religion is singapore's sticky problem
-
I think govt is stuck on issue of handling religion issue in singapore and its constant belief that singapore is a multi religious country.
It cannot get itself into a proper understanding on the fundamental effects of religions.
Firstly, atheism rejects religions' truth. Its a straighforward concept.
Politics, on the other hand, dare not dare to take a stance. Instead politics calls for tolerance and respect, and in the end, totally avoids answering the main question, is religion telling truths or not? atheism does not call for religious people to be prosecuted, so why cannot we just educate people? No one is going to be punished for believing, but truth have a responsiblity towards these religious people in educating, not punishing them, why religion has no truth in basis.
atheism, has a clear answer. and it believe falsehood leads to more problems for society, so we need to educate people.
Politics though, seems play the hide and seek game when it comes to religion.
Failed. If i am politican , i would do things differently from govt... I wonder what is in their mind. The govt is going to get more problems from their current policy because they do not understand the nature of the whatever problem enough.
-
lee hsien loong already made known that singapore is a secular country.
-
singapore is a gay hub
-
don't need be so judgemental.
-
thanks for telling me about secular state... i have wiki it and found this..
A secular state is a concept of secularism, whereby a state or country is officially neutral in matters of religion, neither supporting nor opposing any particular religious beliefs or practices. A secular state also treats all its citizens equally regardless of religion, and does not give preferential treatment for a citizen from a particular religion over other religions. Most often it has no state religion or equivalent.
A secular state is defined as protecting freedom of religion as pursued in state secularism. It is also described to be a state that prevents religion from interfering with state affairs, and prevents religion from controlling government or exercising political power. Laws protect each individual including religious minorities from discrimination on the basis of religion.[citation needed]
A secular state is not an atheistic state (e.g. Albania under Enver Hoxha), in which the state officially opposes all religious beliefs and practices. In some secular states, there can be a huge majority religion in the population (e.g. Thailand, Turkey etc.) and in others there may be great religious diversity (e.g. India, Lebanon, etc).[citation needed] Some may have de facto official religions, in which even though a government doesn't support or deny religion, it may require some members of it's government to be a certain religion
-
after reding about secular state concept... my conclusion is that
countries who adopt secular state concept are still going to get themselves in trouble with religion.... secularism is not a good policy... its a fact... trust me...
secular state is better than religious state, i admit... but its neutrality stance is its weakness also...and it hell going to cause a lot of problems.. many many..
-
January, the ruling party will constantly maintain it that way. They are mindful about inciting relgious disharmony. Quite long ago (should have saved a copy of the text), can't remember was it lee hsien loong or the father indirecting said about a religious group, insinuating they are mindful about their ways.
-
Perhaps, you would like to write to the ruling party to convey them this message you posted here.
-
i think its wrong to suppress religions from atheists concept....
atheists should convince, persuade by non violent means like dialogue, debate, and conference....
however, believers should not in anyway be punished or bullied. its atheists responsibility to educate and find ways to communicate with them.
. religion is a natural evolution of things. if atheists want to end religion... they must only do it by creative ways that are peaceful..
-
Originally posted by Fantagf:
January, the ruling party will constantly maintain it that way. They are mindful about inciting relgious disharmony. Quite long ago (should have saved a copy of the text), can't remember was it lee hsien loong or the father indirecting said about a religious group, insinuating they are mindful about their ways.
well, the same old problem of dangers of religious disharmony....the govt must put in more brain power to educate its people...
the policy of secualrism may seem a safe option as of now... but i feel that it has already created alot of problems in singapore already....
look at all the singaporeans... whenever religious issue come up, the people has all their views.. plus the media being the pivotal plateforms who have their own views as well... and the govt still giving substandard replies does dun not deal with the root problems... in the end.. singaporeans still have not learned anything because there are too many views already...
its going to be like this always in the future... i guarantee... 2 yeras, 3, ,4 and 10 years down the road.. same old problems, same confusion and same conclusion with no good outcome for the society in the end...
we are going nowhere progress in the issue of religion.. the conclusion is dun meddle with other people religion, they have right to choose what they believe... Truth, takes a second seat...
-
Originally posted by january:
well, the same old problem of dangers of religious disharmony....the govt must put in more brain power to educate its people...
the policy of secualrism may seem a safe option as of now... but i feel that it has already created alot of problems in singapore already....
look at all the singaporeans... whenever religious issue come up, the people has all their views.. plus the media being the pivotal plateforms who have their own views as well... and the govt still giving substandard replies does dun not deal with the root problems... in the end.. singaporeans still have not learned anything because there are too many views already...
its going to be like this always in the future... i guarantee... 2 yeras, 3, ,4 and 10 years down the road.. same old problems, same confusion and same conclusion with no good outcome for the society in the end...
we are going nowhere progress in the issue of religion.. the conclusion is dun meddle with other people religion, they have right to choose what they believe... Truth, takes a second seat...
so are u in favour of the country being secular or you want govt to mix religion with politics, reading your few posts made me confuse. -
Originally posted by Fantagf:
so are u in favour of the country being secular or you want govt to mix religion with politics, reading your few posts made me confuse.
January talking about present reality and the ideal nation. -
Having an atheist nation or irreligionist nation may not be a bad idea. Even in a secular nation with the freedom to practice any religion, no one can tell who is a religious fanatic or fundamentalist who is out to harm the nation. In an atheist or irreligionist nation, a fanatic or fundamentalist will stand out like a sore thumb.
-
Some of you here have very short memories how an independent Singapore came into being. It was not by choice, nor ideology and certainly not for religious reason.
Singapore's existence always hangs in a balance and many of us know seems to either forget, and ignore. This is attitude is dangerous to say the least, especially so after 9/11.
We know there will always be under-laying tensions between different races, religion and different segments this crowded island. This applies to any other countries and societies. However, that similarity ends. So what is the difference?
Race/Religion tensions and violence are usually historical in-nature and gets infected from generations to the next. It is an endless cycle this is very difficult to break. Israel/Palestein, Pakistan/India. This are all God-fearing nations contantly at war for over 50 years.
Singapore had been very lucky. VERY Very lucky, IMO, for the last 4 decades that race/religion is kept seperated from state & politics and managed at a grass-root level.
We see JI attempt to radicalise the general Muslim population.
We see foreign religious groups doing aggressive works in Asia.
We see our neighbouring countries having to deal with constant threat by ultras who create tensions and instability within and with-out their borders.
And now we see AWARE saga a manisfestation of religion activism in action. This event is not simple exercise about moral rights or wrongs on sexual orientation nor about women's right. These issues have become tools for certain quarter's larger agenda.
Sometimes, you have to ask yourself to whom you seek truth with?
Your families? Your loved ones? Your inherent human sense of harmony?
Of some "holy spirit" which you believe that others of difference belief should subscribed to?
If you seek the later, you are on your way back to the vicious cycle of hell-on-Earth that many today are trying to avoid or get out of.
Today's Singapore exist not by just prayer alone. It was the work of our forefathers sweat (minus the blood) who put their differences aside and work for their childrens future.
We are those very fortunate children.
Don't EVER forget that.
-
that is why secularism is a safe option for most countries... countries dare not temper with the strength of religion and people's need for higher beings...
However, secularism is merely a temporary solution which itself creates problems by its neutrality stance. I believe that the fear of religious and racial riots is too big that make govt insistence that
Singaproe should follow the multi racial/religious policy.
I do understand that govt position in adopting secularism. But I would point out that secularism does not solve the issue well in the long term.
In human world, Truth is the most important virtue that every country has to promote, at least in the long term.
SOmetimes, for the sake of peace, we can hide truth for the short term.
But while secularism provide stability in a country for the time being, we better make full use of the peace time to do the correct thing, because hiding the truth is also hurting the society indirectly during this peaceful times. In the near future, transition beyond secularism is a better policy.
An atheistic state is perhaps too pushy and will create backlash effect from religion... so i suggest govt in the future adopt a gradual approach in the education of truth.
I suspect the govt is already approaching the truth policy by indirect method so that atheism will become more prominent but people will not sense that it is due to govt policy but will attribute it more to social and global phenomenon....
You know in politics, the govt official stance may be this... but the way their policies works may actually deviate from their stance... This, however, is just my guess..
But surely politics i know always play alot of pyschological games in running the countries.
-
Originally posted by january:
that is why secularism is a safe option for most countries... countries dare not temper with the strength of religion and people's need for higher beings...
However, secularism is merely a temporary solution which itself creates problems by its neutrality stance. I believe that the fear of religious and racial riots is too big that make govt insistence that
Singaproe should follow the multi racial/religious policy.
I do understand that govt position in adopting secularism. But I would point out that secularism does not solve the issue well in the long term.
In human world, Truth is the most important virtue that every country has to promote, at least in the long term.
SOmetimes, for the sake of peace, we can hide truth for the short term.
But while secularism provide stability in a country for the time being, we better make full use of the peace time to do the correct thing, because hiding the truth is also hurting the society indirectly during this peaceful times. In the near future, transition beyond secularism is a better policy.
An atheistic state is perhaps too pushy and will create backlash effect from religion... so i suggest govt in the future adopt a gradual approach in the education of truth.
I suspect the govt is already approaching the truth policy by indirect method so that atheism will become more prominent but people will not sense that it is due to govt policy but will attribute it more to social and global phenomenon....
You know in politics, the govt official stance may be this... but the way their policies works may actually deviate from their stance... This, however, is just my guess..
But surely politics i know always play alot of pyschological games in running the countries.
An atheist state may be needed to spot the religious fanatics in a country.
-
Originally posted by january:
i think its wrong to suppress religions from atheists concept....
atheists should convince, persuade by non violent means like dialogue, debate, and conference....
however, believers should not in anyway be punished or bullied. its atheists responsibility to educate and find ways to communicate with them.
. religion is a natural evolution of things. if atheists want to end religion... they must only do it by creative ways that are peaceful..
Are you a communist?
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
Are you a communist?
nope... from what i know communists is a different idea and political system. -
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
An atheist state may be needed to spot the religious fanatics in a country.
i have not really think about this . i feel that the purpose of promoting atheism is not so much to catch terrorists, though they are definitely related issues...Besides, the way to spot religious fanatics may have easier way also, though i have not thought about that.
If i were to think now, i think poverty is also a big cause of terrorism.. but some terrorists are from rich background... so for this people, its solution is to have a good education system , really good one, in singapore..
In singapore, some malays go to religious schools, i think it is called madrasahs, for their primary education, these schools have to teach science and maths also, but not as much as the govt primary schools. This is for readers information only.
-
Originally posted by january:
that is why secularism is a safe option for most countries... countries dare not temper with the strength of religion and people's need for higher beings...
However, secularism is merely a temporary solution which itself creates problems by its neutrality stance. I believe that the fear of religious and racial riots is too big that make govt insistence that
Singaproe should follow the multi racial/religious policy.
I do understand that govt position in adopting secularism. But I would point out that secularism does not solve the issue well in the long term.
In human world, Truth is the most important virtue that every country has to promote, at least in the long term.
SOmetimes, for the sake of peace, we can hide truth for the short term.
But while secularism provide stability in a country for the time being, we better make full use of the peace time to do the correct thing, because hiding the truth is also hurting the society indirectly during this peaceful times. In the near future, transition beyond secularism is a better policy.
An atheistic state is perhaps too pushy and will create backlash effect from religion... so i suggest govt in the future adopt a gradual approach in the education of truth.
I suspect the govt is already approaching the truth policy by indirect method so that atheism will become more prominent but people will not sense that it is due to govt policy but will attribute it more to social and global phenomenon....
You know in politics, the govt official stance may be this... but the way their policies works may actually deviate from their stance... This, however, is just my guess..
But surely politics i know always play alot of pyschological games in running the countries.
<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } -->
Having wiki on the concepts of secularism, I am surprised that you had missed an important classification of modern secularism which is defined as Hard and Soft secularism. The former regards any religious propositions as illegitimate, while the later allows tolerance when science and religion clashed.
Singapore system and ,in fact more of the today's Western political system, are regarded as soft-secularism. Meaning the religious institution (church) is separated from state and policy making.
However, that does not mean total removal like what is done under hard-secularism. Religious bodies still have voice and view heard by the State.If the Singapore secular system had been trying to hid the "Truth", as you had pointed out, then why is the SAF crest being blessed by several major Religions that are practiced and recognized under the Republic law?
-
Originally posted by january:
i have not really think about this . i feel that the purpose of promoting atheism is not so much to catch terrorists, though they are definitely related issues...Besides, the way to spot religious fanatics may have easier way also, though i have not thought about that.
If i were to think now, i think poverty is also a big cause of terrorism.. but some terrorists are from rich background... so for this people, its solution is to have a good education system , really good one, in singapore..
In singapore, some malays go to religious schools, i think it is called madrasahs, for their primary education, these schools have to teach science and maths also, but not as much as the govt primary schools. This is for readers information only.
Not much use for atheism in a multi-religious country. Just remember to respect each others' beliefs.
-
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
Not much use for atheism in a multi-religious country. Just remember to respect each others' beliefs.
I beg to differ when you say it is not much use of atheism in a multi-religious country.Spreading atheism and succesfully convincing people in a multi religious country will definietly and greatly improve many aspects of the country, with catching terrorists only one of the many lists of benefits.
A country who remain mutli religious will not progress so much in terms of science, discovery, economy, solving crimes, happiness level, creativity and good characters of people.
The reason is because and based on the simple premise of truth brings real knowledge so that more knowledge can truly be built and expanded while falsehood build imaginary knowledge which nothing substantial can be discovered and expanded upon.
-
Originally posted by january:
I beg to differ when you say it is not much use of atheism in a multi-religious country.Spreading atheism and succesfully convincing people in a multi religious country will definietly and greatly improve many aspects of the country, with catching terrorists only one of the many lists of benefits.
A country who remain mutli religious will not progress so much in terms of science, discovery, economy, solving crimes, happiness level, creativity and good characters of people.
The reason is because and based on the simple premise of truth brings real knowledge so that more knowledge can truly be built and expanded while falsehood build imaginary knowledge which nothing substantial can be discovered and expanded upon.
Hence atheism is only useful for a atheist country and religion is useful for a multi-religious country. -
You speak of Atheism as if it''s another religion in its own right.
-
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
You speak of Atheism as if it''s another religion in its own right.
It's the belief of anti-deitistic believe.