Lina Joy case and cancelled “Building Bridges” Conference to feature on 1st day of Parliament

Image Hosted by ImageShack.usThe far-reaching consequences of the Lina Joy case, which was reported in over 1,000 foreign media in the first 48 hours of the judgment, and the last-minute cancellation of the “Building Bridges” Islam-Christianity Interfaith Conference in May will feature on the first day of the Parliamentary question time on Monday.

I will be raising both issues during question time on Monday when asking the Prime Minister what had been done to repair the damage to Malaysia’s international reputation as a model multi-religious nation with the last-minute cancellation of the “Building Bridges” Islam-Christianity Inter-faith Conference in early May.

Members of Parliament regardless of political party should come forward in the forthcoming parliamentary meeting to ensure that on the occasion of the 50th Merdeka anniversary of the nation, religion should become a positive force for nation-building in promoting inter-racial and inter-religious understanding, goodwill and harmony instead of becoming the reverse.

It must be a matter of concern to all Malaysians that religious polarization of Malaysians is increasingly a major threat to nation building in the past decade, unless the first three decades of nationhood when the problem of religious polarization was quite unheard of.

What has gone wrong. Why has religious polarization become worse instead of better, especially when the Islam Hadhari advocated by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is to promote justice, integrity and harmony.

Among the questions which I will be raising in forthcoming Parliament are:

  • To ask the Prime Minister why public confidence in government ability to ensure low-crime Malaysia has reached a new low despite earlier favourable public responses to Royal Police Commission Report and to report on implementation of commission’s 125 recommendations, in particular on IPCMC.
  • To ask the Prime Minister whether the Cabinet’s misjudgment and mishandling of sexism in Parliament on May 9, 2007 had caused great damage to the good name of Malaysia internationally and what lesson the Cabinet has learnt from it.
  • To ask the Minister of Works on the itemized expenditure of the recently announced RM220 million allocation to inspect new government building in Putrajay as to justify the needs to spend such huge sum from the government’s coffer when the public has no confidence in the quality of works from the Public Works Department (PWD).
  • To ask the Minister of Finance to table a progress report on the seeking of an oversea partner for Proton and the required criteria as well as to explain on how the partnership would strengthen the position of Proton not only as a national car-maker, but also as an internationally well-known car-maker.
  • To ask the Minister of Health on the investigation on why the ambulances at Kepala Batas Hospital had run out of petrol which caused the death of 31-year-old Yusnita Abas on 13th October 2006 and a report on deaths caused by unsatisfactory ambulance services in the past year and the remedial actions taken.
  • To ask the Prime Minister the total costs of Parliament renovation to date and the causes of the spate of government building and public construction defects and mishaps and the remedial actions taken.
  • To ask the Prime Minister on whether the government is willing to set up a Royal Commission to investigate the May 13 incident and declassify all official documents in order to reveal the truth as a way to promote racial understanding and enhance racial integration in conjunction with the 50th Merdeka Anniversary.
  • To ask the Prime Minister to explain what the government and organisations like Integrity Institute of Malaysia (IIM) have done to prevent Malaysia’s position in TI CPI from continue to slip which will be mockery for our 50th Merdeka anniversary celebration.
  • To ask the Minister of works why the Government has failed to reveal highway privatization agreement with various concessionaires as promised in February 2007 as such failure has seriously affected the public’s confidence in the Government.

  1. #1 by greenacre on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 3:54 pm

    In 60’s and 70’s my neighbors accepted our festival greetings and all the fine cakes and likewise we did. They used to ask ‘what’s the cooking?
    But since 80’s they don’t ask what’s the cooking ? rather ask whose cooking? Even in our home they expect their cooking to be served. Funny, How this came about? Is Dr. Mahathir the villain of this or an architect of new Malay Asia?

  2. #2 by Jong on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 4:10 pm

    YB Lim are you sure the Prime Minister will be at Parliament to answer your questions? I understand he hardly attends Parliament session, what makes you so sure he will this time?

    Btw isn’t he supposed to be visiting countries, cleverly slot in for his honeymoon trip as well, and on tax-payer’s expense?

    [You are correct. The PM will not be in Parliament to answer, as he would have gone off on another of his official tours which I had criticised.

    The question will be answered by another Minister representing the PM, most probably Minister in the PM’s Dept, Nazri Aziz. – Kit]

  3. #3 by pwcheng on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 5:23 pm

    We can ask but looks like it is their birth right not to reply us. The same is happening in most, if not all government departments. It is rotten from head to toe, but again what can we do???

  4. #4 by ReformMalaysia on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 7:10 pm

    especially the May 13 incident…the BN government would try to bury the real facts …maybe forever..

    Just wondering:

    The ISA was already in place…. why it was not used to stop the individual/riot leader from instigating the people? -it is because it involving ‘orang sendiri’ and there is a big reward/hiden agenda for creating the incident?….

    If ISA used without double standard, the incident might not take place at all….

  5. #5 by toyolbuster on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 7:21 pm

    But Kit, isn’t Nazri a joke. In medieval time, he would be the court jester. So, what kind of answers can we expect from this fella.

    He may probably suggest that building bridges is an expensive affair, so, he may want to consult Samy first to see if it can be slotted into the 10MP.

  6. #6 by Libra2 on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 7:58 pm

    Malaysian Muslims think they are superior beings and it would be degrading to sit at the same table and talk with non Muslims.
    You see they believe only they can go to heaven. So all our corrupted politicians, murderers, liars and rapists who belong to their religion will go to heaven and we, no matter how good will go to hell.

  7. #7 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 8:16 pm

    “…//..It must be a matter of concern to all Malaysians that religious polarization of Malaysians is increasingly a major threat to nation….//…” YB Kit.

    I assume by the word “polarization”, it means an increasingly clear dividing of two broad groups and interests – in our context, a reference to Muslim and Non Muslims – in conflicting or contrasting positions.

    Now the controversial cases of converts – for examples, Benedict Gopal vs Nur Adryana over children, the taking away of Magendran’s wife Najeera Farvinli and Marimuthu’s wife Raimah Bibi by religious authorities, the taking away of Moorthy’s and Anthony Rayappan’s bodies for muslim burials – invariably polarize because one party is a convert Muslim and the other family member a non Muslim in which the latter alleges his/her rights have been infringed and encroached by State’s enforcement of Sharia….

    Lina Joy’s case is different and to be differentiated from the above cases in that it does not involve an alleged infringement or encroachment of non Muslims’ rights by State’s enforcement of Sharia (unless one is talking about the rights of her Christian cook husband).

    It involves Azalina Jailani, who was by birth a Malay whom by law was born a Muslim and who claimed she had converted from Islam to Christianity with the name Lina Joy in her identity card to show it and arguing that it came under her right to freedom of religion under Article 11 of the Constitution of Malaysia to have Islam deleted as her designated religion in her NRIC. No non muslim was involved. The case concerns the right of a born muslim to exercise the constitutional right to freedom of religion including to commit apostasy by defination of her faith of her birth.

    So if YB were to raise Lina Joy’s case in Parliament, one of the first objection to be raised would conceivably be why is a Non Muslim involved in Muslim affairs relating to apostasy – if at all such an issue on Muslims rights to religious freedom were raised, shouldn’t it be raised by Muslims? What is a non Muslim interest in the case?

    Sure there appears to be a polarization about the court outcome of Lina Joy’s case, with many Muslims happy with it and many Non Mulsims the opposite. But that’s about it. Does it, bottomline, infringe any non Muslims’ constitutional right – if no, what is the nature of Non Muslims’ interest in Lina Joy?

    How does one respond to such a challenge?

    The broad answer to it is that Lina Joy is not just about polarization of views over the court’s decision.

    It is really about the Constitution, whether it is still secular in nature as per Tun Salleh Abas’s pronouncement in Che Omar Che Soh v Public Prosecutor, and status of religious freedom in Malaysia that is supposed to be protected by it under Article 11(1) – and how the secular character and the protection of fundamental rights enshrined in it (to protect multiculturalism) have been steadily eroded and displaced over the years (culminating in Lina Joy’s predicament) by the then creeping, and now fast growing emphasis and endorsement (even by the courts) of all interpretations and nuances, Islamic, rather than secular, that in turn has effect of converting the country, in which all Muslims and Non Muslims have a stake, to that of a defacto Islamic State pointing the Middle East way.

    It is about how far a government (that advocates Islam Hadari) will appease, give in to and be stymied by the ultra conservative and over zealous groups within the religious establishment lobbying for their agenda and interpretation inconsistent with Islam Hadari and conflicting, to say the least, with secular character of the Federal Constitution and the fundamental liberties for all Malaysians therein enshrined, that Non Muslims have a legitimate stake in that being preserved.

    On these issues and so far as Lina Joy’s case exemplify them, even Non Muslims have a stake and therefore the right to speak upon.

  8. #8 by LittleBird on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 8:23 pm

    YB LKS, how about for once you and all opposition parliament members express 100% to all government projects and decisions. Let’s see if then the sleeping malaysian voters will come to their senses.

    From the day Bumiputra Bank scandal to smart tunnel not one person was ever charged or held accountable. That’s almost half a generation. Nothing would change the damage done.

  9. #9 by DiaperHead on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 8:55 pm

    This is the advance copy of the reply from the Prime Minister obtained from reliable though undisclosed sources:

    – Malaysia does not have the highest crime rate. The ‘higher’ crime rate is due to better reporting. Malaysians have confidence in the police which is working hard to ensure the safety of all Malaysians. The IPCMC is being looked still because we have to be careful. We do not want to have change it later on. Let the AG do his work.

    – I have not received a single phone call from any leader of another country about sexism among our MPs. Men and also women sometimes become sexist, though not sexy, out of the lack of attention from their spouses. So the best way to solve this is to give your spouse more attention so that he or she does not become sexist but sexy.

    – Samy Vellu is hard at work to come out with the details. We cannot give too much details because they will show who gets more cut the others and it will lead to a lot of complaints. You must give the man time to juggle with the figures. After all he is getting old after some 23 years of serving the people. He is slow and also forgetful. Sometimes he would appear at my office without his toupee.

    – Proton is a failed project by Mahathir and it is wrong to revive it. It is now on life support. But finally I think we may have to sell the assets for scrap. I have asked my Finance Minister to do the arithmetic and let me know how much we could get from selling Proton that way rather than as a viable enterprise. It is not viable lah.

    – Ambulances run out of petrol because drivers cannot remember everything. You don’t expect the Health Minister to be running around checking all our ambulances. We don’t want him to get gaji buta.

    – Buildings get old and become dilapidated like other 60 year old women. At least mine is not yet 60 – but close lah! We try and repair and make them beautiful again but sometimes it is better to abandon them and build new ones.
    – May 13? Over the years I know a lot of Malaysians who made money from number 13. Other than that it is best not to revive the ghosts of May 13. Nobody knows how it happened. This is all speculation. One more speculation is not going to get us nearer the truth. You can write books and say it is coup as a result of some people going cuckoo etc. It is not going to stop. But you can make money. Lots of money, yes!

    – No, nobody is going to make a mockery. This one is DAP tactic lah! IIM is to educate government servants on the importance of integrity and to tell them how to conduct themselves so that they integrate better.

    – These concessionaires must make enough money to pay everybody so that everybody is happy. We have to juggle the competing interests and it is not easy. Sometimes we drop the ball. But every time I pass through these tolls I see everybody paying money and smiling at the girls. Nobody is complaining. This one all DAP punya pasal. People are happy and they want to tell people not to be happy.

  10. #10 by Godamn Singh on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 9:01 pm

    “I assume by the word “polarization”, it means an increasingly clear dividing of two broad groups and interests – in our context, a reference to Muslim and Non Muslims – in conflicting or contrasting positions.” Jeffrey

    And what position is that? The ‘lotus’ position is very difficult to maintain. If you try too many positions you get all twisted up. You don’t want that.

  11. #11 by dawsheng on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 10:31 pm

    “I assume by the word “polarization”, it means an increasingly clear dividing of two broad groups and interests – in our context, a reference to Muslim and Non Muslims – in conflicting or contrasting positions.” Jeffrey

    Yes Jeffrey. Whoever take on this issue will have to take side and you know it will be a disaster as the line is clearly drawn, after that what’s left are matters of confrontation. The deseases are fast spreading and it has reached close enough to ignite an unending crisis in our country, as a matter of grave concerns DAP may want to ask the DPM cum Defence Minister Najib how we are going to deal with the situation is South Thailand, which many described as come close to civil war, or should I say already a Muslims against Buddhist war? With trouble brewing so close to us, don’t you think we should act with more caution, certain things are best left untouch for the moment, and keep doing that prayers and may peace last in this country.

  12. #12 by wtf2 on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 10:53 pm

    as long as any tom dick and harry can call themselves ulamas and muftis the polarization will continue.

    pure waste of time to debate matters pertaining to religions.

    they will need to restructure the muslim council ( whatever name they wouldlike to call it) to really have some persons with substantial sense and ability to think and not follow any books blindly to pursue his/her own agendas at the cost of other faiths.

    It;s like asking them to throw away the bumiputera privileges even though they definitely do not deserve the privilieges accorded.

    Malaysia is heading backwards. So instead of trumpeting 2020 or even 2057 etc etc as the goals perhaps they shoudl herald the second coming that’s counting backwards….

    until the time when religion and race can be segregated there will never be progress. [deleted]

  13. #13 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 1:09 am

    “What is a non Muslim interest in the case?” Jeffrey QC

    Good question!

    Could be because DAP is fishing for some votes, and doing it from the wrong lake?

  14. #14 by Jong on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 1:46 am

    undergrad2, I don’t think that’s a fair remark. As the politician one should look into the interests of the masses irrespective of their race or religious beliefs.

  15. #15 by bhuvan.govindasamy on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 5:36 am

    Mr Lim, while I applaud your efforts, I personally believe your questions will fall on deaf ears. It is not a christian, muslim, hindu, buddhist, taoist dialogue that is needed.

    What is really needed is dialogue between moderate muslims & zealots. Only when all muslims can find their identity and a middle ground, can the rest of us communicate with them rationally.

    Else, it will just degenerate into an emotional pissing contest.

  16. #16 by Godamn Singh on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 6:11 am

    Building bridges?? What has religion got to do with building bridges?? The Works Minister should look into it.

  17. #17 by lakshy on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 6:27 am

    When a person leaves his religion, its probably because he does not know much about his own religion and its strengths. Hence he is easily swayed. To combat this if that is what you want, people must take the interest to find out more about their own religion.

    If the muslims are concerned about it, then perhaps its about time to revamp the islamic studies that is being dished out in schools. Something must be seriously wrong with the system if the muslims still do not understand their own religion, and have to fear their members being converted out from Islam.

    I dont think any other religion in the world has this paranoia. I wonder why?

    Anyway the malaysian constitution prohibits spreading of other religion to muslim communities. So it shouldn’t happen.

    See what they said in NST dated 15th june pp16….by Zainah Anwar

    In August 1998, the sheikh of al-Azhar University declared that Islam recognises freedom of religion and Muslims are free to leave Islam as long as they do not harm the religion.

    Dr Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi believes there can be no compulsion in Islam. He asked what was the point in forcing those who wanted to leave Islam “to stay as this will only make them hypocrites”.

    Jakim then also sent a delegation to consult several Arab countries in 2000. And the late justice Harun Hashim said that the Malaysian delegation were surprised to meet scholar after scholar who believed in freedom of religion in all the countries visited!

    He was shocked to find that the Arab ulama who were reputed to be conservative, were far more enlightened than the Malaysian ulama.

    If you ask me, its not surprising…….the malaysians dont read…..they just mimic and shout without much substance.

    Know your facts first, then act!

  18. #18 by lakshy on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 6:29 am

    IKIM views in 12th June’s Star pp N42

    “The Quran has to be reinterpreted according to the changes in human history”

    Dr Syed Ali Tawfik Al-Attas.

  19. #19 by lakshy on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 6:30 am

    The Quran also says: “[3.84] We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us, and what was revealed to Ibrahim, Ismail and Ishaq and Jaquob and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and Jesus and to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinctions between any of them, and to Him do we submit.”

    So what was told to Moses and Jesus is also to be followed. So how can a person who leaves Islam and embraces Christianity (like in Lina Joy’s case)be found to be wrong? He is still following the teachings from the same book, and is also supported in the words of the Quran.

  20. #20 by lakshy on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 6:33 am

    Surah 6:38 “And there is not a single animal that walks the earth and not a single bird that flies with wings except they are communities (ummah) just like you. We have not left anything out of this Book. And in the end they will all be returned to their Lord”

    So not only dogs, but all the rest too are Ummah who will return to their Lord!

    God loves all of us, warts and all! Be you a Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Atheist, etc, according to the Quran.

    So why all the fuss in the LIna Joy case. Why is man judging her for her personal choice? Wouldn’t she be a hypocrite if she continued as a muslim when in her heart and sould she is a christian? IS this what Islam teaches, or what the ulema’s preach?

  21. #21 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 6:49 am

    “God loves all of us, warts and all! Be you a Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Atheist, etc, according to the Quran.” lakshy

    I think you had too much nasi kandar.

    But it is true that those who have not known Jesus but who so believe in Him will be at His mercy, meaning they are not destined to go to Hell.

    “So why all the fuss in the LIna Joy case. Why is man judging her for her personal choice? Wouldn’t she be a hypocrite if she continued as a muslim when in her heart and sould she is a christian? IS this what Islam teaches, or what the ulema’s preach?” Lakshy

    Thanks to UMNO, religion or should I say Islam has been politicized.

    But yes, you need to understand something about Islam. Islam do not differentiate between it and the state. Leaving the religion is akin to committing treason.

  22. #22 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 6:55 am

    Today murders are being committed in the name of Islam. At one time murders were committed in the name of Christianity.

    Millions were put to the sword for being non-believers. There were genocides committed in the name of religion. Things have not changed very much. Islam is going through the same throes as Christianity went through several hundred years earlier.

    Today we speak of the God of the New Testament as being a loving and forgiving God, and that of the Old Testament as being a strict and punishing God.

  23. #23 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 6:56 am

    The God of Islam is the God of the Old Testament.

  24. #24 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 6:59 am


    I am impressed with your citations “And there is not a single animal that walks the earth and not a single bird that flies with wings except they are communities (ummah) just like you” and especially your interpretation “God loves all of us, warts and all! Be you a Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Atheist, etc, according to the Quran.”

    So would it be true, according to your learned interpretation, that the swine has an undeserved reputation?

  25. #25 by lakshy on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 7:07 am

    I dont think it can get much clearer than that. So swine, and Jews also are loved. It’s man that creates and propogates hate, although religion tells us to love and respect each other.

  26. #26 by lakshy on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 7:09 am

    It is not my intention to equate Jews with pigs. It’s just to show that the the very same Jews that are hated by the muslims, also are communities. And will return to the Lord!

  27. #27 by lakshy on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 7:14 am

    Dont confuse Islam with the way it is practiseed by AAB or its followers.

    The same way you cannot judge Christianity by the way George Bush (a born again christian) kills innocents around the world, and also probably was the architect of the 911 plane crashes.

    Read about Islam itself to understand what it says.

    The many islamic terrorists also purport to commit crimes in the name of Islam. But they are misled by those with ulterior motives.

    And yes, I agree that religion and politics should not mix!

  28. #28 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 7:21 am

    “There were genocides committed in the name of religion” – Undergrad2

    Lets agree that men use religion to commit atrocities.

    Are you aware of any murders or genocide committed in the name of Buddhism?

    The term atheism originated as a pejorative epithet applied to any person or belief in conflict with established religion(s). However, with the spread of freethought and scientific skepticism in present age, it looks like atheism is also a fast spreading philosophical world view. Would it not be the case that the prospects of genocide or atrocities being committed by men in the name of religion be reduced and become less with the spread of atheism?

  29. #29 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 7:27 am

    Then again the Godless Communists in Stalin Soviet Union and as Mao’s China committed atrocities – but it was not in name of atheism but underthe name of Communism, class struggle, cultural revolution etc.

  30. #30 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 7:39 am

    “It’s man that creates and propogates hate, although religion tells us to love and respect each other” – Lakshy.

    Is it not a necessary implication – correct me if I were wrong here -that from what you said, it appears that precisely because men “create and propogate hate”, religions (never mind, which one) are propagated and embraced to neutralise and dilute this hate and aggression in the hearts of men, and the fact that hate and aggression may still be committed rampantly under the name of religion amply demonstrates that the bad impulse of hatred and aggression has triumphed over the other “good” impulse to neutralise and combat this bad impulse through institutional vehicle of religion, which therefore raises the question whether the spread of atheism may not really a bad thing, wouldn’t you say? Just some musings here from what you said.

  31. #31 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 9:47 am

    Perhaps we may want to take another look at this reader’s comment made in reply to mine on an earlier thread:

    undergrad2 said:

    **But it is true Christians, Muslims and Jews are referred to as People of the Book. As people of the Book, they are allowed to marry without having to convert. The late Tun Suffian’s wife remained true to her faith as a Jew and never converted at least not formally.**

    “Your statement is only partly true.

    Only the women are not required to convert. This means it’s possible for a Muslim man to marry a Jewish or Christian woman. But the children have to be brought up as Muslims.

    Where-else a Jewish or Christian man has to convert if he wants to marry a Muslim woman.

    So only the Muslim man has the privelage of marrying any female from the People of the Book. A Muslim woman can only marry a Muslim man, none else.” Raj

    Hermes corrected me on the facts too. He said Tun Suffian’s wife was a Catholic and not a Jew.

  32. #32 by dawsheng on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 11:05 am

    “And yes, I agree that religion and politics should not mix!” Lakshy

    Not only that, race also should not mix. Let me give you a bad example of how thing can be very complicated; let say one is a muslim, an UMNO and a Malay, all three combined and you have what we have today, problems and soon disaster. The only way religious intolerance or religious extremist can be counter is the disintegration of UMNO and that you do through the ballot box, by that I don’t ask you to vote for PAS.

  33. #33 by jc on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 11:26 am

    Saudara Lim,

    I salute you for your resilience and courage. I have been your ardent supporter 100% for the past 40 years, and will ever be. Hope you can come out with some excellent strategies with Anwar, the only hope…maybe another devil; but better to have alternative devils than the same one all the time. At least can keep all the devils on their toes!!
    Terima kasih, Saudara Lim Kit Siang.

  34. #34 by pulau_sibu on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 11:44 am

    did the government censor the media about Abdullah’s new wife? Please take a look here about the news report
    The news said there was rumour that she is a Chinese?

  35. #35 by lkt-56 on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 12:02 pm

    Religions born out of cultural differences are here to stay.

    That Lina Joy wants to convert into Christianity is beyond the control of the islamic authorities. How the authorities, and us fellow Malaysians react to her conversion will determine whether there will be a positive outcome to Lina’s conversion.

    That the judge should rule against Lina Joy’s suit to compel the NRD to delete the word “Islam” from her identity card is beyond Lina Joy’s control. How she reacts to the result will determine if there will be a positive outcome to her failure.

    In life we do not have control over many things that happen to us. But whether we succeed in finding balance and happiness depends on how we react to an event, be it positive or negative.

    Kit, you may ask Abdullah the questions… but I am afraid he has no answer. Neither do you have the answer. Each and everyone of us has to find our own answer. :)

  36. #36 by anakbaram on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 12:41 pm

    When under oppression like, Lina Joy, a person must remember that the last frontier is inside oneself. There no one can be in control except the individual himself. No matter what others do and no matter what they use in order to robe a person of that freedom they can never have the sole freedom in changing a person’s innermost self.

    Extreme oppression were expreinced before. It was done in the Nazi concentration camp by Hitler, in Rubin Island by the Africanas, in Viet Nam by the Vietkong and many others. In each case the surviors were those who maintain that inner freedom no matter under what trial. So my prayer for Lina Joy is that she be unpertubed by oppression. But keep her inner peace which is hers alone. Shallom.

  37. #37 by RGRaj on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 7:58 pm

    lakshy said:

    **I dont think it can get much clearer than that. So swine, and Jews also are loved. It’s man that creates and propogates hate, although religion tells us to love and respect each other.**

    Please read the Quranic ayat below.

    al-Quran 5:60

    Katakanlah: Mahukah, aku khabarkan kepada kamu tentang yang lebih buruk balasannya di sisi Allah daripada yang demikian itu? Ialah orang-orang yang dilaknat oleh Allah dan dimurkaiNya dan orang-orang yang dijadikan di antara mereka sebagai kera dan babi dan penyembah Taghut. Mereka inilah yang lebih buruk kedudukannya dan yang lebih sesat dari jalan yang betul.

  38. #38 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 9:03 pm

    Contrast this with Genesis 1:25

    “And God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeliness…”

  39. #39 by moong cha cha II on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 9:31 pm

    can you ask a supplemental question since you are meetin the PM

    can U ask PM if we all of us can be called “Bumiputras”

    that will solve your unity problems quite imeediately

  40. #40 by karlmarx8 on Sunday, 17 June 2007 - 10:34 pm

    It must be a matter of concern to all Malaysians that religious polarization of Malaysians is increasingly a major threat to nation building in the past decade, unless the first three decades of nationhood when the problem of religious polarization was quite unheard of.

    What has gone wrong. Why has religious polarization become worse instead of better, especially when the Islam Hadhari advocated by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is to promote justice, integrity and harmony.

    I don’t know much what happened during the 60s and 70s. Learning osmotically that these periods are exceptionally quiet (in religious aspect)and easy going in the interaction amongst the races-radicalism of Islam is unheard of. Post 9/11, and May 13 started the big bang. May 13 is a different set of situation, alright. Then come PAS!

    Most moderate governments are facing the problem of radicals now (what happen to yesterday bomb blast in Puduraya? Nobody said anything about it???)that some have to satisfy these radicals so they have to “enforce” some “strictures” so that they look the same. Otherwise, by GE most voters will go to PAS. Simple as that. The juggling is the most painful one that a forceful stricture will “hurt” the non muslim…but then again who knows what’s the “final goal”? So, Unc Kit, you should raise the issue on the building bridges, but read their lips (with much respect to you, I am not teaching…in fact you should read their soul!). ? ?? .

    The other issue on the “Law of Mobocracy” (mob crazy)we often being bombarded with the always “peaceful and friendly” Malaysia especially with each and every GE, the underline message is that mobocracy will ruled if there is some “unbalances” in the power game. So, how? much water had flow since then and this phrase is so workable that the “May 13” had always been brought up everytime during GE. Recently, it could have re-phrase to a “peaceful & friendly” then. Catch the phrase!

    So, Malaysia had gone from a very very moderate to a politically correct politico-religious governing. No more striaght sense of politic per se. It has embraced the true teaching of the religion -so to say.

    Did the Islam Hadhari had impact domestically? Had it being exported or that it has imported another version, instead?

    So, what’s wrong you asked? We would like to know. This has impact for the all subsequent generations of non muslim.

  41. #41 by karlmarx8 on Monday, 18 June 2007 - 12:33 am

    Unc Kit, why don’t you write a book on the impact of hadhari and the state of which Islam is in Malaysia? Where are the non muslim heading to in 10 or so years time? What the future holds for interfaith? Seditious?

    Someone had written about the doom of Malaysia…but his view is narrow and did not touch on the historical aspect…kind of “commentary” rather than a good writing…

  42. #42 by Tai Lo Chin on Monday, 18 June 2007 - 12:50 am

    (what happen to yesterday bomb blast in Puduraya? Nobody said anything about it???) – karlmarx8

    Yeah what happened to it? I heard it was reported in Chinese newspapers (GuangMing) but not reported in any of the mainstream English papers. Was it true? Were papers instructed not to report?

  43. #43 by Godamn Singh on Monday, 18 June 2007 - 6:58 am

    Somebody’s car tyre got punctured. Not much of a news item.

  44. #44 by Toyol on Monday, 18 June 2007 - 2:55 pm

    My neighbour’s trip to Cherating was marred when her Malay friends refused to sit with the rest because they were Christians! And they were just havng coffee. Also my friend who wore shorts to pay a visit to her Malay friend was scolded by her friend’s daughter who accused her of being indecent. What the hell is going on in this country? Where is the tolerance the govt is bullshitting us about or is the tolerance one sided?!!!

  45. #45 by undergrad2 on Monday, 18 June 2007 - 5:23 pm

    Tolerance?? What tolerance?

  46. #46 by ReformMalaysia on Monday, 18 June 2007 - 5:51 pm

    # undergrad2 Says:’The God of Islam is the God of the Old Testament.'(17/6/07 , 06:56.27)

    But in Old Testament, it was told that: God created Adam, then created Eve as his companion…. that is 1 woman for 1 man…… one for one…….

    But Islam allow a man to take 4 wives….. does that means that men’s needs had increased… that God change his mind and approving man to have for wives?

    God being a superior being should know what would be the traits of the man he created… why didn’t he created 4 women for Adam?… so I could not really agree that Islam’s God is the Old testament God…

  47. #47 by undergrad2 on Monday, 18 June 2007 - 10:21 pm

    ReformMalaysia, I am sorry but you need to re-form your facts.

    If you read the Bible closely, under Genesis there were two versions of the Creation.

    One version has it that God created the first Man, Adam out of dust and later almost as an afterthought created Eve to keep him company. He created Eve out of Adam’s ribs. What does that tell you if not the first Woman was to be docile and dependent on the first Man?

    Talk about ‘sexism’ in our Parliament! God was sexist.

    Then there is the other version of the Creation which has it that God created Adam and Eve out of dust and at the same time. You don’t have to believe me. Read Genesis for yourself. Remember the Bible is not just a book of faith but is also a history book.

    Scholars studied both versions of the Creation and some thought that the second version is suspect. According to this ‘feminist’ viewpoint, Eve was not the first Woman but Lilith is. Lilith was Adam’s equal. Eve was substituted by male writers later to make women appear docile and dependent on men.

    Don’t forget the Bible is also a history book. In the Old Testament men were living up to 700 years and were having hundreds of wives and concubines. Check it out!

    A prophet of the Old Testament Lot after escaping from the fires of Sodom and Gomorrah had sex with his own daughters! Check that one out too.

    Since we all are descendant of Adam and Eve there must have been incest. How else would the earth be populated?? Indeed there was widespread sinning those days and God became angry and decided to drown every living thing except for Noah, his family and a pair of each animal that walked the earth. Then it is incest all over again!

    Then came The New Testament. They are testaments because they are covenants struck between God and us. In this New Testament, there was no mention of monogamy by Jesus.

    I do not know the Qur’an but Prophet Muhammad today would fit the definition of a pedophile. I am sorry.

  48. #48 by ReformMalaysia on Wednesday, 20 June 2007 - 8:13 pm

    Well, what God want is consistent… but the devil always there to give temptation to men to do the evil things…

    ….and there are things which was not expressed… but implied…

    I do agree with your last sentence… in this case- a man take a 9-year old girl(Aisyah) as wife….

  49. #49 by mabert on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 9:52 am

    Mr.Lim, there is so much talk about religious sensitivities in this country. I,myself a civil servant wish to state that non muslims are being forced to attend courses that include ceramah agama and vcd shows conducted by Jakim. This is very true in the intergrity course which is compulsory for all government servants or face displicinary action.Right on our faces they talk about kafir which normally refer to us non muslims. Should I react the way these people reacted towards Lina Joy. P.S I went for the course but I stay at hotel room during the ceramah. In future I may not attend any of these courses anymore. I even e-mail the matter to the department concern. Talk about religious freedom! This what happens when the so call ‘social contract’ handed over too much power to one community.

  50. #50 by advocater on Saturday, 30 June 2007 - 5:46 pm

    Firstly,it can be opined that lina joy’s decision to actually change/remove the word ‘islam’ in her mykad is actually a ‘ridiculous’ one.she ought to have known that although this is a multi-racial country;living in a country where the muslim dominates the majority of the population-freedom of religion will definately be over-shadowed.

    Secondly,in commenting about the Federal Court’s decision-i am at no surprise that lina was actually being defeated.the decision was based on a utilitarian concept ie;the greatest pleasure for the greatest number-as Jeremy Bentham would say.this clearly contradicts or is inconsistent with the concept of the right to a fair trial.if ‘justice’ cannot be seen in ones homeland,where else can a citizen of a country go?so much for ‘malaysia boleh’.

    Thirdly,the aftermath of the case-the muslim’s are happy and the non-muslim’s are wondering what has happen to equal rights and non-discrimination amongst race and religion in a country which connotes THAT.

    But,one tends to wonder,what would the remarks be if the decision was decided otherwise?we would have the government’s view on the case,the judges,the lawyers,the academics and not to forget the islamic extremist.this would then set a precedent to many,changing the info in their mykads.multi racial marriages between a muslim n non-muslim wherein which conversion would not be an issue to even talk about.the traditional view on marriage would be upheld-a VOLUNTARY union of a man and a waoman to the exclusion of others…but if the law for the matter is seen as a hurdle to bypass,then the CONSTITUTION which connotes freedom of religion would be of no use.

    There is absolutely no use to force someone to be something they are not.ISLAM strives for actually denying her to change/remove the word in her mykad…she is denied a right to a fair trial,a right to marry and freedom of religion.what makes you think that another would not hesitate to even leave the country,for the matter if human rights are not taken seriously?as it is we are loosing qualified graduates who refuse to come back…

    Lastly,kudos to lina joy to actually bring the case up to the,this case will be read by many in law text books…but what is the big deal?maybe we should also come up with a legislation akin to the ECHR…but,wait a minute;who makes law?Parliament…who sits there?…..hhhmmm…sometimes, we just have to embrace the FACT and ACCEPT it!

You must be logged in to post a comment.