If it's convenient, it must be right

The Ministry of Education (MOE) has finally reinstated sexuality education programmes offered to schools by external vendors, but limited the schools to only six vendors.

SEXUALITY education programmes run by external organisations are returning to schools, close to a year after they were suspended.

The Education Ministry (MOE) has approved the programmes by six groups after a tender exercise that drew applications from 17.

Terence Lee dove into the list of approved vendors, found that four out of six are Christian organisations, and latches onto the inconsistencies of the PAP government.

It seems then that the underlying philosophy behind MOE’s direction is one of ‘harmony’. MOE refuses to bulge on this issue because it is afraid that accepting liberal values when it comes to sexuality will bring about disruption and protest from what it calls mainstream society. But this goes against another assertion that the government likes to make: That they want to do what is right, no what is popular.

Is the Singapore government hypocritical in this regard? If the route to social harmony is through endorsing non-secular beliefs rooted in religious beliefs and tradition, then isn’t this an exercise in pandering to the whims of the masses?

It is perhaps not surprising that four out of six of the external vendors come from Christian organisations. I just find it distressing that Christian values are sneaked into the classroom this way, undermining the whole notion of a secular society.

I agree with Terence, but I want to add a point that he did not go into: they cannot have their cake and eat it. The government cannot choose to swing between "religion must not intrude into secular society" and "doing XXX will offend mainstream society, dictated by religious sensibilities" and go with whatever is convenient for them at the time, and expect people to not call them out on it.

If this is a secular society, then let them come out and unequivocally say so. But based on the selection criteria of the sexuality education programmes, this gray area will continue to be exploited by the government to the detriment of both religious and non-religious Singaporeans.