The only intriguing sex-related story in the last month came courtesy of Shu Guang Girls' Senior High School in Hsinchu City. After completion of what the Catholic school calls a "life science course," these children will be given a card which they sign and carry around like a credit card to affirm their commitment to sexual abstinence until they are married.
Setting aside the contentiousness of telling minors that adult pre-marital sex is a sin, the Catholic establishment seems to be oblivious to the reality of Taiwanese society. The average age for marriage for men and women in this country is almost 30, which means the Church expects its adult flock -- and millions of other Taiwanese, if at all possible -- to live sexless lives for most of their youth or else be branded as sinners. Little wonder, then, that a number of academics and officials have frowned on the school for its fundamentalist approach to sexuality and its aping of US-style evangelism.
The Catholic Church is no doubt concerned about the large number of abortions that take place in Taiwan. But the nature of programs targeting students like those at Shu Guang Girls' Senior High School is symbolic, not practical. Hardliners in the Catholic Church are resolutely hostile to women controlling their own sex lives free of Church interference. Pope Benedict XVI shows no signs of backing away from this, and it is instructive that of all of the themes that the pope could have chosen to discuss in his first encyclical, he chose "love."
Preaching abstinence is a minor issue, yet minor issues are the only kind that the Catholic Church seems to openly and aggressively pursue in its attempts to craft Taiwanese society.
Throughout this country's history, the Catholic establishment has worked on the margins, lacking the personnel to make a substantial mark on the community. It was not until the late 1940s, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government fled to Taiwan, that Catholic missionaries -- mistreated and expelled by the Chinese Communist Party -- arrived in large numbers. Beholden to their KMT hosts, they remained "neutral" and largely silent at a time when great injustice was being inflicted on the Taiwanese population. It took the rival Presbyterian Church to stand up and fight for justice for the Taiwanese.
In the new millennium, the Vatican's lack of enthusiasm for Taiwanese and its willingness to dump Taipei for Beijing is merely an extension of its desire to regain its footing in the "real" China, and therefore should surprise no one. For the Vatican, as for blinkered "Sinologists" of old, Taiwan's days as a microcosm of pre-communist China are over, and the Vatican is somewhat impatient to return to the main game -- even if the government it courts continues to persecute many Chinese Catholics.
Taiwan's government can hardly be credited for its attempts to keep the relationship with the Vatican afloat -- the Ministry of Foreign Affairs probably doesn't know the difference between the crucifixion and the Catechism. But symbolism can matter just as much to Taiwanese people as to the pope and his advisers. And poor symbolism can corrode the Vatican's moral authority to the point of inviting mockery. Benedict's sworn opposition to moral relativism will amount to nothing if the Vatican swims in it en route to Zhongnanhai.
By the time the girls of Shu Guang high school have grown into adulthood, the moral authority of their "true-love abstinence commitment card" may well ring rather hollow. In all likelihood, the Vatican will have symbolically left their society behind, clutching the yuan equivalent of thirty pieces of silver.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS