<B>By Saoud BACCUS

The State subsidizes religious activities to the tune of some Rs 70 m every year. Is that money well spent? It would be if somehow it served the interest of the country as a whole, like using religion to bridge the gap among the different religious groups of the country. Or if it inculcated in people good values that in turn led to reduced crime, whereby we save on policing, court time and expenses, and the cost of running a prison.

It is doubtful that we have met these objectives. People are more divided than ever, most communities are referred to by their religious denominations and/or ethnicity, elections are held and won along religious/ethnic lines, politicians run in ri-dings that fit their religious/ethnic profile. While we are not beating up on each other ? we did a couple of times though - we are still far from accepting the other as we accept one of our own. And people are still hired according to their racial affinity, while some others, both intra- and inter-religiously, are still more equal than others despite years of trying. It does not take a crystal ball to see that we are split up according to our faith. We can be (insert faith here) or agnostic or atheist and Mauritian at the same time. We don?t have to be one or the other. We can be one and the other concurrently. Nobody said we have to pick between the two, they are not mutually exclusive. Various religions in Mauritius have failed in stressing that point. It is to the sermons or endless speeches about what is religiously right or wrong that we principally owe the disparate psychological and ultimately behavioural division in whether to the religion or to the State we first belong. Sadly, the State is partially funding these people to speak against her. Neither is the State getting anything out of this financial support in terms of churning out better people. Serious crime is on the rise, petty crime as well, dishonest merchants overcharging Mauritians they mistook for foreigners because they speak French. You name the scam, we?ve got it! Fake doctors, bogus land registry documents, people abusing properties that do not belong to them, scholarships awarded to non-applicants. Yet, how ironic the message is when you travel the country. A first-time visitor may shrewdly observe that Mauritians must be very religious, for there is a place of worship at least every 500 metres in populated areas. Starting from the Municipality of Curepipe to Eau-Coulée, a distance spanning less than 2 kilometres, there are 2 churches, 2 mosques, 1 Hindu temple, exclusive of the surrounding areas. The medium is indeed the message. The immoral has become moral by sheer force of general practice, irrespective of religious teaching. While ruling governments may be hamstrung by the ever-present fear of losing votes and maintain the status quo, religious organisations don?t absolutely have to accept government subsidies. All religious bodies have at least one common universal value - they don?t condone activities bordering on the immoral. As such, they don?t want unclean money to fund their faith-based activities. There are examples where individuals wishing to donate money to their respective church, temple or mosque, and the source of which is dubiously immoral, have had their morally-risky donation turned down. The argument put forth is simple. Dirty monies cannot be used to promote values that are at odds with deeds from which these monies originate. Why then would religious associations want to accept money from the government that includes tax proceeds related to the sale of alcohol and tobacco, or from business activities such as casinos, gambling clubs, horseracing? It is egregious and an absolute oxymoron. We can find better ways to spend the Rs70m. Like giving some to school libraries.

[email protected]</B>