April 24, 2006

Undoing

Posted in Malaysia, The Cause at 1:23 am by egalitaria

This is one version of response to current efforts undertaken to restore a Constitutional Malaysia. (You can still sign the online petition) Here freedom of speech is given an ugly name, and is labelled as a Western concept. The fact that human rights is also attacked and played down in the following letter is telling of the larger opinion its writings reflect. I'm not one to stir up dissent but I'm rather amazed at what I read. Check it out below. More blogging to come… right now, signing off after a busy but rewarding weekend.

Dear friends

It very unfortunate for me to received comment that slanders me as ignorant and other wild accusation. Clearly show that the person him/herself ignorant about him/her religion and understanding.

Malaysia as Islamic Country

I do belief that Malaysia is an Islamic country not just from 1957 but dated from Malacca Sultanate. It is important we that accept this as it already manifested in the federal constitution that Islam as official religion of federation. Yet it’s not denying others to profess any religion and ensure protection of all.

To conclude 200% for sure that Malaysia is Islamic country. Why so hard for others to accept the basic and fundamental of our nation. Its not that you are deny professing whatever religion. Yet these people don’t want to accept that Islam is the official religion. This is the issue.

Secularism fanatic.

Lately there is a small group try to gain support, promoting and infuse secularism in Malaysia. They use whatever means to shake the bedrock of our country. I strongly oppose to turn Malaysia into secular country which against the value that we all carried. I do believed that Malaysian need to show 200% support to Islam Hadhari to clearly show that secularism don’t have place in this country.

The model of secularism such freedom to profess any religion, freedom of speech and human right already delivered by Malaysia. I see the secularism is carries by the people with hidden agenda. I do have a bad feeling about this that it will bring disaster to Malaysia. We cannot tolerate with secularism.

Emotional and out of context

I did attend a seminar organized by Article 11 and Bar Council which the outcome pretty shameful as small group of people cry that they have more right than others and try to interfere Islam matter by requesting the abolishment of Article 121 (1A). This is totally absurd and unjust to Malaysian Muslim. The amendment introduce because the Muslim had treated unjustly by court before the amendment took place. And now we heard that this small group wants to reintroduce this unjustly article under banner of justice. Totally absurd.

During the seminar several individual did quoted some cases that clearly being interpreted according to personal emotion and out of context. Just to backup their issue and to rise up sympathy. All in the name of freedom of speech and even seek protection under Article 11. I do wonder if they using this as a platform to gain support before they destroy the harmony of this nation.

Time to accept and realized.

I do hope for those who still clouded will realized and accept that Malaysia will never adopt secularism and Malaysia is Islamic nation as accepted before and after Merdeka. Don’t live in denial. For sake of this country lets focus on more important issue such as the merger of different school system that creates and nurture division among us. And I do believe we should move forwards for better Malaysia.

That’s all for now my friends. Please do share your view with clear mind and cold head.

Sayonara!

(Taken from Muslim-Brothers.org) 

Advertisements

5 Comments

  1. Sivin said,

    like it or not this is the kind of response we will need to grapple with. Sounds like a more “layman” view where technical nuances of law, history and language are unclear or even confused. To this person, I think approaching the subject via the route of Malaysia is a secular state and we need to restore a constitutional Malaysia seems to backfire even though I’ve heard speakers linked with Article 11 clearly stating they are not against Islam the religion but against it being used in a way that may be abused – and would affect the over all well being of the country.

    I see the process of engaging views like this response to be a challenge and requires something more than a “constitutional” approach – which to me appeals very much to “the clear mind and cold head” this author is talking about while I “feel” his concerns are more “warm” hearted. so, again we have a situation where there’s no one size fit all approach. I think the Art 11 and Bar council efforts are appealing (and targetting) a segment that is not represented by this author. Perhaps, a “conversational” approach which touches on his/her concern as following:
    1. historical perception and interpretation (e.g. “Malaysia is an Islamic country not just from 1957 but dated from Malacca Sultanate. “) – Can one see Malaysia as an “Islamic state” metaphorically like people perceive the USA as a “Christian Nation” even though technically or consitutionally it’s more nuanced and complicated? Is there space for that for the common Malaysian Muslim.?
    2. Political education and clarification (e.g. “The model of secularism such freedom to profess any religion, freedom of speech and human right already delivered by Malaysia. I see the secularism is carries by the people with hidden agenda.”) – what is the political or governing model of Malaysia? a hybrid or has it evolved? there’s appeal to the past for continuity but how can we talk about the future considering current realities?
    3. Confusion and misinformation (e.g. “… requesting the abolishment of Article 121 (1A). This is totally absurd and unjust to Malaysian Muslim. The amendment introduce because the Muslim had treated unjustly by court before the amendment took place. And now we heard that this small group wants to reintroduce this unjustly article under banner of justice.”) – What was the context of the amendment of Article 121 (1A) – the history, the process and outcome? Then list down the examples of how perhaps because of this Article or the interpretation of the artile that has caused injustice either way.
    4. A “Better” Malaysia (e.g. “For sake of this country lets focus on more important issue such as the merger of different school system that creates and nurture division among us. And I do believe we should move forwards for better Malaysia.”) – What is a “better” Malaysia? How can we move towards a better Malaysia internally between people who are similar as well as different? How can we collectively work towards our agreements and work through our disagreements that sets us apart in this globalized conflicted world? Education is one important place to start … but what are we educating?

    I thought I’d try to let some of my questions emerge hopefully graciously as “inspired” by this response.

  2. egalitaria said,

    Hi Sivin, thanks for your elaborate comments! Good to know you’re very much interested in this issue.. 🙂

    I think primarily the confusion comes about with the very term ‘secularism’. The reason for the up-at-arms-clash between those who advocate a secular Malaysia and an Islamic Malaysia revolves around terminology first, and all else second.

    Stage One is relatively easy to address: meaning through education, we can inform people that “secular” does not necessarily mean devoid of any moral value, or even contradict religious values at all. It just means it is removed from being so closely tied to any One specific religion. Its contents may not necessarily be un-Islamic. In fact, a highly moral secular state can very much be “islamic” or “christian” in nature. Call it what you wish; when you extract the moral basis from every religion, this forms part of the “public space morality” that people keep talking about. This is secular Malaysia! Not the kind of secular that conjures up images of panty-clad women dancing on tabletops.

    Stage Two, however, is more difficult to address. Say that we have cleared up the terminology and that all alike accept that a secular Malaysia is not necessarily a bad thing, it will be impossible to remove any one religion from the equation. This is fine if it allows fair treatment to the other adherents. But it does not seem to be the case currently. I will write more about this. For now, I do believe that by simple practice of “do unto others what you would want others to do unto you” should suffice to ALL Malaysians to take into account! 🙂

  3. Sivin said,

    nice to have your elaborate two stage reply. I shall embrace them for further thought.

  4. Dear Egalitaria,

    Thanks for your interest and an enlightened comments.

    Regards,
    MUSLIM BROTHERS,
    http://www.muslim-brothers.org

  5. egalitaria said,

    Thanks for leaving your comment; it will be good to encourage your members at Muslim-Brothers to continue reading alternative views, as am I, such that we do not get entirely myopic and only read ONE point of view. In a plural society like Malaysia, I sincerely hope that you will be open to all sorts of opinions, from all sorts of people. I am also part of this quest to read and understand more, outside of my own perspective. I hope you can do the same.

    Regards.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: