4 ms·
That last two examples both talk about the same thing, which is that it's illegal for a religious organization to explicitly comment on public policy matters.
by visakanv 11y ago
That last two examples both talk about the same thing, which is that it's illegal for a religious organization to explicitly comment on public policy matters.
Of course, it doesn't at ALL stop them from organizing and spreading their perspectives – it's an open secret that gay sex is still technically illegal in Singapore because of the conservative Christians lobbying for it to remain.
It just forces the religious groups to be more subtle about their agendas, which I think is about as good as it gets, really.
- cookiecaper 11y agoI think that's dangerous. Religion is a valid player on the field of public policy and they should be free to comment. In a government by the people, if the people choose to put weight on religious advice or concerns, that's completely valid. They don't need to reason by an arbitrary governmental standard that excludes something they believe in. Even the restrictions on political speech for religious organizations in the US are worrisome (they lose their tax exemption if they explicitly endorse a specific candidate or party in an election).