The Straits Times reports in "Leaning on religion to help the environment" (13 January 2014):
BUDDHISM teaches non-violence and living simply, both Islam and Christianity state that humans are stewards of the earth, and Hinduism says nature is a gift from God.
So why not rally the religious here to do more to protect the environment?
This thinking is behind the first faith-based "eco-guide" to be launched here next month.
The free 62-page guide is written by academic and environmentalist Sofiah Jamil, 31, a Muslim who sits on the board of the Young Association of Muslim Professionals (Young AMP), and community development trainer Farheen Mukri, 42, also a Muslim.
The Singaporeans hope that champions within each faith will use it to help followers and places of worship "turn their beliefs into action", and make green living "part and parcel" of their faith.
The guide includes a simple checklist covering 10 areas for faith groups to rate their performance.
These include energy and water use, purchasing decisions, transport and surrounding flora and fauna.
For instance, places of worship are asked if they recycle their rubbish, publicise conservation issues or organise nature walks.
Groups are encouraged to introduce ways to improve these, so that their practices are "not seen merely in terms of being a ritual".
The guide also draws on information from the Alliance of Religions and Conservation in Britain, a secular group that helps faiths build environmental programmes, to neatly outline overlapping views on nature from Buddhism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Baha'i, Judaism, Sikhism and Taoism.
"Most religions highlight how nature is part of God's creation, and how we're here on earth to protect what God has created for us," said Ms Sofiah. "But in terms of action there's very little."
Understanding how the environment fits into their faiths will give people "impetus to act", she hopes.
The latest population census done in 2010 found that 84 per cent of Singapore residents ascribed to a religion.
Religious leaders welcomed the guide. General secretary of the National Council of Churches of Singapore Lim K. Tham said that the guide shows readers that "environmental issues are not just the concern of any one religious group".
He recommended that churches encourage their members to study the guide in small groups or by themselves.
Venerable Seck Kwang Phing, the secretary-general of the Singapore Buddhist Federation, said that he would encourage preachers to speak more about the environment.
Buddhists should "be mindful at all times" not to harm the environment, he added.
In fact, the religious may be more easily persuaded to aspire towards sustainable living if they see that deeds to protect the environment are deemed pious, said Young AMP president Shamir Rahim.
He cited the Islamic act of ablution or washing oneself that is often done with a running tap.
"You can actually take ablution with half a cup of water," he said.
The guide will be launched on Feb 8 at The Hub Singapore on Somerset Road, and can already be downloaded for free from http://thegreenbush.wordpress.com/faith-nature-guide/
President of the Nature Society Shawn Lum, who is not deeply religious, said: "No matter what your religious views are, these are shared values. We're all for the same thing."
This is a positive step.
Environmental issues are a shared problem, as are their solutions. Indeed, as emphasised in "Collective Solutions Needed to Address Climate Change":
The environment is the collective heritage of all humankind. A problem like climate change is not just the problem of a few; it is everyone's problem. The solution must be a collective one, pursued by everyone.
As stated before, in order to effectively address environmental issues, more can and should be done to challenge the attitude among Singaporeans which privileges a lifestyle of convenience above the environment, as has emerged from the debate over plastic bags (see "Still Privileging Convenience: The debate over plastic bags").
Regarding the invoking of religion, an optimist may see this as an affirmation of shared and common values across all religions.
Yet, to play the devil's advocate, perhaps this may be why religion has been roped in, since few can seriously doubt the impact religion (or irreligion) has on society.
Given the tension between religion and self-centredness, comparison may appropriately be made with the introduction of Religious Knowledge in public schools in the 1980s in order to combat hippyism and its "libertine preoccupation with self-gratification, the cult of living for today and for myself and to hell with others".
As such, it may end up susceptible to the same criticism as levelled against the Religious Knowledge policy back then, namely, that such an approach is not entirely neutral in the matter of religions. In choosing to include certain religious beliefs, one inevitably excludes certain others. Furthermore, this effectively defines what is acceptable religious belief (see also "Religious Knowledge in Mission Schools: A constitutional and historical perspective").
But perhaps the difference here lies in the fact that it is not the Government which promotes it.
Nevertheless, we may see environmental issues taken seriously as a result of such a move.
Will religion overcome the culture of convenience?
I On Singapore
*The author blogs at ionsg.blogspot.sg