Holy Money!

One of the headlines in today’s newspapers caught my eye, raised my eyebrows, and made me swear. Quite a way to start the day, I must say.

The headline says that a leader of the popular Church here in this country has been paid $500,000 in the last financial year. Converted to USD, that would come to about $330,000, just 70 grand shy of Obama’s paycheck, and this is without the added stress of getting the country out of a recession and ending 2 unpopular wars. Now you get why I swore?

The newspaper article goes on saying that this church not only was able to reward its leader half a million dollars, but also was able to raise $19 million (US $12.6 million) in ONE day. ONE DAY!

I’m not going to judge, though those who know me would know how much I’m itching to say inappropriate and un-PC things in regards to this issue, but seriously, should a church be this wealthy? What happens to the Sunday school teachings of staying humble, helping those in need, etc, etc? I believe in rewarding people who have done great service to your cause, but 500 grand? Yes, this leader has recruited followers, some of whom are teenagers who need guidance in their lives. Yes, this leader has made religion hip and has provided moral grounds for young people who would otherwise turn to the world of sins and amorality. But 500 grand? Seriously?

It’s hard for me to take a religious institution who makes close to US$40 million last year and is planning to build a multi-million dollar building seriously. I mean, seriously, is this a corporation or is this a spiritual haven? Why must the building to be constructed cost millions? Surely a simple worship place would be suitable, and the extra money can be given to charities or to start foundations to help the disadvantaged youth of the country or the region even with that kind of money. Surely people who are seeking God would go to a church or any other religious house without considering the architecture, the quality of materials or the annual financial statement?

Maybe it’s just my upbringing of idolizing Pope John Paul and Mother Theresa in my religious days, seeing these two great religious figures who were simple and humble, and enriched their lives in immaterial things. Yes, Pope John Paul got to live in that awesome place in the Vatican, surrounded by priceless masterpieces of the Renaissance artists (I’m so jealous), but he campaigned for peace and human rights. Mother Theresa abandoned her wealth to help the poor. And how much, I wonder, did they get paid?

Look, I don’t know where all this 40million earned would go to, but I certainly hope the poor and the needy would get  a slice of that. It speaks of the church’s popularity and the generosity of its followers to bank that kind of profit, but seriously, spreading the word of God shouldn’t be attached to any price or salary. And this is coming from a cynical self-proclaimed Agnostic.

To the church leader defense, the dude who’s receiving 500 grand, he has requested twice that his position be a no-pay one; however, the church board has rejected his first request, and no answer has been given for his second one. I guess we all should consider a career change, shouldn’t we?

The Scary Truth of the New Astrological Sign

I took a “What’s Your New Astrological Sign” quiz on Facebook. Of course I took this quiz for pure fun, but based on my experiences, these kind of quiz no longer surprises me. The answers have always been the standard description of my star sign, and this description describes my personality quite well. Maybe it’s just biased psychology; my mind unconsciously agrees with whatever is written because it is made up of traits that I like- love to travel, needs challenge, cannot be tied down, stubborn, etc, etc.

However, this New Astrological Sign quiz kind of took me aback a little. Not only it provides the standard description as other astrological quizzes, it also pegs the bad sides of me quite to the T:

Buoyancy characterizes the Sagittarian Rooster. He’s atwitter with chitchat and agog with stories of adventure. This subject, born under two of the most high-strung signs, will be nervous, frank, candid, and a bit carried away with himself. The word is enthusiasm but it’s more than that. Sagittarius/Roosters are full of dash and elan. They cut an impressive figure wherever they go-and they go everywhere! Superficially, this character appears boastful and cocky. But deep down he is serious, dreams of helping the downtrodden and cares enormously about others. His love life is highly charged, but uneven. Great passions come alive and carry him to heavenly heights. The next week, it’s over. The paradox lies in this person’s odd relationship to deceit. He can’t stand untruth and yet is capable of some devious fibbing of his own. This approach makes cementing love into anything more permanent than a roll in the hay in a grass hut. The sex is surely delicious. But don’t count on this character to still be there in the morning.

If any one of my friend is asked to describe me, they would say 99% of what was written above. On the one hand, I’m quite pleased that this astrological stuff has turned out to be more than just ancient beliefs and eve my cynical side is nodding in agreement that there may be some truth in how the stars were alligned on the day you were born could affect your personality. But on the other hand, I’m sure I’m not the only Sagitarian Rooster in the world, and although this quiz result doesn’t apply to all of my fellow Sagitarian Roosters, there must be a percentage who sees their personality being described accurately just by entering their birthdates. It kind of makes me feel less unique. I’m starting to think that these characteristics are what make me ME, and having to share these with others? I’m selfish that way.

Watchmen

On March 4, a day before Watchmen opened nationwide in this island nation, I was surprised to see a review of this movie, based on one of the best graphic novels of all time, received a depressing 2 star rating. The reviewer claimed that the jaded superhero story was a been-there-done-that idea that failed to ignite his imagination, and that Watchmen was nothing but yet another superhero movie with no essence and zero entertainment value.

Well, I beg to differ.

Watchmen the movie, like Watchmen the graphic novel, is set in 1985 in a parallel universe where America won the Vietnam War and Nixon never had to go through the Watergate scandal. America and USSR are steps away from a nuclear war, and the doomsday clock is set at 5 minutes to midnight, indicating that annihilation is just around the corner. A group of superheroes, known as the Minutemen, was lauded and loved by the public in the 1940s. Forty years later, a new generation of superheroes known as the Watchmen has been disbanded, rejected by society  and despised by its people, thanks to the Keene Act.

The story is basically a whodunit murder mystery. The Comedian aka Edward Blake, a Minutemen/ Watchmen member, was thrown out of his apartment window to his death. Roschach, another Watchmen has-been, suspects that The Comedian’s murder is only the beginning of more masked vigilante’s deaths. Roschach’s investigation introduces us to the other characters in the movie: Dan Dreiberg/ Nite Owl, Laurie Jupiter, excuse me, Juzpeczyk/ Silk Spectre II, Doc Manhattan, and Adrian Veight/ Ozymandias. 

As the story unfolds, the background of each characters is revealed, and we learn how jaded and depressed these ex-superheroes are, how the dejection of the Keene Act takes away a livelihood and happiness that each character (except Roschach who refuses to obey the Act) takes from crime-fighting.  We also learn about the widespread fear and uncertainty of the looming nuclear war, and ultimately, what humanity fears, what motivates it, and the results of these motivations and fears. In the process, the movie peels layer after layer of complexity that the novel took 12 issues to reveal, and we learn in the end the true motive behind The Comedian’s murder and the unexpected consequences in the search for justice.

Zack Snyder, who has been entrusted in translating Watchmen to the big screen, has stayed loyal to the graphic novel by religiously following the dialogues of Alan Moore and the illustration of Dave Gibbons.  Critics may say that Snyder was using the same formula of his previous movie 300, another graphic novel adaptation, but let me say this: by using that same formula, Snyder has made a movie out of a graphic novel that has been widely believed can never be made into a movie.

Watchmen is more than just a story about a superhero trying to find the bad guy and bring him to justice. Watchmen is more than just jaded superheroes trying to find meaning in their lives after their crime-fighting alter egos are rejected by society. Watchmen tries to answer society’s questions of who is held responsible for those in power and it attempts to explain what humanity is and what it is capable of doing.

Watchmen is an intelligent, deep, complex movie that is also visually satisfying. The graphic violence is, well, graphic and unforgiving, but the story will be crippled without this violence (Roschach will never be Roschach if his acts are censored for a PG13 rating). Symbolisms that are prominent in the novel are displayed faithfully in the movie, giving more realism and completing the whole movie experience, though I am itching to see the movie again to see what I have missed.

Watchmen is a pure entertaining movie that carries a lot of intellect and (dare I say) philosophy that some people may find tiring or unbelievable, as our 2-star reviewer has found. However, fans of the graphic novel are rejoicing, and those who are new to it are awed at what a graphic novel can do. Watchmen is, without a doubt, worth more than 2 stars.

The Last Single Girl

My cousin has just announced that she is engaged and will tie the knot in May this year. This news, naturally, set off my parents’ longing to see me walk down the aisle, especially I am the only female in the family with no boyfriend or a ring on my finger. I, naturally, balk at the idea of committing myself to someone for the rest of my life.

Some may say I’m commitment phobic. Well, I am commitment phobic, I’m sure a lot of guys out there would vouch for that. I just simply don’t like being in a relationship. My first boyfriend was so needy and demanded to spend every second of free time with me that telling him I was going out with my girlfriends became a guilt trip. He had to call me every night and talked about every single thing that happened in his day that I have put him on speaker, went about to do my own stuff, and came back to find that he had not stopped talking, and also he had not realized I was gone for a few minutes. I made a point to learn from my mistakes and devised a radar system which I can use to recognize such neediness in guys so that I wouldn’t have to go through such a relationships again. My system worked fine, and I ended up chasing the bad boys instead of the dependable, emotionally available good guys. However, I did find a flaw in my system. Even the bad boys have a sensitive side, and when that side comes out, my system crumbles. I just couldn’t be with someone who is so nonchalant with a devil may care attitude in public and a sensitive new age guy in private who gets offended when I spent some of my free time calling a college buddy over the weekend. 

Some may say I’m career driven. I can assure you, I am definitely not career driven. One, I’m unemployed, and two, I don’t even know what kind of career I want to pursue for the rest of my life. If trying to make money from my ranting is considered career driven, then yes, I am guilty of that, but I’m 100% sure I don’t fall into the category of 21st century women who put their career first and marriage second.

Some say maybe I haven’t found my soulmate, and God knows how often I hear this. I met up with a childhood friend a couple of years back, and of course coming from a strong family oriented country such as our home country, the topic of conversation naturally turned to ‘When are you getting married?’. When I told her that I hadn’t felt the itch yet, the first thing she said to me was not to worry, because the right guy would come along. I’m sure she doesn’t mean it in a condescending way, but when you’ve heard it said to you every time someone asked when you’re getting married, you start to feel that it’s become a consoling, sympathetic remark that can be translated to: “You poor thing, you haven’t found a potential husband yet. I hope you find one soon or you’ll spend the rest of your life miserably alone.”

Why is my choice to be single and not wanting to see anyone or being in a relationship so difficult to accept or comprehend? Why is it such a blasphemy to say that I don’t believe in the institution of marriage for myself? 

I’m not arguing that marriage is bad. My girlfriends would make great wives and mothers, whereas I would make a terrible one. I am too independent for my own good and too stubborn to compromise on anything that doesn’t lie in line with my beliefs and thoughts. I am not afraid that I would grow old alone in a small little flat, with only dogs as my company, because I can foresee the unhappiness if I defied myself by giving in to marriage. I know that I would feel I was missing out on a lot of things. Places to go, books to read, friends to be made, and my own self-discovery. 

Perhaps I’m just selfish; I simply don’t want to change myself or compromise anything that is mine for anyone else. Perhaps it’s the way I dislike how society in my home country view women as unsuccessful unless she has a man to call her husband. Perhaps it’s the expectation that has been imposed on women to utilize our reproductive system maximally to pass on the genes and continue the family name. 

All I know is that, from my own experience, I am much happier when I am on my own than when I am with another person. And I know, that even every one around me is getting married one by one, leaving me all alone in my own world, I’d be much happier as the last single girl than as a Mrs. Someone.