Tag: Muslim

Wearwhite: We Support The Expression Of Concern By Roman Catholic Archbishop William Goh Over The Upcoming Concert By Madonna

All religions taught us to have a higher and deeper sense and taste of aesthetics and arts. To entertain with lust and immorality is easy, cheap & hollow.

Wearwhite supports the statement of archbishop William Goh.

Let us return to Fitrah.

***

Archbisop William Goh’s statement is available at https://sg.news.yahoo.com/singapore-archbishop-warns-flock-against-madonna-concert-063258861.html

Singapore’s Roman Catholic archbishop has expressed concern at an upcoming concert by pop diva Madonna in the city-state and warned his flock against supporting those who “denigrate and insult religions”.

Archbishop William Goh said in a statement posted on the diocese website on Saturday that he had met various government officials to express the church’s concerns about the February 28 concert, part of her global Rebel Heart Tour.

The concert, at the 55,000-seat National Stadium, will be Madonna’s first-ever in largely conservative Singapore.

She was barred from performing in Singapore in 1993 after police said her performances bordered on the obscene and were “objectionable to many on moral and religious grounds”.

Goh said that in a multi-ethnic society like Singapore “we cannot afford to be overly permissive in favour of artistic expression at the expense of respect for one’s religion”.

Authorities have assured the archbishop that restrictions have been placed to ensure that content deemed offensive to religious beliefs would not be allowed on stage, the church statement said.

The Media Development Authority has restricted the concert to those aged 18 and above because of sexual references.

Local media reports said Madonna would not be performing a controversial tour segment called Holy Water, which includes dancers dressed as scantily-clad nuns performing on cross-shaped stripper poles.

The church statement said many Roman Catholics have voiced outrage at Madonna’s “disrespectful use of Catholic and other Christian symbols” in her performances.

“There is no neutrality in faith; one is either for or against. Being present (at these events) in is itself a counter-witness,” the archbishop said.

He warned his flock against supporting “the ‘pseudo arts’ that promote sensuality, rebellion, disrespect, pornography (and) contamination of the mind of the young”.

Some Catholics said they supported the archbishop’s decision and would not attend the concert.

Student Kevin Koh, 24, said he would not go but would not pass judgement on fellow Catholics who attend.

“Singapore as a society has to start being open to these things because we can no longer live in our own shells,” he told AFP.

Some online comments were critical, with one commentator saying the faithful should be allowed to make their own decisions.

***

Source: Wearwhite

February 25, 2016
What PAP Really Wants Is Assimilation, Not Multicultaralism

The ban on hijab is part of the PAP’s attempt to remove Islamic identity among Malays in preference of a Chinese cultural hegemony.

The last few weeks, the Muslim community has once again, been treated poorly by the PAP Ministers.

K Shanmugam Sc] accused the community of being distant (even though the Malays are the most open and accommodating community in Singapura).

Then Masagos Zulkili justified the ban on hijab and likened the ban to the law against gay sex.

As stated in the other post, Assoc Prof Lily Zubaidah Rahim argued the hijab ban is due to a Secular Fundamentalist PAP government trying to control Islam.

But why does the PAP, a party that claims to promote multiracalism…

ban an Islamic obligation in the name of harmony?

The answer is that what the PAP want is not multiracialism but assimilation.

For a community to be assimilated into another, they need to change their values, behaviour, beliefs and anything that makes them different.

And become the same as the community they assimilate with.

Barr and Low observed:

“the Singapore systems of meritocracy and multiracialism are no longer concerned primarily with intercommunal tolerance…

but are aggressive programmes of assimilation of the racial minorities into a Chinese dominated society.”

“Chinese values—or at least the government’s narrow, sectarian version of Chinese values—were promoted to the whole population…”

“Where does that leave the minority races?… [To] prosper in this society, they need to internalise ‘Chinese virtues’ and become ‘like the Chinese’ in subtle but important ways.

In short, they are expected to submit to a form of partial or incomplete assimilation into a Chinese generated, Chinese-dominated society.”

The authors further argued that “the onus was thus placed on the Malay community to assimilate into the predominately Chinese Singapore, or risk continued marginalisation and discrimination.”

While LKY’s and the PAP’s desire to privilege their race is understandable even though it is racist…

Barr and Low assert that the Malay MP’s major function is to facilitate the Malay community’s assimilation into the Chinese community.

They noted “the overwhelming evidence is that the public leadership of the Malay community across the board are keen to help their constituency to assimilate, since this seems to be the path to prosperity and peaceful coexistence.

The PAP Malay MPs are obviously enthusiastic assimilationists, since this is a large measure of their raison d’etre…

Indeed, this need to assimilate into the rest of society in the public sphere is recognised by Syed Haroon Aljunied, Secretary-General of MUIS.

When asked if he thought ‘assimilation’ was necessary for the Malays to gain a higher representation in the civil service,

he replied ‘Yeah that’s right. Then they don’t see any difference.”

Reference:

Barr, M. D., & Low, J. (2005). Assimilation as multiracialism: The case of Singapore’s Malays. Asian Ethnicity, 6(3), 161-182.

Source: Almakhazin SG

February 16, 2016
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
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