In response to the National Day Rally announcement that the Hijab/Tudung will soon be allowed for healthcare workers in the public sector, online Muslim activist group Lepak Conversations posted a statement on their Instagram account, and made a series of demands over and above the current Hijab policy change.
Lepak Conversations said that this policy change should not be viewed as a concession, and that it had been a long time coming, that only happened after years of closed-door deliberations by Muslim leaders, and through the persistent efforts of Muslim women defending their religious choice.
In addition to the statement, Lepak Conversations is now demanding that the Hijab/Tudung should be allowed in the schools, the Singapore Police Force (SPF), and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF).
The Singapore online Muslim activist group (Lepak Conversations) disagreed with the reasons behind the disallowing of the Hijab/Tudung in schools and in the uniformed services, given by the Prime Minister during the National Day Rally.
Lepak Conversations claims that all Muslim female students in schools should be allowed to wear the Hijab, and that it will not in any way affect the bonds between the students. Lepak Conversations added that, any bonds between the students that are affected by the wearing of the Hijab in schools, would be Government’s fault, for failing to foster racial harmony in schools.
After years of racial harmony and minimising differences in religion, race and wealth in schools, Lepak Conversations has now decided that it would be beneficial to the students to shoehorn the Hijab policy? And not only that, but actually blame the Government for any unintended negative consequences? This is as logical as a customer blaming the bank for losing his money in love scam, despite repeated warnings and explanations of not transferring huge sums of money to lover Mary.
In disallowing the Hijab to be worn in the SPF and SAF, Lepak Conversations disagreed with PM Lee explanation, and said that the Hijab should not be treated as a symbol that affects impartiality or the secular nature of the uniformed services in Singapore.
Both the SPF and SAF, as secular arms of the state that should be acting impartially and without fear of acting with biasness. How is it possible that the officers of the SPF or SAF be seen as impartial, when they are wearing a piece of religious headgear?
More importantly, has Lepak Conversations ever found out if the frontline uniformed personnel would actually prefer to wear Hijab while on duty? Have the people at Lepak Conversations ever been on active duty before? What is the significance of pushing for this to happen? Apart from making the uniformed services appear biased towards a particular religion?
The very definition of secular, is not having any connections with anything religious or being seen as religious. How does the wearing of a religious piece of headgear not affect this?
Is Lepak Conversations implying that the Hijab/Tudung is in fact not a piece of religious headgear, but actually a piece of fashion accessory? If so, this would be a totally different argument, that should not be made in conjunction with religious grounds and justifications at all.Editor's Note: Do you have a story to share? Please use our Submission Form or email us.
If not, why not give us a 'LIKE'
Ping me on WhatsApp