Like I said before, I read the supposed "death threat" email from one of our local poet to Thio during the 377A saga, other than a single F word, which is no more offensive or uncouth than Thio's straw drinking analogy, there was no death threat, the poet only vowed to piss on her grave if he should outlive her. Granted, there may be some unkind and intemperate language used somewhere on Thio, but the pro-Thio/anti-Siew gang is equally guilty of such behaviour.

Actually i wonder how many of you have actually read the postings on the US sites? I have. Not all but the majority of them. And there has never been any threats of violence in any site. Cite me just one posting overseas that has threatened her physically. And tell me how was her parliamentary speech civil or polite to LBGTs? Which sentence in her speech signifies tolerance and understanding to LBGTs? Quote me 1 line. People in the US are not as passive or inarticulate. Check out their postings where they slice every line of her speech, emails and postings with logic, rationality and facts. As I said, I have no problems with PM Lee's speech on the matter as he clearly understands the issue from al angles; TLS's speech is just full of hatred, intolerance and bigotry. Don't agree? Prove me wrong

Singaporeans are generally a tolerant lot. We do not deny LBGT their rights. Neither do we ostracize or discriminate against them. We definitely do not not persecute them. The LGBT and their supporters were furious with Dr Thio for her parliamentary speech in support of not repealing 377A. Dr Thio's detractors had not lost any opportunity to let her savor their denouncements in this and other forums, and in cyberspace. There was no timidity nor diplomacy in their counter arguments to demolish her stand. The use of intemperate language and very unkind sentiments were hurled her way. Why is there this obsessive intent to bay for her blood? What is sadly lacking is a sense of balance and rationality. In striving to right a slight/slur allegedly committed by Dr Thio, some LGBT activists had gone overboard. Their in-your-face confrontational stance is counter-productive to a healthy and fruitful discussion. The non partisan public watching all this must surely feel nervous and worried.

Kim - I think the dean was referring to her earlier 18 points rebuttal letter to the students and academia of the NYU Law Fac which he found offensive & hurtful.

I disagree with what Sloo wrote that just because if you write or speak against something one deserves to be lashed out at. Ms Thio disagrees with homosexuality and she speaks out against it in a civic manner. People who disagree with her can rebut her arguments but should do so in a civic way. There is no excuse for bad behaviour, bad language and threats of physical harm. If we condone such uncouth and uncivilised manner, aren't we promoting the development of an intolerance society where one lives in fear of the safety of his life for having a dissenting view. I think through this episode we can see that American society is indeed taking a step back. So much for freedom of speech! It is a farce!

After reading Ms Thio's letter to the dean, I felt it was a well written and polite letter. I do not understand why the dean said that it was offensive and hurtful. Doesn't make sense at all! The Americans always talk about freedom of speech and yet when someone holds a different view point, they will criticise the other party. And I think in this case, threats of physical harm were hurled at her and vulgarities too. So where is the freedom of speech and tolerance? Please, Amercians stop telling other people what to do. Practise what you preach!

Helfire. And when TLA and TSM accuse us of having a 'gender identity disorder', that our lifestyle will harm the moral values of society and define us as criminals, i guess we should just sit quietly by and let the abuse (or helfire?) rain on us cos we deserve it for being who we are. PLs. If TLA choose to lash out against the LBGT the way she did, then she should be prepared, even expect, that others will lash out back at her the same way. And we are not only talking about the LBGT but also straight people from allclasses, religions and cultures. Don't say thats intolerant or bigoted. Cos she started the ball rolling so either she hits it back or steps out of the way. Guess what she did? So much for standing by her convictions.

When over 700 students and faculty sign a petition to hav eyour invitation rescinded, when students faculty gays and liberals write in blogs vilifying you, calling you names, makinfg unjustified accusations and even making threats, this is not intolerance and militancy?? Perhaps to the homosexual and lesbian this is the norm and we have witnessed this first hand in the AWARE saga and the EGM of the standard of normality for the Gays. Shouts abuse and silencing the opposition. Get a life Tok.

Did TODAYonline verify that this letter is the very same letter sent to NYU Law School?

AboveTheLaw.com documented the saga closely, so readers should be able to sense what the true campus sentiments were, what American values generally are (as pointed out by a ST forum letter) & whether TLA overreacted each time with her email interview & then memo (before even showing up!) Pretty silly of her, & some parochial Singaporeans, to frame it as a victim of intolerance or militancy, if you ask me.