Rudyard Kipling"
āWhen you're left wounded on Afganistan's plains and
the women come out to cut up what remains, Just roll to your rifle
and blow out your brains,
And go to your God like a soldierā
General Douglas MacArthur"
āWe are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction.ā
āIt is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it.ā āOld soldiers never die; they just fade away.
āThe soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and be the deepest wounds and scars of war.ā
āMay God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't .ā āThe object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.
āNobody ever defended, there is only attack and attack and attack some more.
āIt is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.
The Soldier stood and faced God
Which must always come to pass
He hoped his shoes were shining
Just as bright as his brass
"Step forward you Soldier,
How shall I deal with you?
Have you always turned the other cheek?
To My Church have you been true?"
"No, Lord, I guess I ain't
Because those of us who carry guns
Can't always be a saint."
I've had to work on Sundays
And at times my talk was tough,
And sometimes I've been violent,
Because the world is awfully rough.
But, I never took a penny
That wasn't mine to keep.
Though I worked a lot of overtime
When the bills got just too steep,
The Soldier squared his shoulders and said
And I never passed a cry for help
Though at times I shook with fear,
And sometimes, God forgive me,
I've wept unmanly tears.
I know I don't deserve a place
Among the people here.
They never wanted me around
Except to calm their fears.
If you've a place for me here,
Lord, It needn't be so grand,
I never expected or had too much,
But if you don't, I'll understand."
There was silence all around the throne
Where the saints had often trod
As the Soldier waited quietly,
For the judgment of his God.
"Step forward now, you Soldier,
You've borne your burden well.
Walk peacefully on Heaven's streets,
You've done your time in Hell."
The difference between discrimination and dress codes - By Commander (Rtd) S THAYAPARAN Royal Malaysian Navy
Wednesday, November 15, 2017
Malaysiakini : COMMENT | "I have always thought that if women's hair posed so many problems, God would certainly have made us bald." - Marjane Satrapi, "Persepolis"
Muslim-only launderettes and banning frontline staff from wearing
headscarves are not the same thing. It is not hypocritical to object to
the former and have no opinion of the latter or even not object to it at
all. There is a big difference between discriminating against a person based on race or religion and having a dress code that may āmay ā affect some people because of how they identify with their religion.
Some Muslim women wear headscarves. Some Muslim women do not. There is enough empirical evidence to suggest that many Muslim women face pressure to wear the headscarf, indeed one Malaysiakini
columnist related how her college-going daughter was pressured by her
female contemporaries to ācover upā but chose to deal with it in her own
way.
This idea that there is freedom of religion in this country for the
majority, with apostasy laws, with rehabilitation camps for those who
deviate, with verboten words for non-Muslims and the constant threats
not to interfere with Islam, makes a mockery of the principle of freedom
of religion. The incidents of unilateral conversions, forced conversion by state
agencies and the countless court cases involving the trespass of the
religion of the state into our private and public domains, is also
evidence that freedom of religion is more word than deed in this
country. This is the context some people are choosing to ignore.Furthermore, this is not a question of religious beliefs. Nobody is
discriminating against Muslims in this instance. This is more to do with
freedom of expression. Some ā some ā Muslim women choose to express their religious beliefs by covering up.
Now if they have a choice in this, then surely they can make a choice
as to what kind of work environment they desire: a work environment
which is flexible about religious expressions, or one which has a
stricter dress code which limits their religious expression.
The last thing I want to know about anyone in the service
industry, or any industry for that matter, is what religion they
subscribe to. It does not matter if you are a Hindu, Buddhist, Christian
or Muslim. What has displaying your religious affiliation have to do
with the job you were hired to do? Do you know what is discrimination? If the hotel chooses not to
entertain customers who wear headscarves. This is discrimination. If the
hotel chooses not to entertain customers who express their religious
beliefs overtly. This is discrimination.
Some Muslim women do not think it is an obligation to cover up.
Liberals are always telling us that covering up is a choice and not an
obligation as some Muslims claim. So why is this an issue? Believe me, you could be discriminated based solely on race and there
isnāt anything you can do about it except rage on internet message
boards and support political parties that claim they are egalitarian,
when most often they make idealistic claims to stoke the base.
Dress codes for civil servants
Some people have linked this situation with overzealous civil
servants enforcing a dress code when entering public service premises. It is not for civil servants to enforce a dress code. They do not
have a mandate but more importantly, they work for the public. While government agencies may have a uniform dress code for their
staff and this may take into account religious observances (for whatever
reasons), this does not mean that the private sector should do the
same.
Some workplaces are flexible when it comes to this issue, some are
not. People have a choice as to where they want to work. They do not
have a choice when it comes to dealing with a bureaucracy they are
paying for.
PKR vice-president Rafizi Ramli (photo) claims it is
time for an equal opportunity law. Unfortunately, these types of laws
work both ways. The rules apply to the private and public sector. This
is why so many Malay rights groups have always had a problem whenever
this act has been mooted.
Apparently for some Malay rights groups, equal opportunity laws go against the Federal Constitution. By this I mean, they go against the legal and social contract
concepts of Malay privileges. Unless we are talking about an equal
opportunity law which does not apply to the public sector. Then it is
not really an equal opportunity law, but rather another law to justify
the importance of political parties to their political and racial base.
A place of work is not the avenue for the expression of your
religious beliefs. Your religious beliefs have nothing to do with your
professionalism. So to suggest that practising a dress code applicable
to everyone is discriminatory is dubious and honestly mendacious.