I would like to respond to Jennie S. Bev’s article titled “Democracy, compassion for Indonesia” (The Jakarta Post, April 28).

First of all, who said Indonesia was a secular state? At the same time, Indonesia has never claimed to be a religious state either — read the history of the Jakarta Charter. The truth is, in principle, Indonesia sits quite comfortably in the middle ground between extreme religiosity and, yes, extreme secularism. Let’s read the following verses from the 1945 Constitution, Article 29 states: “The state is based on one God and the state guarantees the freedom of each citizen to adhere to his/her own religion and pray based on his/her religion or belief”.

What makes you think that our national principle must bow down to the concept of secularism? What the Constitution is saying is that it IS possible to achieve individual freedom to follow different religions while maintaining the role of religion in the life of Indonesian society.

You can be an atheist in private, no problem about that. But in public discourse, you should assume the role of religion in Indonesian society. Now in America or in Europe, the premise is that religion is a private matter, while in public discourse you should assume secularism as the prevailing norm. In Indonesia, you just reverse the logic.

Second of all, you said that “change is the name of the game”. Well, let’s ask further: Are all changes good? I completely agree that we need to deal with the Islamic fundamentalists so they have less influence in inflicting fear on Indonesian society.

But I don’t agree if we have to deal with them by exchanging the role of religion in national life with secularism. You referred to Islamic fundamentalists as Islamic fascists, but you forget that the real fascists, aka the Nazis during WW II, were in fact, secularists. Nazism was based on the science of eugenics, which classifies the superiority of one race to another.

Communism is another example of secular thought. Both of these secular ideologies were behind the bloodiest century in human history: the 20th century. Why would we want to blindly adopt secularism as if it were a revelation from God?

Now if you read the Constitution regarding religion and culture, you will see the importance of both the intellectual quotient (as you put it, to become “smarter”, “skillful” or more “intelligent” individuals) and the emotional/spiritual quotient (“faithful and pious” individuals).

This is the type of qualities that the Indonesian nation wishes to have, namely an individual that is smart and accomplished in intellectual skills, as well as good or righteous in deeds. We don’t want to create intelligent but selfish, individualistic people who are not sensitive to other people’s normative values for the sake of expressing their own beliefs, be they Islamic fundamentalists or secularists.

Tian
New York

Popular

Festive Indonesia celebrates 80th Independence Day

SoftBank to invest $2b in Intel to become top-10 shareholder

Religious Affairs Ministry vows crackdown on intolerance