"... regardless of race, language or religion
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation."
I never REALLY understood what those lines meant though i had uttered it every morning, more than i could have known over the 16 years of schooling in SG. The 4 sacred lines were meaningless to me then - because i didn't understand what it meant, and it is meaningless to me now too - because now i know what it SHOULD REALLY mean. So it was and is just lip service.
What equal rights are we referring to? If rights are equal why is it always lop-sided, favouring the left? Why are there instances where minorities fought for their rights but were rejected because policies are such and such. Who made those policies? Aren't the policies supposed to consider all that affect every individual, thus forming an anti-discriminatory society, an equal rights for all regardless of race or religion? Rights for the minorities to be inclusive too, no?
I find it hard to believe that the sunny island I adore-ly call home, comprising of more than 4 different cultures, still turn a blind eye to exercise equal rights. Come on, I'm not talking about extreme request but to meet the basic practical requests of one's daily lifestyle in order for him or her to live in what he or she believes in. However, in the southern hemisphere where it now becomes my temporary home, where more than 50% are caucasions albeit Europeans etc, the minorities are well taken care of. Yes, there may be hatred expressed here and there, no doubt about it but where it comes to human rights, they are treated as equal. As equal as the majority. There is a Commission set up just for this and I dare you to directly or indirectly discriminate one in a workplace, a complaint will come flying right through the commissioner's window. And you are screwed. It's as simple as allowing one to observe the basic rights: allowing hijab at workplace for Muslims and observing the Kosher diet for Jews, among other practices. Rights are not exclusive to religions. Even employees with kids have their own rights. Companies are not allowed to observe or carry out an event where it will cause a disadvantage to employees with kids. That, my friend, is an indirect discrimination.
But in SG, i see the opposite. Imagine the last scenario mentioned above in an SG setting and you'll get other employees rolling their eyes; and bitch about how the disadvantaged employees spoil the company's initial decision etc. And the decision? Well, most companies tend to sway to the "majority wins" outcome. You cannot make it, too bad lorrr...
And we, SG'eans tend to judge or stereotype cultures and people. Eh, he doesn't need to do it what... So it means it's ok that you don't do/need it too rite? Different people of the same culture may or may not have the same lifestyle as like we say, to each it's own. But that does't discount the fact that that very right should be ruled out altogether.
Now I'M starting to roll my eyes.
We really need to relook at our pledge. But that'll be the unthinkable and might start a riot (sarcastic). What was i thinking... tsk tsk tsk.... Review our policies is more practical.
I strongly encourage my fellow citizens to live abroad if their situations allow. Not necessarily for the rest of their entire life, but at least enough to experience what others practice that we do not. It'll open up ur vision and mind to whats's beyond the tiny island called home to a supposedly democratic society.
