“Honour in Singapore” is a mini series by TOC following the recent formation of the Honour (Singapore) non-profit organisation, made up of distinguished individuals closely related to the government and a far-right Christian group. The series will explore some of their profiles, and bring to light what the group meant by “promoting a culture of honour and honouring” in Singapore.
By Ghui
When local non-profit organisation Honour (Singapore) was first announced, one of the key personnel identified was its executive director, Mr Jason Wong.
Wikipedia’s definition of executive director states that:

“The role of the Executive Director is to design, develop and implement strategic plans for the organization in a cost-effective and time-efficient manner. The Executive Director is also responsible for the day-to-day operation of the organisation. This includes managing committees and staff as well as developing business plans in collaboration with the board. In essence, the board grants the Executive Director the authority to run the organisation.”

This essentially means that Wong would be responsible for planning, overseeing, directing and executing the initiatives that Honour (Singapore), an organisation that claims to be for all of Singapore, deems in its charter to undertake.

Wong is actively involved in the education scene, speaking at events organised by the Ministry of Education (image - MOE Parents in Education website)
Wong is actively involved in the education scene, speaking at events organised by the Ministry of Education (image – MOE Parents in Education website)
Wong is no stranger to the local community. He is the chairman of Focus on the Family Singapore, an organisation that is known for taking hard lined Christian stances to social issues. For instance, it has consistently proliferated the view that a family is made up of a man, a woman and children – an approach that can have a very divisive effect in multi-faceted Singapore.
TOC as also noted earlier that Wong was identified as an elder of Full Gospel Business (FGB) Gatekeepers Singapore’s Strategic Gatekeepers’ Family Gate. It is understood that Wong continues to be heavily involved in FGB Singapore, a group known for its religion-led perspectives for social development.
Wong has spoken openly about his convictions towards family values, which has been a key driver for the various initiatives he undertook at Focus on the Family. He has similarly expressed a desire for the nation to adopt a more concerted view on the family. He was also formerly a senior director with the Ministry of Social and Family Development. It is evident that the family constitutes a great part of Wong’s motivation and his work, and we should expect him to carry those same convictions to Honour (Singapore).
Mission statement and guiding principles of Focus on the Family Singapore (image - Focus on the Family Singapore website)
Mission statement and guiding principles of Focus on the Family Singapore (image – Focus on the Family Singapore website)
While Focus on the Family Singapore is run separately from its American counterpart, it remains associated to the American evangelical Christian organisation. For example, Focus on the Family Singapore received S$45,477 in grants from its American counterpart in 2009. On the assumption that funding is an indication of alliances and shared goals to a certain degree, I can safely guess that the two organisations have very similar objectives. Given the extremely conservative and draconian reputation Focus on the Family, America has, it would again be safe to assume that Focus on the Family Singapore will not be too different in agenda.
The mission of Focus on the Family Singapore as stated on its website is to “help families thrive at every stage and phase of life”, and it envisions “transformed families, communities and societies”. It has six guiding principles: the sanctity of life, the permanence of marriage, the importance of outreach, the value of children, the importance of social responsibility, and the value of male and female.
Notably, Focus on the Family has contributed positively to society through events and initiatives such as Dads for Life and the Yellow Ribbon Project. However, we need to be concerned about its very limited definitions of what constitutes “family” and how it insidiously discriminates against groups that do not fit into their idea of what society should be.
Arbitrarily making pronouncements on what constitutes a family can have a very polarising effect on a multi cultural and multi religious society. It can be tantamount to imposing its own beliefs on cultures that may not necessarily share their view. In some instances, this imposition has led to the break up of family units, which is ironical in the face of the organisation’s belief that family is the building block of society.
Singapore has no lack of stories about non-heterosexual individuals being turfed out of their homes because their families are unable to understand their sexual orientation. Websites such as that of Focus on the Family serve to deepen the chasm of misunderstanding. Many of these families, which had strong bonds before, are then torn asunder by ignorance.
To what extent will a prominent member of an organisation, well known for taking certain positions on the family, have an influence on another organisation that also wishes to focus on spreading “honour” by “starting with the individual, then family, then others in society”? Honour (Singapore) is also interested in engaging “a broad spectrum of Singapore society – schools, families, businesses, workplaces and community groups”. How might Wong’s personal convictions on the family influence the activities he will have an active hand in planning and executing for Honour (Singapore)?
Understandably, Focus on the Family and Honour (Singapore) are two separate organisations. But the fact that Wong is the executive director should suggest to us that Honour (Singapore), which now claims to speak on behalf of the nation, needs to be closely monitored for how it balances cultural relations, and if influences from Focus on the Family is seeping in through its executive director.
In its bid for a more inclusive Singapore, will Honour (Singapore) led by Wong result in a more excluding definition of family and society? Is the rest of the board of Honour (Singapore) going to be influenced by Wong’s Focus on the Family slant? In sitting on the same board, are the other board members giving their silent seal of approval to these narrow interpretations of family?
More worryingly, does Honour (Singapore) see the upholding of a traditional family unit as part of upholding honour in Singapore? Given that “honour” is a phrase that is so subjective and with scant information on the precise actions Honour (Singapore) will take to promote “honour”, one cannot help but wonder if this is an organisation whose aim is to “christianise” Singapore under the guise of a government endorsed organisation patronised by the elite of Singaporean society.
I certainly have nothing against Christian organisations. Singapore is a land of many religions and each has equal right to believe. But if you are a Christian organisation wanting to spread pro Christian values, be upfront about it, and be open about potential lines of influence. Does Honour (Singapore)’s silence on this issue, until uncovered by online media, give the public confidence that it really has no Christian agenda?
Top image – Honour (Singapore) website

The “Honour in Singapore” series includes:

Like this article? Support us so that we can do more. Subscribe to TOC here.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

许通美脸书抱怨《海时》偏颇报导 引发最低薪资论战延烧

配合30周年庆晚宴,在10月26日,李光耀公共政策学院政策研究所(IPS)举办了共四场论坛,邀请多位部长和学者同台演讲,探讨社会政策、公民精神、贫富不均等议题。 不过,我国巡回大使许通美教授,在隔日阅读《海峡时报》报章后,就在个人脸书贴文对该报表达不满。由于许通美教授在论坛上发表对最低薪资看法, 有关落实最低薪资利弊的论战,也在其脸书贴文延烧,引来各路人马参与辩论。 在帖文中,许通美指出,《海时》报导了人力部长杨莉明在论坛上,提出有关最低薪资可能导致事业和非法就业的观点。 然而,当时许通美教授也参与了讨论,反驳了杨莉明的说法,指出日本、韩国、香港和台湾等新近过,都实施最低薪资制,并没有遇到杨莉明所形容的问题。然而, 《海时》却省略了许通美的意见,令后者质疑《海时》偏颇报导。 许通美说:“我很高兴并积极参与了公共政策研究所,在周四和周五进行的30周年庆论坛和晚宴。两项活动都非常成功。我对研究所所长 Janadas Devan致敬,因为他有勇气邀请我的好友–施仁乔,出席第三场的论坛讲座。” “然而,我想询问《海时》,为什么刊载了第一、二和第四场论坛的照片,却独漏第三场?难道普杰立部长和施仁乔的照片,有违国家利益?” 许通美称,他也向在《海时》任职的朋友抗议,该报对论坛的偏颇报导将使媒体失信于众,例如《海时》报导了部长杨莉明的观点,却省略掉他本身提出的反对意见。 “现有收入分配制度是道德耻辱” 他不忘在贴文中强调,我国现有的收入分配制度,乃是道德耻辱。献金还有很多劳动人士赚取的生活薪资不足,而陷入贫穷。…

转业计划助PMET投身新领域 惟有雇主迂回法规“内定”外籍人才

人力部长杨莉明,在昨日(16日)出席该部门一项工作研讨会上强调,促进劳动群体的职业流动,仍是应变与提升计划(Adopt and growth )的主要动力。 他形容,大部分人都期许有学习、成长机会,职业流动/升迁的需求,相当于人们对社会阶层流动向上的渴望。 他表示政府将继续同劳资政协作伙伴紧密合作,确保所有国人能全心投入发展自己的事业,包括较年长、现有工作受科技冲击以及工作性质长期以来一成不变的员工。 去年有3万多名求职者在人力部的应变与提升计划下投入新的工作岗位,当中有四成人士仍在新岗位上工作。 她承诺该部接下来会着重于提供这群工作者,诸如职业辅导、联系网络和针对性培训等,更多开拓新机遇的资源。 同时,她提及专业人士转业计划(PCP)如何继续协助专业人士高管和技术(PMET)群体,适应新工作和新成长的领域。 她以60岁的商务顾问自由业者陈金有(译音)为例,在去年成功转入电讯科技领域,也证明并非只有年轻人才能拥抱科技行业。 “只要有学习新技能的机会、本身也愿意去适应,我们的雇员们获得更好工作和薪资有更好前景。” 转业计划并非适用所有人…