Carigamers
Off Topic => Ole Talk => Politics & Soap Box Rants => Topic started by: Bsensei on September 13, 2004, 06:18:52 PM
-
I would like to know the view of GATT's populas, what are your views on these awards...
Do you see them as a valid attempt for Religious Equality or as an attempt to further segregate the blacks and the indians in our twin island state??
-
It's an attempt at further segregation just cuz they can't have a say in what the nation's highest award is called.
The next best name was 'the order of Trinidad and Tobago' but b'cuz an 'Indian' didn't think of it they vex...
-
Hoss i agree, now every mc in GATT who know me know i eh racial some of my very good friends are indian, but these "extremeist" are mad, nex the will want to change the police symbol because our nation's police force uses the Star of David
so i dont know, i agree with changin the name becasue a cross does symbolize christianity, but not making a "national award" that not even the president supports so then how can it be a national award???
-
I ein't know what to tell alya men yes.
The figures of national awards are biases for African people.
That can't be argued.
It's plain as the eyes on your face.
It is the governments own fault, so don't blame the Gopio Folks.
Listen to 106 I think it is Monday-Thursday from 8:30pm.
Or is it 103?
I doh even know, but that program will really open you eyes.
Segregation already there, we can't change that.I agree with burbon, how can U make a national award a Religious Symbol?
Indian damn right for quarreling and I hope the Muslims go start asking for a Moon shaped one :)
-
lol
it's a matter of history. The cross ain't an "african" symbol.
It is a christian symbol, and in case you didn't know, christianity ain't a negro thing by default. We got that pushed on us by the caucasians.
If the national award was a calabash and a gold cocoyea broom, I could understand the bachanal.
It isn't. Our history has our entire system based on the bible and it's moral statements. Changing all the little aspects of that now for the sake of equal representation for all religious groups is at worst childish and at best a good gesture.
THE USA have all but thrown out the bible from their law books thanks to trying to "please" all religions that live there.
Personally, I don't think that is a good thing. Its like saying because you have so many religions, you gonna remove it altogether from the curriculum of your school/country (which is what has been done in some cases)
Better thing would be to incorporate the best of them all. Rather than omit one for sake of offending the other.
I pity the man who has to do that though, lol. Threadin on a fine line ihmc.
This guy tried. Didn't do too bad of a job either.
Ernest Holmes
http://www.milehichurch.org/believe/ernest.asp (http://www.milehichurch.org/believe/ernest.asp)
-
The only solution is a secular solution.
And I say that not only for this issue, but for all issues in multicultural socieites like this one.
Religion is not the foundation of morality. It's the other way around.
Religion is also not the foundation of the Trinidadian identity. It is just one aspect of our history.
Our entire system is not based on the Bible, and whatever moral statements influence our legal system can be found echoed in the Koran or Gita. A Hindu uttered The Golden Rule millenia before Christ did.
There is an obvious Christian bias in the Trinity Cross. The Award is a brainchild of the intellectuals of the day, many of whom were still heavily influenced by colonial thought and dogma. Christianity is the religion of choice (heh) of most Africans in this country, and therein lies the racial link.
Changing the Trinity Cross to something universal is far from childish, or even a good gesture. It's a social obligation on the part of the government of Trinidad and Tobago.
The award should simply be something secular, and reflective of the identity of Trinidad and Tobago. We can reflect aspiration and inspiration without religion.
Religious people need to grow up.
-
I agree, but I wasn't talkin about just the award when I said it would be childish. I talking about all the aspects of the law of the land which is based on the bible.
My greater concern is by heading in that secular direction, you risk losing the benefits of religion in the first place.
In a utopian world, you would have schools with religious leaders of all races having classes exposing all kids to the good points of all the good books.
We know that ain't gonna happen. Nor is it gonna happen on a national level.
mc @ reality.
-
As for GOPIO and what they're doing...it's f*cked up, but they're doing what they have to do to protest.
As divisive as their actions are, the government ignoring it is just as bad. Manning is sending a message to his Afro-Christian electorate: "Yuh see how we run tings?"
The USA throwing the Bible out of their Law Books is a sign of progress. The Bible was a lawbook for a different time with different circumstances. It's inspirational, but as a book on keeping a diverse, free society, it's a goddamn joke. Same is to be said for the Gita and the Koran.
One religion should never be given precedent over another in any government institution of a truly fair and equal society.
And the best way to ensure that doesn't happen is to remove religion altogether from the official administrative process.
Same goes for schools. I don't mind the Catholic or Hindu Boards controlling their own schools, but public schools shouldn't force prayers or services on anyone. Social Studies and Civil Studies are what's needed.
Because at the end of the day, Christians, Hindus and Muslims can NEVER totally get along. NEVER NEVER NEVER. The very nature of their religions ("My way is the only way") forbids it.
-
My greater concern is by heading in that secular direction, you risk losing the benefits of religion in the first place.
Secularism is an absence of religion, not morals.
Notice I said that Social Studies and Civil Studies have to be taught in all schools?
Those are the morals we need to build a strong nation.
Religion might inspire morality in some, but to the majority it comes at way too much of a price: Divisiveness. Complacency. Bigotry.
Civil Studies teaches three crucial things: Discipline. Tolerance. Production.
And that's all it teaches.
-
agreed
Together we aspire, Together we achieve.
-
Here's a quote from another forum that explains much of my feelings on the issue.
Well I believe that morals and religion are not the same thing. Yes religion teaches morals but its actually more concerned with giving an account of our origin.
Before there was Christanity and Islam, people were living in communities and there were rules governing behavior. Human beings, because we are social animals, have an intuitive sense of what is acceptable behaviour, behavoir that will allow us as a group to survive and make for the best shared experience. Because religion is man made it contains all of our fears and our beliefs about moral behavior but its not the source of morals.
Of course we have deviants in the society but before religion we had ways of dealing with thoes people and today we also have stratergies for dealing with deviants. I doubt you can really tell me that forcing children to go to sunday school or the IRO having national days of prayer has any impact on the morals of people in the society.
Yes religion is a nice organized way to teach morals but its also very effective at teaching hate and bigotry. I think that without religion people will still hate but since there is no organized institution preaching hate an organized response will be less likely (eg terrorism etc)
I believe that religion is actually starting to break down and is starting to be replaced by REASON (perhapes more quickly in the more developed countries before countries like Trinidad). It is intresting to note that Trinidad with all of its righteous indignation has more crime per capita than many of the developed countries that we critize as being immoral.
-
personally religion tend to carry additional baggage which can and often cause segregation. i believe firmly of seperation of religion and state. yet i frankly cant support changing national symbols. now i tryin to be very deligate with my speach but this topic often infuriates me simply cause of the saying "you so what you reap". you cant preach separatism socially and then quarrel about lack of representation nationally. this use to pissed me off during my stay in england and im sad that i see it here as well. i not going to rant on this topic cause as i said its one thats really sensitive.
i simply believe that somethings are basic. the trinity cross is a symbol of our country. it a symbol of our history our country. so would forget our country is call TRINI-DAD or as La Trinity by the old spanish. so while we are at it lets change our name. wait wait, calling cities like arima, arouca, tumpuna etc is misrepresentitive of our diverse culture. how many amerindians are there really in society? where do we stop? i might sound like im exaggerating but frankly thas how it sound when i hear someone say change the trinity cross. the trinity cross represents more than just a medal and a name. its also the sum of our national history, good and bad. from its bloody beginnings to it present day. religious or not its the symbol of our country.
-
its also the sum of our national history, good and bad. from its bloody beginnings to it present day. religious or not its the symbol of our country.
Sorry...that is BS.
How can one religious symbol ever represent the sum history of a multicultural, multiracial, multireligious State?
How does a religious symbol represent our irreligious struggles?
Our country was built on trade, genocide, slavery, exploitation, struggle, emancipation, multiplicity, enlightenment and independence.
I understand the need to respect history.
We remember the Trinity and its significance in our history everytime we say Trinidad. It reminds us that there are elements of this country that preceded us, and that we weren't always in control of our destiny.
Now that we are, we can reward our Great Achievers with something that we think represents us in the here and now. The reward came after our Independence, and should reflect the multiplicity from which this nation was formed.
Arima and all those other places aren't meant to be representative of anything. They are just names for places. The National Award was created to be a symbol of the achievements of the people of this country. And as a truly universal symbol, it's unacceptable.
-
Am, soooo maybe we should change the name our country as well ??????
If TRINITY CROSS is a big problem.....TRINI-DAD could be in trouble...
What say you, "The Cosmospolitan Island and Tobago" ???
GOPIO mc. BTW, Trinity Cross NOTHING to do with Christianity. Because Kayode name Kayode he is a Christian ?? I know Hindus named David and Christians named Krishna. It's just a NAME. A NAME. If the name happens to be of Christian origin SO BE IT. That doesn't make it a symbol of Chrisitanity.
Change the country friggin name one time....Change Arima, that Amerindian, Change San Fernando, that Spanish and i is ah african. Give everyting a neutral name. Then some fool go say, change it, cause is ENGLISH. GOPIO playing up, and if ppl cyah see the level ah foolishness that going on, is just a matter ah time b4 some idiot come wid an even more asinine idea and get "thinking" ppl to follow him.
All who doh like the Trinity Cross, go jump in the sea, cause Christopher Columbus, a Christian, named Trinidad, La Trinity........as a honour to his Christian God......You living in La Trinity..damnit....
Let's not allow ourselves to be pawns of evil minded ppl
--- It's amazing how a few fools can have hordes of educated brilliant followers -----
-
The National Award was created to be a symbol of the achievements of the people of this country. And as a truly universal symbol, it's unacceptable.
So, aren't the ppl receiving the award Nationals of Trinidad & Tobago ???
What's more important, the purpose of the award, or the shape, origin and "perceived" significane ???
By refusing the award, such are stating their DISTINT separation as Nationals of Trinidad & Tobago. Their allegiance is to something ,someone or somewhere else first and foremost.
Kayode, our National football team and Athletic teams and Cricket teams are all dominated by one race each. As a representation of our country, THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE !. Maybe W.I. should mandate a player from every West Indian Island, MUST be on the W.I team. Clever huh !?!
Change the Cross, but doh stop there, change everything National, to reflect we history, and multicultural society, and multiracial....whatever......
Change we National Football Team....more Indian and White, Chinese too
Change we National Cricket Team.....more Africans.....
Make Ganges meet the Nile, the National Anthem.......
Change the National Anthem and Pledge, cause some Christians doh swear or pledge, and some cannot stand at attention.....to an anthem. That is disrespect...
Kayode, you can't plz ppl !!! Leave the damn Cross !!!
Cause after the Cross, they go want something else....and they will never be satisfied !!!!!!
------ common sense ent to common ---------------------
-
No one is disputing the purpose of the award. Many people are dissatisfied with its shape and its name.
The National Football Team. The National Athletics Team. The National Anthem. The National Pledge.
The Trinity Cross.
You see the difference there? We're discussing names and symbolism. All of these things have purely National identities, while the Trinity Cross has a distinctly Christian form and name.
And what's wrong with everything being national? We're a nation, not a theocracy.
All that thing about more Afrcans or Chinese or whatever is irrelevant to what we're discussing. We're discussing a name and symbol. Try to stay on topic. Also, try to read the other contributions before going off on a rant and trying to determine who intellegent and who not.
-
And you so offbase it eh funny.
By refusing the award, such are stating their DISTINT separation as Nationals of Trinidad & Tobago. Their allegiance is to something ,someone or somewhere else first and foremost.
By refusing the award they are protesting. This is a democracy, and it's both their right and their obligation to protest what they see as an inequality or misrepresentation in their country.
Kayode, our National football team and Athletic teams and Cricket teams are all dominated by one race each. As a representation of our country, THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE !. Maybe W.I. should mandate a player from every West Indian Island, MUST be on the W.I team. Clever huh !?!
No, because yuh talkin toots. The West Indies Cricket team represents the region and is comprised of the best the WI has to offer. Same as the Trinity Cross.
Only thing is, the West Indies Cricket Team's name and logo does not reflect any bias towards any one country, race or religion. It's something totally neutral and secular. The Award should be the same.
Make Ganges meet the Nile, the National Anthem.......
Ganges Meets The Nile is nothing more than an informal version of the Anthem. The Anthem reflects true equality and diversity. It doesn't lean towards any race or religion, like the Cross.
Cause after the Cross, they go want something else....and they will never be satisfied !!!!!!
This is the most telling statement you've made.
It gets down to the whole root of this issue.
Us vs Them
Who are "they"? Nationals of Trinidad and Tobago who live here, contribute to society and don't think that a Trinity Cross is an acceptable universal symbol of achievement for Trinidad and Tobago?
If so, I am one of "them".
-
So if it stay a cross and rename the National Order of Trinidad & Tobago, that would be fine ???
And having a National Identity is subjective to each person. If i don't want a National Identiy a la, the Trinity Cross, i make it a problem. Even though our Football team is the National Team, if a some Trinidadian decides that the team is not in keeping with a National Identity, does the name "National" Football team make it National to him ?? And if you object to the Trinity Cross on the base of religious significance, why won't someone in future not object to something like the National Team, on racial composition ?? I must go off the topic slightly cause, this is not a problem of religious intelorance. You know that and i know that. Leh we stop pretending to be all diplomatic and objective. I attacking this problem at the root, not debating the farce thrown forward.
How come between 1995 and 2001, it never change ??? Is a big problem now !!
Oh BTW, the lil intelligence thing wasn't directed at you..or any posters in this forum,. It is directed at ppl who follow others blindly, and those who cyah see the wood for the trees.
-
Personally, I don't have a problem with the use of the word 'Trinity', speaking as a Hindu.... the Christian people have their ideals of the word Trinity, but so do other religions, and could be made applicable if they so wish...
The use of 'Cross', IMO, should be changed...maybe change the title to "Trinity Order" or something along those lines...
But then that's just me...and there are MANY other people on both sides of that argumentative fence who won't even come to a compromise as such...:?
-
So if it stay a cross and rename the National Order of Trinidad & Tobago, that would be fine ???
Yes, it would be. It would be perfect.
One less thing for the religious people to quarrel about, one more step in the right direction.
And having a National Identity is subjective to each person.
Well let the National Order be open to interpretation.
Yuh know, sometimes it's necessary to deal with the smaller problems before you get to the main one. The less "little" things people have to complain about, the easier it is to identify what is really bothering them.
-
But then that's just me...and there are MANY other people on both sides of that argumentative fence who won't even come to a compromise as such...
Why compromise when we have Mr Patrick to show them Indian who is boss?
-
the cross isn't even originally a christian symbol , it was origonally a roman symbol, and the Egyptians had a cross like symbol called the 'Akh' thousands of years before that.
Most other countries have cross based awards, the english have the Victorias cross, the germans the Iron cross... , its just a symbol .
Heck the pope has an upside down cross on his seat, all the stupid people and satanists thought it meant he was evil... but actually the upside down cross is a symbol of St. Peter long before it became one of the occult .
-
It's nice to think that u consider yourself one of "THEM". But "THEY" as i used it doesn't refer to those who object to Trinity Cross as a National Symbol. Gee, probably the overwhelming majority of persons in the island don't care, or feel offended. You think i personally care whether it's a Trinity Cross, Trinity Bowl, Trinity Moon, Order of Trinidad & Tobago ??
How many ppl u think actually care ??
I use "THEY" to refer to those that see it as an opportunity to further divide the country. To cause political mischief, to stir up tribalism, etc. There is a HUGE difference between the immediate above, and persons opposed to the Trinity Cross as our National Symbol.
Ok, why don't you form an Independent Group to lobby for it yourself ??
Maybe then u'll see that your goals and GOPIO's are not and will NEVER be the same.
But to be fair i will give my evidence ......
How come in our multicultural and multiracial society, the Yorubas eh have no quarrel. The Buddists eh have no quarrell. Even Christians who have objections to the symbols and images eh makin no big scene ?? Even Atheists eh making no trouble....
Get me straight. I in NO WAY subscribe to or PRACTISE discrimnation. But i am not going to pretend that the Trinity Cross issue is a lobby for equality. Equality by itself is a MYTH and something that will NEVER BE achieved in any man made system. I am not going to present a case for GOPIO and those of similar ilk. I look at the bigger picture.
The very nature of our country dictates that NO ethinic group, religious group or groups otherwise will ever be totally happy about the representation of symbols and awards at the National Level. Remember the steelpan and dholak issue ?? So making a case for evey disgruntled national is an exercise in FUTILITY. If you do it for GOPIO, do it for ALL. Then you will see the chaos that will emerge. You think "THEY" and we both know who i taking 'bout', really care about changing the Trinity Cross ??? Well it coulda change between 1995 and 2001 and it never change. Gee, i suppose it just offended some after 2001. i NOT supporting political mischief.....And "THEY" does be glad when ppl like you could lend your quite informed support to "THEIR" Machiavellian schemes.
Against the TC, form an independent body, that comprises a wider cross section of society that are against the TC. And believe u me, u'll get lots of ppl.
-
I use \"THEY\" to refer to those that see it as an opportunity to further divide the country. To cause political mischief, to stir up tribalism, etc.
That's both GOPIO and the people who refuse to change (or even consider changing) the Cross.
Just because nobody is making as big a fuss as them doesn't mean that nobody else is bothered. It just means that nobody else is bothered enough to do anything about it.
Equality by itself is a MYTH and something that will NEVER BE achieved in any man made system.
So is Order. And Happiness. And Justice. And Peace.
But that doesn't mean we shouldn't work towards the ideal.
By dealing with the Cross, it's possible to increase equality and shut GOPIO up (if only for a while). Yuh kill two bird with one stone.
You approaching this with a kinda frig up mindset. We can never have true equality, and yuh want to spite GOPIO, so to hell with the whole issue.
You letting GOPIO blind you to the topic at hand.
The fact, with all politics and rhetoric removed, is that the Trinity Cross is not a true representation of excellence in Trinidad and Tobago.
When we deal with that matter, the public trust will have been served, and GOPIO will have one less thing to politically exploit.
See how simple?
-
Why compromise when we have Mr Patrick to show them Indian who is boss?
Name calling ??? Tsk Tsk. How unprofessional !! Shows though, like i said, it's more than just changing the TC.
What does Prime Minister Patrick Manning have to do with the TC, or its changing ?? You really are one of "THEM". :P :P lol lol.
What he can do is ignore a frivilous attempt at mischief and focus on running the country. And i reiterate, i am NOT against changing the TC. I will not allow myself to be used by GOPIO and in general by persons with their own hidden agenda. If, Kayode any serious group of people genuinely interested in having the TC changed, lobbied for it, there ain't a thing PM could do about it. Such a lobby though will not remotely resemble the overtly racist agenda of groups like GOPIO. And i not blinded by GOPIO. There have always been and will always be thousands of ppl against ANY national symbol. This has never been so touch an issue for anybody in T&T. All of ah sudden, TC is a problem, the steelpan is a problem. So u think i blinded by GOPIO ? So why YOU never lobby against before in your life if you find is such a big problem ?? Why Nobody never lobby against it before, if is such a big problem ??? And why the membership of GOPIO never ask the govenment between 1995 -2001 to change it, if is such a big problem ??? And i blinded by GOPIO ??
Lol....GOPIO making it a problem. True, many Trinis mightn't like it but it low low down on we list of priorities. It ain't no big deal as u trying to make it. In fact, is only a problem for Anti - Manning people, and GOPIO.
What wasn't a problem for 6 years could NEVER be so big a problem today. Whappen, ppl does ketch a vaps and realise the TC offensive ??
Maybe none were given out by the non-Christian government between 1995 - 2001. You quote real history in yuh posts, well tell me this one ?
Hmmmm, have any Non-Christian ever recieved the TC ??
You could answer any of these ??? And i blinded ??
Of all the ppl against the TC, and i ain't quoting no names, cause we both know the 3 most vocal ppl....and well you is the 4th. Allyuh have one thing in common....Dislike for Patrick Manning, and incarnations of him(Thas for the Anti - Cross man from waaay back)....
LIVE WITH IT !!!!!
I done....i wasting time here.....Good Day Mr Kayode.......
---- What Mr Manning do you ? ---
---- Let GOPIO be your Guide --- EQUALITY 4 ALL !!! -----
-
lol @ trinity bowl.
Fellas, kick brass topic and kick brass contributions.
Let us be reminded that if we detiorate into bitter rants and personal attacks that we will lose the essence of this thread. It is much less about attackin baego/sensei/kayode/silk and much more about tacklin the issue.
Pros and Cons.
Get passionate by all means, but don't get personal.
cool? cool.
In this particular scenario...I think we can safely say that history provides us with the trinity cross and GOPIO is a step in the wrong direction.
If sufficient people have a problem with it and the current government refuses to address the issue after sufficient protest, the best they can hope for is a change of government and attacking the issue again.
still lol @ trinity bowl
-
Yuh new here, so yuh clueless, but it's no big secret on the forum that I have scant regard for politicians in general. I diss everyone from Sat Maharaj to Cudjoe to Uncle Bas. Anyone in here can vouch for that. Even those who disagree with me on this issue. I'm not anti-Manning. I anti-politicians and the morons who follow them.
So please...don't put anything political into my motives. I don't vote. I have no respect for any of the parties we have to choose from. I realise that you want to jump to an easy conclusion, but yuh can't do that with me. What I say is what I mean.
Plenty PNMites and Afro-Christians want the Trinity Cross to remain for the same reason GOPIO wants it removed. It reflects (among other things) Afro-Christian dominance.
Regardless of who's received it, it's a religious symbol that's embraced primarily by Afro-Christians.
And just as an aside...
In 1997 an independent National Awards Committee, chaired by Trinidad & Tobago’s Chief Justice Micheal de la Bastide, recommended that the Trinity Cross be renamed to the The Order of Trinidad & Tobago. The IRO itself supported the move.
It's been an issue every year since then. It was an issue since the 1970s when it was first rejected by a Muslim and Eric Williams himself acknowledged that something had to be done about it.
So all that talk about how it wasn't a problem between 1996 and 2001 is trash. Kinda like the rest of yuh rant. But as I said, yuh new here. Yuh don't know me. So yuh will get a excuse for now.
-
In this particular scenario...I think we can safely say that history provides us with the trinity cross
Dread...you read my posts?
History has provided us with a multitude of symbols that can represent our identity and excellence. The Cross is not a good example.
-
no no no, I MEAN that history has provided us with the Trinity Cross.
Who ever was in power at the time came up with this award and here we are today. Strictly historically.
-
Okay...hard luck.
-
Lol ....peace brethren....nice thread......
I hear yuh Kayo...:) :)
Baego put it in a nice nutshell.......Kinda like what i was trying to say....If the Cross got to go, GOPIO is a step in the wrong direction. Wow...so clear and concise....Hmmmm....smooth man, smooth.....
-
the cross and reference to the trinity come from the origins of the name of our country
the cross shouldn't go
but something should be placed above it more because the traditional reference to the name of the award and the origin of our country has no reference to the other island of our twin island state
now what baego said is true and correct
what we got was the trinity cross
because this nation was originally christian
now I am not saying that christianity should have a revered place
but to say that the trinity cross is dividing the country is petty and ignorant and it is thinking like that, and rash comments for change that cause the real division
yes there should be changes made due to the fact that now there are non-christians of a significant number, and that their contribution to our society should be recognised in many aspects
however when separation of church and state starts to become suggested the result is an unfortuneate use of all religion in the political arena, more so than seen here now
when this comes to pass I hope our government and society will not become like France, Canada and the US in this regard
in summary,
keep the cross, it is tradition
put something above it
something that includes
but not something that cannot be identified on a personal lvl by everyone
for that is what neutral tend to be
however I will close this
if this is what is called a pressing issue, with the crime and corruption in this country
with other, real causes of division
then I cannot helped but be disapointed
people are being killed out of greed everyday and we talk about awards
-
The Sanatan Dharma Maha Sabha (Trinidad & Tobago), the only legitimate national Hindu voice has once again brought objections to the nation’s highest award — the Trinity Cross. The government this month invited national awards nominations. The Secretary General of the SDMS, Shri Satnarayan Maharaj, in response has called on members of the public to refuse to submit nominations for the national awards. The SDMS has been making this call to change the nation’s highest award for years across a series of successive political administrations clearly indicating that the objection against the Trinity Cross cuts across all political lines.
The substantial issue remains that the nation has to be equitable and that no citizen or groups within our society made to feel like second-class citizens. The Trinity Cross disregards all non-Christians and Tobagonians annually. In particular no Hindu will ever accept the Trinity Cross. Of course there is the likelihood a Hindu collaborator who will perhaps accept a cross for a “cap, a gown, and a mess of pottage”.
SWAHA’s PNM Senator Manideo Persad only a few months ago lamented in the Senate that the Trinity Cross should be changed. Ironically Senator Persad spoke as an Opposition Senator forgetting that he belonged to the ruling party and was indeed in a position to make the change. Or was it that SWAHA’s Senator Persad, like most Indians and Hindus in the PNM, have no real power do anything of real substance and are merely window dressing? Despite the earlier lamentations, SWAHA’s PNM Senator, Persad, in responding to the call to boycott the Trinity Cross nominations by the SDMS stated: “We can’t expect change overnight because there are so many other pressing matters” and called for “less confrontation and more dialogue”.
Dr Wahid Ali — a Muslim — refused to accept the Trinity Cross in the 1970s and only accepted it when then Prime Minister Eric Williams promised to change the Cross in the future. Williams, once having stated that Indians were a “hostile and recalcitrant minority”, it was no surprise the promised change never came. In 1995 the Dharmacharya of Trinidad & Tobago, Pundit Krishna Maharaj, refused to accept the Trinity Cross from the Manning administration.
In 1997 an independent and impartial National Awards Committee, chaired by Trinidad & Tobago’s Chief Justice Micheal de la Bastide, recommended that the Trinity Cross be renamed to the more inclusive title of The Order of Trinidad & Tobago. The Committee’s report noted that “the Trinity Cross...was perceived as a Christian symbol” in this multi-religious society. The recommendations of the Committee renewed the faith of the Maha Sabha that there are some individuals in society that are not blinded by sectarian interests. SWAHA’s PNM Senator Pundit Persad obviously is ignorant of the fact that this “overnight” objection has been on the national agenda for over two decades. How much more “patience” and “dialogue” must the Hindu community endure before an effective change is made? Last year during the throes of the historic 18-18 hung parliament, the Prime Minister Patrick Manning boldly gave an undertaking to seriously look at the issue of changing the name of the Trinity Cross to a more acceptable national award. Now without a hung parliament to force an appeal to the Hindu and Muslim voters, the elected Prime Minister Patrick Manning stated “it is very unlikely that will happen this year, very unlikely”.
Prime Minister Manning also noted that “it was very interesting that Mr Panday, who was very vocal against the Trinity Cross, in his six years as Prime Minister, never touched it. One of the things I would like to do before touching it myself is to find out why. ..We will adjust it yes, but before we do it, let’s look. We do not jump precipitately into these matters. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.” One has to wonder if Prime Minister Manning’s actions are being guided by what former Prime Minister Panday did or did not do rather than what is “morally and spiritually” correct. SWAHA’s PNM Senator Persad revealed that the PNM perhaps is not changing the Trinity Cross due to ignorance on how it can be changed. Speaking on behalf of the PNM Administration Pundit Persad stated, “we were not sure of the mechanisms required to effect this change.”
Support for renaming the Trinity Cross comes also from the President of the Inter-Religious Organisation, Brother Noble Khan. Brother Khan stated that “the time was now right to make a name change” and suggested that The Order of Trinidad & Tobago should be the new name. Brother Khan explained that the Cross “has been aligned by many people in the country as a biased symbol, while substantial sections of our population would like something more neutral and acceptable.” The President of the IRO in his comments sees what the Prime Minister and SWAHA’s PNM Senator refused to see. Brother Khan observed that if the award was not changed the “bitterness” among the population would remain.
Of course Brother Khan assumes that persons in government and the ruling party care about the bitterness of Indians and Hindus. It concerns the Prime Minister Manning to “correct the historical imbalances” of those who have not in the past had access to begin their own business and indeed entrepreneurship — the rationale for CEPEP —. Yet the Prime Minister and SWAHA Senator remain unmoved with the concerns of the historical bias against Indians and Hindus. Given the track record of PNM Prime Ministers on the Trinity Cross and on matters concerning Indians and Hindus, it is predictable that the Trinity Cross will continue to be a burden on all non-Christians for decades to come.
-
Anyone knows why this wasn't changed when the UNC were in power?
-
because this nation was originally christian
This Nation was never Christian.
This Nation was born on August 31, 1962 as an independent cosmopolitian republic.
Christianity was never declared as the official religion of Trinidad and Tobago.
The national Awards were born with the nation and were meant to be representative of the national identity. One buss.
I don't see why it's so difficult for people to see what the Trinity Cross is. The idea behind the Cross is a relic of colonial Christian influence. It follows in the tradition of the crosses that have always been awarded by Britain to British achievers.
As for it being "What history gave us"...so what?
History gave us "Discovery" Day, which we discovered was a farce and replaced with Emancipation Day. Yall act as if we can't change things because they're "history" or "tradition".
The history books will always show that the Trinity Cross existed. We can't change that. We don't want or need to change that. What we want to change now is the symbol and the name, and present something new and all-inclusive to out National achievers.
-
Anyone knows why this wasn't changed when the UNC were in power?
One of three things.
- They was too busy rapin de treasury.
- A "Hindu Administration" changing a Christian Icon would have been political suicide and would have turned every Christian in the country against them (even more).
- The PNM has claimed ignorance of the procedure needed to change the award...it apparently needs acts and amendments. They were probably in the same bind.
I tend to think it's the second.
And strangely enough, I think that's the same reason the PNM is afraid to touch it. They might shake the faith that their Afro-Christian core has in them.
That's the root of the whole thing. No one can look at the issue objectively and say that the Cross must stay. Everyone who supports the Cross staying is one of two things.
- In a anti-GOPIO political rage.
- A Christian who's making up all kinda ridiculous excuses about "history" or "tradition" when in reality all they're doing is trying to maintain the dominance and sanctity of their Lord Jesus Christ, which is what they've been programmed to do since birth.
-
The West Indies Cricket team represents the region and is comprised of the best the WI has to offer.
Ha ha...that's a good one! Oh, wait...you were being serious? My bad!
I will support a change in the name but the current name and symbol concern me not!
A rose by any other name...
-
The USA throwing the Bible out of their Law Books is a sign of progress. The Bible was a lawbook for a different time with different circumstances. It's inspirational, but as a book on keeping a diverse, free society, it's a goddamn joke. Same is to be said for the Gita and the Koran.
quote]
blah blah blah, you seem to have alot to say perhaps you should be a politician, but isnt this specific line in bold, a little disrespectful? see you make a good point about things being secular, but you crossed the line by insulting people's religions. not a good way to get your point across my friend, but i agree with that you say in general
-
all good answers and perfectly explain why changing the historical cross in this particular aspect is going to be VERY difficult. Even if Hindu's are in power.
Political suicide on both sides of the fence.
That being the case, is best it be left alone indeed.
At least, until we can get a secular government, elected by a secular majority.
-
I agree with you here Baego. Even if the administration of 1995 - 2001 couldn't change it, why wasn't they as actively lobbied, as the present government is being ??
That's my point. At least we could have seen a serious effort on the persons who comprise GOPIO and assumed they serious. But they NEVER extensively lobbied the government of that day and now want to agitate the present administration ??
BS !!!!!
-
With an acronym that contains G for "Global" and a reference to one specific racial group, GOPIO could NEVER be interested in any form of UNITY. If that ent d case, they on division. FULL STOP !!!!!
Maybe somebody should put a poll, "Do you see the TC as a symbol of Afro-Christianity ?"
I am an Christian, and i NEVER once saw the cross in that light. The cross could dissappear tomorrow for all i care. But that doh mean my eyes closed to GOPIO.
-
Not liking GOPIO is not a good enough reason to support keeping the Cross.
Not liking PNM or Afro-Christians is not a good enough reason to support the removal of the Cross.
The only full stop in this whole debate is the undeniable fact that the Cross is not a proper representation of Trinbagonian excellence.
I'm probably the only person in this thread approaching the issue primarily from that viewpoint. Everyone else blinded by either politics, GOPIO, or ignorance of the country's history.
That being the case, is best it be left alone indeed.
Why...because whichever party does it will get less votes next election?
That is a why the right thing shouldn't be done?
At least, until we can get a secular government, elected by a secular majority.
We will never have a secular majority in this country. If African-Americans were told that they'd get full Civil Rights when an African-American majority supported the move, they would be in an even worse mess than they are today.
This is an issue of ideals, not statistics. The right thing to do is clear as day, and any government, "Hindu" or "Christian", that doesn't do it, is abrogating its responsibility to promote fairness and equality.
If you said "That being the case, it's going to be left alone unfortunately," I might have agreed with you. But saying that it's "best" it be left alone...it's almost as if you support don't the ideal because of the reality.
-
But that doh mean my eyes closed to GOPIO.
Yuh eyes not closed to GOPIO, but they closed to the issue of the Cross.
And any one who rejects changing the award because they against GOPIO just playing straight into GOPIO's hands. Simple as that.
Think about it.
-
well my words may have betrayed my intention because I am saying it precisely because of the reality and nothing more.
For the 50% of me that is an idealist (supporting a change of the cross because it is right) there is another 50% that is a realist (it quite likely won't be changed because of the very good issues raised above)
A secular majority will remove some of the hurdles and like you said, that is also hardly unlikely in our lifetime.
-
Not liking GOPIO is not a good enough reason to support keeping the Cross.
Not liking PNM or Afro-Christians is not a good enough reason to support the removal of the Cross.
The only full stop in this whole debate is the undeniable fact that the Cross is not a proper representation of Trinbagonian excellence.
My sentiments exactly. The real problem and the real issue.
Maybe everyone would be appeased if we had a the Trinidad Rainbow as a tribute to our "Rainbow" population of races.
LOL, but then certain residents of San Francisco, USA, would be very disturbed to see trini's giving the symbol of their liberation and exodus from the closet in such a cavalier manner.
-
Man, just call it the Order and make it a circle with the Crest inside, like a oversized shilling.
-
ok fine the country was never declared christian but think about it
who was in charge
ok right, doesn't really matter
but still lol
anyway all I will say is that in the end this topic is not as important as others and does not really deserve all this attention
why?
because we ( those typing the words in this thread) are not doing a thing and besides there are other more important things that sould be our concern (unless of course you are getting off your "couch")
if the country wants it to change it will, because politicians want to do the popular thing (in theory)
if not then it doesn't really matter what intellcetuals and a few pissed off people who just wanna complain about something say, will it
tell me how many people even know who were the recipiants of said award
(besides you kayode)
and if you really must then I think we should rename this country to rainbowdad or gopiodad (had to say it lol, just joking oh gawd)
anyway it should be changed
the name should have something real to do with our people
not something that is neutral or for the sake of change
otherwise what is the point to try to include everybody if no one really cares about the award
so what should it be called,
if you think it should be changed, present what it should be
and not to me to the country
if it should be, then full speed go
otherwise this debate is more or less over as there isn't anything left to say is there
and to what point, who is declared the winner.........
btw who here really wants a secular government
just curious?
(so we could start another thread and argue some more :) )