Yours Toothfully by Dr Chan Joon Yee

So what’s new? Singaporeans are getting more religious and this is worrying our leaders. I don’t blame them, but is this a recent problem or was it better in the past? I don’t think so.

I remember my Primary 2 form teacher Mrs Chua who was preached and proselytised in class. Being the 8-year-olds that we were back then, we had no idea what the school sylllabus was. Nevertheless, I had a vague idea that we were not supposed to be singing Christian songs and listening to bible stories all the time. There were even 2 Malay boys in my class, Supratna and Aziz. They were usually quite lost when the class was singing, but Mrs Chua didn’t bother with them.

What really made me lose all respect for Mrs Chua was her blatant favouritism towards my classmates who were Christians. They had all kinds of perks and privileges like drink coupons on sports day, little gifts and individual attention with their schoolwork.

I became rebellious and never passed a single test given by Mrs Chua. She used to tell me what a useless kid I was, how I was going to grow up a criminal, how Jesus was not going to forgive me and let me burn in hell. I guess people who know me well should have figured that I wasn’t frightened by all those threats even though I was only 8. Instead, the tougher Mrs Chua’s stance became, the more stubbornly unChristian I got.

I wonder where Mrs Chua is now. It’s not that I’m seeking revenge. I just want her to see that her least favourite student is not doing too badly now. Perhaps God is forgiving me for not believing in Him.

Happily, teachers like Mrs Chua will not be able to do what she has done in today’s schools. Whether we’ve become more religious or not, teachers today are better trained and more aware of student sensitivities in the classroom. When I told my parents about Mrs Chua’s proselytising in class, they just told me to shut up and pay attention to the other things she taught.

Today’s parents would shoot a letter to MOH. Why should we be so worried when communal politics is monopolised by one party? Why should we be worried when there are ears in every church and temple, ready to report on any deviant and politically motivated sermon? Yes, the AWARE saga was broadcast a bit too “loudly”, but from a secular point of view, the results were favourable. Somehow, the folks at AWARE are more assertive than the folks who bought minibonds who can’t hold a candle to their conterparts in very assertive Hongkong. The only “worrying” thing for any management or leadership, is the love for freedom and the strong conviction of the majority. Carrots and sticks may not be so effective in the next elections.

The word CHANGE worked wonders for President Obama. It would only be wise for others to follow, but when the followers have very different ideas about change in mind, the results can be funny.

“CHANGE is in the air for Singapore’s political system,” reports a local a newsPAPer.  ”But change must be tethered to fundamental principles — three, according to Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong.”

First, they must be fair to all contesting parties and “not be biased in favour of one party or the other”, said Mr Goh, ahead of details to be announced this week by the Prime Minister.

Oh, of course. We certainly wouldn’t want any changes resulting in one party controlling all the newsPAPers, the TV and radio stations. I can’t imagine what would happen if our newsPAPers become a mouthpiece for Dr Chee Soon Juan. How come this first fundamental principle sounds funny even without any input from Mr Brown?

Second, they must result in a strong, effective Government. “We do not want a system which ends up with a weak, hung Parliament. And then you have a coalition Parliament that is politically unstable for Singapore.”

Huh? Level the playing field, but we must still win all? Why can’t a coalition government be stable? Because the strong government says so?

And third, these changes must “facilitate representation for diverse views in Parliament, including views of the Opposition parties”.

But such facilitation to previously disadvantaged opposition parties may well result in a “mixed” parliament and a government that is not as “strong” as it wants to be. How should this apparent contradiction be resolved? I’m sure SM Goh and the folks with him have their plans in place. I’m just not so sure if CHANGE has any real meaning when all is said and done. Imagine saying such things to the American people in President Obama’s shoes. Why not copy all the way and promise some change we can believe?