Author Affiliations: Assistant Law Professor (University of Hong Kong), JSD Candidate (University of Chicago), LLM (University of Chicago), LLB (University of Singapore). Admitted to the bar in New York and Singapore.
關鍵詞
freedom of religion; Proselytization restrictions; religious harmony; Singapore
摘要
Proselytisation restrictions are typically subjected to two objections. First, these restrictions curtail religious liberty and impede religious truth-seeking. Second, these restrictions tend to favour politically dominant religions and discriminate against minority religions. The restrictions on offensive religious propagation in Singapore thus present an interesting departure in which sanctioned religions are not politically marginalised religions, whereas protected religions include numerical minority religions that are socially, economically, and politically disadvantaged. This article utilises the atypical case study of Singapore to highlight the limitations of the two typical objections toward proselytisation restrictions. In particular, the emphasis on religious truth-seeking underpinning these objections is premised upon a distinct set of religious worldviews not shared by the majority of religions in Singapore. This article posits that if religious truth-seeking is no longer the accepted normative goal, then there may be circumstances in which some limited and even-handed restrictions on offensive religious propagation are sufficiently justified on the grounds of social peace and harmony.
目次
Abstract 1 Keywords 1 I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. OBJECTIONS TO PROSELYTISATION RESTRICTIONS 5 A. Discriminatory Nature 6 B. Infringing Religious Liberty and Impeding Religious Truth-Seeking 9 III. RESTRICTIONS ON RELIGIOUS PROPAGATION IN SINGAPORE 12 A. Diverse Religious Landscape 12 B. Legal Framework 15 1. Religious Liberty in the Constitution 15 2. Legal Arsenal Against Offensive Proselytisation 16 a) Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act 16 b) Sedition Act 18 c) New Penal Code Provision: Section 298A 19 d) Internal Security Act 20 C. Regulating Offensive Proselytisation in Practice: Four Recent Incidents 21 1. “Seditious” Comics: The Ong Kian Cheong Case 21 2. “Injurious” Cards: the Andrew Kiong Case 23 3. “Unacceptable” Testimonials: The Pastor Tan Incident 24 4. “Looked Into” Sermons: the Pastor Ng Incident 26 IV. ANALYSIS: FEATURES OF SINGAPORE’S RESTRICTIONS ON RELIGIOUS PROPAGATION 27 A. Beyond Offensive Proselytisation: The Breadth of Singapore’s Restrictions 27 B. Religious Propagation as a Constitutional Right 30 C. Reconciliation Under the Shadow of the Law 33 V. THE ATYPICAL CASE OF SINGAPORE’S PROSELYTISATION RESTRICTIONS 37 A. The Dynamic of Majority-Minority Re-examined 38 B. Religious Liberty and Religious Truth-Seeking 46 1. Disparity in “Competitiveness” and Pressure to Compete 47 2. Religious Truth-Seeking 50 3. Summary: The Contested Assumptions of Religious Truth-Seeking 53 C. Spiritual Balkanisation and Religious Harmony in a Religiously Pluralistic Society 53 D. A Tentative Defense for Limited Restrictions 59 VI. CONCLUSION: DESPERATELY SEEKING OVERLAPPING CONSENSUS 63 Acknowledgement 65 Research Funding 65
