at it again… upholding ‘ketuanan islam’

you must have heard of the merdeka statement (also as sun2surf) launched by the centre for public policies studies by now, i guess. you must also have heard of how our minister of misinformation respond to the statement by now too. right? if no, better quick click on the links to find out!

first we have the zam zam guy protesting to the statement.  i would like to highlight these 2 parts:

"They (42 NGOs) are an elite group which cannot be considered as representing the people and are not a group representing the feelings of the people below and they are removed from the heart and pulse of the people."

[…]

"We (government) believe in our ways. To strengthen and improve national unity, the government will accede to the people’s wishes and not the wishes of this group of 42 "

how does he knows the statement are not the wishes of the people in general? didn’t he know that the people might just need these NGOs to represent them, that the statement are the feelings of most of the public in general?

how can he say their views does not represent everyone’s view when they (read that as UMNOputra and some muslim groups) themselves did or said something, they will say things like "it’s the people wish", "the malaysian public wants this…" and  so on. well if they  can now say this group of NGO are not speaking for everyone, then why were they speaking for everyone during those time?

so fed up of their double standard!! grrr!

(read bob’s post ‘the audacity of idiocy’ and xpyre’s post ‘how to demonise NGO’s wish-list: zainuddin maidin’s statement’)

and now here it comes… the protest by some muslim groups. if they protest constructively, ok but it seems that they are trying to uphold the ‘ketaunan islam’. (like when they protest against the set up of the interfaith council).

"The Merdeka Statement has failed to consider what was set up in our Federal Constitution and state laws aimed to control… proselytising of non-Islamic teachings to Muslims, as well as (those) stating the rules by which Islam is administered," their statement reads.

yes i understand about the proselytising of non islamic teachings to muslim in the federal constitution… but why the need to emphasise it in the merdeka statement? this only shows how weak their faith are! if your faith is strong, why so scared of people proselytising to you? if your faith is so strong, no matter how people proselytise to you, surely you won’t be swayed, you’ll stick to your own faith.

i know this is part of the constitution and of course i can’t do anything about it as i respect the constitution. however, just for example, if there is a law that says nobody (no other faith) should proselytise to the catholics, as a catholic, i will be the first to protest loud and clear that i do not want such a law.

The two largest Muslim coalitions, however, alleged a hidden agenda that would allow apostasy, based on the contents which urge the Conference of Rulers to defend the rights of Malaysians to choose their religion.

but my dears the freedom of religion is enshrined in the federal constitution while apostasy is not. apostasy is under syariah law. oh dear. so now they are saying syariah law should be above the federal constitution? haven’t they heard the call of raja nazrin to uphold the constitution?

"It is unreasonable to ask for new rights for non-bumiputeras when, at the same time, the bumiputeras are asked to relinquish their special rights as stated in the social contract made between the leaders before independence day," the Muslim groups said.

er,,, don’t want to relinquish their special rights? ok lah if they still want to be spoon fed, or as dr m, ex PM said, to be on crutches, let them be. i have no problem with that (in fact, better for me to keep me amused). anyway, what is this social contract thingy? according to very prolific young blogger, john lee, the social contact is totally flawed and should be thrown out!

"The Merdeka Statement is a statement made by one party and cannot be said to be representative of all Malaysians because it is not fully agreed by others," they stressed.

tsk tsk. just like what zam had said. what about when parliament made decisions and all that? they never consult the people! so we can also say the decision was made by parliament and cannot be said to be representative of all malaysians because it is not fully agreed by others.

finally, i end with bob’s question:

Is Pembela and ACCIN, by rejecting these suggestion off hand, suggesting that they want to reserved the right to be extremists, discriminatory and unjust? Or is this just another instance of narrow ethnocentric nationalism and chauvinism misusing the cloak of Islam to legitimise opposition and gain wider support – even at the expense of national survival and harmony?

oops. sorry, not the end yet. i would like to end with some words of dr syed akbar ali who wrote the book ‘malaysia and the club of doom: the fall of the islamic countries’. he mentioned the muslim seems to get petty over religious matter and and because of that they will never grow, and that ultimately it will be the muslim themselves who caused their own downfall. not my words, ok.