Taiwan looks desperate
I have a comment about a recent event that took place in Poland in regard to Taiwan support vis-a-vis China. The Taiwanese media and the office of the prime minister welcomed the very warm support from IPP TV, the Polish Christian TV channel.
Frankly, I am really surprised and perplexed as to why the Taiwanese media and its political leadership would welcome the support of an organization that on a daily basis advocates hate and intolerance toward minorities such as the LGBT, Arab, Muslim, Asian and other communities.
IPP TV frequently praises policies of General Pinochet of Chile or the fascist regime of Francisco Franco of Spain only because of their anti-communist stand regardless of millions of victims.
It also proclaimed the victory of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil as a victory for the “Christian world” regardless of the fact that Bolsonaro expressed utter contempt for the victims of the military regime there.
The type of “Christianity” proposed by IPP has nothing to do with mercy or love toward the other, but everything to do with the supremacy of the “white race” dressed up as religion with the lowest common denominators of chauvinism, racism and vulgar contempt for democracy as its flagship.
Because of this, IPP and the 11/11 Movement are an extremely marginal blip on the radar of Polish politics that does not have more than 1,000 members in a nation of 38 million.
In IPP’s view, the new Christian world order has Poland at the top due to the purity of its people and their “faith” after the defeat of the “pagan” Catholic religion and the coming of the messiah.
In many ways, these are classic characteristics of a cult and most Polish people who have heard of IPP treat it as such.
That someone in the Taiwanese media or government would embrace something like this shows not only poor judgment, but desperation.
Strategically, by lowering its own democratic standards, Taiwan only fuels China’s propaganda against it. So with friends like these, Taiwan really does not need enemies.
As a visitor to Taiwan and admirer of its rich culture and people, I think Taiwanese deserve better than this.
Derek Monroe
Round Lake, Illinois
Religion and gay rights
Sunday’s editorial focused on the legal aspects of and the church’s opposition to same-sex marriage (“The right to live free from bigotry,” Nov. 4, page 8). I wish to point out a few things about the latter, the opposition of church groups to gay marriage.
Many religious groups have a difficult time distinguishing in their sacred writings between what is of cultural origin and what is of religious origin.
When I was young, many churches taught that homosexuality itself was wrong, but now some of those very churches teach that homosexuality is not wrong, but that the practice of homosexuality by those who find themselves to be gay is wrong, as such practices are against the “natural law.”
The natural law is what all human beings find in their hearts, which enables them to know what is good or bad for them. It is therefore a matter of culture — how people function in their particular society — rather than a matter of religion.
The natural law is often mirrored in sacred writings, since these writings arise out of specific cultures at specific times.
However, what is discovered to be natural for the heterosexual majority is not natural for the LGBTQ minority.
Indeed, as the understanding of homosexuality that we now have, thanks to scientific advances in the knowledge of humans, was not known in ancient times, in which most sacred writings arose, we cannot rely today on the cultural views expressed in these writings.
In other words, homosexuality must be viewed in the same way — in a cultural context, not a religious one — as other basically cultural matters in sacred writings, such as food, rituals and gender relationship prescriptions, which are no longer practiced.
It is about time that the church made an effort to align itself with the reasonable distinction between culture and religion in its sacred writings. Such an alignment will end its “religious opposition” to same-sex marriage.
MT Young
Nantou
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
RSS