Preaching religious intolerance undermines Singapore's harmony. Stop it

Preaching religious intolerance undermines Singapore's harmony. Stop it

by Lester Lam Yong Ling (The Straits Times Forum, 21 Apr 2006)

I refer to the letter "Proposing medical treatment along religious lines is unprofessional" by Mr Cho Jia Cai (ST Online Forum, April 18).

I was shocked to read about this seminar, which leads to more questions.

There has been rampant evangelism recently which lambasted other religions. Many believers of different faiths are disappointed with the actions of these Christian evangelists who do not care about the religious sensitivities in Singapore.

The post-911 world has seen a lot of action to rein in hatred preaching. Singapore is no exception, with the setting up of Inter-Racial Confidence Circles to promote understanding among the different races and religions.

The government emphasises a lot on religious harmony as Singapore comprises many people of different races and religions. The ideal of our forefathers, including the late Mr S.Rajaratnam, is that Singapore be a democratic nation regardless of race, language or religion.

There should not be any action to destroy the very foundations of our nation. However, the speaker's words at the seminar showed otherwise. Preaching intolerance shakes the religious harmony the government has been trying to build.

The speaker also did a great disservice to the thousand-year-old traditional medical therapies. These had served people well and they still do before the advance of modern western medicine.
Many westerners have also given the thumbs-up on the benefits of these therapies. It is very unfortunate that the speaker discouraged people to try out these therapies on the basis that these are non-Christian.

She also gave an unconvincing reason that these therapies stem from Shamanism. Even if these therapies have their roots in the religion, there is no reason to discriminate against them just because it is another religion.

I understand that a permit is needed from the police for speaking in public. The speech had elements of religious intolerance. Why did the police allow the seminar to be held since 2003?

There are rules for making speeches at Speakers' Corner to protect racial and religious harmony. Why was this particular seminar allowed to carry on? This brings forth another question. How can we allow hatred and intolerance to be preached? Can the authorities look into this?

All Singaporeans have a part to play to preserve the basic values of this nation. I am proud to be in Singapore where we do not have discrimination because of our race or religious beliefs.

We have to protect the ideals of our forefathers to build a safe and harmonious Singapore society.

Singapore : Proposing medical treatment along religious lines is unprofessional

Proposing medical treatment along religious lines is unprofessional

by Cho Jia Cai (The Straits Times Forum, 18 Apr 2006)

I attended a talk on Easter Friday at YMCA titled Spiritual roots of medicine and alternative therapy. Being a first-year medical student, I was intrigued and hoped to find out more about the basis of spirituality in promoting healing.

Instead, the speaker started lambasting at the other religions and alternative therapy, saying that Shamanism is the root of Celtic beliefs, African witch doctors, Taoism, Buddhism and Hinduism.

On alternative therapy, she denounced acupuncture as traditional Chinese medicine having gotten its roots from shamanism in which rituals required needles to be poked onto a human body to expel evil spirits. She said Christians should know better than to take the Traditional Chinese Medicine Biomedical double degree from NTU.

In addition she told the audience that alternative therapy may work, but it was not the right thing to do and that Christian doctors should know better than to suggest the treatment to patients because yoga stems from Hinduism and Taiji comes from Taoism.

I got the impression that anything non-Christian is wrong. Listening to the talk was not only distressing, it was also traumatising.

I believe that as a patient, I would want to receive the best health care treatment possible, be it alterative or conventional therapy. Fracturing the range of treatment options along religious lines is not only unprofessional, it is narrow-minded as well.

If Singapore wishes to become a health care hub, such ideas are simply unacceptable. I cannot believe how it is possible that in present day Singapore, people can openly conduct such seminars that infringe on religious sensitivities.

And the worst thing is, this seminar has been conducted yearly since 2003. May I know which body regulates such talks and seminars, or can anyone register a venue and just say whatever he or she wants?

Singapore : Doc asked patient to pray

Doc asked patient to pray

by Alvin Choo Weng Kee (The Straits Times Forum, 4 Oct 2005)

The letter, 'Should teachers seek to convert pupils?' (ST, Oct 1), reminded me of an incident at a specialists' clinic in a hospital some years ago.

I was consulting an oncologist on the outcome of a CT scan. Grim-faced, he told me the bad news: my cancer had returned.

Fully aware that I was not a Christian, the doctor asked me to kneel with him and pray. This made me even more distraught because the conclusion was that conventional medicine had run its course and divine intervention was needed.

At that critical moment, I felt that faith and medicine should not have been dispensed in the same prescription.

Singapore : Isn't Boys' Brigade just a CCA?

Isn't Boys' Brigade just a CCA?

by Ong Swee Seng (The Straits Times Forum, 4 Oct 2005)

The letter, 'Should teachers seek to convert pupils?' (ST, Oct 1), struck a chord with me.

Some years ago, my son was studying at Sembawang Secondary School when he joined the Boys' Brigade. Without my knowledge, the instructors/teachers in charge would take the members to church to attend worship services, and study the Bible.

Finally, one day my son told me he wanted to become a Christian.

I wonder whether the Ministry of Education and the school principal were aware of this.

Singapore : Should teachers seek to convert pupils?

Should teachers seek to convert pupils?

by Thio Sin Loo (The Straits Times Forum, 1 Oct 2005)

I am writing this letter because of some questions posed to me by a friend's daughter, a Primary 6 pupil studying in a local school.

This girl corresponds with her teacher on MSN Messenger and one day while I was surfing, she started asking me about Christianity and Buddhism. I found it strange that she would ask me these questions and not her parents.

Apparently her teacher had been asking her to attend Saturday worship services by The Rock, a Christian church based at Suntec City. A Buddhist, she replied that her parents would probably not let her go for the service.

The teacher told her it was not up to her parents to decide, that she was free to make up her own mind, and kept pressing her to go for his church's service.

I find this disturbing in many ways. For one thing, I feel that teachers should not be communicating with their students on such a personal level outside school. A teacher-pupil relationship should always exist within the parameters of education and the school.

Secondly, I am shocked that the teacher is encouraging his pupil to disobey her parents and listen to him instead. This is not the kind of approach our educators should adopt for impressionable teens.

Thirdly, teachers, as educators and authority figures to be respected in school and in society, should be the ones to inculcate tolerance and respect for other cultures and religions.

As most teachers are young educated adults and they form a large percentage of Christians in Singapore, are they allowed to impose their personal values, morals and principles on their pupils?

Is there any restriction or guide that regulates the relationship between teacher and pupil outside the parameters of the education system?

Are teachers allowed to go on MSN Messenger to communicate with their pupils on any issue and topic?

I would like to know the Ministry of Education's stand on this matter.

Proselytism in Schools a Cause for Concern in Singapore

Proselytism in Schools a Cause for Concern in Singapore

by Alvin Leong Bai Ran (The Straits Times Forum, 6 Aug 2005)

Singapore has prided itself on being a melting pot where people of different religions and cultures live together in harmony.

However, a sizeable portion of the Christian population engages in activities like Proselytism, Evangelism and Attacks on Evolution. Proselytism and Evangelism often include verbal assaults on other religions.

I am a secondary school student and have often seen people promoting their religion within the school. While they are free to believe in their faith, what they are doing is against the very Pledge they recite every morning, and an affront to the work our ancestors had put in to establish this nation.

Our ancestors put aside their differences, worked together and built this country through friendship, trust and tolerance, something these 'missionaries' are threatening to undo.

Should there be some religious influence on government decision-making? Nay! I say. The United States has already let religious authorities affect its bureaucracy. Now, half the schools in the country do not teach evolution and that the Earth is about 6,000 years old, despite the scientific evidence.

Are we to devolve to that level?