kerfuffles, and the need for compromise

i think the problem with civil / civic discourse in Singapore, is that people are not used to the idea of give and take. At least, not the people who shout the loudest. Perhaps this is the problem with civic discourse everywhere -- it's not particularly civil, because the civil people, the ones who are more likely to take time to think about things, are usually the ones who don't speak up. Or rather, they don't speak up fast enough, and by the time they've finished thinking about things, everyone has moved on and is shouting about the next new controversy.
.
Here's the thing, though. Singapore is not like other countries. We are so tiny, so densely-populated. In fact, according to the World Bank, we're the 3rd most densely-populated country in the world, after Macau and Monaco. And, actually, if you look at those two places, they're not proper countries, really, strictly speaking. Macau is a Special Administrative Region of China; its citizens hold Chinese passports, and it doesn't have its own military. Monaco is an independent state, yes, but it's only 2 sq km in size (the mind boggles ... ), and according to the CIA World Factbook, it relies on France for military protection. So, if i were to be really nitpicky about it, Singapore is the most densely-populated Proper Country (in the sense that it covers all the bases for the conventional understanding of what it means to be a sovereign state) in the world.
.
So, unlike in other, bigger countries like the US, or even the (relatively) smaller countries in Europe, we don't have space for people to be rude and uncivil to each other. In the US, if you're ultra-conservative and believe that all gays go to hell and gun-ownership is your God-given right because it is enshrined in the Constitution, what you do is to go live in a place like Texas, where a significant majority of people thinks the same as you. You can then enjoy life in a place that caters to your preferences and lifestyle, without feeling much conflict with your general social environment, without ever having to wonder if perhaps your beliefs might be less than completely right. If, however, you're ultra-liberal, and think that gay marriage is an unquestionable human right, and that gun-ownership is evil, then what you do is go live somewhere on the coasts, NYC, Boston, San Francisco, where you'll find that your beliefs are not only endorsed by the legal system, but also by general social consensus, and you can happily live your life without ever having those beliefs challenged by someone you actually respect and think worth listening to.
.
We can't do that in Singapore. We're too small. We can't start carving up the island into different constituencies so that people can spend all their lives surrounded by other people with similar values and lifestyles to their own. Our physical size necessitates dialogue, understanding, negotiation, compromise. (The alternative, entrenched conflict, is not something any thinking person would want for a society.)
.
In all the kerfuffles that have emerged over the last few years, especially the ones involving religion, the most striking thing has been a lack of balance on both sides of the debate. Secular folks who refuse to try to understand how the religious folks feel that the environment here is changing, the societal values which for so long have enabled them to practise their faith with ease and without feeling much conflict with the rest of society, are rapidly evolving towards something that, they feel, threatens their lifestyles and personal values, that makes them out of step with the rest of society. That's a pretty worrying thing if you're not used to being the odd one out. And for a long, long time, societal values here in Singapore have very conveniently coincided / dovetailed with religious values. That's changing, and it's uncomfortable for the religious folks. Secular people need to understand that. It's not as simple as just practising one's faith privately. The environment one lives in affects the ease with which you can choose how you want to live your life. So secular folks need to be less aggressive in the way they fight for their causes. They need to stop using words like 'bigot' to describe their religious counterparts. And sometimes, they need to step back on their demands, be willing to concede some space to other people. That is what negotiation and trade, compromise, diplomacy, life itself, are all about.
.
Conversely, the religious folks need to understand that secular folks do not begin with the same baseline assumptions about Life, the Universe and Everything that they do. It's a different worldview, and the conclusions about what "the good life" entails may differ too as a result. And they have every right to think that way. The fact is that there is no incontrovertible evidence for the truth of any religious faith -- at least, not the way things stand now. The beginnings of the major religious are too far back in history for anyone now to investigate their claims without, at some point, having to take a leap of faith (haha). And what faith is, ultimately, is a choice. You choose to believe, or you don't. And we are free to choose. The religious folks really need to think more deeply about their faith, about the roots of their belief; and see that it is not right for them to expect everyone else to share their beliefs (and therefore their convictions on morality, which are founded on their religious beliefs). i've always thought that the Muslims here in Singapore manage that balance extremely well. Living as a minority group in a country where even things like one's dietary preferences are generally out-of-step with those of the majority (Chinese people lurrrrve pork ... ) has got to be really difficult. But we don't see Muslims campaigning for all eateries to be halal-certified. They're OK with some eateries being halal-certifed; and i certainly hope that the rest of society honours that compromise by being ready to compromise in return when they're with their Muslim fellow-citizens. Similarly, i think the other groups here, particularly the Christians who seem, unfortunately, to be the ones always kicking up a fuss, need to reflect on where they draw the line between their right to exercise their religious preferences in terms of life choices, and other people's right to make different choices. They can't go around campaigning for the rest of society to adopt their practices all the time, even if they do believe that such practices will be beneficial for the health of society as a whole. They need to understand and accept that others may not think the same. And if this means that the environment here changes such that their own practices and beliefs seem increasingly quaint and antiquated, then, that is something they will have to live with if they choose to hold on to their beliefs. Faith is a choice, and like all choices, comes with a cost. And real faith will make sure it absorbs the cost, rather than dumps it on others.
.
Religion in Singapore has usually been a benign thing. We don't have a history of religious conflict; things like the Crusades or the Inquisition, trampling on other groups in the name of one's faith, are other people's history, not ours. And i hope we keep it that way. In Singapore, religion has so far been a force for good -- all the different religious groups have a track record of doing good for society as a whole: they build schools, hospitals, homes and charity organisations that are open to people of all faiths, or no faith. Here in Singapore, it is not unusual to find churches, mosques, and temples (Buddhist, Taoist, Hindu, Sikh) standing right next to each other, sharing common space. Sometimes we even have different religious groups sharing the same building facilities for events or activities. Perhaps this is unheard of elsewhere, but this is the country we live in. It's such a rare and precious thing. It pains me to see the current quarrels, not between religions, but between the secular and the religious -- because such quarrels are premised on the assumption that religion is somehow not benign, that it seeks to harm society in some way. It pains me even more that, among all the religious groups, it is members of my own faith who seem the most ready to condemn others and impose their beliefs and practices on others. This is so different from what the early Christian missionaries did here, which was to contribute to what the rest of society readily acknowledged was the common good. That is what real faith does. It reaches out to help and heal, rather than to hurt and divide.
.
We have no space here in Singapore for any one group -- religious or not -- to assert its views at the expense of others. We have to make room for everybody, because this is all the land we've got. Sensitivity, compromise, responsibility -- these things apply to secularists as well as to the religious. The way things are going now, is not the way to go. We are veering off the path that has worked so well in the past, and heading in the direction that other societies have taken, to their detriment. We need to get back to making a path that will work for us. Our very happiness depends on it.
.
.