How do you deal with religion in a secular society like Singapore?
TODAY 27 May 2009
‘A RECIPE FOR DISHARMONY’
-------------------------
NMP Thio Li-ann speaks out against ‘militant secularism’
WHILE Singapore’s secularism dictates that religion should not be mixed
with politics, religion is "not separated from public life and culture",
law academic Thio Li-ann asserted in Parliament yesterday.
And those who engage in public debate cannot be expected to do so
independent of their religious views, the Nominated Member of Parliament
stressed.
In his speech last week when he reconvened Parliament, PresidentS R Nathan
remarked that the recent Association of Women for Action and Research
(Aware) saga demonstrated a new style of politics that does not involve
political parties.
Describing such politics involving lobby groups as an "ideological"
contest, Prof Thio criticised the "militant secularism" and the biased
media coverage - "particularly in one paper" - of the Aware saga which
involved her mother, former law dean Thio Su Mien, who had drawn flak for
her viewpoints as "feminist mentor" to the group.
With the senior Thio looking on in the public gallery, Prof Thio argued:
"Secular fundamentalists are oppressive where they seek to mute
religiously-informed convictions in public debate." They do so "by
demonising a view as religious in attempting to make religious faith a
cause for embarrassment, or to distract citizens from the merits of an
argument by discounting a speaker whose values are shaped by a religious"
faith.
Such militant secularism is "a recipe for social disharmony", she added.
In the aftermath of the saga, Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng had
reiterated the Government’s position that religious individuals "have the
same rights as any citizen to express their views on issues in the public
space, as guided by their teachings and personal conscience". But they
should also be mindful of sensitivities, he had added.
Yesterday, noting the power of the press "when it comes to moral
disagreements and public policy", Prof Thio said that journalists "are
entitled, like all citizens, to have their own opinions; however, they do
a disservice if they report contentious issues in a one-sided fashion".
While the "proper limits of religious activism" was a valid issue that
arose, she felt that other issues were "strangely subdued" in the media,
including "whether it was really a debate about values, rather than
religious overstepping".
‘A RECIPE FOR DISHARMONY’
-------------------------
NMP Thio Li-ann speaks out against ‘militant secularism’
WHILE Singapore’s secularism dictates that religion should not be mixed
with politics, religion is "not separated from public life and culture",
law academic Thio Li-ann asserted in Parliament yesterday.
And those who engage in public debate cannot be expected to do so
independent of their religious views, the Nominated Member of Parliament
stressed.
In his speech last week when he reconvened Parliament, PresidentS R Nathan
remarked that the recent Association of Women for Action and Research
(Aware) saga demonstrated a new style of politics that does not involve
political parties.
Describing such politics involving lobby groups as an "ideological"
contest, Prof Thio criticised the "militant secularism" and the biased
media coverage - "particularly in one paper" - of the Aware saga which
involved her mother, former law dean Thio Su Mien, who had drawn flak for
her viewpoints as "feminist mentor" to the group.
With the senior Thio looking on in the public gallery, Prof Thio argued:
"Secular fundamentalists are oppressive where they seek to mute
religiously-informed convictions in public debate." They do so "by
demonising a view as religious in attempting to make religious faith a
cause for embarrassment, or to distract citizens from the merits of an
argument by discounting a speaker whose values are shaped by a religious"
faith.
Such militant secularism is "a recipe for social disharmony", she added.
In the aftermath of the saga, Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng had
reiterated the Government’s position that religious individuals "have the
same rights as any citizen to express their views on issues in the public
space, as guided by their teachings and personal conscience". But they
should also be mindful of sensitivities, he had added.
Yesterday, noting the power of the press "when it comes to moral
disagreements and public policy", Prof Thio said that journalists "are
entitled, like all citizens, to have their own opinions; however, they do
a disservice if they report contentious issues in a one-sided fashion".
While the "proper limits of religious activism" was a valid issue that
arose, she felt that other issues were "strangely subdued" in the media,
including "whether it was really a debate about values, rather than
religious overstepping".
Comments
I the Singapore context, I am a 'Kemalist' and believe zealously that ANY religion should be kept out of legislation.
There is enough freedom in Singapore for anyone to practise their religion freely. No imposition of religious law - as already undertaken by AMLA - should be permitted.
The Grand Moofti
http://imranwrites.blogspot.com/