Gopio awards: A plea for equality or an attempt to segregate

[Bsensei]

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??                    

[Nebuchadnezzar]

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...                    

[Bsensei]

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???                    

[hiddenagenda]

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                    

[TriniXaeno]

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                    

[Kayode]

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.                    

[TriniXaeno]

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.                    

[Kayode]

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.                    

[Kayode]

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.                    

[TriniXaeno]

agreed

Together we aspire, Together we achieve.                    

[Kayode]

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.

                   

[vinion2000]

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.                    

[Kayode]

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.                    

[silk]

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 -----                    

[silk]

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 ---------------------                    

[Kayode]

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.                    

[Kayode]

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".                    

[silk]

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.                    

[SPK]

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...:?                    

[Kayode]

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.