Maybe I should start this post with a bit of background, I have just argued with a friend over a discussion related to education, religion and girl perhaps? I don’t know if I held too hard by my point and try to “force” others with me on issues related to the Christianity and social issues. But the lack of patients to think from a different viewpoints, protectionism are those made me feel extremely upset.
During a friendly dinner, two friends appreciated about Christianity. If you know me, you would know that I am very vocal against religions which may wanted to size control over the general society with their religion standards, I do personally agree that certain moral standards must be withheld today, however the social identity should be able to adjust loosely overtime and here are many different views related to how things should be handled.
One of them got hyped and started talking about the incident happened in China 1989, where the Chinese Government brutality dismissed a students protest which demanded for equality and against corruption in the society. I tended to agree given whatever done by these students, a violent crackdown was definitely not necessary to maintain peace and Communist Party’s control over China.
However, when I raised the issue related to Rome’s treatment on homosexuality, pedophilia priests, education as well as suppression of scientific advancements, the person who was strive for democracy in China reluctant to understand that these issues related to the ideology of Christianity. It demands control over the state, as well as parts of the Bible encourages hate crime against population from different religion backgrounds (Deu 13:12 ~ 13 :16) , sexuality (Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13) or as simple as not having fruit on the tree (Matthew 21:18 ~ 21:22). As these views are not as famous as the “Don’t be afraid, just believe.” (Mark 5:36). These issues are as valid as it gets in today’s modern society due to the less people practice / involve in religion activities ^(Ruy Teixeira’s presentation on social demographic change with SLAA), people started to question these laws and reevaluate them as whether they should be applied to the general society or not?
The comments from another friend was related to higher education in Hong Kong, which covered the issue of Mainland China students and the lack of seats and funding for broader students. Today, universities in Hong Kong are taking 18% of the total high school graduates. We may argue that the there are many other paths for unsuccessful students to earn their higher education, but every year there are 10,000 students whose meet the minimal requirements for entry but rejected. The person then said it should remain as it is, but the government should evict / reduce seats for Mainland China students.
Which I believe two questions will sum up with these opinions:
- Who should have the right to judge which individual’s deserve to enjoy higher education which is funded mainly public? (Private donation is rare)
- Best students from all over the Mainland China are coming over to join and collaborate with us and bring our local culture other places, what a pleasure
Additional note on the funding and the availability – Most of the population in Hong Kong lives in government-funded public housing estate and subsidize housing, should government take away these benefits because these aren’t good enough to earn sufficient salary to pay of mortgage for private housing? Same question on health care, should the lower social economic class denied from public funded hospitals and clinics because they don’t pay tax at all?
I’ve born in a middle class family, raised by a religious maid from Philippines and educated in a primary school with Catholic background, that gives me so many reasons that I should believe in god right? The answer is no, the lack of consistency with their belief and education methods were burned into my memories forever. If I’d ever learned anything from that school, that would don’t have double standards. It reminds me hard that the lack of consistency in life means nothing is valid at all, thus nothing you can trust and rely on.
Some people had suggested me not to be that vocal or critical over issues in order to maintain “friendships”, I’m sorry but that’s not happening because it’s not me is to hide conflicts. And just be honest, I sometimes wish that I don’t have knowledge and be a “normal” kid with no understands what’s related to the world, social and ideas. Go out and fool around with dodgy friends sounds extremely attractive, right?
That’s why I look for evidence, information, trustworthy partners. That’s why I beg to differ, thus how I made my statement.
P.S. I admit that I sometimes irrational when discussing tech products 
Update: This post was originally published under the title “What’s all about making a point?” It was then reevaluated twice and updated to better suit content and intention for this article.
