reflecting and reflecting again AWARE

I received an email from my cell leader about a Christian perspective.

Singapore lost on that day. The AWARE saga, despite being trumpeted by the CSOs as being a watershed moment for civil society in Singapore, was instead, a demonstration of the weaknesses of Singapore society. Despite being twitted and all, it instead showed mob rule, and it degenerated into intolerance and insensitivity - both of which reflected poorly on Singapore.

There was neither diversity of opinion nor debate, no persuasion nor compromise required for a democracy, for a genuine civil society.

Christians might have lost, but so did Singapore, and so did civil society. Is it possible to be religious in a secular context? How do people express religious perspective in a secular environment?

Words such as 'conservatism' and 'liberalism' don't mean anything anymore, judging from the American experience. Let's be real. Singapore is neither a conservative society, nor a liberal society, but a society in transition. I think there is a place, where homosexuals are allowed to live their lives unharassed, but at the same time, their viewpoints as only just one of the many perspectives in society.

A democracy does not mean the loudest voice win. Democracy means debate, persuasion, compromise: it means logic. Both sides, if to be put in so polarised way: means that both religious groups and secularist groups HAVE to give way to one another. This is what it takes to be a genuine open society, where all groups have their opportunity to express themselves, and to debate.