Tag: Islam

Only PAP-Approved Version Of Islam Allowed In Singapore?

When PAP Minister Masagos Zulkifli made his comment about the hijab ban and gay sex, there was another issue that he mentioned that probably has a much larger repercussion..

Masagos stated that Islam in Singapura should be practiced according to local context.

On the surface, it does not look that harmful.

It supposes differences in context for Muslims living in different parts of the world and at different times..

Many assume he simply meant that Muslims should take our local context into account.

But that was not all he said.

Masagos’ comment was in relation to the PAP government’s decision on the type of Muslim speakers they allow into Singapura..

It is about the type of Islam the PAP allows to be practiced.

In discussing the ban on Muslim scholars who believe Muslims should not wish others on their religious holidays..

Masagos argued that these scholars did not take “into account the teachings of our religious scholars that allows it, and they reject our religious scholars – this is very dangerous.”.

But his assertion that we should take into account the teachings of local scholars (as though all our local scholars allows it)…

betrays the fact that there is a difference of opinions among the local scholars.

PERGAS wrote in their irsyad that the difference of opinion is valid and that this difference should be respected.

How can he accuse the Ulama as though they are behind the decision to ban these speakers when these Ulama stated they accept the difference of opinions?

And the ulama do not have the ability to deny anyone entry.

That ability rests with the PAP government.

The decision to deny entry was not made by the Ulama.

That decision was made by the PAP government.

The PAP government decides on the types of Muslim scholars allowed to enter Singapura based on the type of Islam they allow.

The “Islam according to local context”…has nothing to do with referring to our local scholars.

It is about referring to the PAP.

Masagos’ statement is about creating a version of Islam…

Created and approved by the PAP.

Source: Almakhazin SG

February 15, 2016
Mohd Khair: S377A Not Appropriate Bargaining Chip For Tudung Issue

By the way, the gay or lgbt issue in Singapore is a concern NOT only of the Muslim community. It is also a matter of concern among Christians, Catholics and other groups.

In fact, way before Muslims in Singapore made their concerns more public, the Christians and Catholics have been more vocal on the issue. So, as a Muslim, I’m not sure how the tudung issue has now become part of the bargaining chip to ward off lgbt pressures to scrap Section 377A of the Penal Code in Singapore.

I can’t understand the logic of the argument that by allowing Muslim women to don the tudung, the government will also be obliged to scrap Section 377A of the Penal Code.

All the while I thought the reason as to why the Government is not willing to do away with Section 377A is due to the fact that the MAJORITY of Singaporeans are still very conservative. Hence, it is surprising that tudung is now implicated.

Source: Mohd Khair

February 12, 2016
Lee Hsien Loong Writes To Appeals For Increased Haj Quota From Saudi King

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has written a letter to the Saudi King, appealing for Singapore’s official haj quota to be increased.

The letter was presented to a Saudi minister by Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs, on Thursday.

Dr Yaacob is in Saudi Arabia till Friday (Feb 12) with chief executive of the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (Muis), Haji Abdul Razak Maricar, and other officials for the annual Haj ministerial meeting to discuss the haj quota and operations, as well as the welfare of Singaporean pilgrims.

In the letter, PM Lee said that he is seeking King Salman Abdulaziz Al Saud’s consideration in changing the quota from 680 to 800, in line with Singapore’s growing Muslim population.

He said that Singapore’s current quota of 680 was based on the formula decided by the Organisation of Islamic Conference in 1987, which determined that the haj quota will be set at 0.1 per cent of the Muslim population.

“Since then, Singapore’s Muslim population has grown by about 20 per cent but our quota has remained unchanged,” he wrote. About 15 per cent, or 800,000 of Singapore’s current population, are Muslims, he said.

He also made a personal appeal to the King to grant an additional 200 places on top of the revised quota this year.

PM Lee also conveyed his appreciation for King Salman’s generous hospitality accorded to Singaporean pilgrims over the years.

“I appreciate the heavy responsibility and complexity of the Haj operations undertaken by the Kingdom,” he wrote.

PM Lee added that ongoing efforts to enhance the infrastructure and the Haj management system have benefitted the welfare and safety of pilgrims.

Source: www.straitstimes.com

February 12, 2016
Almakhazin SG: What Is PAP’s Tudung Policy Really All About?

The hijab ban is not because interracial harmony or relationships.

The ban…which Masagos Zulkifli supported..

Is about a group of secular fundamentalists trying to control Islam.

Two nights ago, PAP Minister, Masagos Zulkifli justified his party’s ban of the hijab.

He claimed that the ban is part of the PAP’s way of ensuring harmony by making every community sacrifice what is important to them.

He is not alone in the PAP in making such comments.

Former Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong said the hijab affects integration.

Yaacob Ibrahim claimed it is problematic.

But the claim that the hijab affects harmony or integration does not stand scrutiny.

According to Assoc Prof Lily Zubaidah Rahim

“To date, the government has not provided any empirical evidence to support the presumption that allowing Muslim headscarves in primary and secondary schools impedes national unity.

Indeed, some school principals contend that students who had donned the tudung in the past did not disrupt social integration in class.”

If harmony and integration are not the reasons for the hijab ban..

then what is?

Lily Zubaidah argued the “no-tudung policy for Muslim schoolsgirls bears many similarities to Turkey’s headscarf restriction policy…

Both states exhibit secular fundamentalist and authoritarian tendencies…”

As Lily Zubaidah noted “An Naim has observed that this form of authoritarian state secularism is ‘often designed to enable the state to control religion…”

The PAP’s ban is not about a creating a multiracial, multireligious Singapura.

It is about a group of secular fundamentalists trying to subjugate Islam.

Reference:
Rahim, Lily Zubaidah. Governing Islam and regulating Muslims in Singapore’s secular authoritarian state. Murdoch university. Asia research centre, 2009.

Source: Almakhazin SG

February 12, 2016
Damanhuri Abas: Government’s Policy Of Religious Harmony Based On Mutual Tolerance And Acceptance Is A Failure

During the malay program ‘Bicara’, Minister for Environment and Water Resources, Masagos Zulkifli reiterated the continuation of the discriminatory policy that has prevented the employment of Malay/Muslim women who wants to don the Tudung/Hijab in jobs such as nursing and other uniformed group services. Throughout the program, the Minister tried his level best to defend the continuation of the discriminatory policy on several grounds in order to justify it.

His reasoning ranges from the need to be sensitive to the feelings of other races, namely the majority Chinese population which he implied will be upset when they see Malay/Muslim women donning the Tudung/Hijab as nurses, police officers, military personnel, etc., right up to the fear-mongering scenario of the potential opening a Pandora box of misunderstanding and conflict that may lead to undesirable consequences such as racial conflicts for reasons that he deemed too sensitive to be shared to the public. It is unbelievable that a Minister reasoned almost similarly to a US politician that recently justified the call to ban the entry of all Muslims into his country on grounds that its better to play safe than sorry because Islamophobia is justified.

It is indeed disappointing to hear such unsubstantiated and almost simplistic justification by a person in the position of a Minister in a public broadcast in this time and age essentially addressing the very community that feels discriminated against and who has tolerated patiently to see wisdom from the government to discontinue the archaic policy that has essentially outlived its shelf life.

In truth, Singaporeans of all races have grown accustomed to the presence of Tudung wearing Muslim women in public. They are present as teachers in our schools, as employees in the public and private sectors too and raises no concern whatsoever. The implied suggestion that their presence is undesirable on grounds that essentially are Islamophobic are disrespectful to those women specifically and insulting to the whole Muslim community in Singapore.

It is dishonest of the Minister to mention that any attempt to challenge this outdated discriminatory policy as dangerous and fiddling with religion and politics. The reality is the Minister and the government is precisely politicizing the issue by not dealing with it as a discrimination matter. Instead of addressing the growing anger and frustration of the community being discriminated against by this policy, the Minister chooses to confuse it by comparing the government so-called stand on the LGBT community as further justification. The comparison and a zero-sum approach vis-à-vis the LGBT community, to the issue of discrimination against Muslim women wanting to don the hijab for uniformed group is disingenuous.

Once again, Singaporeans must honestly ask ourselves whether the efforts of the government all this years to ensure the growth and maturity of our different races and religious communities to mutually tolerate and accept one another and celebrate both our similarities and our differences, has indeed succeeded. By one Minister after another highlighting evidence of failures, it only supports the view that the policies aimed to unite our different communities are flawed and have not produced the desired results and thus have to be reformed and changed to reflect the present times where the communities are no longer separated like in the past and the majority of us, the common folks do live together in HDB flats and chat and interact with one another harmoniously.

Finally, the Malay community has been quoted by 2 studies done by the government’s own think-tank institution namely the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy and the Institute of Policy Study as being the most tolerant and accommodating of all communities when it comes to acceptance of diversity and differences. Maybe it is time that the focus of the effort to educate our society on tolerance and understanding be on the majority community rather that on the minority. Only then, wisdom based on grounded evidence will prevail instead of baseless justification that borders on political expediency.

Source: Damanhuri Abas

February 12, 2016