Indian economist Amartya Sen in his book Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny argues that we are becoming increasingly divided along lines of religion and culture, ignoring the many other ways in which people see themselves, from class and professions to morals and politics.
“Our shared humanity”, he writes, “gets savagely challenged when the manifold divisions in the world are unified into one allegedly dominant system of classification – in terms of religion, or community, or culture, or nation, or civilization.”
Our humanity here in Singapore is in danger of being ‘savagely challenged’ by two recent developments.
First of these was MOE’s choice of vendors to teach sex education in schools. Four of the six approved are known to be part of conservative Christian groups.
Then there was the National Art Commission’s decision to cut the funding of theatre group Wild Rice because, the Commission said, it would not fund “projects which are incompatible with the core values promoted by the government…”.
It seems to me that the State, which had declared its determination to protect the secular nature of our society, is privileging one system of values over other value systems and in so doing is in danger of subverting the very nature of a secular society.
What do we mean when we talk of a secular society?
The British philosopher Stephen Law, editor of the Royal Institute of Philosophy journal Think, defines a secular society as, roughly, one that is neutral between different views about religion.
He writes: “It protects freedoms: the freedom to believe or not believe, worship or not worship. It is founded on basic principles framed independently of any particular religious, or indeed, atheist, point of view: principles to which we ought to be able to sign up whether we are religious or not.
“Because you live in a secular society, your right … is protected from those atheists, and those of differing religious views, that might want to take that freedom from you.”
It follows then that one of the responsibilities of a secular state is to maintain the neutrality of all public space. These spaces include institutions of a public nature, such as schools, government offices and government-linked companies.
The choice of conservative Christian groups to teach sex education in schools is a curious choice for the government of a secular society. It is like letting a fox loose in the chicken coop!
The anxieties and fears about social breakdown, marital instability, and teenage pregnancies are real. They should be acknowledged and addressed.
But repression of alternative views and values does not work and has not worked to counter these social problems. Compromising the values of a secular society with political enforcement of conservative values, especially religious conservative values, has to be challenged.
_______________________________________
This article by Constance Singam first appeared on AWARE and we thank her for granting us permission to re-publish this here
______________________________________________________
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
zzz another vain attempt to push the gay agenda in a subtle way.
Why wont these folks listen that our society does not want this as a norm. Just do your thing in private and no one will bother you!
VV,
what gay agenda?
being gay is illegal.
heh.
CS
So what if they are Christian gps? The issue is do they reflect the views of society. I think they do.
And are you saying that a secular society cannot have “conservative” values? It must according to you by definition have “progressive” or “liberal” views.
Come on, don’t try to follow the PAP habit of trying to frame an issue.
And what exactly is this ‘gay agenda’ might I ask?
I have already given up my hope in this country. For new citizens who illusion PAP is their god, I feel so sorry for you. There will come a stage you will face the same traumatism as true-borned Singaporean.
The LBGT community can start its own schools if it feels that mainstream education does not fulfil its needs or it is being marginalised.
Bob… The “gay agenda” is what the religious right screams when they want to extend their tentacles further into our political and social institutions. And the “gay agenda” is what they scream when they want to whip the hallelujah hordes into a frenzy and scare the crap out of our overpaid politicians and civil servants who might otherwise be tempted to ask “Um, what about our secular principles?”
We are not supposed to wonder how homosexuals who represent no more than 5% of the population can possibly present such a threat to the rest of us. We are just supposed to be thankful that religious right is there to save us from it.
In short, the “gay agenda” is the fundamentalists’ most useful weapon to bully the rest of us into submission.
A Tan,
Of course a secular society may be conservative. A secular society may be anything, so long as the basis of its constitution is derived from principles which can stand up to the scrutiny of rational thought. In other words, you can’t say something is wrong and legislate against it on the grounds that a Higher Power told you so, or that it’s not ‘conservative’.
What is conservative society, anyway? What are conservative values? Perhaps you should define your terms.
David,
What are you on about? Are you in the right comment thread?
Bob,
I’m afraid you’ll have to wait for the publishing of the Supreme Gay Council’s Annual Report.
im not christian, doesnt mean i support wad TOC is doing
SingaSingaporean,
‘Supporting’ TOC, I would think entails actively contributing articles, doing research for them, join their activity (whatever those are)… or at least donating money. Have you done any of those?
I don’t ‘support’ TOC as well, since the most I do is post my comments on their views, and on views by fellow posters.
Moderating Editor: There are different levels of support and we are honoured to have this support (in whatever form) from each and every one of you – even our detractors and the trolls!
A Tan,
The fact of the matter is, no public education should be taught by any representations of religious groups. Now, the person teaching it however can be from any religious background. However, none should be “co-incidentally” be from the same place of worship.
Just as much parents who want their child to learn the love of god. I for one do not want my child to be enslave by the believe that there exist one. However, I will teach my child tolerance.
The day that this country turn into Texas Jesus town, is the day that I will leave.
Further more, people should just accept all different sexual orientations. The natural or un-natural way can only be determine by what? God’s words or text? Hence, to be secular means that we don’t have to listen or not listen to those words and text.
//The issue is do they reflect the views of society. I think they do.//
If people (whoever they are) are made to believe that only the views of the other side are those of society and that theirs amount to nothing, sooner or later it may well turn out to be a “prophesied truth”.
//And are you saying that a secular society cannot have “conservative” values? It must according to you by definition have “progressive” or “liberal” views.//
Of course it may (who and what is society ? you alone ? some specific group(s) ? ), as long as the very ‘conservative values’ (society again ?) do not “penalize” (in some mandated form ?) the “progressive” or “liberal” views of others. As you can see, we have put in a lot of inverted commas.
No Constance, you forget that “Secularism’ has become the new religion. What goes into it is of no concern any longer.
-
Rather, it is what must be, in the name of total liberation that is secular in nature.
-
Can this be?
-
Supporters who shouted victory at the AWARE takeover are now seeing the result of that ‘victory’.
-
Can it be seen as a victiry at all?
Gemani
and in the meantime priests abuse boys, pastors plagiarise and insult other faihs, bishops lead Christian blocs whose members cry for the death penalty for the lbgt and members that belong to the same churches as the sexuality vendors have been reported to be prosetilysing and harssong school childen. These are facts. These are also people whose conservative values the govt endorses and we are suppose to respect. And the irnoy is that the morethe conservatives push, the deeper the polarization and divide and in the end. Thankgod for the conservatives!
Sloo
-
When a human being commits a crime it does not mean the whole of humanity is evil. Humanity is bigger than the individual.
-
In the same way, the members of the Church, be they lay persons or those in office, who commit crimes do not mean the Church is bad.
-
I believe you are more intelligent than I think you are not to see the difference here.
-
So please do not go overboard with your argument. It shows your weakness.
RedDotWong,
-
You’re saying the gay has no agenda?
Compromising the values of a secular society with political enforcement of conservative values, especially religious conservative values, has to be challenged.
–
You want to challenge people but try to silence others view by moderation, how to challenge.
Moderating Editor: Challenge by way of discussion is fine but challenge for the sake of challenge is counterproductive and pointless, sorry.
/You’re saying the gay has no agenda?/
At least not as bad as some lawful statutes (agenda is an understatement) which could potentially be used against them for certain acts.
I think instead of going into the “i support this/that”, let’s look at it from a governance point of view. It’s pretty binary actually- should the state have some kind of base values or should the state be value neutral.
There are many social problems today- which can be mitigated for example, teen pregnancy, divorce rate etc. This is not a value judgement on people but to acknowledge there are negative social effects such as impact on children. For a govt perspective, they will definitely have to take a stand on those issues- which is to discourage it.
A hands-off stance where “the govt should be value neutral and don’t bother if these problems are increasing because it’s the people’s own decision.” will mean that the govt sits there and do nothing about it.
But at the same time, discouraging it does not mean persecution. For example, abortion is still legalized despite clamouring from the conservatives. While the state has to discourage people from making those decisions in the first place (as part of its responsibility), they also have to respect the rights of people who have already made those decisions.
i think the main issue is that if something is discouraged, it forms a stigma. While that may not be the intention, it has that unintended consequence of implicit exclusion. But i don’t think it’s a good reason for the govt to wash its hands off the issue and retreat to ‘value-neutral’ mode because it means not doing anything.
Of course- this is my initial take on the state’s role in social sphere, which admittedly is still half-baked. pls feel free to comment-esp if there is a counter-argument. it’s quite usually easy to be blind-sided in a values issue.
gemami… Of course the gays have an agenda? Wouldn’t u if you had to suffer the criminalization, discrimination, and demonization that they have to endure?
But, i ask myself, does the agenda of a small repressed minority (no more than 5% of the population) qualify as a threat to Singapore? Does it deserve all the noise and hysteria that the fundamentalists have decided to give it? And the answer to both questions is a resounding NO!
I can only suppose that the purpose of the conservative right’s anti-gay crusade is to advance their own agenda. They have been well tutored in the value of “wedge issue” politics by their American mentors.
Personally, as a straight educated Singaporean with a world view, I feel much more threatened by the spreading tentacles of these aggressive colonizing religions into our political and social institutions than by pink dots.
Problem is, I don’t see any buddhist, Hindu, or Muslim groups making any attempt to be involved in the sex education of our kids. If you bochap and the christians take over, you have no one to blame. Just be grateful someone wants to do the job that even you as a parent avoid.
Too busy making money ? then don’t complain when your kids get pregnant at 14, speaks tagalog, and treat you as their ATM.
mic o mic
Yes it would be gd if Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist organisations get involved in sex education.
Would show that the government policy on sex education reflects the views of the majority of S’porean parents.
CS shld and can argue that the view of the majority of S’poreans is wrong, a perfectly legitimate and reasonable proposition.
But she isn’t.
She is raising (unintentionally perhaps) the spectre of the S’pore’s constitution being subverted by the government.
She shld clarify her position.
Let me add on to some of SLOO’s factual events.Just 2 days ago in MALAWI,a Muslim nation in Africa,its government has sentenced 2 gay men to 13yrs in jail.Their crimes:they wanted to get married.My point is this, that the gays are having such a good time here.No gays in the local LGBT community are going face any punishment if they wanted to get married.Their only disappointment may be a rejection from the marriage registrar.They can do whatever they want behind close door just like any other couples would do.Unlike some of our neighboring countries,we do not have morality policing squads breathing behind your back.The fact that the LGBT recently had that ‘LOVE-IN’ parade at Hong Lim park says something about your freedom of expressions.The Singapore government is not going to stop you from having a stage play depicting your points of view pertaining the alternative life-style.If 5% of our population is having some sort of alternative life-style,there should be enough money raised to stage a homo-stage play.Living in a secular society like Singapore is really a big plus for you guys.Sometime i wish TOC would send some of his staffs to countries like Sudan,Malawi or Burundi,S.Africa for some news reporting on gays and how their lives under constant threats by their own country citizens.Be happy and gay in Singapore.
As a medical student in the 1970s, an evangelist group of Christians who called themselves the Navigators, were allowed to put up a poster in the notice board of the medical faculty at Sepoy Lines (now the College of Medicine Building) that boldly declared “Towards a Christian Nation”. The Dean and most top people were Christians and hence such blatant disregards of respect for non-Christian religions was condoned.
The larger proportion of Christians amongst elitists and Ministers definitely have a role in influencing decision-making that is anything but secular.
We pride ourselves as “asian traditional” country but we behave as western as the bigoted American south!
Shame on our government for lacking the courage to do the right thing but instead yield to fear of losing votes amongst the “powerful” Christians!
All of us have choices in choosing what we want to hear, and to walk away, if we chose not to. Hence, to those such as nonreligious, and david, you can choose your options – ignore or do what you need to do so assertively within permissible limit. Instead, we hear complaints. The pasture is always greener at other side.
If the christians can stop our teens from over exercising their sexual urges, teen pregnancies and abortions, I am all for it as long as they don’t stat asking the kids to join their church.
mic o mac… “if they can stop our teens…”? … is there evidence from anywhere in the world that they can?
because of rising rates of teen pregnancies and STDs in many American states where they had taken over sex education, most of the the preach-and-nag abstinence-only vendors have recently been fired. … but of course there’s still a market for them in Singapore … our easily bullied MOE and our gullible parents don’t care about what actually works anymore … they just want to go back to the 1950s.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
Divorce rates among Christian groups:
The slogan: “The family that prays together, stays together” is well known. There has been much anecdotal evidence that has led to “unsubstantiated claims that the divorce rate for Christians who attended church regularly, pray together or who meet other conditions is only 1 or 2 percent”. 8 Emphasis ours]. Dr. Tom Ellis, chairman of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Council on the Family said that for “…born-again Christian couples who marry…in the church after having received premarital counseling…and attend church regularly and pray daily together…” experience only 1 divorce out of nearly 39,000 marriages — or 0.00256 percent. 9
A recent study by the Barna Research Group throws extreme doubt on these estimates. Barna released the results of their poll about divorce on 1999-DEC-21. 1 They had interviewed 3,854 adults from the 48 contiguous states. The margin of error is ±2 percentage points. The survey found:
bullet
11% of the adult population is currently divorced.
bullet
25% of adults have had at least one divorce during their lifetime.
bullet Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience.
RedDotWong {“…(no more than 5% of the population…]”
-
Gee, RDW, you sure know how to turn things to your advantage, but in actual fact, you have just shown us why we have to be vigilant toward minority views that have hidden agendas.
-
Listen to the call of the Pink Dot event and in case you have forgotten, the aim was not only to call for the gathering of the ‘suffering’ gays but to also clamour for support from those in the ‘conservative’ camp, who are all so lost on human love.
-
Fact is, you guys are no longer the 5% you speak off when the idea is to infiltrate, conquer and force into acceptance the gay agenda (I am dropping the inverted commas since you have admitted there is indeed and agenda).
Constance questions the government’s decision in approving four Christianity-linked groups in MOE’s sex-education program.
-
There are too many flaws in her argument, which can also be seen as a personal attempt to devalue the contributions of Christians toward the secular composition of Singapore’s society.
-
She claimed that ‘humanity’ in SG is in danger of being “savagely challenged”, by giving reason that the approved vendors arepart of a conservative Christian group, failing to address adequately whether the opening up of liberal values would not savagely challenge the SG society just as well.
-
Sge questions NAC’s decision to cut funding to Wild Rice but again failing to acknowledge that the Theatre Company had been subtly promoting gay values (gay agenda) into a society she deems as conservative with its CORE VALUES being Peace & Harmony before Equality.
-
In her context of secularism, she argued that the State is privileging one value system over another, and therefore, “subverting” the very nature of a secular society. She made reference to a British academic to suport her argument that a secular society is defined as being one that is “neutral” between different views about religion (only), again failing to understand that many other factors that contribute to the CORE values adopted.
-
In a composition such as SG’s, it does not mean that we do away with what had helped hold the fabric of society together in the name of being progresive.
-
She plays the role of ‘saviour’ when she claims that the choice of vendors can be likened to letting a fox loose in a chicken coop, as if SGporeans are in dire need of a saviour to save us from peril.
-
Does it mean to her that pushing religion to the corner of a secular society would solve all the problems she mentioned, like, teenage pregnancy and marital instability? What proof does she have for us?
-
She questions what does the government mean when it sayd SG is a secular society? This is what it means: “It is the inclusion (not exclusion) of ALL segments of society where it can, and where there is not common consensus, then a set of prevailing general guiding apply”.
-
I suggest that Constance and Aware take it in stride and acknowledge that their sex-education program is not good enough for SG’s comsumption, before attempting to push it because of her own personal agenda under the disguise of being progressive.
-
Perhaps it can be summed up in two parts: that of one pushing for a progressive secularism against that of a conservative secularism. We are unique, aren’t we?
I grew with a mother who attended a Methodist Chinese church in the 1960s.
Later I attended Sunday School conducted in English.
Yes it was “shiok” – felt like a “a class above ‘pai sin’ (‘ancestral worshippers’)people. Church is smog-free, clean and “high class”.
Never mind if the Sunday School teacher couldnot answer the many “why’s” such as WHY a compassionate God could be so wrathful!
Memorising bible verses and reciting to perfection to win prizes!! It was a good life! Treated to Cold Storage ice cream in Orchard Road – shiok man!!
Then Christian mum died.
The pastor who stood in front of the coffin, asked the family facing him to stand up.Other then myself, the rest were “free thinkers”.
In Mandarin, the Pastor commanded the family members to swear, that they were all be converted to Christians!
It was a wake up call for me as a 14-year-old and after deconditioning my mind of imagery of burning in hell forever for forsaking the saviour, I became free of a blind-faith cultist religion!!
I was wondering abt SC’s comments on Wild Rice: what it had to do with GLBT?
On BBC World Service I heard an interview with a director (name slips my mind) from WR.
He was saying funding cut was because of Animal Farm play WR put up.
So it seems there are multiple reasons for WR funding being cut.
Stubborn-Unconvert, not the Methodist Church I knew. The Methodists tot me the value of hard work, and honesty. Fat gd it did me.
A secular society can aspire to conservative values (low divorce rates, low abortion rates, stronger marriages, tolerance) so i don’t see how having conservative christian groups teaching sex education is a bad thing. the only “problem” might be that they are less tolerant towards homosexuality, but their other values (abstinence before marriage, self control, non promotion of abortion) are ideals that every society and person can hold up, even if they aren’t always achievable by every member of society. Everyone needs an ideal to aspire to, right? We can’t just give up and say, “oh, everyone’s doing it, let’s forget about teaching the value of abstinence before marriage”.
The only incongruence would be their stand on homosexuality, but as it is with Singapore, it’s illegal anyway. Teaching tolerance is best. And the MOE has already made it clear that groups are not to proselytise. Remember what happened to the Family Life Society when some students complained that they forced them to think of abortion as a sin?
So on the sex education front, I don’t think having any christian group facilitating sex education is a threat to secular society.
Please note that any comment that is offends religious sensitivity will be deleted and the commenter will be placed under permanent moderation. Thank you.
is this onlinecitizen for singaporeans, all sorts of singaporeans or what?
do enlighten on this thread for secularism.
why are questions and news about secularism deleted just because islam is mentioned??
let’s try again. should there be secularism?
http://g5sikhmedia.co.uk/events/view/1073/39.html
As a medical student in the 1970s, an evangelist group of Christians who called themselves the Navigators, were allowed to put up a poster in the notice board of the medical faculty at Sepoy Lines (now the College of Medicine Building) that boldly declared “Towards a Christian Nation”. The Dean and most top people were Christians and hence such blatant disregards of respect for non-Christian religions was condoned.
The larger proportion of Christians amongst elitists and Ministers definitely have a role in influencing decision-making that is anything but secular.
We pride ourselves as “asian traditional” country but we behave as western as the bigoted American south!
Shame on our government for lacking the courage to do the right thing but instead yield to fear of losing votes amongst the “powerful” Christians!
Reply to theonLinecitizen,
It seems that Christianity is the easiest target to shoot at and according to TOC the rest of the religions is too sensitive to debate or discuss.Words like Taliban,Biggots,crusaders and other derogatory words can be applied to Christians and Christianity and not others.Are you playing political correctness or do you have a discriminatory attitudes towards one religion and not others or both?
I will copy and paste your reply.
This is exactly how some are using political correctness in europe, america, and australia to silent others into total submission or they file charges of sedition if the ever popular charges of racism does not work.
copy and paste ::
Reply to theonLinecitizen,
It seems that Christianity is the easiest target to shoot at and according to TOC the rest of the religions is too sensitive to debate or discuss.Words like Taliban,Biggots,crusaders and other derogatory words can be applied to Christians and Christianity and not others.
Are you playing political correctness or do you have a discriminatory attitudes towards one religion and not others or both?
::
You reply will disappear and no one will be the wiser.
It is better known as submission.
Reply to murtad,
Be real,our government cannot cater to the fringed groups or they could lose political power.Holding political power comes before courage or doing the right thing.Just watch and see how many opposition candidates dare and have the courage to speak out for the fringed groups like LGBT community if they want to survive politically.Even politicians like KJ knows how not to cross the line.The time has not come yet in your favor,so live life the way it is for now and keep on waiting and waiting and waiting.Unlike KJ,Phillip his brother has a bigger brain and knows the dynamic of political changes within government of the day.You will see,Phillip J.could be the catalyst to social changes if he performs well from the view pts of the PAP government.Hope you are still with us to witness that day to come.
Sophie,
-
You make so much sense that no one wants to engage you. That’s the way it is and will always be. When the anti-Christians have no answer to logic, they shut their eyes and ears.
Sophie’s logic hardly leads to the conclusion that the type of sex education favoured by these Christian groups actually works. It certainly didn’t work in the USA and, after spending almost $2 billion on Christian-inspired abstinence only, the Yanks are now grappling with rising teen pregnancy and STD rates. Most of the abstinence-only vendors have been fired and comprehensive sex education is being rapidly re-instated into the curriculum.
The MOE is certainly aware of the unfortunate American experience but has nevertheless decided to give Singaporean kids a dose of the same quack medicine.
I am sure that many parents, unfamiliar with the actual facts, will applaud the MOE for trying to re-inforce conservative values. I doubt if the Ministry of Health, faced with more ignorant kids with STDs and unwanted pregnancies, will be as congratulatory.
By the way, gemami, I’m not anti-Christian. I’m just pro-practical and pro-Singapore. The proper place for religion is in the church, temple, mosque, and the privacy of our homes… but not in our schools and other public institutions. Our ethnic and religious complexity and our geo-political circumstances argue vehemently that Singapore’s best interests are not served by Team Christian or Team Muslim or Team Buddhist competing for influence.
how do you enjoy eating and serving halal food or employ a muslim woman with a hijab, and now the nikab against your conscience.
how does it serves to be pro singapore when the government compels you to do so.
this will once again be subjected to removal because secularism means nothing critical about islam is allowed too.
RedDotWong,
I believe the source of contention for Aware’s removal was its seemingly pro-homosexuality stand. Judging from the fact that this is Singapore and homosexuality is still a crime (not that i support this law), it’s easy to see why Aware was booted out.
But I don’t think you should be so narrow in your thinking that MOE’s appointment of these conservative Christian groups as sex educators is going to lead Singapore to its diseased destruction. These groups are abstinence-plus. They teach abstinence, but they also talk about contraception, abortion, etc. They have to – it’s in the MOE’s sex-ed curriculum (Sec 1 boys get to watch a video on how to put on a condom)
What’s wrong with that?
red dot wong,
do you know of how conservative koreans deal with sex education.
why do you and other detractors keep bringing up christian organisations or america west. what is the agenda.
you cannot expect to import western value systems into singapore and then blame the west for dealing with their problems their own ways.
singapore is not america west. you may allow korea to enter your thoughts at this juncture.
sophie…. abstinence plus is of course the ideal… but,judging from the American experience, it is not delivered by religion-based vendors with the practical neutrality that makes it work … even in the American school districts that mandated abstinence-plus the vendors often undermined the safe-sex message that they were obliged to deliver by simultaneously declaring that, for instance, condoms were ineffective… yeah, the kids were taught how to use the condoms but also came away with feeling “why should we use them anyway if they don’t work?” … there were also incidences of vendors insinuating anti-abortion and even anti-evolution messages into the sex education.
On a more general note, I very much hope that the fundamentalist Christian-inspired sex education will be able to encourage aspirational values without savaging the 5% of our population who happen to be homosexual. It doesn’t seem very aspirational to heap scorn and condemnation on a small minority whose lifestyle must necessarily be different from the majority’s.
Murtad… Many thanks for bringing up Korea. It’s a horrifying example of what happens when aggressive imported evangelical religions infiltrate politics, education and, there, even the armed forces. Let’s hope that we Singaporeans are wiser than Koreans.
one was being clever by half, i hope.
you did not avoid the obvious answer at all.
korea has a system that is already conservative without the influence of christians.
in fact their age old conservative values are similar with christian values in more ways than you care for.
which is why there is great acceptance among the koreans. thanks for taking note.
you cannot hope for more liberal values in singapore and not blame the west for it.
try korea again. singapore can learn from them.
thank you.
RedDotWong,
-
Trust you to go super-hyper over a simple comment.
-
I do not see how you can place the entire blame of the failures of the American society solely on the ‘failure of Christians teachings’. There is a whole host of other ‘unreligious’ factors contributing to the decline of the American society. How is it you do not see that perhaps the $2 billion had prevented the American society from being worse than it is now?
-
If one wants to talk religion, then one must talk about the real ones and not those that disguise themselves for monetary profits. Surely you cannot say the koyok seller who pastes a picture of a cross on his koyok to be a true Christian? You can find very many in the US of A.
-
You need to understand that religion, particularly Christianity, have been so badly represented by those we already knew to be ‘wolves in sheep clothing’. But I don’t think you’ll ever understand this, not because you can’t, but because you won’t even try. I can only take consolation at your words, at least at face value, that you are not anti-Christian.
-
I will only accept and acknowledge your claims that the ills of society is due to the failures of Christian-related doctrines. Do you have proof to stake your claims? If not, then your accusation can only ring hollow, don’t you think?
-
Mind you, the Aware’s CSE program was effectively running alongside others for a number of years too before it was discovered and halted last year. Has it proven to be more effective than others?
-
If you could stand to reason, then may I suggest you listen to Sophie’s comments and consider what she had shared, that the Christian sex program does not tell its students to convert to Christianity, but to give recommendations to abstinence as the best form of protection against (teenage) pregnancies. It teaches love among family members so that a family will remain a family. How is this so dreadful and fearful? It is mainstream values and virtues we are promoting.
gemami… thanks for putting words in my mouth and decorating them with quotes as if they were mine… i said “the failure of Christian teachings”??? um, no i didn’t … in fact i’m a great admirer of christian teaching as expressed by mother theresa and those christian aid workers in places where misery thrives … teaching by example and sheer goodness of heart is so much more inspiring (and christ-like) than preaching and bullying, no? after all, salvation is all about free choice and resisting temptation and not about brainwashing and imposed conformity, right?
but i did say in so many words that sexuality education in the hands of Christian fundamentalists seems not to work… i agree that the American example is not exactly fair but, sorry, there’s no other place where religious conservatives have taken over sex education … i was tempted to use little Denmark as an example… after all, it does always top the list in global happiness surveys and its rates of STDs and unwanted pregnancies are lower than singapore’s … but, oh no, kids there are taught about sexual health from the age of 6, only 5% of the population (mostly immigrants) actually go to church, and homosexuality is, gasp, accepted… so it would be even more unfair to use the Danish sex education model as an example of what actually works… no no, i wouldn’t do that!
perhaps it is churlish of me to suggest that the failure of christian sexuality vendors in the USA will be inevitably repeated in singapore… but it is also highly presumptuous of you to insist that they will succeed here… you are used to blind faith… i am not
can you help this poor confused heathen, please? … suspicious me wonders if the reduction of teen pregnancies and STDs is not really the purpose of christian sexuality vendors in singapore. …. could it be possible that the real purpose is to re-inforce the values and prejudices of parents and, especially, to make sure that homosexuality is thoroughly condemned and denigrated? could it be possible that it doesn’t really matter if a few thousand kids end up with STDs or unwanted pregnancies as long as they hate homos? could it be possible that the vendors will be tempted to promote their religious beliefs here and there and let their anti-abortion, anti-evolution and pro-israel obsessions show up now and then? what do you think?
as far as i know, the AWARE sexuality programme (whose central message was that abstinence is always best) has not been statistically assessed by the MOE for its effect on the girls in the handful of schools where it was taught… of course, it also included the acknowledgment that homosexuality exists and that heterosexual anal sex happens… in the minds of many singaporeans, this was de-facto proof of its failure to preach proper core values and so i guess any real and rational assessment of AWARE’s impact on teens’ choices to have sex or not is impossible and, unfortunately, irrelevant … the mob, especially the fundamentalist christians, have spoken… in singapore, he who screams loudest, wins.
by the way, why are fundamentalists so obsessively aware of sinful sex and so unaware of other transgressions? maybe i’m just a dumb buddhist guy but i thought there were 7 deadly sins for christians. What happened to the other 6? You know, pride, GREED, deceit, wrath, gluttony, etc. And why is christ’s sermon on the mount so easily drowned out by a few passages in leviticus and paul’s epistles? (before you go off on a theological frenzy of biblical justifications and excuses, these are just rhetorical questions, ok? i already know the answers.)
Hey RedDotWong,
You ask a lot of questions that ordinary people do not have the answers to – like why it is some places like Denmark have lower rates of infection/unwanted pregnancies than Singapore. There are probably a big host of factors but every country has its own social dealings to overcome (Denmark has a high rate of divorce; high percentage of first-born children are born out-of-wedlock)
The crux of my argument is just that having conservative Christian groups be approved as external vendors to educate youths about sexuality is not a bad thing because they will espouse good values that centre around abstinence before marriage (as an ideal) and not promote abortion/contraception, but will instead teach the kids what they are for and how to use them in the right context, while still holding up abstinence as the ideal.
I believe this is a good thing, so that is why I don’t think it is a threat to secular society.
Like I mentioned, the only incongruence would be these groups’ stand on homosexuality, but that is irrelevant in our society (at least right now) because homosexuality is still a crime. Which is why I also said, it is best if these groups promote tolerance, and anyway, if they were to condemn homosexuality in their lessons, you bet there will be a backlash.