31 July 2009

Breaking News: Henry has yet to be taken into custody

The Orwellian has not got me.

Eric and I almost shitted in our pants yesterday when we saw there had been 185 pages loaded in a single day. What scared the hell out of us most was that out of the 185 pages viewed, 47 pages came from one single IP address. That IP address followed us for more than 15 hours. The worst information was that, our StatCounter told us that the surveillance was from SHEUNG WAN!!! The first thing I could think of was the Big Brother here.

Eric and I ended our MSN chat with a long goodbye. Eric then went "lubing his ass" so that it would be easier when he meets Jack Bauer around the corner. We only hoped that we would end up in the same labour camp.

I then went to have my hair done in preparation for the camp.

I soon found out that it was my hairdresser.

Anyway, the Libertines Pub will have its 1,000th page viewed soon (now 995). People from 16 countries somehow stayed with our blog for zero second to 15 hours.

Thanks for everyone who argued with me or commented on our blog in Facebook or through MSN, special thanks to:
  1. My hairdresser who made Eric and I understood the profoundness of our friendship, and the importance of having a bottle of lube around;
  2. My redneck colleagues and the only one liberal among them;
  3. The husband who got forced into discussion with me by his lovely wife;
  4. Colleagues of the husband above;
  5. That lazy university lecturer;
  6. That school bullying victim who never understands a single word of us, and hence making us feel that we must be right;
  7. Those Twitters;
  8. That young man living in UK for most of his life who writes better Chinese than most of the news reporters in Hong Kong;
  9. That pretty young lady who only communicates with me through Facebook and whom I never understand;
  10. That news reporter;
  11. Erica Yuen, who simply ignored my entry dedicated to her, even though I personally linked it to her blog, and while another guy copied the whole content there again some days later.
I will continue being the provocative, libterine ass, until the Orwellians take me into custody. Stay tuned!

30 July 2009

And now for something completely different

Greeting! Fellow readers of blogs, once again I have the privilege to grace your screens thought literature (can’t say the same about the rest of these entries thou) For those of you who are unfamiliar with yours truly- Ma Wing Shun at your service.


Now I am sure you are all aware of the recent events that has unfolded, and I for one can no longer stand the non sense! Hence I err… ‘borrowed’ my dear cousin Eric’s laptop, in order to address you all.


The nonsense that I referred to, of course is the sickening states of moral unconsciousness the Hong Kong Book Fair has demonstrated! I am extremely disappointed at how they handled the affair: teen model should dress appropriately? This is a bloody outrage!! (pardon my french) WHAT ABOUT THE VISITORS AND STAFF? How come there's no rules in making sure they are dressed appropriately? They are the same human being as teen model!?! Why letting them off?!


Let me quote Isaac Cheung's reason- I am not angry at the models but opposes their presence at the fair because their fans may get too excited and distract genuine book lovers.


Exactly! I am with you there Isaac! I AM A GENUINE BOOK LOVER. Who's there to protect me from being distracted because visitors and staffs were dressed inappropriately?!?! Fudge that! Oh and my love for books doesn't end at the book fair! Who's there to protect me from being distracted while I read outside! I shall be writing to our all powerful government, demanding them to make a law! A law to make sure everyone is dressed appropriately AT ALL TIME! (Why do I have to do your work for you Isaac? 3 mins of fame is enough already?)


You know what else really bother me? Teen models! yes! I totally agreed with Erica's Yuen's argument! Teen model poses are disgusting! Of course they spread immoral message to our innocent asexual male population!! Where else would you find such obscene stuff? No where! I tell you! NO WHERE! It's all teen model's fault!!


Oh and like Erica said, their pose are not healthy sexy!! Proper model and Ms. Hong Kong are healthy sexy, everyone knows that! The only reason guys gawk at proper model and Ms. Hong Kong in swim suit is only because it reminds them of their feminine sides, surely not because it reminds them of sex!! Just ask any guy you know!


Lastly! For the last time (play of words there without swearing again! Ma 2 - Eric 0) Teen model are not model!! Forgive me for repeatedly quoting Erica's amazing logic- Models are nothing but mannequin for fashions and products! if you were not sell any product, you are not a model!! I hereby declared Chrissie Chow and all those no good succubus as Teen nonmodel. While we are at it I would also like to recall Mona Lisa, Virginie Gautreau, Madame Ginoux, Whistler’s Mother, Dora Maar and renamed them as Art-nonmodel as they were clearly not sell anything at all while being painted. Shame on those attention seeking whores!


My work here. Is done. (I can hear Eric cursing and running this way)


Until next time heathens,

Yours Truly,

Ma Wing Shun.

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Pejoratives: written for my redneck colleagues and friends

"Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." John 8:7

I intended not to repeat a topic in the Pub. But the Facebook is flooded with pejoratives these days. I read again my earlier entry to see if I have made myself clear enough. I know the Libertines Pub could be quite inconvenient intellectually for most of the rednecks. But yes, my earlier entry on pejoratives only showed that there is no good reason to use pejoratives to talk about sex workers. I have not proved explicitly the possible harm of pejoratives, though I actually discussed that briefly in another Pub entry and in my Dictionary blog.

For the sake of those rednecks who hardly use their brains, I will be straightforward and simple; for those who enjoyed the Pub for its lightheartedness and provocation, this might be a bit boring, but I beg you to keep reading to show your support.

The reason why we should not call sex workers "whores" instead of "sex workers" is that by calling them "whores", we make everyone believes that they're lower lives; we marginalise them. For those of you who read Chinese, I begged you to stop labeling "性工作" and "援助交際" as "賣淫" in my earlier entry.

Zi Teng, a Hong Kong organisation for the rights of sex workers, told us clearly that young people involved in compensated dating were marginalised by the popular negative moral assessment. They are afraid of seeking help openly.

So rednecks, I know you don't understand, I will give you another example.

Imagine you're now in 1980s, you're a patient who needs regular blood transfusion. Misery likes company, you got infected with HIV. At the time, it's a popular belief that you could only be gay to have aids. And being homosexual was taken to be immoral. You don't want to even show up in the hospital for your aids treatment, because you know people around will call you "faggot" and condemn you for your "sin". You end up dying one month after your infection at home alone.

That is the harm marginalisation brings. Similarly, because those young people in compensated dating know that you "adults" would condemn their acts, they go deeper underground. Those who wanted to help them can never find them anymore.

I was asked by certain Samuel what would I say if one of my immediate family members got involved in compensated dating or prostitution. I jokingly answered that I might already have one in that, so what?

I should give my more sincere answer here: if it is the case like what Samuel asked, I hope that people around could all help him/her instead of condemning him/her morally. So fucking obvious, right?!

For those of you who mouthed off in Facebook that "compensated dating (援助交際)" is "obscenity soliciting(賣淫)" and should be condemned, I beg you to think the matter over. I know that some of you don't want your kids to live in a future world where compensated dating became an extra-curricular activity, that's why you want to condemn it and hope that it will be killed and cleaned.

For one thing, I am quite sure that the recent hype on compensated dating is a deviancy amplification spiral; compensated dating won't become an extra-curricular activity. Moreover, prostitution of any sort will always be there. There is always a possibility of your children getting involved, face it!

Condemning it with pejoratives will only make it harder for us to help these young people, possibly any of your kids, in the future.

Anybody still wants to stone the woman?

27 July 2009

The debate that I rather miss on teen models

I missed the City Forum on Sunday for some good sleep in bed, and I think I didn't miss a shit.

For one thing, I don't understand why the City Forum had to discuss the recent row over the teen models. But yes, there're not much issues around Hong Kong these days, and they still have to do something anyway. The Libertines Pub faces the same problem, we had a hard time shoving everybody to crap a shit or two here every week.

The guests list also tells that the issue concerns nobody. This lad called Isaac who stirred up these different stupid Facebook groups is certainly a joke. But Erica Yuen was there too?

I was not interested in the debate at all, though the Standard told me just now that it was quite a rational one, apart from the "going a bit too far" remarks made by Ms Yuen.

I read the summary of her remarks in her conspicuous blog and found that our former Miss Hong Kong contestant is telling us a major moral myth.

What exactly are the moral values that we should be defending against these teen models?

I am sure these books are far from being pornographic. Tell me why they are pornographic if you do not agree.

Ms Yuen said that those photos are obscene, but refused to explain why they are so. Erica, may I call you that? Do you realise that "pornographic" and "obscene" are value-laden qualifiers which are not "factual" as you imagined and claimed in your blog? You owe us an exposition on those!

The Williams Committee, chaired by one of my favourite modern philosophers Professor Bernard Williams, concluded in 1979 that pornography has very little to do with the social problems we had tried to blame it on. The relationship between obscenity and pornography is even more obscure.

It's entirely wrong and reckless to assume that our kids are totally ignorant and are idiots whom we can freely manipulate. They might be more reasonable and intelligent than most of the adults and especially the hypocrites in our society. In any case they need to learn how to judge independently on things, it's best to make them learn how to make their free choices and be responsible for them, as I discussed in another entry.

So Erica, if the teen models books are not pornographic nor obscene; and that even if they are pornographic or obscene, no harm can possibly be done if they're not sold or shown to the minors; how degrading these teen models could possibly be?

To argue that teen "modeling" leads to compensated dating, prostitution, and adult video is a laughable BS; even if God grants that argument logical, why are those things immoral? Maybe the pejoratives are working here?

Maybe Erica actually has something to say in good faith here. Maybe she doesn't want to see any of these young girls possibly being abused by the agents and the media. But I rather believe that it's a healthy contractual relationship working there, what we liberals treasure. Something one despised maybe what others desire. Certain feminists do support pornography, anybody realises that?

I was asked many times before my views on these teen models. I thought they're neither sexually interesting nor morally significant. But then the City Forum had to talk about that, so why not the Libertines Pub.

23 July 2009

The Libertines Pub proudly presents its first conspiracy theory: The making of an Orwellian Hong Kong

Conspiracy theories are proven to be popular, so I decided to work out one here to boost the traffic to our site.

Eric and I discussed one day on why Hong Kong people had become so conservative, and even worse, hypocritical in recent years. We both have no clue. Considering the overall education level and degree of interaction with the western world, Hong Kong shouldn't be that conservative.

We started to consider if it's about the Chinese blood in us. As a born sceptic (on almost everything), and worse, having studied the "queen of all sciences", I cannot take that. After all, I trusted that I have Chinese blood in me as well, though all the people I know think that I am at least a 1/4 Indian. But I have openly admitted that I am a libertine.

Until I read this inspiring blog entry today I think I can make up a theory. (Sorry, Chinese again; if you don't read Chinese, you can take my theory as original, and that's even better...)

There is an Orwellian organisation in Hong Kong.

By growing a bunch of Orwellian Gen X, who now became parents, teachers, media professionals, public policy makers and advisers, they are now moralising Hong Kong.

They must also have training and control centres around the world, so that they can train the elites doublethink when they studied overseas, to avoid them becoming westernised and liberated.

These elites, no matter coming back from overseas universities or getting their first class honour degrees in Hong Kong, climbed to the top of the social ladder easily, and became prominent individuals of the society.

Some of them work in the media, and successfully lead their teams to create deviancy amplification spirals and hence moral panic.

Some of them got invited to join different advisory bodies. Some became teachers and parents. In response to the moral panic created by their comrades, they advise us to lock our kids into prisons, call our sex workers whores, make Coco Chanel looked gross, trigger a backlash against our hot chicks, and restrict our freedom of expression.

They, together with the religious rights, are creating an age of idiots. By doublethink and with newspeak, they want us to stop asking why and challenging the authority, and to start accepting the accepted.

They also create moral high grounds as weapon to attack their rivals. You see what happened to Ludvik in Kundera's The Joke.

Once enough idiots are created and the moral high grounds secured, the Big Brother can conquer our society with no sweat. Hong Kong will become an Orwellian dystopia in no time.

It seems to me that the Orwellian organisation will get me in any time. If you will, please send this entry to these people and ask for help, as they claimed that they fight for democracy in Hong Kong. But make sure he is not alerted, as I suspect him to be an Orwellian.

Hope you will see my next entry.

21 July 2009

Politic: the Masquerade or Imma gonna say wutever it please you as long as I get the declious cake

A while ago I was catching up on some The Daily Show and found out that Jon Stewart was having Former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate of the 2008 election Mike Huckabee as a guest on the show. By the power of internet social commentary I hereby demand you to watch that clip. HERE

Go ahead. Watch it. I’ll wait for you here. For those of you who’ve already seen it, you is free to do what you want for the next 20 minutes. After that you belong to me again.

As you have already seen the interview/debate (for those who still have not seen it, please slap yourself repeatedly then watch the clip) it underlined the issue of abortion, and at the end of the debate, although Steward and Huckabee both have rather different view points, I must say Huckabee brought a lot of humanity and honestly into such an dynamic issue, and both the host and guest deserved respect for having such a civil discussion on t.v. Which was rare and I was so shock by the niceness that I had to watch a clip of Bill O’reilly yelling ‘’you have blood on your hand!’’ to counter-balance my media compass. Here Have Some Billo (Skip to 7:20 for RAGE!!!)

At the end, I must agree that abortion is such a complex issue, that it cannot be definite by answer such as simple Yes or No, right or wrong. Let it be Pro life or Pro choice, demonizing each other simply enhance the ignorance within us, and leads us to do even stupider stuff.

The topic of Abortion aside, it is refreshing to see Huckabee so willingly engage in a civil discussion, and display a side of a man who’s sensible and willing to listen to the other side of the argument while rationally explaining his points to his opponent . Unlike some douche here who’s flat out to decline the other side and claim the question is silly.

Hey…. Wait a minutes there… ……oh c'mon…


Same O’Huckabee. The differences?

1st interview is Mike Huckabee host of the show ‘Huckabee’. The 2nd?? Mick Huckabee-Republican President Candidate.

Oh that makes sense now.

I understand tat Mike needed the dumb conservative Christian vote for the primaries but then again,I expect sumone who has a Bachelor degree in Religion(1) would have a better argument of creationism than a simple ‘’I really don’t know’’. But then again, I expect too much.

What about you? Fellow Libertineian? What do you expect from your politicians? Do you expect them to say everything perfectly according to YOUR moral standard and everything he/she does is superhumanly political and socially correct? Do you get mad(2)every time a politician SAID something ‘WRONG’? Do you feel pumped up every time a politician said they gonna represent you and fight for you?. Or. Do you recognized the fact that Politic is just an occupation field and politician is merely a job title, whatever the fuck the guy on stage says, really actually, just mattered on stage.


Little footnotes:


1) trust wiki!! it's over 8000% fact! Written by people who can be trusted 1100% that makes wiki's Truthiness level say.. over 9000%?!
2) Hey kids, DT doesnt represent u, No, but a facebook page totally does.

щ(゚Д゚щ)

Stop depriving our teens of their basic human rights

First came the drug test in school, then the sniffer dogs.

Now they're talking about limiting the freedom of travel on teenagers to Shenzhen.

We might as well just throw all of our kids to prison, like what is suggested here.

Are we trying to bring up a bunch of idiots, who only know how to follow instructions and know nothing about freedom and responsibility of choice?

Put yourself into our kids' shoes. How does it feel to have dogs breaking into your classroom sniffing around, to have your pee confiscated once in a while for tests which could give false positive results easily, and to be barred from visiting Shenzhen for cheap DVDs with friends? I'd rather shoot myself with speedball and actualise what the "adults" wanted to prove so badly, that we're all wasted!

I'm glad that I've long passed my teenage. Or else I'd possibly be deprived of my freedom to travel entailed by the Basic Law article 31.

If you go around the corner and ask whoever you get if they treasure liberty, I don't think you're going to get one "no" out of the hundreds of them. If you have a Facebook account, it's very likely that you will put "liberal" in your political view field (I don't).

But in view of the recent disarray including the school drug test, movie poster censorship, and the attack on my beloved Chrissie Chau, I can't help but think Hong Kong people actually see eye to eye with Jacky Chan. What's up with these 18,XXX people here, then?

We might be fighting for a democratic society, but it seems that it's a totalitarian one we're looking at now.

Our kids are not lesser humans. They shouldn't have lesser rights, and they should be taught to take full responsibility of their choices.

Oppression and surveillance are never going to cut it. Throwing them to prison like situation only gives the impression that you care less about your kids, you entrust your kids to a prison system. It's education and parenting ABC.

It's about giving them the freedom and trust with proper guidance. Raising a kid is much like flying a kite. If you don't let go, it will only be a retarded paper thing sticking around you doing nothing.

And for those in governmental advisory bodies, please start using your brains and think carefully about what you're suggesting. I know it's easy to bullshit through your agenda there, but think about those who're at stake, I beg you!

19 July 2009

The caveman who advocates the use of pejorative

I read an irritating note posted on Facebook by my colleague this morning. It's later told that a large part of it was actually an article on The Sun by this caveman Wong.

I believe a lot of our readers (a lot?!) read Chinese. For those who don't, I'll try my best to explain; but if you don't understand, let me know!


The caveman wants the media and government to talk about prostitution with words which he thinks are right. "賣淫" (obscenity soliciting; lame direct translation, just want to show it's a value-laden term) should be used instead of neutral terms like "性工作" (sex trade/work) and "援助交際" (compensated dating).

He thinks that the use of less value-laden terms will make the sex workers feel better and only encourage more young girls to join the profession. He is probably upset about the recent conviction of a 17-year-old girl for compensated dating.

After thinking about the matter for a day, I found it so damn difficult to argue against the caveman, because it's so fucking obvious to me that prostitution is not immoral nor obscene.

Think again, what harm could prostitution bring to the society and its people?

Of course, some pimps who manipulate and control disadvantaged women as cash cow might be shit. But I trust we can always take the business back from the triads. Before 1932, prostitution was actually legal and regulated with registration and regular health examination in Hong Kong.

I consider that the burden of proof is on the caveman's side. I pleaded with you earlier not to be a sexual hypocrite. It's simply a trade for our normal need.

If you're worrying about young girls joining the profession merely for the branded bags, then it's about giving them a true picture of what is at stake and let them make their own free choice.

On what ground could we condemn sex workers by using pejoratives, then?

A moral society is one where everybody is respected for their basic human right, not one which the disadvantaged are labelled with pejoratives and suppressed. That's tyranny.

Zi Teng made a lot of effort teaching us to use the right words like "sex workers". What the caveman advocated is a big step backward.

It's actually the value-laden words which blinded the public into thinking that prostitution is a bad and immoral thing.

Until anybody can convince me with reason that prostitution is immoral or harmful, condemning and hence hurting sex workers with pejoratives stinks.

13 July 2009

Replacement Writer

Dearest readers,

Good Afternoon to you all, as you can tell from the polite and formal greeting, I am not Eric Wan.

Fellow sons of God! Allow me to introduce myself, why would you be interested you say? Truth be told, I could not care less if I tried, what kind of people read this blog anyway, I get everything I need to know from my trusted T.V, Newspaper (if it's not reported, it didn't happened) and most importantly the Bible and frankly all the leftness in this blog makes it unreadable for a conservative Christian like me.

To put in simple terms: Eric's wonderfully devoted mother told me to fill in for him, while he tries to sort out his life for the 28th times, it's a annual thing, that poor family have to deal with that renegade every year (how many times do you need to figure out what to do in your life?) with all his un-christian behaviors (oh! all the swearings! God doubting!, homosexual friends!, as well as those weird ideas of his :Silly and pointless essay on Iran I must say, worrying so much about a foreign country, that boy should start worrying about his unemployment and eternal life in heaven! just let the heathens burn, ok? oh and I am telling you the Iran thing is over, no report on TVB= didn't happened).

Personally I think my dearest Eric can be save from the hellfire of hell (See that? you don't have to swear to play with words, Eric!) , after all caring for our fellow middle class Christian is what us middle class Christian do! we would like to leave the lower class for the government and those attention seeking local politicians, also most lower class are Buddhist (ugh) anyway, (however I must say their children are v.good for raising the head counts at church functions, Buddhism simply doesn't provide unwarranted peer support like your fellow young christian! feeling insecure? join the church! feeling lonely? join the church! no hot girls/boys in your school? Join the church! not enough friends count on your facebook? Join the church! want to abuse power and play politic in a safe environment? You can do that too! (after all we forgive each other 449 times! even if we hate your guts we still won't show it and won't even tell you what's wrong! we are that nice!) And people say we Christian are out of touch! bah! there's no better way to raise your social status! plus, Buddha's not real anyway, and people who worship idols go to hell (no Eric, I do not worship Eason Chan, I just think he is an inspiration that require me to constantly buying his Album and paying for his concert ticket and thinking he is very funny and witty in those McDonald ad and everytime I go to Karaokie I just HAD to sing his song, oh Eason, such an important figure in my life)

Oh you must forgive me for ranting on and on and not introducing myself, forgive me like Jesus said at least 449 times, ok? (however you must never forgive those homosexual and babies killers!) So without further ado, Ladies and Gentlemen, Ma Wing Shun at your service, I am Eric's close cousin and I will be contributing until Eric get his head straight and sort himself out. If you are reading Eric, I suggest finally getting yourself Baptisted (you see, he cannot get into heaven without having a priest touching his forehead with some distilled water or mineral water is even better, but no tap water!!! it is a holy ceremony!!!!!!!!!!!! simple as that, no other way). Hopefully he will get himself sorted out soon and I can stop wallowing in this Leftness that is The Libertines Pub.

Until next time heathens.

Thank you for your kind attentions,
yours truly,
God Bless,

Ma Wing Shun

10 July 2009

Stop treating our kids as guinea pigs, at least for once on drug test

I personally oppose drug test of any sort on our kids. I am not going to discuss my controversial libertarian stance here. I even think that schoolbag search, which is very common for schools in Hong Kong, is unfounded. So you have an idea about the libertarian inside me.

Today is 10 July, they're talking about launching this "pilot scheme" on drug testing in school in September. It is reported in SCMP (yes shit! login required) today that they still don't have an idea on who to get the results first.

I am sure, and I am sure they know, and I am sure that they know we know, that they don't have a clue on what they're doing.

Knowing that they don't know what to do, and that there are definite risks of negative impact on our kids, they still want to treat them as guinea pigs, they called that "pilot scheme".

"Pilot schemes" are used when you have a clear project operation plan and want to give the system a test, but not testing out methods on guinea pigs to come up with a plan.

If any school principal fails to understand that, the person couldn't manage a school.

If any AO fails to understand that, give me back your HK$30K+ pay cheque!

If any CE fails to understand that, then I don't know what to do...

If they are not going to kick the test as I wish, at least work out a good plan! A well-planned murder is usually less brutal than an ad hoc one.


Survival tips on drug tests:

They said parents and kids will have to give their consent on the test. Fuck that. If you're a kid, would you have the guts to refuse the test?

So I'm going to walk you through the non-sense of it, so you could do some non-sense if you're unlucky.
  1. Open any search engine and type "how to pass a drug test?" You will get thousands of suggestions and things to buy online!
  2. Pick an easy to memorise name out of the list of substances which give you false positive results. Tell them you took that the other night for your headache or cold. In other countries, they will give you another test, or another more thorough test, some time later, and you will be dead. But as I said, people here don't know what they're doing. You probably will get through!
  3. Switch to other things. Cough syrup sounded like a good candidate. Or you might as well go back to the harder but out of fashion stuff like heroin and become a real junkie. No school will take you, and no more drug test! Because they're those boring dicks who never get high, they don't understand the fantastic and dynamic world of drugs! They don't know that we can actually switch! Keep exploring new stuff to get high on, fellas; and screw their test!
  4. Softer recreational drug like marijuana is out of the question. Don't take them, because they stay in your body for a whole month! Cocaine lasts for only 1-4 days. It's ok to do coke during summer holiday, Christmas holiday, and maybe Easter holiday too! You can manage to go back clean!
  5. It's actually easy to keep a little bottle of clean urine, or a few clean hair, with you. Don't be a lazy ass, pal! Keeping a little bottle of urine alongside your bottles of ketamine is really nothing!
After all, why worry about the test at all? I don't think they know what they want to do to you even if you're tested poisonous, I mean, literally having poison running in your vein.

Maybe they will just kick you out of school? I don't know. It seems to me that they don't have a plan at all and just don't want you to get high in school. If not, why don't they do something about the dealers instead of the users? Chickening out because the dealers are the bloodlust triad members?

05 July 2009

Moral MythBuster at the age of religious right seepage

I conceived the idea of starting this blog after hearing enough bullshits from my redneck colleagues. But the more remote, yet, important motivation is the rise of the religious right in Hong Kong.

Although I am an open apatheist, I have absolutely nothing against religion. I personally admire the idea of Christian faith a lot, maybe hell lot more than any Christians ever understand.

But what religious right wingers advocate and promote in Hong Kong surely sends shiver down my spine, you may want to watch the Pearl Report I linked earlier as a starter.

This Facebook Concern Group for Hong Kong Religious Hegemony has a lot of discussion and material to read; I don't know how correct are those facts, you may want to judge them yourself.

Religious discrimination is a worrisome thing.

Members of any religious group may apply the teachings of their bibles to every other decision in daily life. People from other religious groups, or non-religious people, could be deprived of the fair chance in employment, promotion, and enrolment to schools. The Pearl Report showed that the clergy "guided" their members in voting.

The other thing that worries me is the moralisation of the society.

Religious right hold conservative moral views. Homosexuality, abortion, divorce, are out of the question. Rev. Patrick So even had the guts to claim that homosexuality promotes HIV (watch his great speech at the Legco in the Pearl Report).

They condemn others who think otherwise. They don't allow diversity. Their views are absolute.

Religious right churches are natural factories of two kinds of members, either they become blind believers of the conservative and hegemonic moral point of view, or, hypocrites who happily use morality as a weapon. I expounded in my dictionary blog the danger of these two kinds of people.

A moral mythbuster bashes moralists' vice. It encourages questioning of the accepted moral standards. It however doesn't offer you an alternative one. It encourages you to think for yourself. The only motto here is "sapere aude".

I'm not asking you to not believe in your god. You can have faith in whatever you have faith in. But don't have blind faith in what your church or the clergy tell you. Always ask why. Believing in a religion doesn't equate believing in its clergy. It is not necessarily so. Don't accept that the clergy communicates better than you do with your god. That's bullshit.

We will go on ridiculing unfounded moral views, and other shits in Hong Kong. We hope one day, there're more independent thinkers than hypocrites plus blind conservatives here in our great city.