The DAP accepts Islam as the country’s official religion as long as PAS has no plan to turn the country into an Islamic state or introduce hudud laws, its chairman Karpal Singh said.He said that he had, at no time, belittled Islam and DAP had no quarrel with PAS except for its fundamental ideology to turn Malaysia into an Islamic state and introduce hudud laws.
Karpal Singh said the DAP accepted Islam as the official religion of the country as guaranteed under the Federal Constitution.
“PAS must accept and face reality and not depart from what the Constitution provides and the views of former prime ministers Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Hussein Onn.
“There’s no doubt that the Chinese and Indians in Kelantan are happy, but that doesn’t mean that they subscribe to the creation of an Islamic state or the introduction of hudud laws,” he said in a statement yesterday.
Source: DAP only has qualms about Islamic state
I do not fear Islamic State; many Chinese and Indians too did not fear Islamic State and Hudud Law. We fear those enforcers and syariah officers who thinks they are God's protector and tried to intimidate others using Islam based on their own interpretation and their own set of moral behaviors. I can kiss in the park because I believed it is not morally wrong; I can walk and hold hands in the public park because I believed it is my rights to do so and there's nothing immoral. But a Chinese boy and a girl was caught by Muslim Moral Enforcers at the KLCC park and charged in the court for close proximity; they were not indulging in any behaviors that are outlawed by the civil law; they are Chinese and it is morally right for them within their belief system.
Now, the syariah lawyers association wants to Federal Constitution to be amended so that the non-Muslims can be charged in the civil courts for behaviors not allowed by state Islamic councils.
But civil laws are universal and moral laws are differing. I respect your moral code if it is applied to your community but I expect you will also respect my own belief system and moral standards as long as I did not intrude in your personal life but you can't impose a code on me without impinging on my liberty in the name of yours.
Now, the syariah lawyers association wants to Federal Constitution to be amended so that the non-Muslims can be charged in the civil courts for behaviors not allowed by state Islamic councils.
But civil laws are universal and moral laws are differing. I respect your moral code if it is applied to your community but I expect you will also respect my own belief system and moral standards as long as I did not intrude in your personal life but you can't impose a code on me without impinging on my liberty in the name of yours.
23 comments:
"Thank God I'm an atheist."
put religion diff. aside 1st...
best karpal's dap, pkr & pas work fast & fury to wrest the country from those robbers in putrajaya...
take petronas from bn/umno & rebuild the country... give it back to the people.
do not allow the current federal goverment to jeopardize those states under the people alliance rule.... the citizen enemies like azalina, johari, 2xmohd are bend on giving us hell..
act now...! we malaysians are 110% behind the people alliance
It's a sure die way to manage a country based on beliefs. Decisions have to be logical, deterministic and measurable. Otherwise, somewhere down the line, opportunists will prevail and it'll be much tougher to break.
Another politic gimik by DAP head ...Don't try to divert ur message. DAP and PAS always have conflict form begining and for sure it will be no ending ... X-File. Karpal is try to taichi the statement. Pls firm on ur stament and do not change the seek of ur interest.
Doc,
Unfortunately, Shariah law are SUBJECT to abuse.
Shariah don't have real check balance system in place.
hi mav - have you read the comment by this PGSM prez?
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/81010
man - he is unbelievable!
he has the temerity to state that charging non muslim for khalwat in a civil court "does not touch on constitutional rights of non-Muslims as the action will be taken in a civil court and not Syariah Court"
I mean what kind of skewed logic is this?
he further states that “If we say that non-Muslims have the right to khalwat and commit adultery, are we saying that they have the right to break syariah law?"
How can we break a law that is not applicable to us - non muslim?
Muslim can have 4 wives - why non muslim cant? Can we put it that muslim have broken the civil law by being able to marry 4 wives?
This joker should visit Disquiet - Malik Imtiaz to learn more about the Federal Constitution 101 before trying to be a know all.
Seriously, I think DAP is right.
The nons don't care if the Muslims wants to invoke the hudud for themselves as long as it doesn't encroaches into the rights of the nons as per the Federal Constitution.
Even if we sin (morals or religious violations), let us be the ones to make peace with our own Gods and NOT be subjected to overly religious zealots who often abuse their authority !!
Look at JAKIM, the so called religious policeman - the high number of reported abuses which goes unchecked and unpunished further fuels their own sense of importance and authority.
The example you mentioned - pity the poor boy, I believe his case is still unfinished even though he's no longer with the girl he was with.
the problem with this world : religion.
j. lennon is the greatest being who ever grace the earth...
Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one
DAP is seriously dead wrong. this is palying with fire, and it will kill all of us, everyone including the malays and non malays alike.
malaysia is a multi-racial country, and it's best not to promote an official one to a national level. just keep your religion to yourself, that will be best. take thailand for example, some people wanted to make buddhist the state religion, but the muslim rejected. even though based on majority they can do it anyway, but they decided not a wise idea. and they are right in this aspect.
when we started independence from the british, chinese didn't go seriusly into politics, they are more interested in business. and their thinking is that they are happy making money and so long as you do disturb them. but water never remain stagnant.
but this thinking in wrong to begin with. with no political power, you have no say in state holdings. and even your so-call business will die, cos those in political power can change the rule of your game, u are at their mercy forever.
and now DAP is going to do the next stupid move to deprive us of freedom of religion. though it may not seem like it now, but it will make a turn in subtle or drastic way. except for muslim, no other religion has a civil law or authority power. there are no christian, buddhist or indian court or religious official to protest us. if we go to court against a muslim on religion maters, our legal court will push to civil court, and trust me, nobody will be there to protect our religion rights.
it's best not to let ourselves to be a the mercy of others, fight for our rights at the way, for equality and same rights in legal and in civil court. let no man has to stand lower that the man beside him. if muslim in thai can protest to an official religion when it's not to their advantage, why not us?
you can say malay is stupid, or whatever. but believe me, they are very smart in forseeing the power of politics and religion, which races like the chinese failed to. once the foundation is build, you are forget about changing it anymore, to our disadvantage. just like how we lose political power, and now we will lose the right to protect our religion.
the thailand example is really interesting. hmm....
anyway, well-said. anything between me and God (or if I dun believe in one), it's between us and i dun need any of you to interfere, let alone the overzealous so-called religious officers who invaded citizen's life. pls.... MYOB.
so, all you guys trying to implied - too much thing on religion, harmful to the health... issit?
Hasilox,
Every country is managed with a belief system. What is the main concern is the fact that moral code and standards of each religion is not the same and a good govt will seek an appropriate standard that do not impinged on the individual liberty while maintaining a just and fair rule for the common good of the people.
Moot,
I do not agree that Syariah law is subjected to abuse; every law is subjected to abuse and Hitler did abuse the German laws too. It is the jurist and the enforcers who lacks competence that is the problem.
Agnos,
Ya I did; I didn't care much as the few lawyers did not study Jurisprudence and the lacks competence.
Gan,
The main problem is that the institution is managed by incompetent people.
CK,
Laws, particularly moral codes are made for the common good of the people, not to satisfy some holier-than-thou enforcers.
anyone want to follow my religion?
work hard for...
good beers,
nice food &
beautiful company.
MB Kedah minta Karpal tutup mulut
Azamin Amin
Wed | Apr 09, 08 | 10:31:23 am MYT
KUALA LUMPUR, 9 April (Hrkh) - Polemik sensitif yang berlanjutan berikutan kenyataan Pengerusi DAP, Karpal Singh tentang negara Islam telah mengundang balas daripada Menteri Besar Kedah Ustaz Azizan Abdul Razak untuk menyanggah kata-kata beliau sebelum ini.
Malah Ustaz Azizan menyifatkan Karpal tiada pemahaman jelas berhubung isu tersebut sehingga menyebabkan beliau mengeluarkan kenyataan yang mengundang kemarahan ramai di samping mendapat teguran daripada Mursyidul Am PAS Tuan Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat.
Menurut laporan, Azizan meminta Pengerusi DAP Karpal Singh menutup mulut dan berhenti bercakap tentang PAS dan kaitan dengan negara Islam sebaliknya harus memberi tumpuan kepada isu yang lebih besar yang boleh dibincangkan di antara PAS dan DAP.
"Saya rasa perkara terbaik adalah dia berhenti bercakap tentang perkara tersebut.
"Banyak lagi isu-isu lain yang lebih besar untuk diperkatakan,"kata Azizan yang dipetik daripada akhbar berbahasa Inggeris.
Beliau berkata Karpal bebas untuk menyatakan pendapatnya dan tidak ada sesiapa yang akan menghalangnya.
"Kita juga tidak katakan kepada Karpal supaya jangan menentang usaha-usaha PAS untuk menjadikan Malaysia sebagai sebuah negera Islam,
"Karpal ada pandangannya terhadap hudud, tetapi ada juga pendapat lain tentang undang-undang Syariah.
"Sebenarnya dia bukan sahaja kurang faham tentang perkara tersebut, bahkan dia tak faham langsung," kata Ustaz Azizan.
Beliau berkata, kerajaan Kedah yang diketuai oleh PAS tidak pernah berbincang tentang pelaksanaan hudud di Kedah sebab ia tidak termasuk di dalam manifesto PAS Kedah dalam pilihan raya umum yang lalu.
"Mereka yang takut kepada hudud adalah perompak dan barang siapa yang tidak mencuri atau merompak, tidak takut kepada perlaksanaan Hudud," katanya. - mks.
************************
that's why don't talk so much about Islam if you don't understand. "bagi kamu agama kamu, untukku agamaku".
adakah kamu seorang perompak yang takut dipotong tangannya? adakah kamu seorang penzina yang takut akan direjam? kalau bukan, kenapa mesti takut dengan hudud/undang-undang Islam?
contoh : Zina
saksi : 4 orang (kalau kurang tidak sah) lelaki Islam yang melihat sendiri kejadian (tahu kejadian secara terperinci dari mula sampai akhir), cukup umur, waras (bukan gila), adil, peristiwa masih baru berlaku
hukuman : penzina lelaki atau wanita yang telah berkahwin dikenakan hukuman rejam (lempar
batu di khalayak ramai) hingga mati. Bagi yang belum berkahwin pula dikenakan hukuman rotan sebanyak 100 rotan.
"Dan orang-orang yang menuduh wanita-wanita baik-baik berbuat zina dan mereka tidak mendatangkan empat orang saksi maka deralah mereka (yang menuduh itu) lapan puluh kali pukulan dan janganlah kamu terima kesaksian mereka buat selama-lamanya. Dan mereka itulah orang-orang yang fasiq".(An Nisa'' ayat 4).
now tell me.. senang tak nak cari 4 orang saksi yang saksikan sendiri kejadian tu? perkara sebegini kecil pun tak mampu difahami oleh orang Islam apatah lagi pada bukan Islam...
Hypocritical UMNO version has been vile and they dunnit covertly while we slept. PAS will have to work hard at it.
Suealeen,
Thanks; good information. But Ustaz Azizan and you may not be reading the contextual argument of Karpal.
What Karpal was responding was about the aspect of Islamic State which was expressed by a PAS leader. The Federal Constitution provides for a secular state and any attempt to override the constitution is against the spirit of the social contract and conventions. Karpal is not trying to interpret Islam and the Quran. He is stating a Legal Point of Constitutional Law.
Anyway, pertaining to your emphasis on Islamic law and your contention that:
"...perkara sebegini kecil pun tak mampu difahami oleh orang Islam apatah lagi pada bukan Islam..."
I do agree with you that many Muslims had yet to competently understand the Quran and Islamic laws. But do not think that non-Muslims also do not understand; majority of non-Muslims may not understand as they do not read the Quran but many do read and understand it much better than the ordinary Muslims.
I like to emphasize that your example of Zina is lacking insights of the doctrines of Islam as expoused in the Quran and the Syariah Law. I believe it would be more helpful if you read up Syariah Law on Zina.
thanks mave.. i just want to make the example as simple as i could.. that was actually been taught in Pendidikan Islam since primary school.. itu cuma pemahaman asas tentang hukum dan kesaksian orang berzina. & untuk menunjukkan kepada orang bukan Islam untuk tidak berasa takut kepada hukum Islam itu sendiri.
yep.. i agree with your 5th line..
Suealeen,
I truly appreciate your open mindedness and ability to learn without the yoke of calcified mindset.
The need of 4 witness for a rape case is not the same as an accusation of adultery. Your example is meant for an accusation of adultery of which the Islamic law requires at least 4 witnesses to testify so as not to criminalize an innocent person. As for rape, the application do not require 4 witnesses but factual evidence and good cross-examinations by the Islamic jurists.
It is the actions of the Moral police that is giving Islam a bad name.
Similarly, the actions of some overzealous RELA personnel are also giving the orgnaisation a bad name.
moral is something that is personal, and it should remain that way. moral or civil laws is different from legal laws.
you can be jailed for killing a person, but you cannot be jailed for watching when a person drowned and not lift a finger to grab a pole to reach him. police cannot jail you for a moral offence.
moral or civil offence is something that the public judges, and at times it can be subjective, unlike legal offence.
When you want to make a moral law punishable, you are putting something moral into legal. how do you do it? one way is to put 'moral police' patrolling the streets, watching people social business. And there are bound to be abuse, and violation of privacy rights.
Iran? Iraq or more liberal ones like Saudi Arabia, Eypt? There is no such things as human rights and privacy rights, when certain people can looks into your private life, and judge you on moral grounds.
In Iran, we have women being killed, or raped for not wearing a veil. In Saudi Arabia, women are being lash and jailed for not having a male relative to accompany them when they go out. It's under their so-call moral laws. These are in the news, not something I invented.
Tell me which country that has moral police not giving Islam a bad name. The system is bound to be abuse, cos there is no balance and check for it. A system must be in place, not just rely on the 'moral police' being supposely moral themselves.
I strongly believe only the legal jurisdiction court should have the power to give punishment, not moral court. Giving moral police to look into people private life and judges to give punishment is equal to imposing fear to the society to life according to certain rules and guidelines.
Purple Haze,
You are right about the moral police. However, we also can observed that certain State Muftis are no better than the moral police in their behaviors and thoughts.
What will PAS do with them UMNO muftis?
Wits0,
All State Muftis is appointed by the Sultan. PAS can't do anything.
Post a Comment