http://mohamadsabu.com/berita111.html
Oleh MJ

KOTA BHARU, – Mursyidul Am PAS menganggap pemimpin bukan Islam semakin berani mendesak kerajaan menyemak undang-undang berkaitan pertukaran agama kerana ideologi memisahkan agama dan politik masih menjadi anutan pemimpin utama negara.

Tuan Guru Dato’ Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat berkata, punca berlaku tuntutan seumpama itu kerana kefahaman pemimpin yang memisahkan agama dan politik dalam pentadbiran negara sudah merebak. “Ini punca yang mendorong pemimpin bukan Islam berani mendesak kerajaan menyemak semula undang-undang berkaitan pertukaran agama. Pemimpin negara masih menganggap agama sekadar sembahyang, puasa, keluar zakat dan menunaikan ibadat haji semata-mata.

“Anutan itu dibiar berkembang sehingga sekarang, sedangkan agama mencakupi semua bidang dalam kehidupan manusia termasuk aspek politik,” katanya pada kuliah mingguan di Medan Ilmu di sini, hari ini.

Semalam 10 menteri kabinet bukan Islam dilaporkan mengemukakan memorandum bersama kepada Perdana Menteri bagi meminta Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi menyemak semula undang-undang berkaitan pertukaran agama.

Sebelum ini Presiden MIC, Dato’ Seri S Samy Vellu meminta kerajaan meminda perlembagaan sedia ada bagi memastikan hak orang bukan Islam di negara ini lebih terpelihara.

Isu itu timbul selepas berlaku kontroversi pendaki Everest, Sarjan M Moorthy atau Mohamad Abdullah memeluk Islam sebelum kematiannya tanpa pengetahuan isterinya yang masih beragama Hindu.

Desakan pindaan itu dibuat terhadap Artikel 121 (1A) Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Malah ada pihak berhujah pindaan itu sekiranya dibenarkan akan menjejaskan Artikel 3 yang memperuntukkan Islam sebagai agama rasmi Persekutuan.

Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz yang juga Menteri Besar Kelantan berkata, penyakit itu terus merebak kerana kefahaman asas politik yang dipisahkan daripada elemen agama.

Dipetik Dari:
HarakahDaily.Net

PAS leaders are against the separation of religion and state (or ‘church’ and state, as it is originally used in political philosophy), which is an essential element of secular democracy:

‘Tuan Guru Dato’ Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat berkata, punca berlaku tuntutan seumpama itu kerana kefahaman pemimpin yang memisahkan agama dan politik dalam pentadbiran negara sudah merebak. “Ini punca yang mendorong pemimpin bukan Islam berani mendesak kerajaan menyemak semula undang-undang berkaitan pertukaran agama. Pemimpin negara masih menganggap agama sekadar sembahyang, puasa, keluar zakat dan menunaikan ibadat haji semata-mata.’

“Anutan itu dibiar berkembang sehingga sekarang, sedangkan agama mencakupi semua bidang dalam kehidupan manusia termasuk aspek politik,” katanya pada kuliah mingguan di Medan Ilmu di sini, hari ini. ‘

PAS leaders’ stance on the Moorthy case is diametrically opposed to that of Lim Kit Siang, as shown in those excerpts.

‘PAS is such and such, did such and such, and holds such and such’
-No, I don’t believe
BBC reports
- biased
TImes
-biased
the Strait’s Times (Singapore)
-biased
Lim Kit Siang’s past media statements
-biased, outdated
This interview statement by Hadi Awang shows that many claims about PAS made in the past are not outdated
-I reject this, whatever it is, I refuse to believe
NST online report
-obviously biased
excerpts of PAS leaders’ speeches, taken from their blogs
-bi..oops. No, no bias. But how can we know their mental states? Even if they say something negative about non-Muslim rights…Well, you can never prove that he really mean this since no one has privileged access to their mental states.

Wow, I’m amazed, really amazed!

Alexx,

I don’t agree with PAS’s agendas of Islamic State and Islamisation. But I don’t hate PAS people.

I don’t agree with my late supervisor on some philosophical issues, but I love him.

Disagreement DOES NOT IMPLY hatred.

What else can I do except expressing my views, since I’m not a politician?

The fact that I don’t agree with the views of most people here does not mean that I don’t understand what they say.

In Kit Siang’s latest blog entry, he says that DAP had no relation with PAS before 8/3, and that the voters’ choice has created a scenario that led to their co-operation.

However, this raises serious questions.

Why did DAP refuse to work with PAS before 8/3? If DAP leaders believed that PAS’s agenda of Islamic state and Islamisation was no longer a problem in this general election, why didn’t they form a coalition with PAS alongside PKR during the election campaign?

If their reservation about PAS’s agenda led to their refusal to co-operate with them before 8/3, do they seriously believe that this (i.e. PAS’s agenda of Islamic state, which led to DAP’s reservation in the first place) is no longer a problem after 5pm on 8/3?

If PAS’s agenda of Islamic state, which led to DAP’s refusal to co-operate with them before 5pm 8/3, remains the same before and after 5pm 8/3, DAP’s current co-operation with PAS will be rightly deemed as unprincipled:

Before 5pm, 8/3, DAP refused to work with PAS because of X; after 5pm, 8/3, DAP is willing to work with PAS DESPITE X

I’m sure DAP appreciates conscientious supporters who are genuinely committed to their principles of Malaysians first and secular democracy. They may be critical, they may lack herd instinct,… but what makes them so are (partly) their commitment to what the party strives for – Malaysians first and secular democracy.

Perhaps it would be good if DAP leaders could explain why they refused to work with PAS during the election campaign.
They might also want to explain why they kept emphasising that there was no relation whatsoever with PAS during their election rallies.