It’s a pity Farish Noor and his fellows don’t get more explicit support. That ‘two-thirds’ of the BBC report in taiking’s comment above is crushing everything – and it may not even have much basis in fact! I made the 2/3 remark in another forum (a US-based one, topic: HSBB in Malaysian mosques) not so long ago, and a Malaysian answered “I live opposite a mosque. If 2/3 of Malaysians are Muslims, then Malaysia has a population of about 40″ – or words to that effect.

I understand the Constitutional position of (some) Malaysians with regards to (one) religion, but I cannot force myself to imagine that every last qualifying Malaysian cherishes the assignment. Even if they do – do they really think with one mind? It is inconceivable! As is so often heard in the rest of the world, I would like to hear from perfectly sensible Malaysian Muslims (or even any Malaysian who would not normally identify themselves with the plaintiff) who think that word-banning is nonsense. I think they are the ones who are most likely to be able to bring a sensible ending to this mess.

“About two-thirds of Malaysia’s population is Muslim
The Malaysian government has refused to release 10,000 Bibles which it seized because they contained the word Allah to refer to God.

The government, which is dominated by Muslim Malays, claims that the word Allah is Islamic and that its use in Bibles could upset Muslims.

The Roman Catholic Church is challenging the ban in court.

Religion has become highly sensitive in Malaysia, where about two-thirds of the population is Muslim.

Religious minorities have accused the government of undermining their rights.

The government has impounded Bibles before, intercepting 5,000 in March as they were imported from Indonesia.

Church officials say that although the word Allah originated in Arabic, Malays have used it for centuries to refer generally to God, and Arabic-speaking Christians used it before Islam was founded.

The Christian Federation of Malaysia said the religious freedom guaranteed by the Malaysian constitution was meaningless if people were denied Bibles which used their own language.”

I am so not proud of umno and its stupidity.

The usage ban on the word “Allah” being imposed on the Christians in Malaysia by BN Government was not only Christians’ problem. Indeed, it is the problem of all Malaysians who are concerned about Government’s encroachment upon the citizens’ civil rights and the freedom of religion as promised by the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

Unfortunately, most Confucian followers, Taoist believers and Buddhism Practitioners will prefer to take up the position of not making an alliance with either Christians or Muslims. The Confucians, the Taoists and the Buddhists will most likely find that it is against the interest of their own to help argue in this case because basically they don’t believe in Monotheism and they also believe in the spiritual value of burning incense to their deities, which neither Christians nor Muslims will agree to do.

In this case, I believe the Confucians, the Taoists, and the Buddhists will choose a political attitude of “standing at the other side of the river and observe on whether the inferno hazard happened at the opposite side will spread further before hastily crossing over to the other side for offering help in order to protect themselves from getting burnt too soon and too abruptly!”

the core issue involved in this blog is in regard of the human rights issues
‘Human’ is a bigger set than ‘Christian’, and larger even than ‘religious’. If it’s human rights, it’s of concern to all humans. If it’s ‘Christian rights’, that’s an altogether different issue.

It will make no sense if I ask for the Confucian followers
It makes perfect sense. Mediators are usually non-interested parties for a reason. If you’re having an argument with your wife, what sense does it make to shut you both in a small room together to go over the same old issues until death do you part? You don’t have to enter into a polygamous contract with a marriage counsellor before they can help!

Pretending that a minor human rights transgression is somebody else’s business (remember the cowhead?), or that there is a greater issue at hand (invariably financial – where got price tag on religious vocab?) is tacit permission to erode any and all human rights, as long as it’s done piecemeal.

I think trying to portray the establishment of this externally imposed orthodoxy as a ‘Christian problem’ is counter-productive in the long run. Aren’t Christians concerned about attempts to ban the name of a murdered foreign ex-mistress? I should think they are! Would they claim it’s not their problem because she wasn’t a Christian? That wouldn’t be very Christian, as I understand it! Worse than that, it would be difficult for any reasonable person to explain it in a positive way.

It’s only my point of view, Onlooker Politics. If I believed the cowhead was a matter for all reasonable people, but thought the Christian/A||ah ban was ‘their problem’, I just wouldn’t be being reasonable. Would I?

Generally speaking, religion does not fit in in YB Lim’s secular state political principle. However, the core issue involved in this blog is in regard of the human rights issues, such as issue of whether the Christians have basic human rights to use the word “Allah” freely in the Malay Language or in the English Language in order to address the Christians’ God in whatsoever occasion and at whatsoever place. When the issue of the freedom of using word “Allah” is only concerned with the dispute between the Christian Churches and the Malay Islamic preachers, then a piece-meal approach whereby only the smaller groups of the interested parties will get involved in the dialogue discussion may be a much more viable strategy in order to get the controversy settled in a peaceable and mutually compromise manner.

It will make no sense if I ask for the Confucian followers or the Taoist believers from DAP to go hold a dialogue with the “tok guru” of Islamic religion from PAS in order to find a consensus guideline for accepting the use of the word “Allah” by everybody because both Confucian and Taoist never have to use the word “Allah” to address their respective God or gods!

In Malaysia, only two major religious groups are seriously confronting one another about the freedom of using the word “Allah”, namely the Malay muslims and the Christian Church/Catholic Church. If Malaysians are to expect any solution for resolving the long-lingering dispute between these two religious groups on the “Allah” wording issue, the solution will only be acceptable by many, if not all, when the solution has been given the prior consent by these both groups.

Kepercayaan kepada Tuhan

Allah itu Tuhan, Tuhan itu Allah!!!

Dont play play with True God!!! The True God will know whether we are praying to Him or to the devil even when we are calling His name!!!

I Am Who I Am!!!

I had a quick look (since you asked) and the other fingers don’t seem to be included in Unicode.

*If you prefer to use just the keyboard Ctrl+ and Ctrl- do ‘zoom in’ and ‘zoom out’, Ctrl0 (zero) resets.

Now just sit back and watch UMNO receiving their comeuppance and retribution from God.

Just can’t stand all those upstarts and nincompoops trying to bare their fists, kris and breasts at God, ha!

This is no laughing matter. When God chooses to strike, not even GUNUNG TAHAN can tahan!

Weak selfish leaders like Pairin & Jeffrey is the reason why Mahatahi could bring in illegal Muslim immigrants from Philippines and Indonesia to dilute the high percentage of Christian population in Sabah.

The sight of millions of Malaysians displaying the NEP fiasco on their Tshirts will make the umno warlords tremble in fear. Anyway, it is much more attractive compared to the stupid 1malaysia finger sign.