My take : Let's start with the basics first. When Muslims refer to Non Muslims as Kaffirs and Infidels, that's definitely insulting! So please act on your own people. People are Non Muslims because they don't believe in your faith and never will. They will never submit that's why. Calling Non Muslims, Kaffirs and Infidels is truly insulting as we have our own beliefs. We have a faith whether Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Zoroastrian, Christianity, Buddhism, Taoism and so many other faiths of the world, long before there was Islam.
This is an underhanded way to creating a blasphemy law. I don't believe this guy. It's empowering the Muslims to accuse other faiths of insulting Islam. Look at Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sudan and the 57 other countries. The laws currently are sufficient. They always gave a pass to Islam whenever the Muslims insulted other faiths. This is a diabolical plan to stop scrutiny and be critical of Islam. So when Christians say Jesus Christ is the son of God, they can be accused of blasphemy. Get my drift? People who are so late in history don't want anyone questioning Islam.
Malaysiakini : “I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the
freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in
power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” ― James Madison, one of America's founding fathers
COMMENT | Considering what I have
written about what I know to be the existential threat to this country,
this piece may come off as self-serving but it has to be said. The Racial and Religious Hatred Act is really a mendacious piece of
legislation. Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Mujahid Yusof
Rawa is an affable politician and I think - hope - he means well by
advocating for this Act, but this legislation is in reality a boon for
the Islamic deep state and all those who subscribe to a particular form
of Islam. Generally speaking, do non-Muslims go about insulting Islam? For all
this talk about Christian proselytisation has there been one shred of
evidence that this goes on? To wit, what about the so-called deviant
teachings of Islam – the Shia norms – for example; are they protected
under this Act?
And what of legitimate criticisms of the Islamic faith by various
NGOs like Sister in Islam, who are always on the receiving end of police
reports for tarnishing or insulting Islam; what about these types of
“insults”? Does quoting for religious texts which put religion in a bad
light an insult to the religion?
There’s that, but more importantly, who defines Islam in this
country? The state, and of course, the dialectic between Malay power
structures which use religion to ensure compliance amongst the Muslim
polity. Hence who determines what is insulting to Islam is the state, in
this instance the Malay/Muslim powerbrokers in Pakatan Harapan. But forget about Islam, if you can. We have seen how the Harapan
state deals with a provocateur like Indian Muslim preacher Zakir Naik.
So, would this Act be used against him? Or would it more likely be used
against someone like me, who is routinely labelled as anti-Islam and
I have to call out this horse manure on this particular soundbite. It
sounds good when Mujahid claims that this Act would be used against not
only those who insult Islam but also against those who insult the other
religions. But here’s the thing. In order to do that, all religions
must be treated the same. Is Mujahid actually claiming that all
religions are treated the same in Malaysia or is this just another
convenient soundbite to lull people into a false sense of security?
Sure, we could talk about free speech and freedom of expression, but
since these concepts only seem to apply to people of certain racial and
religious persuasions, what we should do is recognise that the conflict,
especially when it comes to religion, has always benefited political
parties. And you know who has benefited the most from religion in Malaysia? Amanah, of course.
The so-called moderate breakaway from PAS may not have the numbers
but it sure does have the patronage. If there was no dialectic in PAS,
then there would be no opportunity for Amanah to blossom. For instance,
PAS is always calling other Muslims deviant or liberal for not
following their brand of Islam. They are always saying that Islam is
being tarnished by other Muslims, how does this Act resolve these kinds
of conflicts, now that the so-called moderate faction has assumed power?
Or how about this - is lying about another race or religion runs foul
of this Act? Because not only have there been Umno operatives who have
propagated such lies, there are also Harapan political operatives who
play the same game. So would this type of politicking fall under this
Take, for example, that actress Ellie Suriati Omar. When she says
something like “when Umno is no longer in power, Malays and Islam will
be challenged... that Malays will be bastardised (terbangsat) in their
own land,” is this a lie? If it is, then surely she is insulting the
non-Malay communities in this country. Surely, she is stirring racial
and religious hatred against the non-Malay community. If this is not an
insult to the non-Malays, I do not know what is. Do you see how dumb
this Act really is, or do I need to go further?
Read this passage from my piece
questioning the Islamic agenda of Harapan regarding the Islamic
Development Department (Jakim) – “Have they (Jakim) ever attacked
religious extremism which is a more of a threat to this country? Have
they sanctioned hate speech? Have they warned Muslims that there are
external forces out there which are attempting to subvert the democratic
institutions of this country or enemies who would destroy democracy
from within? Instead, what they have done is target Shia adherents,
labelled dissenting Muslims as ‘liberal’, selectively enforced their
edicts, estranged the Malay community from the non-Malay community, but
most importantly, decried excessive laughter.”
Now to a rational person, what I described about Jakim in that
paragraph, it would seem that it is an organisation which should be
sanctioned under this proposed Act. Unless of course, insulting Muslims
whose ideas you do not agree does not apply when it is Muslims doing the
insulting? Unless, of course, claiming the way how other people
practice Islam as deviant is not insulting to Islam or it is not if
Sunni Muslims are doing the insulting? Unless, of course, selectively
enforcing religious edicts on the working class but not the moneyed
class is not an insult to Islam?
And do not get me started on the racial aspect of this Act. Honestly,
we would have police reports up the wazoo for the kind of comments that
happen on social media. Come to think of it, some people may actually
think that this piece is an insult to ‘bangsa’ dan ‘agama’. I said is many times (and, of course, you may disagree), the best way
to combat Islamic extremism in this country and to loosen the chokehold
of religious politics is to through economic reforms and a plurality of
voices when it comes to Islam.
To do this would require that we hold certain values sacred, of which
freedom of speech and expression are the most important. These values
are not what religious scholars care about, so you go talk to your
Islamic scholars to get their input on this Act because what this Act
really is, is a petty law proposed by small-minded men.