It is surprising that the tudung (headscarf) ban evoked so much response in Malaysia, especially compared to the incident last year when Malay civil servants were unwilling to serve people, even non Muslims, whom they deemed were improperly dressed.

The fact remains that the tudung ban is not about religious tolerance in that Muslim ladies need wear the tudung only when they reach puberty. While many Muslim ladies choose not to wear it, those who do are allowed to wear it in in polytechnics, junior colleges and universities in Singapore.

It clearly shows that it is the parent's own highly subjective opinions of religious responsibility that is the issue here. Their children must wear the tudung even before they reach puberty.

The tudung should also not be compared to the turban wore by Sikhs for hygienic reasons as male Sikhs do not cut their hair which is kept wound under the turban. Their religion has also stressed that they have to wear it regardless of their age.

The Chinese majority usually choose not to flaunt their religion, so the ban should also not be seen as a move to undermine minorities rights. It is an unfair charge as Singapore prides itself in being a true multi-racial society that sees no ethnic division in business, government and education opportunities.

The surprise is that Singapores fast food restaurants are halal (suitable for Muslims) despite the fact that over 80 percent of its population are non-Muslims. Devout Muslims are also given the choice to study at a madrasah (Islamic school) if they so choose.

If any Singaporean ethnic group should claim acts of intolerance by the Singaporean government, it is the Chinese. Despite protests, the Singapore government closed down all Chinese schools and discouraged the use of Chinese dialects as a way to foster a multiracial society to the detriment of the cultural inheritance of the community.