Perfect Happiness

This is taken from Zhuangzi, chapter eighteen: Perfect Happiness.

...When Zhuangzi's wife died, Huizi came to mourn her. At that moment, Zhuangzi was squatting down, beating on a tub, and singing.

Huizi said, "You lived with this person, raise children, and grew old together. Not to cry when she died would be bad enough. But to beat on a tub singing! Isn't that too much?"

Zhuangzi said, "No. When she first died, don't you think I was like everyone else? But then I considering her beginning, before she was alive. Not only before she had life, but before she had form. Not only before she had form, but before she had qi.

In all the mixed-up bustle and confusion, something changed and there was qi. Th qi changed and there was form. The form changed and she had life. Today there was another change and she died. It's just like the round of the four seasons: spring, summer fall, and winter. She was resting quietly, perfectly at home, and I followed her crying 'Wah-hah!' It seemed like I hadn't comprehended fate. So I stopped."...

Not that this really takes away the sorrow for me or anyone who has a loved one facing death, but I guess it is comforting to know.

Yong Vui Kong

Recent update: http://theonlinecitizen.com/2011/04/court-of-appeal-yong-vui-kong%E2%80%99s-case-has-no-merit/


“If Yong escapes the death penalty, drug barons will think the signal is that young and vulnerable traffickers will be spared and can be used as drug mules, argued Mr Shanmugam.”
– TODAY, 10 May 2010


This is perhaps the main reason why the court insists on keeping to the death sentence for Yong Vui Kong's case. But honestly, has this death sentence for drug trafficking prevented drug barons from using people like Yong Vui Kong (that is of course if we believe his case that he was under misconceptions about the drug trafficking laws of Singapore) to traffic drugs? I certainly don't think so. It is not going to make a difference to the drug barons whether their "tools" will be spared from the death sentence or not.


This death sentence for drug trafficking only helps to prevent people actually aware of this law from trafficking drugs. It is true that conceivably, more youths may be tempted to traffic drugs into Singapore if they can be spared from the death sentence. This is what is feared here, that sparing Yong Vui Kong from the death sentence will make others more daring to traffic drugs.


However, the question to ask here is: Are we putting Yong Vui Kong to death because he deserves it? Or are we putting him to death for another reason?


If he was indeed misled by his drug baron about Singapore's drug trafficking laws, surely many of us will feel that he doesn't deserve a death sentence. You can't put someone to death for something he didn't know (was wrong)! This was my initial reaction when I read about his case. The thing is, he knew it was wrong, except that he didn't know how dire the consequences were. On reflection, I realized that doesn't give much ground to saying he doesn't deserve a death sentence. Suppose in a country where there is a mandatory death sentence for someone who murderers another intentionally while not suffering from any mental illnesses (let's assume that this is absolutely wrong in all possible cases) and suppose you also feel strongly that yes, someone who does that deserves to be put to death. Now this murderer knew it was wrong to do what he did, but he argues that he didn't know that it would result in him being put to death. He thought that he would only get a few days in jail and that wouldn't have killed that person if he knew he will be put to death for doing it. Would you sympathize with the murderer in this case? I wouldn't, because if the murderer knew it was wrong and also deserves the punishment for what he did, it doesn't affect either way whether he actually knew of the real consequences. Similarly for Yong Vui Kong's case, he does know what he did was wrong. He probably also knows what heroin does to people. Maybe he also knows how many people the 42.37 grams of heroin could harm, or he might not. Suppose he was fully aware of all this, but he chose to traffic drugs because of certain benefits he would gain through it and he thought that the possible consequences were light but it turns out that the consequences weren't light at all. Now also suppose that we all think that the death sentence is a deserving punishment for someone who traffic drugs because it will harm many many many people grievously, would you still think that whether or not he knew of the actual punishment he will receive due to his actions makes a difference? I think not.


Then, our next concern is whether the act of drug trafficking deserves the death sentence. I could write a thesis on this but that is not the point. The court obviously thinks that drug trafficking deserves the death sentence as they have shown us by consistent rulings of death sentences for drug trafficking. If the court were to reexamine this law, it wouldn't be because of any special circumstances of Yong Vui Kong's case but simply due to the fact the law is less ideal than we thought. As such it would be really difficult to argue his case on from this angle because he court has stood firm on this law for countless cases before him and as I have pointed out, despite his young age, it does not give him any advantage on this point. Even so, let me give my 2 cents on this point. For many people I believe, don't feel that drug trafficking should warrant someone a death sentence because you are not harming people directly .etc .etc It is really subjective and can be argued both ways, but the justification I believe that the court holds for the death sentence for drug trafficking is that it serves as a deterrence to people from doing it. Now we might have a problem here because we are not punishing someone because he deserved the punishment for what he did but we are punishing him for another reason. But usually we feel fine with law because we argue that "he knew he could die doing that, but he still did it anyway, so he is deserving of that punishment". It is a funny fact that we feel someone is more deserving of a punishment for doing something if he knows and accepts it but chose to do it anyway. To use a more exaggerated example, suppose that in a certain country a death sentence is given to someone who lies, not because lying itself is deserving of death but because if the liar was not put to death it would encourage more people to lie and the when everyone lies the world would be in chaos. Certainly, if someone knew about the death sentence for lying but still does it anyway we might not think that he deserved it, but we would certainly think that he deserved it more than the person who lied while knowing that lying was wrong but did not know about the death sentence for it. This is probably why we feel so strongly about Yong Vui Kong's case, because the death sentence, we feel, is not really given because someone who traffic drugs actually deserves it, coupled with the fact that Yong Vui Kong himself was not aware of what consequences he was getting himself into. Because he did not do it while knowing the actual punishment, PLUS the fact that we feel the act is not deserving of the punishment is what causes us to instinctively side with him. The problem here lies with the fact that we feel the act itself is not deserving of the punishment but the punishment is implemented for another reason which the "injustice" of it is especially felt when one is sentenced with that punishment for doing that act undeserving of it, without even knowing that the act will result in that punishment. 


Now this raises one more question as to whether ignorance is punishable or should be punished. Whether it is actually Yong Vui Kong's fault for not knowing the law because if we deem that it is his fault for not knowing the law then the fact that he was not aware of the law is not a point for his case (like in my previous argument) but a point against his case. I definitely agree with Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong who, if i'm not wrong, said that "youthfulness is not in itself a ground for granting clemency". However, youthfulness may decide whether ignorance is punishable or not. Suppose instead of Yong Vui Kong we have a 5 year old kid in the same situation. We will obviously not convict this kid (i hope, i'm not really certain how the court will rule this but I do think they are grossly mistaken if they rule otherwise =/ ) because: 1) there is no point in punishing someone for something that they did that they didn't even know it was wrong (unless of cos, through punishing that person learns that what they did was wrong but that's a whole different question) and it is not his fault that he doesn't know, 2) even if he does know it is wrong, he doesn't know the punishment for the act and it is not his fault that he doesn't know, and hence my previous argument. Yong Vui Kong, who was 19 at that time could also be argued that he didn't know what he did was wrong, as in he wasn't aware of the entirety of the harm he would bring with that act of drug trafficking and isn't at fault for not knowing that it was wrong (less workable). Or it could be argued that he didn't know the law and is not at fault for not knowing the law due to his young age, and hence my previous argument (previous paragraph) again (more workable).


I feel like I'm ranting...I probably am because it's 6am and my brain is dying but I just have to finish this post. 


In my opinion, if Yong Vui Kong was eventually still sentenced to death, it would literally feel like he is a sacrifice to deter people who are aware of the death sentence law from drug trafficking....which note! a group of people which he was never a part of, because he never knew the death sentence law. The death sentence law doesn't even prevent people like him from drug trafficking but it is inevitable that people like him become sacrifices for that law, which makes no sense especially if we feel that his ignorance of the law is not his fault.

Growing up

this is just going to be a compilation of a few of my tweets (as i was tweeting i realized this i was almost writing an essay so I decided to stop and continue here ^^)

grab every opportunity to show love, savour every bit of love you receive, please don't ever take it for granted....


....nothing suffices as an excuse, because someday you'll realize nothing ever even comes near to being as important.


recently i've become very conscious whenever i'm being impatient w/ my mum..."no you don't want to act this way" a voice in my head tells me


think i'm growing up, but also becoming more piercingly conscious n fearful of loss, worrying more, n started d habit of nagging (at my mum)


i have also started being more observant; no action is small enough to escape me. a hand slightly supporting her back when she gets up, the exerted way she walks, her starting to forget little things that she remembered just a second ago....all these things i watch with a little strain in my heart.


just yesterday i posted on facebook that i shall see Aurora Borealis (northern lights) with my own eyes before i die, but as i'm writing this i'm thinking...i'm sure that would be beautiful but what is really so meaningfully beautiful is sleeping right in the next room...


i want to keep watching as long as possible....