After reading Pang's thoughts published on Malaysiakini (and elsewhere), I think I have to agree with one of the comments in response, namely "I really do not believe the average Malaysian is homophobic".
I am older than Pang and I come from a severely Christian / Protestant background, from a baby (not even a convert at an older age). Christianity has always been a part of my life.
Yet, at the age of 11, I accepted that I could be bisexual, and by the age of 13, I knew I was gay. Not once was there ever a conflict with my faith. Of course, by the time I was in my teens, I kept away from church, not because of Christ, but because of the people. If I may be 'authentic', in my eyes (and this is something I still believe to a lesser extent) church people are boring, square, narrow minded and have little imagination. I guess I instinctively recognised this when I was younger.
At the age of 13, I became friends in 2ndary school with a guy who became my best friend. He too was gay. We'd discuss Dynasty and the scenes with Stephen (the gay son). He'd read Danielle Steele and tell me about the the gay son who invariably appeared in the storylines. We'd ogle boys, and he conquered the school. I would cover up for him during recess, when he was 'busy' with a hockey player or with a softball player etc. All this took place in the mid to late 1980s.
We'd have crushes and infatuations and eventually, we pulled in a 3rd friend, whom we both knew had to be gay. And he was. After SPM, when we were 17, we crashed into Blue Boys and met so many wonderful people. Those were fun times.
Life then was all about cruising, because there was only Blue Boys. In pre-Uni, we ended up in the same college and continued our escapades. We fell in love with men, we had plenty of sex, but we eventually expanded our wings, with me making trips to Europe, and our 3rd friend eventually moving to the USA.
All the while, mind, I prayed. I read the Bible. It seems odd to me even now that some people keep on saying that the Bible doesn't allow homosexuality. By the time I was 21, I had read the Bible, from Genesis all the way to Revelations, in Good News (easy start), King James, New King James, NIV and finally the Catholic Bible (the Apocrypha is so cool!).
My best friend and I moved to the UK and our 3rd friend, as mentioned, ended up in the USA. Now and then, we'd make trips back to KL. I was delighted to find more and more venues popping up. But my best friend wasn't.
In fact, along the way, I found there are many older gay men who are not happy that we have plenty of other gay venues. They are not happy that we don't have to hide (we don't really, if you think about it). Why? Because they liked the way things were. Gay life was forced underground, and that lent it a sense of danger, a sense of naughtiness, who knows? Up to now, you'll find older 'veterans' unhappy about the change.
Now, in our 30s, the three of us have grown apart. My closest friend is now anti current state-of-affairs and living the life of cruising and picking up boys at bus stops. In fact, he wasn't happy at all about my union. That was 'joining the straight world', treason to the 'gay world'. My friend in the US has become a militant pro-gay activist. I guess the LGBT in the USA have to be this way, considering what they're fighting. And I? Well, I have settled down happily, and I couldn't ask for a better spouse than BLISS.
And these are the journey of three people.
Of course, I knew people and heard of stories of their families kicking out their children because they were gay. But I also knew of parents who kicked out their daughters for unwanted pregnancies. I also knew of families who abandoned their children for no reason. To my mind, this has nothing to do with homosexuality.
It has to do with PARENTING. And the social pressure for people to get married and have children even if they aren't even proper human beings. How can they be parents?
So what's the issue about this whole issue?
To my mind:
1. Everyone has their own journey. I didn't go through what Pang went through. But I never immersed myself in church life. The church can be a dangerous place.
2. Even the boring narrow-minded unimaginative people in church have their own journeys. Some make it out of church alive, and learn how dangerous church is. Some don't. Some convert to other religions, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. The church attracts broken people. And society is full of broken people. Broken people make even more broken people. This needs to be addressed, but I'm not sure how...
3. The reaction of people in response to situations depends on their journey. I actually don't believe Malaysians are homophobic. Some dumb churches are, especially the hyper fundamentalist or charismatic types, usually exported out from the USA. The lesson? Don't go to a US-based church. My recommendation - try the Eastern Orthodox church.
4. A response which works in one country does not necessarily work in another country. Before sexual rights, there is the ISA. There is the OSA. There is the Sedition Act and the offence of criminal defamation. If you take these away, fighting for sexual rights will be that much easier. Throughout my writing here, I have committed sedition against the church countless number of times!
5. To crush out the imagination is to crush out one of God's greatest gifts. That's the blasphemy taking place in churches today.
And those are my rambling thoughts...
Showing posts with label Socio-political. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Socio-political. Show all posts
Friday, September 10, 2010
Monday, September 6, 2010
Strain out a Gnat but Swallow a Camel (Matthew 23:24)
An openly gay pastor publicly announced he wanted to start an inclusive church that welcome everyone including gays and transsexuals, what do you think he might be inferring? How do you think the Malaysian public will think? Even the gay community is telling each other it's a gay church.
There are a lot of passages in the Bible against women being leaders and teachers in the church but why is there not a single debate in the public about that? Why is there not a single theologian or priest or pastor making any statement against that practice that is clearly a violation of biblical principles. There are lots of women pastors and leaders teaching and leading in many churches (not the Roman Catholic Church though, thank God!).
What have gay people done to make all these religious people up in arms against them? What evil have gay people done in human history that cause such violence reaction toward them? Gay people have no political power, civil rights and recognitions in many societies in the world including our lovely country Malaysia. They are in constantly danger of being humiliated, discriminated, rejected, jailed, persecuted, and even killed. We can learn all about it in history. Oscar Wilde was a good example.
All these people have against gay people is what written in the Bible and the Qu'ran, the infamous story of Sodom and Gomorrah. However, is there any archaeological or scientific evidence or proof that these two cities were destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality? Have there any other solid examples other Sodom and Gomorrah, that a country or city was destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality?
How could anyone against a people group based on writings that they believe is the word of God? Can they scientifically and objectively prove that the Bible or the Qu'ran is the word of God? There are so many injustices and immoralities in our Malaysian society which are clearly against the Bible or the Qu'ran but I don't see any of these religious people up in arms against them.
In the Gospels, the only people whom Jesus got angry with were the religious people. And these religious people were the ones who nailed him on the cross.
There are so many ethical principles written in these two holy books but very few are being practiced. Perhaps, before we point our fingers to anyone whom we think may be violating the word of God, we should first ask ourselves whether we are practicing those principles so perfectly that we can march into the Kingdom of God without fear and trembling.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" Matthew 7:3
BLISS
There are a lot of passages in the Bible against women being leaders and teachers in the church but why is there not a single debate in the public about that? Why is there not a single theologian or priest or pastor making any statement against that practice that is clearly a violation of biblical principles. There are lots of women pastors and leaders teaching and leading in many churches (not the Roman Catholic Church though, thank God!).
What have gay people done to make all these religious people up in arms against them? What evil have gay people done in human history that cause such violence reaction toward them? Gay people have no political power, civil rights and recognitions in many societies in the world including our lovely country Malaysia. They are in constantly danger of being humiliated, discriminated, rejected, jailed, persecuted, and even killed. We can learn all about it in history. Oscar Wilde was a good example.
All these people have against gay people is what written in the Bible and the Qu'ran, the infamous story of Sodom and Gomorrah. However, is there any archaeological or scientific evidence or proof that these two cities were destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality? Have there any other solid examples other Sodom and Gomorrah, that a country or city was destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality?
How could anyone against a people group based on writings that they believe is the word of God? Can they scientifically and objectively prove that the Bible or the Qu'ran is the word of God? There are so many injustices and immoralities in our Malaysian society which are clearly against the Bible or the Qu'ran but I don't see any of these religious people up in arms against them.
In the Gospels, the only people whom Jesus got angry with were the religious people. And these religious people were the ones who nailed him on the cross.
There are so many ethical principles written in these two holy books but very few are being practiced. Perhaps, before we point our fingers to anyone whom we think may be violating the word of God, we should first ask ourselves whether we are practicing those principles so perfectly that we can march into the Kingdom of God without fear and trembling.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" Matthew 7:3
BLISS
Friday, September 3, 2010
So Scary
By Agence France-Presse, Updated: 9/3/2010
Malaysia to monitor Internet for 'harmful' blogs
Malaysia has formed a task force to scour the Internet for blog postings deemed harmful to national unity, authorities said Friday in the latest of a series of actions against new media.
Home ministry deputy secretary general for security Abdul Rahim Mohamad Radzi said the unit would involve the police, Internet regulators, the information ministry and the attorney general's chambers.
"It is a mechanism that will coordinate these various agencies to help monitor what is being said in cyberspace and to take action against those that are trying to stoke racial tensions and disunity," he told AFP.
Abdul Rahim said the group would also monitor alternative and mainstream media for similar content.
"There is a disturbing trend now appearing on the Internet where some people are inciting racial unrest and causing confusion and this will damage the peace we have in the country," he added.
Abdul Rahim cited the recent case of a Facebook page that insulted Muslim Malays. They make up the majority of Malaysia's multicultural population, alongside large ethnic Chinese and Indian communities.
Police are also investigating ethnic Chinese rapper Wee Meng Chee for sedition, after he posted a three-minute rap on YouTube criticising a Malay headmistress accused of making racial slurs against minority students.
The government has ordered a probe into the case which caused anger among Malaysia's minorities, who complain their rights are being eroded as the country becomes increasingly "Islamised".
In another case, Malaysian journalist Irwan Abdul Rahman was charged this week over a satirical blog which made fun of the state power firm Tenaga, and faces a year's jail if convicted.
The prosecution caused a stir because unlike the mainstream press, the web and online media in Malaysia have remained relatively free, despite occasional raids, bans and government criticism.
Major newspapers and broadcasters are closely linked with the ruling coalition, so the Internet has become a lively forum for dissent and debate.
The government in 1996 pledged not to censor online content as part of a campaign to promote its information technology sector.
Malaysia to monitor Internet for 'harmful' blogs
Malaysia has formed a task force to scour the Internet for blog postings deemed harmful to national unity, authorities said Friday in the latest of a series of actions against new media.
Home ministry deputy secretary general for security Abdul Rahim Mohamad Radzi said the unit would involve the police, Internet regulators, the information ministry and the attorney general's chambers.
"It is a mechanism that will coordinate these various agencies to help monitor what is being said in cyberspace and to take action against those that are trying to stoke racial tensions and disunity," he told AFP.
Abdul Rahim said the group would also monitor alternative and mainstream media for similar content.
"There is a disturbing trend now appearing on the Internet where some people are inciting racial unrest and causing confusion and this will damage the peace we have in the country," he added.
Abdul Rahim cited the recent case of a Facebook page that insulted Muslim Malays. They make up the majority of Malaysia's multicultural population, alongside large ethnic Chinese and Indian communities.
Police are also investigating ethnic Chinese rapper Wee Meng Chee for sedition, after he posted a three-minute rap on YouTube criticising a Malay headmistress accused of making racial slurs against minority students.
The government has ordered a probe into the case which caused anger among Malaysia's minorities, who complain their rights are being eroded as the country becomes increasingly "Islamised".
In another case, Malaysian journalist Irwan Abdul Rahman was charged this week over a satirical blog which made fun of the state power firm Tenaga, and faces a year's jail if convicted.
The prosecution caused a stir because unlike the mainstream press, the web and online media in Malaysia have remained relatively free, despite occasional raids, bans and government criticism.
Major newspapers and broadcasters are closely linked with the ruling coalition, so the Internet has become a lively forum for dissent and debate.
The government in 1996 pledged not to censor online content as part of a campaign to promote its information technology sector.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Muslims Have Human Rights too
The Malaysian Insider
Wednesday January 13 2010
JAN 13 — One thing that has become clear in recent days is how separate the various religious communities in Malaysia have come to live and how we have come to see ourselves. We have witnessed ministers talking of inter-faith dialogue as if it were something daring and revolutionary.
And the fact that Muslim ministers or MPs are visiting churches appears to be something worth remarking on, as if it were unusual that elected representatives should want to meet and seek to represent the interests of all the people for whom they are supposed to be responsible.
Like in Northern Ireland, religions have come to be mutually exclusive categories that define who we are, where we belong and where we don’t belong.
And as in Northern Ireland, just as increasingly among the secular Europeans who have suddenly become “Christian” in distinction to “those Muslims” living in their countries, religion is importantly a way of defining who we are not.
Many non-Muslim parents in Malaysia, it would appear, would rather their child married an alien from outer space than a Muslim.
It is easy in this to blame the government, who have branded us Muslim or non-Muslim as plain as anyone can see on our identity cards.
It is easy to blame the law, which turns second-generation South Asian or Indonesian Muslims into “sons of the soil” who then turn around accuse fourth- and fifth-generation non-Muslims of being interlopers or pendatang.
And it is just as easy to blame the religious fanatics who invade inter-faith meetings and colloquia on freedom of religion, or who seek to divide Selangor into Muslim and non-Muslim zones for the purpose of licensing the sale of alcohol.
What I believe this Allah episode has shown us is that we non-Muslims have also ourselves to blame if we find ourselves in a country where religious liberty has gone down the drain. The Allah episode is a major controversy in Malaysia because it affects the way a non-Muslim, Christian, group conducts its own affairs and communicates with its own members.
In reality, it is only really a big issue among non-Muslims because it has crossed the line between what we see as “our” business and what we see as “their” business.
But can we be surprised if those same governmental authorities who are used to being able imprison Muslims in “re-education centres” for months or years for not believing what they are supposed to believe, who can storm into private homes and hotel rooms demanding that brown-skinned tourists get out of bed and show them their passports and marriage certificates, and who can sentence a woman in a holiday resort to be caned for having an apéritif before dinner, now feel aggrieved that they should give an instruction on something vaguely Islam-related (namely, the word Allah) and not be entitled to immediate and unquestioning obedience?
The truth is that we are all guilty of what Pastor Niemöller spoke of when he said: “First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist / … then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew / Then they came for me—and there was no-one left to speak out”.
For how many non-Muslims protested when Lina Joy was told she could never leave Islam and marry her fiancé? How many non-Muslim senators and MPs spoke out against the 2005 Islamic Family Law amendment bill, which set back women’s rights in the Federal Territories, when it went through Parliament?
And how many non-Muslims objected when they learnt that the penalty for prostituting your wife in Pahang is less severe than the penalty for drinking alcohol? Every time the latest teapot-worshipping “deviationist sect” is rounded up and imprisoned, their place of worship demolished and their leaders locked up under the ISA, our silence speaks volumes for our lack of commitment to freedom of religion when it does not concern us personally.
As a warning as to the way our country may be heading, let me relate the story of the Ahmadis in Pakistan. The Ahmadis are a Muslim-revivalist community founded in the Punjab in the 19th century by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, whom Ahmadis believe to be a prophet. Although the Ahmadis, who now form 3-4% of the population of modern-day Pakistan, accept most of the tenets of Islam and consider themselves to be Muslims, other Muslims in Pakistan do not.
In 1984, General Zia, the military ruler of Pakistan, passed an ordinance prohibiting them from calling themselves Muslims or “posing as Muslims”. This means that they are not allowed to worship in Muslim mosques, to call their places of worship masjid or to use the azan, to say assalamualaikum, to quote publicly from the Qur’an, to display or proclaim the shahada, or to preach or publish any materials in public.
The courts in Pakistan have even held that the Ahmadis are guilty of “copyright infringement” and blasphemy when they use certain Islamic phrases. Ahmadis who display Quranic verses have been imprisoned, and the authorities have forcibly obliterated the shahada from the walls of Ahmadi mosques. Ahmadis are also prohibited from undertaking the hajj to Mecca. Outside the official sphere, many Ahmadis have been murdered by lynch-mobs simply because of their beliefs.
It all sounds like the Allah ban gone mad. But surely Pakistan is Pakistan and Malaysia is Malaysia? Surely this would never happen in our country?
Well, in December 2008, Selayang Municipal Council, under the control of the Selangor PR government, ordered an Ahmadi central mosque to remove the shahada from their building. There is apparently a 1975 Selangor fatwa, which you can access on the e-fatwa website, that declares Ahmadis to be non-Muslim, and states that ideally they should be killed, but as this is not currently legal (lucky for them), they should be stripped of all privileges belonging to Muslims or Malays.
In April 2009, the Selangor Islamic Religious Council, ordered an Ahmadi mosque to cease performing Friday prayers with immediate effect, threatening them with imprisonment of up to one year and a fine of RM3,000 for non-compliance. The chief culprit behind this appears to be Dr Hassan Ali of PAS. Again, the silence from other members of the Pakatan Rakyat state government is somewhat astonishing.
Certainly, Malaysians should accept that Islam is the official religion of the Federation and of the states (save I think in Sabah and Sarawak, where I believe the 20-point and 18-point agreements had something to say about the matter), but that does not mean that Malaysians should blindly accept everything that the mullahs in charge of the various state Islamic affairs councils have to say on matters of religion.
If Saudi Arabia, the model of religious intolerance, can allow Shia Muslims to practise their religion (albeit not without some discrimination), then why must Malaysia, the poster child for Muslim moderation, lock up Shia Muslims under the ISA for simply following their faith?
There is a desperate need in our country for Muslims and non-Muslims to accept that what they do does affect one another, whether because marriages break down when one spouse converts to another religion, or because widows and children are disinherited when conversions happen without the family’s knowledge, or because of the activities of places of worship affecting neighbouring residents.
For a supposedly multi-religious country, there is surprisingly little education in schools about any religion other than one’s own. Unlike in England or America, students are segregated into religious groups and learn little about what other faiths practise or believe.
Non-Muslims in particular need to learn about Islam and to engage with what over the past few decades has become one of the strongest forces moving our country; for they should understand that it is not Islam that is their enemy, but racists and bigots claiming a monopoly on religion.
“And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, “We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)” – Sura Ankabut 46 (tr. Yusuf Ali).
Andrew Yong
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/opinion/breaking-views/49417-muslims-have-human-rights-too--andrew-yong
Wednesday January 13 2010
JAN 13 — One thing that has become clear in recent days is how separate the various religious communities in Malaysia have come to live and how we have come to see ourselves. We have witnessed ministers talking of inter-faith dialogue as if it were something daring and revolutionary.
And the fact that Muslim ministers or MPs are visiting churches appears to be something worth remarking on, as if it were unusual that elected representatives should want to meet and seek to represent the interests of all the people for whom they are supposed to be responsible.
Like in Northern Ireland, religions have come to be mutually exclusive categories that define who we are, where we belong and where we don’t belong.
And as in Northern Ireland, just as increasingly among the secular Europeans who have suddenly become “Christian” in distinction to “those Muslims” living in their countries, religion is importantly a way of defining who we are not.
Many non-Muslim parents in Malaysia, it would appear, would rather their child married an alien from outer space than a Muslim.
It is easy in this to blame the government, who have branded us Muslim or non-Muslim as plain as anyone can see on our identity cards.
It is easy to blame the law, which turns second-generation South Asian or Indonesian Muslims into “sons of the soil” who then turn around accuse fourth- and fifth-generation non-Muslims of being interlopers or pendatang.
And it is just as easy to blame the religious fanatics who invade inter-faith meetings and colloquia on freedom of religion, or who seek to divide Selangor into Muslim and non-Muslim zones for the purpose of licensing the sale of alcohol.
What I believe this Allah episode has shown us is that we non-Muslims have also ourselves to blame if we find ourselves in a country where religious liberty has gone down the drain. The Allah episode is a major controversy in Malaysia because it affects the way a non-Muslim, Christian, group conducts its own affairs and communicates with its own members.
In reality, it is only really a big issue among non-Muslims because it has crossed the line between what we see as “our” business and what we see as “their” business.
But can we be surprised if those same governmental authorities who are used to being able imprison Muslims in “re-education centres” for months or years for not believing what they are supposed to believe, who can storm into private homes and hotel rooms demanding that brown-skinned tourists get out of bed and show them their passports and marriage certificates, and who can sentence a woman in a holiday resort to be caned for having an apéritif before dinner, now feel aggrieved that they should give an instruction on something vaguely Islam-related (namely, the word Allah) and not be entitled to immediate and unquestioning obedience?
The truth is that we are all guilty of what Pastor Niemöller spoke of when he said: “First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist / … then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew / Then they came for me—and there was no-one left to speak out”.
For how many non-Muslims protested when Lina Joy was told she could never leave Islam and marry her fiancé? How many non-Muslim senators and MPs spoke out against the 2005 Islamic Family Law amendment bill, which set back women’s rights in the Federal Territories, when it went through Parliament?
And how many non-Muslims objected when they learnt that the penalty for prostituting your wife in Pahang is less severe than the penalty for drinking alcohol? Every time the latest teapot-worshipping “deviationist sect” is rounded up and imprisoned, their place of worship demolished and their leaders locked up under the ISA, our silence speaks volumes for our lack of commitment to freedom of religion when it does not concern us personally.
As a warning as to the way our country may be heading, let me relate the story of the Ahmadis in Pakistan. The Ahmadis are a Muslim-revivalist community founded in the Punjab in the 19th century by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, whom Ahmadis believe to be a prophet. Although the Ahmadis, who now form 3-4% of the population of modern-day Pakistan, accept most of the tenets of Islam and consider themselves to be Muslims, other Muslims in Pakistan do not.
In 1984, General Zia, the military ruler of Pakistan, passed an ordinance prohibiting them from calling themselves Muslims or “posing as Muslims”. This means that they are not allowed to worship in Muslim mosques, to call their places of worship masjid or to use the azan, to say assalamualaikum, to quote publicly from the Qur’an, to display or proclaim the shahada, or to preach or publish any materials in public.
The courts in Pakistan have even held that the Ahmadis are guilty of “copyright infringement” and blasphemy when they use certain Islamic phrases. Ahmadis who display Quranic verses have been imprisoned, and the authorities have forcibly obliterated the shahada from the walls of Ahmadi mosques. Ahmadis are also prohibited from undertaking the hajj to Mecca. Outside the official sphere, many Ahmadis have been murdered by lynch-mobs simply because of their beliefs.
It all sounds like the Allah ban gone mad. But surely Pakistan is Pakistan and Malaysia is Malaysia? Surely this would never happen in our country?
Well, in December 2008, Selayang Municipal Council, under the control of the Selangor PR government, ordered an Ahmadi central mosque to remove the shahada from their building. There is apparently a 1975 Selangor fatwa, which you can access on the e-fatwa website, that declares Ahmadis to be non-Muslim, and states that ideally they should be killed, but as this is not currently legal (lucky for them), they should be stripped of all privileges belonging to Muslims or Malays.
In April 2009, the Selangor Islamic Religious Council, ordered an Ahmadi mosque to cease performing Friday prayers with immediate effect, threatening them with imprisonment of up to one year and a fine of RM3,000 for non-compliance. The chief culprit behind this appears to be Dr Hassan Ali of PAS. Again, the silence from other members of the Pakatan Rakyat state government is somewhat astonishing.
Certainly, Malaysians should accept that Islam is the official religion of the Federation and of the states (save I think in Sabah and Sarawak, where I believe the 20-point and 18-point agreements had something to say about the matter), but that does not mean that Malaysians should blindly accept everything that the mullahs in charge of the various state Islamic affairs councils have to say on matters of religion.
If Saudi Arabia, the model of religious intolerance, can allow Shia Muslims to practise their religion (albeit not without some discrimination), then why must Malaysia, the poster child for Muslim moderation, lock up Shia Muslims under the ISA for simply following their faith?
There is a desperate need in our country for Muslims and non-Muslims to accept that what they do does affect one another, whether because marriages break down when one spouse converts to another religion, or because widows and children are disinherited when conversions happen without the family’s knowledge, or because of the activities of places of worship affecting neighbouring residents.
For a supposedly multi-religious country, there is surprisingly little education in schools about any religion other than one’s own. Unlike in England or America, students are segregated into religious groups and learn little about what other faiths practise or believe.
Non-Muslims in particular need to learn about Islam and to engage with what over the past few decades has become one of the strongest forces moving our country; for they should understand that it is not Islam that is their enemy, but racists and bigots claiming a monopoly on religion.
“And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, “We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)” – Sura Ankabut 46 (tr. Yusuf Ali).
Andrew Yong
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/opinion/breaking-views/49417-muslims-have-human-rights-too--andrew-yong
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Let Allah be Allah
Yesterday was probably one of the saddest days in Malaysia. Three churches were attacked with molotov cocktail and two exploded. One explosion did a little damage but the other gutted an office. The third, by the grace of Allah, did not explode.
The irony of the attack is, the explosions occurred in two Evangelical Protestant churches which may not support the idea of Christians calling God Allah. They believe Allah is the God of Islam and by calling Yahweh or Jesus (which is specifically stated in the Bible as the name of God for the Christians and Jews) Allah is not biblical.
The one that didn’t explode was the one thrown into the compound of Assumption Church in PJ, which is a Roman Catholic Church. The RC Church is the one that brought about the judgment of the high court that Christians can call God Allah.
Later, during the demonstration (must be a great disappointment because only few turned out; I was disappointed because I was waiting to see FRU water gunning these people and beating them with their batons), one of the demonstration leaders said Christians might have staged their own arson on those churches. The statement shows how ignorant and well, stupid, these people are. They couldn’t even tell the difference between Protestants and Roman Catholics and didn’t know that these two have been enemies for hundreds of years, though they may be grudgingly getting along well now.
Personally, I think Allah is showing His muscles. There were people praying in Assumption Church during the time of the attack and if the bomb were to explode, we can imagine the worst case scenario. But it did not and to me that was Allah’s protection.
The two exploded in the Protestant Churches, to me, could be a warning from Allah that we should not disgrace His name. Allah is God for all people and to say Allah is only for the Muslims are first, it is not what the Quran teaches, and second, it insults Allah, locked Him with a group of fanatic followers that constantly malign His name in the world. As for these Evangelical Protestant Christians, they usually believe that all other religions (including the Roman Catholics) are from the devil, deceiving people from believing in the Protestant faith hence lead them to hell. Therefore, to these Evangelical Protestant Christians, the name Allah may be from the devil, deceiving people from the true faith in the Evangelical Protestant Church. (I heard some told me that Allah is actually the name of the moon god).
As for these Muslims, to fight so passionately without using their brain and having proper understanding of what Islam is, they are basically telling Allah that He is incapable of protecting Himself and keeping His name pure. That is an insult to Allah, that He needs our protection and that He needs us to fight for Him.
I could be wrong saying that the two Protestant Churches are supporting Allah is only for the Muslims. There are many Protestants who want to be able to pray to Allah as well, especially the ones from East Malaysia. And I apologize to these two churches if I imply that perhaps it’s the judgment from Allah because they may not have supported the usage of “Allah” for Christians. I was very upset and shaken up yesterday with these churches being attacked and burned and felt very sorry for these two churches. I stand by the conviction that everyone is entitled to his/her own belief and opinion and will die for these two churches to defend their rights to their own beliefs and opinions.
The point I’m trying to make here is, there are so much misunderstanding, mistrust, and fear among us because of our differences, it’s time for all of us to come together to get to know each other better and to understand one another instead of telling one another that you are of the devil because you believe differently.
The Greek root word for demonic is to divide. To divide ourselves like that is actually demonic. The Bible says that the devil comes to steal, kill and destroy. How would it do it? To steal away our peace then make us fight one another and at the end destroy one another. It has already stolen the peace and harmony in this country that used to pride itself to be the model of plurality. Up till now, there has not been any initiative from the authorities to mediate a dialog between Muslims and Christians on this issue and the ruling party's newspapers have been fanning the fire. If this is not demonic, what it is?
However, I also think the church attack incident yesterday could also be a message from Allah; do not play play the name of Allah, and Allah is the God of everybody. It's a wake up call from Allah.
“Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap.” Gal 6:7
“…I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” Rom 9:15
Allah is sovereign and He does not need us to protect Him or to tell Him what He should do. He can fight for Himself and defends Himself. He decides which bomb should explode in which church and how much damage could be done in the explosion. He decides how many people will show up in the demonstration and, whether BN or PR will win in the next general election in 2012 or Malaysia will sink into the South China Sea in 2012.
Let Allah be Allah and let us humble ourselves before Him and submit to Him.
“Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my (Paul) presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.” Phil 2:12-13
BLISS
The irony of the attack is, the explosions occurred in two Evangelical Protestant churches which may not support the idea of Christians calling God Allah. They believe Allah is the God of Islam and by calling Yahweh or Jesus (which is specifically stated in the Bible as the name of God for the Christians and Jews) Allah is not biblical.
The one that didn’t explode was the one thrown into the compound of Assumption Church in PJ, which is a Roman Catholic Church. The RC Church is the one that brought about the judgment of the high court that Christians can call God Allah.
Later, during the demonstration (must be a great disappointment because only few turned out; I was disappointed because I was waiting to see FRU water gunning these people and beating them with their batons), one of the demonstration leaders said Christians might have staged their own arson on those churches. The statement shows how ignorant and well, stupid, these people are. They couldn’t even tell the difference between Protestants and Roman Catholics and didn’t know that these two have been enemies for hundreds of years, though they may be grudgingly getting along well now.
Personally, I think Allah is showing His muscles. There were people praying in Assumption Church during the time of the attack and if the bomb were to explode, we can imagine the worst case scenario. But it did not and to me that was Allah’s protection.
The two exploded in the Protestant Churches, to me, could be a warning from Allah that we should not disgrace His name. Allah is God for all people and to say Allah is only for the Muslims are first, it is not what the Quran teaches, and second, it insults Allah, locked Him with a group of fanatic followers that constantly malign His name in the world. As for these Evangelical Protestant Christians, they usually believe that all other religions (including the Roman Catholics) are from the devil, deceiving people from believing in the Protestant faith hence lead them to hell. Therefore, to these Evangelical Protestant Christians, the name Allah may be from the devil, deceiving people from the true faith in the Evangelical Protestant Church. (I heard some told me that Allah is actually the name of the moon god).
As for these Muslims, to fight so passionately without using their brain and having proper understanding of what Islam is, they are basically telling Allah that He is incapable of protecting Himself and keeping His name pure. That is an insult to Allah, that He needs our protection and that He needs us to fight for Him.
I could be wrong saying that the two Protestant Churches are supporting Allah is only for the Muslims. There are many Protestants who want to be able to pray to Allah as well, especially the ones from East Malaysia. And I apologize to these two churches if I imply that perhaps it’s the judgment from Allah because they may not have supported the usage of “Allah” for Christians. I was very upset and shaken up yesterday with these churches being attacked and burned and felt very sorry for these two churches. I stand by the conviction that everyone is entitled to his/her own belief and opinion and will die for these two churches to defend their rights to their own beliefs and opinions.
The point I’m trying to make here is, there are so much misunderstanding, mistrust, and fear among us because of our differences, it’s time for all of us to come together to get to know each other better and to understand one another instead of telling one another that you are of the devil because you believe differently.
The Greek root word for demonic is to divide. To divide ourselves like that is actually demonic. The Bible says that the devil comes to steal, kill and destroy. How would it do it? To steal away our peace then make us fight one another and at the end destroy one another. It has already stolen the peace and harmony in this country that used to pride itself to be the model of plurality. Up till now, there has not been any initiative from the authorities to mediate a dialog between Muslims and Christians on this issue and the ruling party's newspapers have been fanning the fire. If this is not demonic, what it is?
However, I also think the church attack incident yesterday could also be a message from Allah; do not play play the name of Allah, and Allah is the God of everybody. It's a wake up call from Allah.
“Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap.” Gal 6:7
“…I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” Rom 9:15
Allah is sovereign and He does not need us to protect Him or to tell Him what He should do. He can fight for Himself and defends Himself. He decides which bomb should explode in which church and how much damage could be done in the explosion. He decides how many people will show up in the demonstration and, whether BN or PR will win in the next general election in 2012 or Malaysia will sink into the South China Sea in 2012.
Let Allah be Allah and let us humble ourselves before Him and submit to Him.
“Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my (Paul) presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.” Phil 2:12-13
BLISS
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Happy New Year, Allah!
Allah must be shaking His head in heaven. He has given a golden opportunity to His people, the submitters, to share the true faith to the non-submitters but what they do, they bring the non-submitters who call on His name to court to stop them from calling upon Him!
If I were the submitters, I would take this opportunity to explain to the non-submitters what the real meaning of this name "Allah" is and have many dialogs sessions with the non-submitters to educate them about this name "Allah". This is the best chance to open their eyes to see the real faith, to have the real worship towards Allah. Imagine half of the non-submitters, after the dialogs sessions, come to the realization that they are not really worshiping Allah correctly and turn to the real faith. The kind of rewards and grace Allah would grant to His people, the submitters, are beyond anyone guess.
However, the submitters here are fighting to stop non-submitters from calling upon Him. They are accusing them of trying to confuse the submitters and thus convert the submitters to their wrong faith. These submitters have successfully blocked and turned away potential non-submitters from knowing the true faith and the correct understanding of Allah.
All the faiths in the world believe in this principle, you reap what you sow.
Allah is the most powerful and He doesn't need anyone to protect Him or His name. People who try to do that are basically insulting Him; Allah is incapable to protect His own people from confusion, He needs us to protect His name from being wrongly used.
The problem is, these people who are protecting the name Allah, they are not doing what Allah wants them to do. They are not submitting to Allah the way Allah wants them to. Perhaps, the non-submitters who have been calling upon Allah long before even there is a country called Malaysia, are more submissive to Allah than these so called submitters. Yes, their understanding on Allah may not be 100% correct, but their submission to Allah may be more sincere than these so called submitters who want to protect the faith.
Submitters, this is the golden opportunity for you all to teach and correct the non-submitters about Allah. They are already submitting to Him, all they need are gentle guidance and proper teaching to correct their faith.
To teach, guide, dialog, and understand are a more submissive way than threatening and insulting the intelligence of the non-submitters.
Well...you reap what you sow. May Allah have mercy on us.
Happy New Year!
Bliss
If I were the submitters, I would take this opportunity to explain to the non-submitters what the real meaning of this name "Allah" is and have many dialogs sessions with the non-submitters to educate them about this name "Allah". This is the best chance to open their eyes to see the real faith, to have the real worship towards Allah. Imagine half of the non-submitters, after the dialogs sessions, come to the realization that they are not really worshiping Allah correctly and turn to the real faith. The kind of rewards and grace Allah would grant to His people, the submitters, are beyond anyone guess.
However, the submitters here are fighting to stop non-submitters from calling upon Him. They are accusing them of trying to confuse the submitters and thus convert the submitters to their wrong faith. These submitters have successfully blocked and turned away potential non-submitters from knowing the true faith and the correct understanding of Allah.
All the faiths in the world believe in this principle, you reap what you sow.
Allah is the most powerful and He doesn't need anyone to protect Him or His name. People who try to do that are basically insulting Him; Allah is incapable to protect His own people from confusion, He needs us to protect His name from being wrongly used.
The problem is, these people who are protecting the name Allah, they are not doing what Allah wants them to do. They are not submitting to Allah the way Allah wants them to. Perhaps, the non-submitters who have been calling upon Allah long before even there is a country called Malaysia, are more submissive to Allah than these so called submitters. Yes, their understanding on Allah may not be 100% correct, but their submission to Allah may be more sincere than these so called submitters who want to protect the faith.
Submitters, this is the golden opportunity for you all to teach and correct the non-submitters about Allah. They are already submitting to Him, all they need are gentle guidance and proper teaching to correct their faith.
To teach, guide, dialog, and understand are a more submissive way than threatening and insulting the intelligence of the non-submitters.
Well...you reap what you sow. May Allah have mercy on us.
Happy New Year!
Bliss
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Inverted Sexism
The furore over Adam Lambert's kissing a man on stage (some are furious because of the simulated oral sex) prompted Lambert to defend himself by saying, "If it's gonna be edited, then in a way that's discrimination. I don't mean to get political, but Madonna, Britney and Christina (kissing at the 2003 MTV Video Music Awards) weren't edited. It's a shame. Female entertainers have been risque for years. Honestly, there's a huge double standard."
Some responded that Lambert is no Madona which I agree. In term of fame, success, and career achievement, Adam is nothing like Madona, yet (we can't tell the future). However, his defense has brought up something I called "inverted sexism" which few people, I believe, are aware of.
My darling gave me his observation the other day; people, no matter men or women, like to look and act like men (male) more than women (female). Any gay man will proudly present his manly and macho boyfriend. He wouldn't be proud if his boyfriend is girly and feminine. Macho and manly men are usually hot items in the gay community and feminine or soft males are usually frown upon or ridicule. And the term "straight looking" is a popular self-description of any gay man who wants to give a good impression in their internet profile. I presume "straight looking" means "manly looking" since the stereotype of "gay looking" is basically "feminine looking".
To be a bottom in a gay world is also denote submission and feminine males are usually assumed to be bottom.
Transsexuals or drag queens are definitely no object of wet-dreams for gay men. In fact, one must have accumulated really bad karma to be born a TS this life, many would think.
In the lesbian world, butch lesbians are a common sight. These ladies want to behave like gentlemen or macho man. They wrapped their breasts so tightly to make them flat, wear man clothing and cut their hair short. My darling observes that it is a lot easier to spot a lesbian than a gay man, especially for the generally unexposed public, because they dressed and behave like men.
Lesbian scenes are common in straight porn but if there are gay scenes in a straight porn, it would be called "bi" porn. Americans have accepted a woman kissing another woman on main stream cinemas long ago but only recently we begin to see some man to man kissing on screen. There were kissing scenes between Willow and her girlfriend in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" which was shown about ten years ago. However it was inconceivable to have two men kissing on the small screen during that time. "Interview with a Vampire" had to snip off the scene where Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt lying together hugging in bed to avoid offending the American public. "Alexander" had to be implicit in portraying the gayness of the emperor and Achilles' lover in "Troy" became his cousin instead of his lover (though disputed).
Therefore, it has a lot of truth to what Lambert's claim of double standard because women are allowed to "mess-up" a bit, they are weak and irrational anyway.
For a woman to have short hair and dress in men clothing is considered cool. For a man to dress in woman clothing and put on make-up is considered a freak. My fellow lady colleagues are free to dress in men clothes to teach but for me, a male lecturer, if I wear a dress and make-up to go teach, probably I would not even make it through the college's gate.
It is funny to see a man dressed and behave like a woman and is a sure ingredient for comedy.
Gay issues are usually more prominent and fascinating than lesbian issues. Homosexuality is usually associated with images of two men kissing and hugging each other rather than two women kissing and hugging. And society generally is able tolerate lesbianism more than gayism.
In fact, watching two woman kissing, hugging and undressing each other is probably one of the greatest sexual fantasies for straight men. On the other hand, two men kissing, hugging and undressing each other...
What do all these tell us? Basically it is cool to be a man. It is cool to dress like a man and act like a man. Therefore it is absolutely ok for anyone, disregard of gender, to act and dress like a man because that is normal, that is what a human being is supposed to be.
However, it is shameful to act like a woman. It is a freak to talk, walk, dressed and behave like a woman. To be a woman, one has no choice to behave in such a way though it is not desirable. But for a man to talk, walk, dressed and behave like a woman would be the most abominable thing a man could do.
Men are supposed to lure, protect, control, and dominate women for women are the weaker sex; they are emotional and irrational. Women need men to survive.
Therefore, when two men decide to love each other like a man and a woman, the immediate thought of that will be one of the men is behaving like a woman. Because one of the men has to be weak, emotional and irrational to allow himself to be controlled and dominate by another man. And it is an abomination for a man to behave like a woman.
Anti-gayism goes much deeper that just "because the Bible says so". It is an "inverted sexism". We can't blatantly discriminate against women in our modern society because of the women rights movement but we pretty much still living in a chauvinistic male dominant world. So, since we couldn't make women to stay in the kitchen, we make them behave like us. Tell the world that behaving like men is cool and encourage women to act like men.
And feminists are striving to do the things that men do in the name of equality. I haven't encountered any feminine movement that encourage women to cook, sew, and have babies. Feminists will consider doing those things as "shameful". In fact, the feminists I know are busy doing "men" staff like climbing the cooperate ladder, struggling to be leaders, and learning how to fight like men.
Feminist movies are usually showing how women fight back injustices like men.
I have stopped laughing when I watch comedy where there are men dressed like women. I disallowed my male drama students to act like women (they love to do that, some kind of Freudian thingy, I guess) in order to provoke laughter from the audience. In a case of an all male group doing a love story, I will insist they make it into a gay love story instead of some guys trying to act like girls. Same principle apply to an all girl group.
I am caught. I am not sure how to correct this very basic mindset of our world that women are the weaker sex and inferior to men. And to behave or be like a woman is not something to be encouraged, especially if you are a man. However, unless this attitude toward women is changed, the struggle to gain equal recognition for the sexual minorities in the world remain an uphill task.
Because of the feminist movement in the past century, we now have many women doing men jobs. However, some of these women have become conservative men in women clothing. They are as aspired and vigor as those conservative men to battle against gay rights and some of them even encourage women to go back to their kitchen and submit to their men.
Of the top of my head, I thought of Sarah Palin.
Not really sure how to conclude this...lets continue to struggle and pray for all mankind...may the Good Lord have mercy on us all before 2012 (if that really happens).
BLISS
Some responded that Lambert is no Madona which I agree. In term of fame, success, and career achievement, Adam is nothing like Madona, yet (we can't tell the future). However, his defense has brought up something I called "inverted sexism" which few people, I believe, are aware of.
My darling gave me his observation the other day; people, no matter men or women, like to look and act like men (male) more than women (female). Any gay man will proudly present his manly and macho boyfriend. He wouldn't be proud if his boyfriend is girly and feminine. Macho and manly men are usually hot items in the gay community and feminine or soft males are usually frown upon or ridicule. And the term "straight looking" is a popular self-description of any gay man who wants to give a good impression in their internet profile. I presume "straight looking" means "manly looking" since the stereotype of "gay looking" is basically "feminine looking".
To be a bottom in a gay world is also denote submission and feminine males are usually assumed to be bottom.
Transsexuals or drag queens are definitely no object of wet-dreams for gay men. In fact, one must have accumulated really bad karma to be born a TS this life, many would think.
In the lesbian world, butch lesbians are a common sight. These ladies want to behave like gentlemen or macho man. They wrapped their breasts so tightly to make them flat, wear man clothing and cut their hair short. My darling observes that it is a lot easier to spot a lesbian than a gay man, especially for the generally unexposed public, because they dressed and behave like men.
Lesbian scenes are common in straight porn but if there are gay scenes in a straight porn, it would be called "bi" porn. Americans have accepted a woman kissing another woman on main stream cinemas long ago but only recently we begin to see some man to man kissing on screen. There were kissing scenes between Willow and her girlfriend in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" which was shown about ten years ago. However it was inconceivable to have two men kissing on the small screen during that time. "Interview with a Vampire" had to snip off the scene where Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt lying together hugging in bed to avoid offending the American public. "Alexander" had to be implicit in portraying the gayness of the emperor and Achilles' lover in "Troy" became his cousin instead of his lover (though disputed).
Therefore, it has a lot of truth to what Lambert's claim of double standard because women are allowed to "mess-up" a bit, they are weak and irrational anyway.
For a woman to have short hair and dress in men clothing is considered cool. For a man to dress in woman clothing and put on make-up is considered a freak. My fellow lady colleagues are free to dress in men clothes to teach but for me, a male lecturer, if I wear a dress and make-up to go teach, probably I would not even make it through the college's gate.
It is funny to see a man dressed and behave like a woman and is a sure ingredient for comedy.
Gay issues are usually more prominent and fascinating than lesbian issues. Homosexuality is usually associated with images of two men kissing and hugging each other rather than two women kissing and hugging. And society generally is able tolerate lesbianism more than gayism.
In fact, watching two woman kissing, hugging and undressing each other is probably one of the greatest sexual fantasies for straight men. On the other hand, two men kissing, hugging and undressing each other...
What do all these tell us? Basically it is cool to be a man. It is cool to dress like a man and act like a man. Therefore it is absolutely ok for anyone, disregard of gender, to act and dress like a man because that is normal, that is what a human being is supposed to be.
However, it is shameful to act like a woman. It is a freak to talk, walk, dressed and behave like a woman. To be a woman, one has no choice to behave in such a way though it is not desirable. But for a man to talk, walk, dressed and behave like a woman would be the most abominable thing a man could do.
Men are supposed to lure, protect, control, and dominate women for women are the weaker sex; they are emotional and irrational. Women need men to survive.
Therefore, when two men decide to love each other like a man and a woman, the immediate thought of that will be one of the men is behaving like a woman. Because one of the men has to be weak, emotional and irrational to allow himself to be controlled and dominate by another man. And it is an abomination for a man to behave like a woman.
Anti-gayism goes much deeper that just "because the Bible says so". It is an "inverted sexism". We can't blatantly discriminate against women in our modern society because of the women rights movement but we pretty much still living in a chauvinistic male dominant world. So, since we couldn't make women to stay in the kitchen, we make them behave like us. Tell the world that behaving like men is cool and encourage women to act like men.
And feminists are striving to do the things that men do in the name of equality. I haven't encountered any feminine movement that encourage women to cook, sew, and have babies. Feminists will consider doing those things as "shameful". In fact, the feminists I know are busy doing "men" staff like climbing the cooperate ladder, struggling to be leaders, and learning how to fight like men.
Feminist movies are usually showing how women fight back injustices like men.
I have stopped laughing when I watch comedy where there are men dressed like women. I disallowed my male drama students to act like women (they love to do that, some kind of Freudian thingy, I guess) in order to provoke laughter from the audience. In a case of an all male group doing a love story, I will insist they make it into a gay love story instead of some guys trying to act like girls. Same principle apply to an all girl group.
I am caught. I am not sure how to correct this very basic mindset of our world that women are the weaker sex and inferior to men. And to behave or be like a woman is not something to be encouraged, especially if you are a man. However, unless this attitude toward women is changed, the struggle to gain equal recognition for the sexual minorities in the world remain an uphill task.
Because of the feminist movement in the past century, we now have many women doing men jobs. However, some of these women have become conservative men in women clothing. They are as aspired and vigor as those conservative men to battle against gay rights and some of them even encourage women to go back to their kitchen and submit to their men.
Of the top of my head, I thought of Sarah Palin.
Not really sure how to conclude this...lets continue to struggle and pray for all mankind...may the Good Lord have mercy on us all before 2012 (if that really happens).
BLISS
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Missing the Point
Evangelical Christians in a certain great country are busy stopping homosexual marriage from being legalized. They fight very hard to make abortion illegal and at one time, they even voted in a born again Christian president who messed up the world big time. This group of Christians are very responsive if there is a gay singer about to win an idol competition, they will immediately jump into action to rally the crowd to make sure that this singer wouldn’t win the title. If there is a gay man being ordained as a bishop, they will immediately go into action to protest, petition or demonstrate to tell the world that God hates homosexuals. If there’s a female performer “accidentally” dropped her blouse and showed one of her breast, they will instantly rally the public to complain to the organizers of the “indecent” act. They demonstrate in front of abortion clinics to stop women from entering into the clinic and some even throw bombs into the clinics to attempt to demolish the clinic, without considering there are people in the clinic.
However, they allow their government going down the path of corruption and their economy going down the drain (4 or 5 trillion dollars in debt); their education deteriorated to the point where a high percentage of high school graduates cannot read nor write; poverty and gangsterism in the inner cities continues to thrive; drug addiction, alcoholism, rape, racism are rampant and their standing in the world plummet. And yet, none of these evangelical Christians spring into action to say, lets fight poverty in our inner cities; lets rally all the churches to donate money, give their expertise and talent to solve the racial problems in the country; lets us provide proper and objective sex education so that young people in society have healthy understanding of sex and know how to protect themselves from HIV infection. No, 10 years living in that country I had experienced none of those actions by the evangelical churches.
Instead, they blame those “sins” on the liberals, accusing them for their permissiveness that causes the deterioration in society. They say the solution is in the word of God without acknowledging their so called solution is only their school of interpretation of the word of God, not THE word of God. They don’t realize that it was their rigid conservatism, moral repressiveness, and narrow mindedness that started the sexual revolution in the sixties and seventies. They forgot what Jesus, the person whom they so passionately claimed as their Lord, taught about telling our brother to get rid of the saw dust in his eye but failing to see there is a plank in our own eye. These Christians basically forgot how to be the salt in society. All they know is to shove their own brand of faith into everyone’s throat, claiming that is the only truth approved by God.
I received the following from an email and I think Malaysia in going down the same path as the great country I used to live in. The difference is in that great country, the evangelical Christians are missing the point but here in Malaysia, the…I don’t even how to label this group of Muslims…are missing the point.
BLISS
PAS Youth wants to what?!
In their most recent move to annoy me to no end, PAS Youth has set up a program to go undercover as part of their anti-sex campaign.
Just hearing such a thing raised an interesting question in my head.
Will they be wearing drag along Lorong Haji Taib then?
I guess some Muslims would be thankful that someone is so focused on our salvation.
I'm not one of them, in fact, I'm adamantly against it
If sex is what people want and it's consensual and safe, then why not?
It's obviously keeping them off the streets.
Pre-marital sex is not a large morality issue in this nation. Neither are concerts. Rempits, on the other hand, are a huge criminal, social and moral issue. Encouraging people to switch to environmentally friendly policies are a huge social and moral issue as well.
If PAS youth truly wants to help the Muslim community, they should start by doing something more constructive instead of this move to simply prove they are holier-than-thou individuals.
And if PAS wants to win over the federal government in two years time, this idea should be shot down in its birth, or face a backlash of the more moderate and liberal populous of Malaysia.
Hafidz Baharom
However, they allow their government going down the path of corruption and their economy going down the drain (4 or 5 trillion dollars in debt); their education deteriorated to the point where a high percentage of high school graduates cannot read nor write; poverty and gangsterism in the inner cities continues to thrive; drug addiction, alcoholism, rape, racism are rampant and their standing in the world plummet. And yet, none of these evangelical Christians spring into action to say, lets fight poverty in our inner cities; lets rally all the churches to donate money, give their expertise and talent to solve the racial problems in the country; lets us provide proper and objective sex education so that young people in society have healthy understanding of sex and know how to protect themselves from HIV infection. No, 10 years living in that country I had experienced none of those actions by the evangelical churches.
Instead, they blame those “sins” on the liberals, accusing them for their permissiveness that causes the deterioration in society. They say the solution is in the word of God without acknowledging their so called solution is only their school of interpretation of the word of God, not THE word of God. They don’t realize that it was their rigid conservatism, moral repressiveness, and narrow mindedness that started the sexual revolution in the sixties and seventies. They forgot what Jesus, the person whom they so passionately claimed as their Lord, taught about telling our brother to get rid of the saw dust in his eye but failing to see there is a plank in our own eye. These Christians basically forgot how to be the salt in society. All they know is to shove their own brand of faith into everyone’s throat, claiming that is the only truth approved by God.
I received the following from an email and I think Malaysia in going down the same path as the great country I used to live in. The difference is in that great country, the evangelical Christians are missing the point but here in Malaysia, the…I don’t even how to label this group of Muslims…are missing the point.
BLISS
PAS Youth wants to what?!
In their most recent move to annoy me to no end, PAS Youth has set up a program to go undercover as part of their anti-sex campaign.
Just hearing such a thing raised an interesting question in my head.
Will they be wearing drag along Lorong Haji Taib then?
I guess some Muslims would be thankful that someone is so focused on our salvation.
I'm not one of them, in fact, I'm adamantly against it
If sex is what people want and it's consensual and safe, then why not?
It's obviously keeping them off the streets.
Pre-marital sex is not a large morality issue in this nation. Neither are concerts. Rempits, on the other hand, are a huge criminal, social and moral issue. Encouraging people to switch to environmentally friendly policies are a huge social and moral issue as well.
If PAS youth truly wants to help the Muslim community, they should start by doing something more constructive instead of this move to simply prove they are holier-than-thou individuals.
And if PAS wants to win over the federal government in two years time, this idea should be shot down in its birth, or face a backlash of the more moderate and liberal populous of Malaysia.
Hafidz Baharom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)