In a parliament session on Monday (7 October), Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam and Worker’s Party MP Faisal Manap were involved in a heated exchange during the debate about the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (MHRA).
Mr Faisal uttered that he did not quite agree with the idea of keeping religion and politics separate, and this did not go down too well with the Law Minister.
Speaking in Malay on the changes of MHRA, Mr Faisal said: “As a Muslim, Islam is understood as a way of life. Islam encompasses all aspects of life, including politics and the way to practise politics. And I understand that Christianity also believes that it is unlikely that religion can be separated from politics.”
Upon hearing his statement, Mr Shanmugam asked WP’s MP to clarify what he meant, and the duo went back and forth on this issue with Mr Shanmugam repeatedly asking Mr Faisal if he agrees that religion and politics should be kept separate.
After a prolonged debate, Mr Faisal eventually said, “I do agree that religion needs to be kept aside or apart from politics so that the religion won’t be used to gain personal benefit or the benefit of any political party.”
In attempt to clarify what his fellow party member meant exactly, WP chief Pritam Singh commented that, “In Singapore, as a minority MP for any party, you represent not just members of your community, you represent members of other faiths. And I think the only way to move forward is to accept that there has be a certain degree of understanding towards other faiths and move forward in a way which accepts that we must be mindful of introducing religion into politics,” he said, noting that he is speaking for himself.
“I think ultimately for a Member of Parliament of any political party in Singapore, I think it is important that you remember that you have to represent the interests of every community, not just yours,” Mr Singh added.

The video of this intense debate was uploaded on Mothership’s Facebook page which garnered strong reactions from online users. Many of them slammed Mr Faisal for his opinion and felt that religion and politics should always be separated. Citing Malaysia and Indonesia where politics and religion are intertwined, they noted that “countries which religion is involved in politics ended up the religion being abused for the individual gains which ultimately destroys that country”. Even the national pledge stated that religion should be separated from politics in order to ensure harmony, some netizens said. They added that religion should only act as a guide in politics.







However, a bunch of online users felt sorry for Mr Faisal as they felt that his language barrier hindered him from articulating his thoughts properly. “I think what Mr Manap was talking about is certain values that is carried forth in whatever he (a Muslim) does in life, hence it cannot be separated,” said Darrell Foam Man Lim.



Others applauded Mr Singh for stepping in and helping Mr Faisal to state his points clearly. “Mr Pritam responded well and gave a very clear explanation on how to move the discussion forward,” wrote Yao Weixiong Shem. They added that he showed a lot of “tact and grace in answering honestly and plainly what the right way forward should be”.



Although many agreed that politics and religion should be separated, however others opined that consideration of all faiths must be there when making policies in order “to ensure that the policies would not be leaning to the benefit or loss to any religion”. Kenneth Koh felt that “religion can serve as a moral compass which underpins the values of an individual which in turn produce the desired outcome in the form of sound decision and contributions to our society at the family level or at societal level.”



Separately, a group of online users also criticised Mr Shanmugam for “deliberately making it difficult” for Mr Faisal by asking him to answer “yes or no” for such a complicated and sensitive question. “Attempting to trap with a yes no, agree disagree question which is not simple and or applicable in every scenario where religion and politics are concerned,” Darren Yong said. Some even called the Law Minister as “spineless bully” and a “snake”.



Subscribe
Notify of
1 Comment
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

FT REPORT – AGE AND POPULATION: Singapore system starts to creak

By John Burton in Singapore, Financial Times Singapore would appear well-prepared to…

“Please don’t add to our burdens anymore”: Netizens call out Govt on changes to ERP rates

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) on Tuesday (25 Aug) announced that it…

月薪1千500元外籍配偶忧失工作 质疑没雇主愿出更高薪聘雇本地人

本月3日,人力部长杨莉明在国会宣布,从5月1日起,直系亲属证(dependent pass,简称DP)持有者如果有意在本地工作,将必须申请正式的工作准证。 她指出,在所有工作准证持有者(WP)中,申请工作的直系亲属证持有者仅占其中的1%。目前持有工作准证的DP持有者仍可继续工作,直到工作准证到期为止。 若雇主还有意继续聘请他们,则需要向人力部申请适用的工作准证。 英语媒体《今日报》,周日(14日)就报导,一些外籍伴侣对于上述政策更动感到不安。其中一名印度籍的直系亲属巴特尔(Patel),在接受采访时称他可能为此失去工作。 他称,他须在五月更新直系亲属证,但是他的雇主可能不会再继续聘用他,这可能是因为雇主公司的外籍雇员配额已满,若他们不聘用更多本地人,将无法再申请新的工作准证。 巴特尔透露他本身属“必要领域”工友,特别是在阻断措施期间,确保本地食品供应不中断。但政策的改变令她感到些许失望,因为过去的努力似乎遭忽略。 他在该公司月薪达1千500新元,这肯定也无法达到特别准证(S pass)的条件,因为特别准证的薪资条件需达到2500元以上。 不过,巴特尔质疑,雇主是否能以月薪1500元,聘请到本地人接替他的岗位,“没公司肯出更多聘雇本地人。” 至于其他直系亲属证持有者,则表示政策更动可能迫使他们离开新加坡,她们认为原本她们可以付出劳力,但如今却只能当家庭主妇。 本月9日,则有新加坡国际商会的总监Victor…