Vive la Difference!

“Muslims don't drink alcohol. Hindus don't eat beef. However, in singapore, they don't try to prohibit non-Muslims or non-Hindus from consuming alcohol or beef. Why?
Because the freedom of religion exists in singapore. The first aspect of this freedom is that each of us is free to practise our own faith. The second aspect, which follows logically, is that we shouldn't impose our own faith on others.”

Mr Wang Says So

You mean the freedom of religion exists so long as you don't exhibit your religious affiliation in places of learning don’t you. I thought that is where the significance of appreciating difference and the value of difference is supposed to be learnt under the supervisory guidance of allegedly intelligent teachers? The latter proscription turns the former into a misconception my friend. 

Where one is forced to comply with the dictates of secularism at the expense of one’s faith, and especially where the ideal of secularism is enriched and validated by the infusion of other ways of seeing things, secularism moves from being a watchdog of perspectival freedom to being an arrogant arbiter of the right way of thought.  Where the adherents of a particular faith are not allowed to exhibit their religious affiliation in schools, what we see is the imposition of the belief of ‘religious secularists’ (those who disrespect the beliefs of all whilst practicing their own secular faith of intolerance in the face of difference – their motto is, ‘No faith is better than Any Faith’) on 'secular religionists'.(those who respect the beliefs of all whilst practicing their own faith). 

A classic case is the banning of the hijab in French universities.  This casts the latter, in the eyes of the ever-observant youth, that they are undesirable - especially when non-muslims come 'as is' and do not set aside their traditional religious vestments when going to school.  To ask another to do that is to forward their customs as 'undesirable' and one's own as 'normal'.  If one does not conform to this, one is viewed as a 'troublemaker' - which in singapore is a catch-all word for anyone who asks 'why' instead of 'how high' when told to 'jump'.  What do you think happens when these young’uns graduate to the economic sphere and have learnt that something is not appropriate simply because some party says it is not.  If they, and the ‘adults’ around them, are so docile and apathetic as to not question it, how do you think they are going to react to difference in the work arena? - and this is especially exacerbated where a people practice a culture that values tradition for tradition sake.  Where difference is depreciated in one’s early years by seemingly 'intelligent' adults, it is usually discriminated against when the children move on to ‘adulthood’ as one learns to appreciate homogeneity for its own sake, discount novelty and, via these, learn not to focus on details that contradistinguish since contradistinction itself is viewed as a 'no no'.

Secularism ought not to be a fortress keeping out disparate faiths.  Rather, secularism ought to include within its bosom the faiths of all.  Thus, secularism is validated as such.  All else is an affront to it.  I say this for the perspectival good of and any other nation seeking to do right by its inhabitants and seeking to expand its creative and intellectual wealth.  Take it or leave it.

I for one, embrace difference for it affords me many unique vantage points in life to experience life.  I am, what you can call, perspective-hungry, as I’m most cognizant of the fact that what I know emerges from those few perspectives that I am in possession of, and the more perspectives I add to my perspectival arsenal, the more I will know.  That is what precedes an open-eyed edsperience of life.

Amen.

uk malaysia singapore india philippines france islam secularism sociology psychology