

  Mr. Sitoh Yih Pin, contesting Potong Pasir SMC for the third time in a row, won this time by a 0.72% margin of 114 votes. It is the closest fight in this year’s General Election.

  In my opinion, Mrs. Lina Chiam obtained her 49.64% of votes largely because of her husband, Mr. Chiam See Tong, who had been the MP for Potong Pasir for 17 years, who commanded enormous respect and support from long-time residents of the area. However, this is also what led to her downfall at the hands of Mr. Sitoh.

  Potong Pasir consist of mainly older HDB blocks occupied by older residents that had lived in the area for a long time, and of which most of them are supporters of Mr. Chiam See Tong, the ex-MP of the SMC. However, in the past five years, many new residences had sprung up in Potong Pasir, leading to an influx of new residents that are unfamiliar with, not to mention loyal to, the Chiams. Therefore, most of them would be convinced by the strong campaign ran by Mr. Sitoh, as Mrs. Chiam had been criticized as being uncharismatic and ‘all talk, no action’.

  Also, the PAP had managed to capture the votes of a large percentage of Chiam supporters by promising estate upgrading, which Mr. Chiam had formerly failed to secure for the SMC. Potong Pasir is much less upgraded than neighboring constituencies, with much less new features, which led to many voters who were at heart loyal to Mr. Chiam voting for the PAP only because of the carrot offered by Mr. Sitoh – estate upgrading.

  Therefore, Mrs. Lina Chiam’s main selling point is loyalty, which generated many votes for her from supporters of Mr. Chiam See Tong, which, in addition to the sympathy votes that went her way, almost tipped the scale in her favor. On the other hand, Mr. Sitoh is confident and decisive in his campaign and speeches, which led to many new residents and young residents voting for him, and this, in addition to the votes generated by the incentive of estate upgrading, had led to Mr. Sitoh Yih Pin’s close win – Capability over Loyalty.

Conclusion

  In conclusion, I believe that although the PAP is still the ruling party in Singapore, it’s support had started to diminish; for the first time, an opposition party had won a GRC, and the winning margins for most PAP candidates are down by a significant amount. This shows that more Singaporeans are starting to be discontented with the performance of the PAP. Therefore, in my opinion, Singapore may have a new ruling party in thirty or forty years, riding the dissatisfaction of the people into Parliament House. As for the readiness of an opposition party to govern Singapore, it is impossible to predict now – only time would tell. 

To Kill A Mockingbird - Rosetta Stone

  In Chapter 8 of To Kill A Mockingbird, it stated that "Mr. Avery said it was written on the Rosetta Stone that when children disobeyed their parents, smoked cigarettes and made war on each other, the seasons would change".

  The Rosetta Stone is a black granite Ancient Egyptian stone bearing three inscriptions found at Rosetta, Egypt. It carries the a royal decree that established the "divine cult" of Egypt's new ruler, King Ptolemy V. It is is a late example of a class of donation stelae, which depicts the reigning monarch granting a tax exemption to the resident priesthood.

  In the context of To Kill A Mockingbird, Mr. Avery stated that it is because of the wrongdoing of children that led to the change of weather, and claimed that it was written on the Rosetta Stone. I think that the "divine cult"in the context of To Kill A Mockingbird would be the white population, and the "tax exemption" would be the social, political and economic Superior that white people have over black people in the South, as in the South, the "resident priesthood", the people holding power, are the whites.

When Does Life Begin?

   ‘Life’ is defined as the ability to breathe, grow, reproduce, etc. However, before a fetus is born, it had none of these abilities, and depends on the mother to keep it breathing. Therefore, although biologically, the ‘life’ of a fetus begins at conception, a person does not have moral personhood until much later, after he is born.

  At conception, although biologically, the fetus was produced, but it is still unable to possess an individual consciousness and it’s unable to survive outside the womb. Therefore, at conception, a fetus is not yet a human, but only a potential human life. Renowned philosopher Professor Peter Singer defined argued that something can only be a person if it is self-aware and has temporal awareness. A fetus does not meet this definition until after it is born, so therefore, morally speaking, the life of a fetus begins at birth.

  Infanticide, the homicide of an infant, is illegal in most countries, although the charges vary from infanticide to homicide and manslaughter. However, currently, abortions are legal in most countries, even abortions that allow babies to be aborted at 30 weeks. This shows that the law recognizes the human status of an infant, but not a fetus.

  In religion, many religious academicians take the birth-view stance. This stance is supported by quotations from the respective holy books; the Jewish Talmud holds that a fetus's life is less valuable than a woman's; if the woman's life is endangered by the pregnancy, it requires an abortion. However, if the "greater part" of the fetus has emerged, then its life may not be taken even to save the mother's, "because you cannot choose between one human life and another", therefore implying that a fetus becomes a human life after it is born. Some Christian theologians hold that ensoulment occurs when an infant takes its first breath of air. They cite, among other passages, Genesis 2:7, "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

  Also, although the body of the infant develops at birth, the brain of the infant does not develop and start functioning until much later, after the birth of the infant. Legally and biologically, the brain is the representative of a human; a human is considered dead only if his brain is dead. Therefore, as the fetus’s brain isn’t functioning until it is born, legally, the life of a human begins at birth.

  A favored argument of the opposition is that life begins at conception. However, there are major flaws in this argument. In human cloning, there is no conception at all. Then, could you say that a cloned human is not a human? Conception isn’t even a specific point in time; it is a period over which the sperm meets the ovum, and not a specific time. Also, the life-begins-at-conception argument also ignores parthenogenesis, when the gamete of a female is not fertilized by a male, yet produces viable and unique offspring that are not clones. Only DNA from the mother is inherited, but it is not identical to her. This had been done before; in 2004, Japanese researchers led by Tomohiro Kono succeeded after 457 attempts to merge the ova of two mice, the result of which developed normally into a mouse. Could you then say that it’s not a mouse?

  In 2003, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act was enacted in the United States, which prohibits an abortion if "either the entire baby's head is outside the body of the mother, or any part of the baby's trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother." Meaning that, after most of the baby is born, the baby will be granted human status, and thus could not be aborted, as it would no longer be a fetus, but a human, thus abortion would not be an abortion, but infanticide.

  Therefore, I conclude that medically, philosophically and theologically, the life of a fetus begins only after it’s born, therefore, I believe that life begins at birth.

To Kill A Mockingbird - Lula

  In the novel To Kill A Mockingbird, Lula is the black woman at the First Purchase African M.E. Church, which Calpurnia brought Scout and Jem to in Chapter 7. Upon seeing the two children, Lula confronted Calpurnia for bringing them to the church, saying, "they've got their church, we have ours". This parallels the way most white people in Maycomb treat the black people.

  Lula is the only African American that protested of the presence of Scout and Jem at the church, while most of the congregation welcomed them and respected them because their father, Atticus Finch, is trying to prevent one of them, Thomas Robinson, from being convicted of rape, a capital offense. However, Lula objected to their presence and rudely demand that they be removed. This is possibly because she had been a victim of racism since her youth, and is bitter towards all white people for this. She felt unfair that she could not go to the white people's church, but white people could go to her church, and thus wanted the whites and the blacks to be segregated, and thus took her anger out on the two innocent children. I feel that this is cowardly behavior, as taking her anger out on the children will not achieve anything (and resulted in her being asked to leave the church), and if she really wanted to object, she should take it up with the white men that gambled in the church on weekdays.

  Lula's single appearance in the novel is memorable, as she is the only African American that is openly hostile towards white people, while all others are more docile and appeared resigned to their social status. I do not think that this is very likely, as it is more likely that a significant chunk of African Americans will protest such unfair treatment at the hands of the whites, and some of the more aggressive ones, like Lula, may even form anti-white terrorist groups.

  Therefore, Lula is a complicated figure in the novel that complicated the role of African Americans, in which she seemed to be the only person that dared to speak her honest (albeit twisted and wrong) views.

To KIll A Mockingbird - Cover Analysis

  On the cover of To Kill A Mockingbird, there was the door of a prison cell, from the side view. Two dark-colored hands are stretched through white-painted bars, one holding the bars, the other stretched through the bars.
  In my opinion, the dark-colored hands belong to a Negro prisoner, who is resigned to his fate, as he is not making any violent efforts to get out, although I suspect that he is falsely accused of a crime. This prisoner would symbolize the character Tom Robinson in the novel and is used as foreshadowing to prepare or hint at readers about the role of Tom Robinson.
  On the cover, the pair of hands is viewed from the side view. This could imply that the 'common folk' - the ordinary Maycomb townsfolk - knew about the wrongful fate of the Negro prisoner in the cell, but watched indifferently from the sidelines without doing anything to help him.
  Also, the bars of the prison cell was originally painted white, but some parts of the bars had been eroded by black rust. This could symbolize good and evil - one of the main themes of the novel. The bars would represent the legal and justice system - originally, they were uncorrupted and efficient, but over time, it had became corrupted and biased because of racism and prejudice. Hence, the black rust had eroded the white paint of the bars over time.
  In my opinion, the cover played a major part in hinting to the readers of the contents of the book beforehand, as well as acting as a short 'summary' of themes, albeit in a symbolical way.

Mockingbird - Analysis

  The title of To Kill A Mockingbird is taken from a conversation between Atticus and Jem, on page 96, line 14 - "I'd rather you shoot at tin cans in the back yard, but I know you'll go after birds. Shoot all the bluejays you want, if you can hit'em, but remember it's a sin to kill a mockingbird."
  Although it is used as the title, technically, mockingbirds have no appearances in the novel. Instead, mockingbirds are both used as symbols and also to refer to one of the main themes of the novel, good and evil.
  In the novel, a mockingbird is a symbol for innocent, pure and good people that is persecuted by evil. The two most prominent mockingbirds in the novel is Tom Robinson and Boo Radley - they have both done no harm, with Tom Robinson being a picker who's kind enough to help Mayella Ewell chop up the chiffarobe for nothing, and Boo Radley a man who left the children presents and eventually save them from Bob Ewell. Yet, their fates are both sad - Tom Robinson was convicted of rape by the biased jury and shot in his attempt to escape, and Boo Radley becoming a social outcast, abused and isolated by his father and brother.
  The theme of good and evil in the novel transcend to hatred, prejudice, ignorance, which is applied to innocent people like Tom Robinson and Boo Radley, the 'mockingbirds'. After Tom Robinson's death, Mr. Braxton Underwood, a hardcore racist himself, written in his editorial that it is a sin to kill cripples, and likened Tom Robinson's death to 'the senseless slaughter of songbirds (mockingbird)'. Also, in a later conversation between Scout and Atticus, Scout said that people hurting Boo Radley is "like shootin' a mockingbird". The reference to the mockingbirds showed the death of the good at the hands of evil, like Tom Robinson and Boo Radley.
  The To Kill in the title suggested an instructional text, which was proven untrue by the novel; instead of about how to kill a mockingbird, the story actually described how mockingbirds are killed. A subtle difference, but a fundamental one.

Debate - Capital Punishment

  In To Kill A Mockingbird, Tom Robinson will be executed if he was convicted of a capital offense, rape. On this, Jem said, “maybe rape shouldn’t be a capital offense…” The only thing that separate capital offenses from other offenses is the punishment used, capital punishment, the death penalty. Indeed, the question of capital punishment had come under fire many times, sparking numerous debates worldwide. Thus, I will share my views on capital punishment.

  The two most common arguments against the death penalty are human rights – essentially, a human’s right to live – and the value of life. The human rights arguments states that the death penalty violated the basic rule of human rights – a human’s right to live – which is included in the constitutions and documents of most countries and international organizations, such as the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, while the value of life argument place the emphasis on the value of a human life, and argued that the human life is so valuable that its value isn’t affected by even the most brutal murders, and therefore even the most brutal killers should not be deprived of their lives.
  As for the for camp, the best argument for the death penalty is retribution - the argument that criminals need to receive appropriate punishment for their crime according to the crime. The retribution argument states that in order for justice to be done, each criminal have to 'get what they deserve', and in the case of homicide and drug-related offenses, the criminals deserved death. Another argument is that it deters potential murderers from committing the offense, and that it will remove any possibility of the murderer murdering people again. By executing murderers, then, we would have saved the lives of more innocent people, which justifies the death penalty under the utilitarian view, as even if death penalty is replaced by life imprisonment without parole, the murderer would still be a danger to fellow inmates and prison staff.
  In my own opinion, I support the use of capital punishment. Although in certain cases, such as that of Tom Robinson in To Kill A Mockingbird, who tried to escape because he feared being executed, wrongful executions may occur, objectively, capital punishment will deter more potential murders and stop convicted murders from committing murder again, and therefore, from the utilitarian perspective, capital punishment will save more lives than it will end, and should thus be used. This is proven by the case of Singapore, which had one of the lowest crime rates in the world, and is one of the only five developed countries that still permits the death penalty.
  

TKaMB Feature Article Assignment - The Trial

The Maycomb Tribune

VERDICT: BLACK MAN CONVICTED OF RAPE

By JOSEPH T. UPPERSTONE, LEGAL CORRESPONDENT  Friday, July 09, 1931

  MAYCOMB: In the Maycomb County Courthouse, there are two concrete pillars, left over from when the original courthouse burnt down in 1856. These two pillars are the perfect symbols of justice in this place of law and order; justice will forever stand in the gallant south. This truth was yet again upheld when the verdict is unanimously passed by the representatives of Maycomb citizens, the jury, sentencing Thomas ‘Tom’ Robinson, a black man convicted of rape, a capital offense, to death.

  Thomas Robinson, aged 25, formerly a cotton and pecan picker for Mr. Link Deas, a Maycomb landowner, had been convicted of one charge of rape, a capital offense, for raping Ms. Mayella Violet Ewell, 19, unemployed. Despite a valiant fight by defense attorney Atticus Finch (top), the clear evidence from reliable, white witnesses had proved beyond a doubt that Tom Robinson is guilty of rape.

  Atticus Finch, the defense attorney for Tom Robinson, had accused the victim, Mayella Ewell, of ‘breaking a time-honored code of our society’, by which he implied that Ms. Ewell voluntarily kissed Tom Robinson and was beaten up by her father afterwards, the marks which she and her father claimed that was caused by Tom Robinson. He had also accused the case of being ‘a case of black and white’. He had indicated that he wished to file an appeal with the Supreme Court.

  Mr. Samuel Gown, President of the African-American Welfare Association, had praised Mr. Finch to be a “distinguished man who was the sole hero who dared to speak up on this time-honored taboo.” Mr. Gown also pledged the support of the AAWA to Tom Robinson.

  There had been 12 recorded cases of capital charges against Negroes, all initiated by white men. Of those, all of them had been convicted, and sentenced to death. The attorneys for them are all appointed by the court. None of the attorneys had filed appeals or taken further action, except Atticus Finch. Mr. Finch had hinted that he has received death threats from Mr. Robert Ewell.

  According to the Ewells, on the night of November twenty-first, Mayella Ewell was sitting on the front porch of the Ewell dwelling, when Tom Robinson passed by, and she asked him to help her chop up an old chiffarobe, but when she turned to return to the house, Robinson forced her onto the ground and “took advantage of her”.

  There had been small-scaled protests in Mobile over this crime in the black community. Reverend Skyes of the First Purchase African M.E. Church, which Tom Robinson belonged to, had expresses grief and condemned the verdict of Guilty. The trial had taken a full day for the jury to return a verdict, a record amount of time for the trial of a black man. Senior trial judge Matthew Hall told us, “This is yet one more testimonial to the skill of Atticus Finch…I think he’s the best lawyer in Maycomb County.” 

   There had been an unconfirmed report that Jean Louise Finch and Jeremy Atticus Finch, Atticus Finch’s children, was present at the trial and had watched from the colored balcony. Also, according to the report, Jean Louise Finch had asked Mr. Finch after the trial, “Will there ever be justice for all in this land, Atticus?”

  “Well,” Atticus Finch replied, “We’ll see.”

Teenagers Sometimes Complain That They Are Being Treated Like Children. What Are Your Opinions About This?

 “The young always have the same problem - how to rebel and conform at the same time.  They have now solved this by defying their parents and copying one another.”-Quentin Crisp. Indeed, as children become teenagers and descends into adolescence, they became more rebellious and emotional even as they become more physically and psychologically mature. At this time, if parents still treat them like children such as taking them to ‘baby doctors’, they will become irritated. To mature, teenagers need more responsibility, as well as the trust that comes with that responsibility.

  

 The problem of parents treating teenagers like children escalates in the case of overprotective parents, who often place restrictions on teenagers’ behavior and lifestyles. At adolescence, teenagers’ ability to feel excitement had been dulled, and therefore they need to perform more extreme activities in order to get that adrenaline rush. However, parents are often unable to understand this, and in the case of overprotective parents, place restrictions on those abilities in order to ‘protect’ them, which would of course just make the teenagers even more rebellious and defy them just for the sake of it, resulting in a vicious cycle.

  As the brains of the teenagers mature, the social behavior of the teenagers change. The teenager brain already has the adult capability, but not the restraint that comes with age. It has already developed intellectually, but in the teenage brain, the amygdala is developing faster than the frontal lobes, leading to reactive, but not reflective, behavior in teenagers. Therefore, the surrounding environment is a very important influence on how the teenagers’ brains will develop. So, parents should treat teenagers with respect and give them more freedom, responsibilities and trust.

  This is because most parents simply did not want to admit that their children had already grown up and does not have to depend on them anymore. Also, many of them, due to a mix of pride and stubbornness, do not want to admit that their college-aged kids actually know a lot more than them. Also, A generation or two ago, many people finished school, started work, and got married — all while still in their teens. However, now, many teenagers are financially dependent on their parents well into their twenties, leading the parents to be inclined to think of them as children. While those parents are extremely passionate about their children, a trait which served them well when their children are still children, after they start to grow up, many of them manipulate their kids to keep control through guilt, bribery, threats, intimidation, fear, and anger.

  Although some parents may argue that teenagers have no sense of responsibility and not enough maturity, actually, teenagers aged 14-15 have a brain that functions better than an adult brain, and most of them had attained both physical and psychological maturity, and when parents give them responsibilities and trust, it had been proved that they can take care of themselves sufficiently well, as well as be trusted with important decisions and have a certain degree of financial independence – just that most parents refuse to admit it.

  Therefore, I think that parents should respect their adolescent kids and grant them enough freedom, trust, and responsibilities to sate them and make them feel more mature, as well as to help them mature faster.