[時事討論] 婚外情合理化運動 顧鴻飛

felicity2010

婚外情合理化運動  顧鴻飛
# u+ C3 K( I; ]" u5 J) ?$ L5.39.217.77:8898
( |" l( _/ |/ k- {公仔箱論壇* I* u: N" c3 F2 f9 W5 T( P, q
對唐英年的感情「缺失」,胡應湘有妙喻,說是「課外活動」,這四個字真是舉重若輕。日前曾蔭權又說唐英年的緋聞沒有對與錯的問題,希望公眾「寬恕」他─既然沒有犯錯,又要別人寬恕,做特首做到連起碼的語言邏輯都不懂,有必要找一個語文老師替他惡補一下。
7 s4 \" z0 f; ?/ d/ ~3 Ntvb now,tvbnow,bttvb
/ @- p5 p  o# v1 j出動政商名流洗底TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。3 b3 A4 m! d0 U3 E6 S/ E) m8 L
周松崗說政治人物出軌並不影響他們的歷史地位;胡應湘說政治人物亂搞男女關係只不過是「課外活動」,曾蔭權說婚外情「沒有對錯」,更有論者把批評唐婚外情的言論說是「道德塔利班」,看起來香港就要掀起一場婚外情合理化運動了,再發展下去,只怕我們都要為婚外情唱讚歌了。  s6 J9 |& Z* J9 M
為了配合中央的偉大戰略部署,把一個有緋聞的阿斗捧上高位,居然出動這麼多政商名流,挖空心思為婚外情「洗底」,幾乎要混淆是非,顛倒黑白,如果這不是「教壞細路」,我不知道還有甚麼是「教壞細路」!
% P/ \$ G5 e( I5 o+ \8 Ftvb now,tvbnow,bttvb政界中人懷抱服務社會的理想,本應先天下之憂而憂,雖然暗地裏男盜女娼的也很多,但公開場合至少要擺出道貌岸然的姿態。溫家寶說他每天睡眠四小時,如此勞累大概不包括到夜總會泡女狂歡的時間吧。
( n( k5 ~4 b5 T, f/ _& V5.39.217.77:8898tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb% K4 q2 z( a6 U: H7 N& H4 F  p
媾女快活名正言順公仔箱論壇6 i) J$ {- _, ?% ^' j; V, T
唐英年的「感情缺失」是過去式,本來他交代清楚也就罷了,現在當事人躲躲閃閃,又出來一批政商名流「黑白講」,幾乎要為婚外情「正名」。婚外情既然沒有「對錯」的問題,只合視之為「課外活動」,以前做了沒錯,今後再做也不必大驚小怪,「得閒出去做吓課外活動好正常,只要返屋企得到老婆原諒就夠」。看起來日後唐英年做了特首,每天閒下來出去媾女快活,也是名正言順的了。
/ ]: W8 z, s& I1 Q# R9 C
( e: S2 Y9 N6 E: J, T* F  s: V公仔箱論壇如果唐英年亂搞男女關係有成為偉人的條件,如果他隨時進行一點政務司或特首的「課外活動」沒有對與錯的問題,而玩女人儼然只是權貴們的身份象徵,那唐英年又憑甚麼去和年輕人談理想,談社會責任?他不如去教教年輕人如何到外面亂搞而又可以安撫家裏的河東獅吼吧!- d  _# N# ^' O' L" O- w. |* P
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb! b$ g. I5 P- c' t8 H' ^
如此混賬邏輯,欲置中央於何地?別忘記特首還是中央任命的!
0 [' w* s1 s, T3 c! K
( `0 W# Z# O5 m! b. ltvb now,tvbnow,bttvb據說江澤民挺唐英年,如果唐英年搞婚外情這件事不斷加以合理化,將來算到江澤民頭上,又引起海內外華人更多聯想,想起關於江澤民的很多流言,那算是甚麼呢?那叫一個風燭殘年的偉大領袖(依唐英年的說法)如何消受得起?TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。: W& X) s0 }* ?

, ?$ M! F9 F- a. ~1 o' f% itvb now,tvbnow,bttvb因為小圈子選特首,婚外情合理化看來要成為香港的「核心價值」了,曾蔭權可以考慮一下,要不要到紐約時代廣場做一個廣告,宣傳一下香港成為「婚外情之都」?

felicity2010

( p, b# j& f' D* s$ F$ o8 T) i公仔箱論壇
# \) r$ ^! L/ j5 f8 [This "香港特首選舉"is not a direct election in any sense of the word. The election, which would be held next year, is run by a 1200-member Election committee (EC) (it represented about 0.01% of the population of Hong Kong, if not less) . The Hong Kong government structure is basically consisted of an Executive Council (ExeCo), Legislative Council (LegCo) and a system of civil servants to implement the policies and daily works of the government. Out of this, only 30 legislative council members are by direct election and the other 30 members by functional constituencies (professional groups like banking, accounting, social services), all the ExeCo members are appointed. The functional constituencies group introduced decades ago is originally intended as a interim measure before full direct election. However, this weird entity is here to stay.  With the 建制政黨 and 功能組別 members, the bills from government are guaranteed to pass (unless when there is overwhelming uproar from the society) . This system is a heritage from the British colonial government and peoples of Hong Kong are striving to get the right to elect their own chief executive. The two potential candidates, 梁振英 and 唐英年, still do not confirm their participation in the election. One expresses the intent to whereas the other said he is still thinking. Both of them do not offer a platform for people to discuss and there are only scandals and juicy implication as bases to make a kind of convoluted assessment of the candidates.  Both have intricate relationship with the government since the day of the first Chief Executive, one is the Convenor of Execo as the other is the Chief Secretary for Administration, and they cannot detach themselves from the blames for faults in government policies.  At the end of the day, this election is more a show than anything else given that common people do not have the right to vote.

felicity2010

公仔箱論壇# J8 Q+ i2 U! Q: K

6 Q- `/ }0 A1 }, TMy comment is based on my understanding which may be incomplete and biased. The early 70s should be the MacLehose year in Hong Kong and the beginning of the end of the Cultural Revolution in China. In March 1972, after only a few months joining the UN, Huang Hua, the Chinese ambassador placed a letter about China's position on Hong Kong and Macau at the UN Special Committee on Colonization. It read:tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb9 h! Z& J* E/ r4 W' ]% [+ T1 q

% A5 w1 B" a7 J2 ^$ n# U公仔箱論壇"The question of Hong Kong and Macau belongs to the category of questions resulting from the series of unequal treaties which imperialists imposed on China. Hong Kong and Macau are part of Chinese territory occupied by the British and Portuguese authorities. The settlement of the questions and Macau is entirely within China's sovereign right and do not at all fall under the ordinary category of colonial territories. Consequently, they should not be included in the list of colonial territories covered by the declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and people. With regard to the questions of Hong Kong and Macau, the Chinese government has consistently held that they should be settled in an appropriate way when the conditions are ripe. "5.39.217.77:88981 I; o) ?2 r" P4 T1 Y1 U$ `1 [

8 }. E" e$ Y) c! M; N- V1 [- b$ p公仔箱論壇On November 2, the UN General Assembly accepted the recommendation from the Special Committee on Colonialism to exclude Hong Kong and Macau from the lists of colonial territories. The fate of both places were sealed since then whereas Singapore and Malaysia could tread on the path to independence. The MacLehose's  years saw the booming of the territory's economic power which raised the living standard of the people. People started to ask for larger participation in public affairs though till the end of MacLehose's governorship all members of the LegCo and ExeCo were appointed. The first direct election for LegCo came at 1985. The negotiations for Hong Kong's future were only between Beijing and London and the people of Hong Kong had no representative in the talks. One of main provisions of the Sino--British Joint Declaration regarding Hong Kong in 1984 was that it would be run by the people of Hong Kong after 1997. It also promised that "the legislature of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be constituted by elections. The executive authorities shall abide by the law and shall be accountable to the legislature. " However, the pace for direct election was slow under the governorship of Youde and Wilson. It was not until the last governor, Chris Patten, that drastic change was attempted to the extent of having universal suffrage after 1997 for Hong Kong. Although the bill was defeated upon the protest of China, it certainly raised the hope of self-governing. The  endeavor to get the right to elect the Chief Executive is mainly based on the Joint Declaration though all efforts are futile so far to set a definite date for that. Given China's control over other autonomous provinces like 西藏 and 新疆, the future of direct election looks gloomy indeed. The rude and barbarous behavior of some LegCo members is due partly to the accountability of the government to Central Government rather than to the people of HK. These members have undergone direct election and have more representation than the Chief Executive. I know many young professionals like engineers, doctors and IT workers would actually vote for them. The main fear of China is not these few individuals but the young people who were born in the 80s and 90s. Their frustrations over the incompetence of the government practically foster their militant attitude that is manifest in violent protests. You mention "a mature democratic society" which is not exactly applicable to Hong Kong.

felicity2010

" D5 y$ d' z) H( I+ gtvb now,tvbnow,bttvbTVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。! K5 ^* N2 U) ~. O" O
I am neither nostalgic nor naive. The policies of the colonial government of course would serve the interests of the British government. Examples like the passing of British Nationality Act in 1981 downgraded the British nationals in HK  to "British dependent territory citizens" with the aim to stem the influx of Hong Kong people into Britain. The later introduction of 居英權 to grant immigration right to a small portion of colony's population and the brinkmanship of Chris Patten's political maneuvers were all for England. The strategy of London actually shifted by this time to China rather than HK itself. Since you mention  "corruption was rampant", the establishment of ICAC during the MacLehose's era made HK one of the corruption free cities in the world.
* T; E- Y2 M0 e% @公仔箱論壇/ {8 R6 G1 L1 I+ F! ^
You said "This changing role is difficult for many to understand, let alone to accept." It should be the government job to establish the role of HK in the present context through planning and implementation of policies as it may take years before we see fruitful result. However, the government looks as confused as ever. HK has strong ties with China in terms of blood, trade and political aspect, it is the living condition that most people care.公仔箱論壇- f. ]' J4 Z1 Q$ ]' R, C
5.39.217.77:8898% I- |6 r- R) V  j
"My point is "Democracy" is only one of the political models; it is definitely not a one size fit all system, and there are many variants. " is a rather blanket statement. Democracy in the day of Athens (where the word comes from) would not meet the standard nowadays. The parliament members after Oliver Cromwell executed Charles I were all gentry. The women's right to vote happened in parts of world in late nineteenth century. Universal suffrage becomes a reality in many nations. This represents progress. Let's not get into the fallacy of relativism. The design of political structures may vary but it has a sole aim to hold the government accountable, which is what lacks in HK.
# U4 g1 [/ }0 i* s( Z( ^6 i4 gtvb now,tvbnow,bttvb2 _1 d! A3 T7 J3 G1 f, w2 l
This is my last comment on this post. I have scant knowledge of Singapore. It is beyond my capacity to compare Singapore (colony to an independent country) and Hong Kong (colony to a special administrative region). You sound like a Singaporean, if so, you may give a more comprehensive account of Singapore.