Permanent Residence Status: A red card to Malaysia

Written by Kazi Mahmood
Wednesday, 15 July 2009

At last a support group to handle the task of getting a better deal for foreign spouses in Malaysia. The Foreign Spouses Support Group made headlines with its demand for clarification of the rules to apply and obtain the Permanent Residence (PR) status in Malaysia. World Futures Online supports the group fully.The issuance of PR is one of the most guarded secret of Malaysia. There are a set of rules that are said to apply for the PR status in the country but almost no foreign spouses are given the status. Most applications are rejected or put on hold – in the cold store as I was told by an informant. One way of getting the Red IC is to know someone who knows a junior minister or a top gun in the government. They can sign a note that recommends the PR to such and such persons and this too, if you are lucky, you may be granted the PR. There is no certainty there altogether as the entire mechanism is one of a cat and mouse dance.

This does not happen to the non-Muslims alone as it happens to hundreds of Muslim foreign spouses, both male or female, who decides to stay on in Malaysia, which I did. Now I know many Malaysians reading this piece will shout back at me saying that I am living here I must accept the consequences or I am here and I am being 'kurang ajar' by asking too much. The point however is that since I am here, I have a local wife and a son born in this country, I am automatically half citizen of the nation.

I have the right to question why the PR application procedures takes ages and why the rules keep changing upon the whims and fancies of the officers in charge. It is the rightful thing to do, to write about and to make others read altogether.However, it is not the battle for 'foreign spouses' alone as it also engages the sense of truthfulness of the Malaysian nation as a whole.

The question the foreign spouses always ask when they are cornered and not given any facilities to handle their families in the country is why are the Malaysians hypocritical? The PR status is a matter of concern to all in this country. If my son was to write about the hassle that a foreigner goes through in this country, he would use the four letter words towards the BN regime and the officials and he is Malaysian pure sang!

In my case, I applied for the PR status or 'Permit Masuk' in the year 2000. Now there has been 3 Prime Ministers in this country since then. In the time of Tun Mahathir, the old fox could not be bothered with the foreign spouses. He had more important things to do than look into the matters of concern to the Malaysian citizens who are married to foreigners. In his time, money was more important than anything else hence why bother about a bunch of foreign spouses?

In the time of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, the entire thing was about the 'lembik' and the 'lembut' stories and the officers at the Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN) or Home Ministry could not be bothered about the PR applications. The PR was a hot item given to a few high profile people to raise the level of rich foreigner's/investors confidence' in Malaysia.

I was even told that some Muslim Arabs heard officers saying these Arabs will not get a single PR even if they were to live in Malaysia for 50 years. May I ask who told these officers that they had the right to say such things or to decide in advance who can get the PR or not? The general rule in these departments is that the PM can talk what ever he want to talk about but the implementation is in the hands of the officers. Abdullah Badawi once said that PR application will be expedited but when one visits the KDN it is a different story. The officers callously tells you the PM can say one thing, it is us here who do the decision making!

It will be the same damn thing with the 1Malaysia of Najib Tun Razak. The officers will rule over the Prime Minister or any other Ministers and nothing will change in the PR hand outs in Malaysia. Unless all those concerned are given the support by the families, the friends and even the press.

I once wrote to the Sun's Citizen Nade, asking him to look into the plight of foreign spouses and their children etc in Malaysia. His response was shockingly that of a 'pariah' of the worst kind when he stated in an email to me that 'one individual's plight was not worth it'. This is how Malaysian journalists responds!What will be the next step of the Foreign Spouses Support Group? I am surely eager to know and to report on their activities in the near future.

MACC is doing a good job! YAY!

MACC and police monitor for last minute vote buying Tim Leonard KUALA LUMPUR (March 26, 2009) : The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and the police were present to monitor any possible last-minute attempts to buy votes at the Umno 2008 AGM and Elections today. theSun earnt that MACC sent a couple of officers to monitor the situation on the ground at the Putra world Trade Centre (PWTC) while private eyes were stationed to keep their eyes and ears opened to offers and acceptance. A MACC official said officers were mainly conducting intelligence surveillance. “Our men are undercover and what better way to learn of any possible corrupt practices than to be on the ground,” said the official. The private eyes were patrolling in several teams based on their tasks. A police source said one team of detectives were assigned to monitor the delegates and track any “suspicious” movements of delegates, especially those placed on a “high-priority” list. He, however, declined to reveal who were the ones on the high-priority list as the information was classified. “The other team is stationed to look out for any trouble or mishaps,” said the source, adding that quick-thinking detectives alerted the headquarters for backup to defuse a dangerous situation last night when supporters of two candidates almost traded blows. “When we have the right information, we can act or react fast,” said the source, who has been a detective for about 20 years.

Updated: 04:14PM Thu, 26 Mar 2009

Printable Version | Email to a Friend DO YOU SEE THE POINT TO THIS? = ) MACC NEEDS OWN EVIDENCE BEFORE THEY CAN PROCEED REGARDLESS THAT A PARTY DISCIPLINARY BOARD HAVE FOUND EVIDENCE TO SAY 'GUILTY AS CHARGE'. Ali’s bid scuttled Reports by SAO’DAH ELIAS, MUGUNTAN VANAR, MAZWIN NIK ANIS, SARBAN SINGH, MARTIN CARVALHO, ROYCE CHEAH, CHAN LI LEEN, YENG AI CHUN, LESTER KONG, IVAN LOH and NURBAITI HAMDAN Ali Rustam out of party race Ali to remain as Chief Minister KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Mohd Ali Rustam’s bid for Umno’s number two post has come to a premature end when he was barred from contesting by the party’s disciplinary board. However, his positions and membership in the party is not affected and he remains as the Malacca Chief Minister and Umno vice-president. Mohd Ali was found guilty of breaching the party’s ethics. Also found guilty of the same offence by the board was Rembau MP Khairy Jamaluddin who is contesting the Umno Youth chief post but he was let off with only a warning. The list: Rithauddeen showing the list of the names during the disciplinary meeting at the Umno building Tuesday. Another contender for the post Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo who was investigated by the board for money politics was found not guilty. Mohd Ali, who is said to be one of the stronger contender in the three-cornered contest for the number two post was found guilty under Article 10.1 of the party’s code of ethics, whereby he was presumed guilty for the actions of third parties. Three of his agents who included his political secretary Saadun Basirun were found guilty of vote buying and have been suspended for three years or one term. The other two other are a committee member of Bukit Katil Umno division Rosli Hasan and its Puteri wing deputy head Zalina Ismail. Disciplinary board chairman Tengku Tan Sri Ahmad Rithaud­deen Tengku Ahmad said 29 people were investigated by the panel and 15 were found guilty and the others were cleared.

IN THE NAME OF ALLAH!

i had the oppurtunity to study under the tutelage of Dr.Asri while i was in USM, he was teaching Munakahat and being the young person that he is it was ALOT OF FUN. learning was never boring with him. :P

so in regards to the lastest hoo haa by our beloved government, i hope this would help to understand why some learned scholars just can't be bothered with the hype 'cause they know more than we do. and its about time that we take the time to know about it as well ..

Banyak pihak mendesak saya memberikan pandangan tentang penggunaan nama
Allah oleh agama lain khususnya agama Kristian di Malaysia ini. Pada awalnya,
saya selalu mengelak, cuma memberikan pandangan ringkas dengan berkata: “Isu ini
bukan isu nas Islam, ianya lebih bersifat pentadbiran atau
tempatan.
Peraturan ini mungkin atas alasan-alasan setempat seperti kenapa
sekarang baru ditimbulkan isu ini? Kenapa hanya Bible dalam bahasa melayu sahaja
yang hendak menggunakan panggilan Allah, tidak pula edisi inggerisnya? Adakah di
sana ada agenda tersembunyi? Maka wujudnya tanda soal dan beberapa prasangka
yang mungkin ada asasnya. Maka lahirlah kebimbangan terhadap kesan yang bakal
timbul dari isu itu nanti.
Namun, akhir-akhir ini saya terus didesak. Saya
kata: jika anda hendak tahu pendirian Islam bukanlah dengan falsafah-falsafah
tentang akar bahasa itu dan ini yang diutamakan. Rujuk terdahulu apa kata
al-Quran dan al-Sunnah. Lepas itu kita bincang hukum berkenaan bertitik tolak
dari kedua sumber tersebut.
Kadang-kala kesilapan kita dalam mempertahankan
perkara yang tidak begitu penting, boleh melupakan kita kepada isu yang lebih
penting. Isu yang terpenting bagi saya adalah kefahaman mengenai keadilan dan
kerahmatan Islam yang mesti sampai kepada setiap rakyat negara ini, muslim atau
bukan muslim. Supaya gambaran negatif yang salah terhadap Islam dapat dikikis
dari minda mereka yang keliru.
Di samping itu, hendaklah kita jelas bahawa
yang membezakan akidah Islam dan selainnya bukanlah pada sebutan, atau rebutan
nama Allah, sebaliknya pada ketulusan tauhid dan penafian segala unsur syirik.
Di samping, kita mesti bertanya diri kita: mengapakah kita sentiasa merasakan
kita akan menjadi pihak yang tewas jika orang lain memanggil tuhan Allah?
Mengapakah kita tidak merasakan itu akan lebih memudahkan kita menyampaikan
kepada mereka tentang akidah Islam?. Maka, apakah isu ini bertitik tolak dari
nas-nas Islam, atau kebimbangan disebabkan kelemahan diri umat Islam itu
sendiri?
Jika kita membaca Al-Quran, kita dapati ia menceritakan golongan
musyrikin yang menentang Nabi Muhammad s.a.w juga menyebut nama Allah dan
al-Quran tidak membantah mereka, bahkan itu dijadikan landasan untuk memasukkan
akidah Islam yang sebenar.
Firman Allah: (maksudnya) “Dan Demi sesungguhnya!
jika engkau (Wahai Muhammad) bertanya kepada mereka: “Siapakah yang menciptakan
mereka?” sudah tentu mereka akan menjawab: “Allah!”. (jika demikian) maka
bagaimana mereka rela dipesongkan? Dan (Dia lah Tuhan Yang mengetahui rayuan
Nabi Muhammad) yang berkata: Wahai Tuhanku! Sesungguhnya mereka ini adalah satu
kaum yang tidak mahu beriman!” (Surah al-Zukhruf ayat 87-88).
Firman Allah
dalam ayat yang lain: (maksudnya) “Dan sesungguhnya jika engkau (Wahai Muhammad)
bertanya kepada mereka (yang musyrik) itu: “siapakah yang menurunkan hujan dari
langit, lalu dia hidupkan dengannya tumbuh-tumbuhan di bumi sesudah matinya?”
sudah tentu mereka akan menjawab: “Allah”. Ucapkanlah (Wahai Muhammad):
“Alhamdulillah” (sebagai bersyukur disebabkan pengakuan mereka yang demikian),
bahkan kebanyakan mereka tidak menggunakan akal (untuk memahami tauhid) (Surah
al-Ankabut ayat 63).
Ayat-ayat ini, bahkan ada beberapa yang lain lagi
menunjukkan al-Quran tidak membantahkan golongan bukan muslim menyebut Allah
sebagai Pencipta Yang Maha Agung. Bahkan Nabi Muhammad s.a.w disuruh untuk
mengucapkan kesyukuran kerana mereka mengakui Allah. Apa yang dibantah dalam
ayat-ayat ini bukanlah sebutan nama Allah yang mereka lafazkan, sebaliknya
ketidak tulusan tauhid yang menyebabkan akidah terhadap Allah itu dipesongkan
atau bercampur syirik.
Justeru, soal bukan muslim mengakui Allah tidak
dibantah oleh Islam, bahkan kita disuruh bersyukur kerana pengakuan itu. Cuma
yang dibantah ialah kesyirikan mereka. Umpamanya, jika kita mendengar bukan
muslim menyebut “Allah yang menurunkan hujan, atau menumbuhkan tumbuhan”, maka
kita tentu gembira kerana dia mengakui kebesaran Allah.
Apakah patut kita
kata kepadanya: awak jangan kata Allah yang menurunkan hujan, atau mencipta itu
dan ini, awak tidak boleh kata demikian kerana awak bukan muslim, sebaliknya
awak kena kata tokong awak yang menurun hujan”. Apakah ini tindakan yang betul?
Tidakkah itu menjauhkan dia dari daerah ketuhanan yang sebenar? Kita sepatutnya
berusaha mendekatkan dia kepada ajaran yang benar. Namun, jika dia berkata:
“Tokong ini adalah Allah”. Saya kata: “Awak dusta, itu tidak benar! Maha suci
Allah dari dakwaan awak”.
Maka, ketika Allah menceritakan peranan peperangan
dalam mempertahankan keamanan dan kesejahteraan manusia,
Allah menyebut:
(maksudnya) “..dan kalaulah Allah tidak mendorong setengah manusia menentang
(pencerobohan) setengah yang lain, nescaya runtuhlah tempat-tempat pertapaan
serta gereja-gereja (kaum Nasrani), dan tempat-tempat sembahyang (kaum Yahudi),
dan juga masjid-masjid (orang Islam) yang sentiasa disebut nama Allah
banyak-banyak dalam semua tempat itu dan sesungguhnya Allah akan menolong
sesiapa yang menolong ugamanya (ugama Islam); Sesungguhnya Allah Maha Kuat, lagi
Maha Perkasa. (Surah al-Hajj ayat 40).
Ayat ini mengakui tempat-tempat ibadah
itu disebut nama Allah. Adapun berhubung dengan orang Kristian,
Allah
menyebut: (maksudnya) “Sesungguhnya telah kafirlah mereka yang berkata:
“Bahawasanya Allah ialah salah satu dari yang tiga (triniti)”. padahal tiada
tuhan (yang berhak disembah) melainkan Tuhan Yang Maha Esa..(Surah al-Maidah
ayat 73).
Ayat ini tidak membantah mereka menyebut Allah, tetapi yang
dibantah adalah dakwaan bahawa Allah adalah satu dari yang tiga.
Justeru itu
kita lihat, orang-orang Kristian Arab memang memakai perkataan Allah dalam Bible
mereka, juga buku-buku doa mereka. Tiada siapa pun di kalangan para ulama kaum
muslimin sejak dahulu yang membantahnya. Jika ada bantahan di Malaysia, saya
fikir ini mungkin atas alasan-alasan setempat yang saya sebutkan pada awal tadi.
Cuma yang diharapkan, janganlah bantahan itu akhirnya memandulkan dakwah Islam
dan menjadikan orang salah faham terhadap agama suci ini.
Saya selalu
bertanya sehingga bilakah kita di Malaysia ini akan begitu defensive, tidak
memiliki anti-bodi dan tidak mahu berusaha menguatkannya dalam diri? Akhirnya,
kita terus bimbang dan takut kepada setiap yang melintas. Padahal itu bukan
sifat Islam. Islam agama yang ke hadapan, misi dan intinya sentiasa
disebarkan.
Sehingga Allah menyebut: (maksudnya):“Dan jika seseorang dari
kalangan musyrikin meminta perlindungan kepadamu, maka berilah perlindungan
kepadanya sehingga dia sempat mendengar keterangan-keterangan Allah (tentang
hakikat Islam itu), kemudian hantarlah dia ke tempat yang selamat. Demikian itu
(perintah tersebut) ialah kerana mereka itu kaum yang tidak mengetahui (hakikat
Islam). (Surah al-Taubah ayat 6).
Ada orang tertentu yang berkata kepada
saya: nanti orang Islam keliru kerana sebutan nama Allah itu sama antara mereka
dan Islam. Lalu rosak akidah orang Islam kita nanti. Saya berkata kepadanya:
“Jikalaulah sebutan nama tuhan itulah yang menentukan akidah Islam, tentulah
golongan musyrikin Mekah tidak memerlukan akidah yang dibawa oleh Nabi s.a.w.
Mereka telah sekian lama memanggil tuhan dengan panggilan Allah.
Lihatlah
bapa Nabi kita Muhammad bernama ‘Abdullah yang bermaksud hamba Allah. Tentu
sekali bapa baginda lahir pada zaman jahiliah sebelum kemunculan baginda sebagai
rasul. Nama itu dipilih oleh datuk Abdul Muttalib yang menjadi pemimpin Quraish
pada zaman dahulu. Quraish pada zaman jahiliah juga bertawaf dengan menyebut:
LabbaikalLahhumma yang bermaksud: Menyahut seruanMu ya Allah!
Al-Imam Muslim
dalam sahihnya meriwayatkan hadis mengenai perjanjian Hudaibiah antara Nabi
s.a.w dengan Quraish Mekah, seperti berikut:
“Sesungguhnya Quraish membuat
perjanjian damai dengan Nabi s.a.w. Antara wakil Quraish ialah Suhail bin ‘Amr.
Sabda Nabi s.a.w : barangkali aku boleh tulis Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. Kata
Suhail: Adapun Bismillah (dengan nama Allah), maka kami tidak tahu apa itu
Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. Maka tulislah apa yang kami tahu iaitu BismikalLahumma
(dengan namaMu Ya Allah!)”. Dalam riwayat al-Bukhari, Nabi s.a.w menerima
bantahan tersebut. Ternyata mereka menggunakan nama Allah.
Maka yang
membezakan akidah Islam dan selainnya adalah tauhid yang tulus yang menentang
segala unsur syirik. Ketidak jelasan dalam persoalan inilah yang menggugat
akidah jenerasi kita. Mereka yang berakidah dengan akidah Islam sangat sensitif
kepada sebarang unsur syirk agar tidak menyentuh akidahnya. Bukan semua yang
mengakui Allah akan dianggap beriman dengan iman yang sah selagi dia tidak
membersihkan diri dari segala unsur syirik.
Lihat, betapa ramai yang memakai
serban dan jubah, berzikir sakan tetapi dalam masa yang sama menyembah
kubur-kubur tok wali tertentu dengan cara menyeru dan merintih pemohonan
darinya. Ini yang dilakukan oleh sesetengah tarekat yang sesat. Apa beza mereka
ini dengan yang memanggil nama-nama berhala yang asalnya dari nama orang-orang
saleh juga, yang mati pada zaman dahulu.
Firman Allah: (maksudnya) Ingatlah!
Untuk Allah agama yang suci bersih (dari segala rupa syirik). dan orang-orang
musyrik yang mengambil selain dari Allah untuk menjadi pelindung (sambil
berkata): “Kami tidak menyembah mereka melainkan supaya mereka mendekatkan kami
kepada Allah sehampir-hampirnya. Sesungguhnya Allah akan menghukum antara mereka
tentang apa yang mereka berselisihan padanya. Sesungguhnya Allah tidak memberi
hidayah petunjuk kepada orang-orang yang tetap berdusta (mengatakan Yang
bukan-bukan), lagi sentiasa kufur (dengan melakukan syirik). (Surah al-Zumar
ayat 3).
Di Malaysia kita pun ada yang memakai gelaran agama menentang
pengajaran tauhid rububiyyah, uluhiyyah, asma dan sifat. Mereka ini menyimpan
agenda musuh-musuh dakwah. Padahal pengajaran tauhid yang sedemikianlah yang
mampu menjadikan muslim memahami dengan mudah hakikat tauhid. Mampu membezakan
antara; sekadar mempercayai kewujudan Allah dengan mentauhidkan Allah dalam
zatNya, ibadah kepadaNya dan sifat-sifatNya.
Persoalan tauhid anti syirik ini
begitu mudah dan ringkas untuk memahaminya. Nabi s.a.w telah menyebarkannya
dengan begitu pantas dan mudah. Seorang badawi buta huruf yang datang berjumpa
baginda mampu memahami hanya dalam beberapa sessi ringkas. Bahkan mampu pulang
dan mengislamkan seluruh kaumnya dengan akidah yang teguh. Namun, di kalangan
kita, pengajaran akidah yang dinamakan ilmu kalam begitu berfalsafah dan
menyusahkan.
Bukan sahaja badwi, orang universiti pun susah nak faham.
Sehingga seseorang bukan bertambah iman, tetapi bertambah serabut.
Bertahun-tahun masih dalam kesamaran. Diajar Allah ada, lawannya tiada, dengar
lawannya pekak, lihat lawannya buta..lalu ditokok tambah dengan
falsafah-falsafah dan konsep-konsep yang menyusahkan. Padahal penganut agama
lain juga menyatakan tuhan itu ada, melihat, tidak buta, mendengar, tidak pekak
dan seterusnya. Apa bezanya jika sekadar memahami perkara tersebut cuma?
Maka
anak-anak orang Islam kita gagal memahami hakikat tauhid anti-syirik yang
sebenar. Padahal ianya begitu mudah semudah memahami kalimah-kalimah akidah
dalam surah al-Ikhlas yang ringkas. Kata Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi: “Tambahan pula,
perbahasan ilmu kalam, sekalipun mendalam dan kepenatan akal untuk memahami dan
menguasainya, ia bukannya akidah…Lebih daripada itu perbahasan ilmu kalam telah
terpengaruh dengan pemikiran Yunan dan cara Yunan dalam menyelesaikan masalah
akidah. Justeru itu imam-imam salaf mengutuk ilmu kalam dan ahlinya serta
berkeras terhadap mereka” (Al-Qaradawi, Thaqafah al-Da’iyah, m.s. 92 Beirut:
Muassasah al-Risalat). Dahulu kelemahan ini mungkin tidak dirasa, tetapi apabila
kita hidup dalam dunia persaingan, kita mula menderitai kesannya.
Jika akidah
jenerasi kita jelas, apakah mereka boleh keliru antara ajaran Islam dan
Kristian? Adakah mereka tidak tahu beza antara ajaran yang menyebut tuhan bapa,
tuhan anak dan ruhul qudus dengan akidah Islam yang anti-syirik, hanya
disebabkan adanya sebutan Allah? Begitu jauh sekali perbezaan itu! Bagaimana
mungkin sehingga mereka tidak dapat membezakan antara malam dan siang? Apakah
juga nanti kita tidak membenarkan pihak lain menyebut nama nabi Ibrahim, Ishak,
Ya’kub, Daud dan lain-lain kerana budak-budak kita akan keliru lagi. Akidah
apakah yang mereka belajar selama ini di KAFA, JQAF dan berbagai lagi sehingga
begitu corot. Kalau begitu, sama ada sukatan itu lemah, atau tenaga pengajarnya
perlu dibetulkan.
Maka sebenarnya, isu ini adalah isu kelemahan kita umat
Islam dalam memahami akidah yang sebenar. Jenerasi kita tidak mempunyai benteng
akidah yang kukuh. Lalu kita semua bimbang mereka keliru dengan akidah orang
lain. Untuk mengatasi masalah ini, kita cuba mengambil pendekatan undang-undang.
Agar dengan halangan undang-undang, kelemahan akidah generasi kita dapat
dipertahankan.
Persoalan yang patut kita fikirkan, sehingga bilakah kita akan
mampu terus hidup hanya berbekalkan oksigen dari saluran undang-undang sehingga
kita yang majoriti, dengan segala peruntukan yang ada; TV, radio, berbagai-bagai
institusi dan agensi yang dilindungi, masih takut kepada gerakan minoriti? Di
manakah kehebatan Islam yang selalu kita sebut dan ceritakan sejarah
kegemilangannya? Atau sebenarnya, kita tidak memiliki Islam seperti hari ia
diturunkan? Maka kempen Islam kita selalu tidak berkesan.
Bagi saya, bukan
soal nama Allah itu yang terlalu perlu untuk direbut atau dijadikan agenda
besar. Tetapi, gerakan membina semula akidah yang sejahtera dan memahamkan
generasi kita wajah Islam yang sebenar agar mampu bersaing dan menghadapi
cabaran zaman.

dear, dear palestine

how your soil seeps with blood,
never ending,
forever,
each and one,
wanting that city of God,
in the midst of the dessert heat.


how many times have we cried and screamed for vengeance? how many time have we gotten ourself so heated about Palestine that we wanted justice for those forgotten people.

israel has been desecrating the holy lands since the 1920's beginning the fall of the Ottoman Empires, and yet where were we?

its just frustrating to hear the same old story over and over again. in the event that it happen, we get all worked up we roar and roar until our throats get sore. we demonstrate in the streets, demanding that israel back down from its aggression. we demanded and demanded with placards, with banners and then tomorrow?

what happens tomorrow? or the day after?

nothing, nothing happens. typically being malaysian, we want to help and yet everyday of our lives we change nothing except but that one day only. our lives are still the same, still living the american dream, but here in malaysia.

what are you going to do about it? will you do anything about it?

Islamic or not Islamic that is the question.

Feel like morphing into a girl or guy permanently? Iran has the solution.

No offence. Just curious. But I wanna share with you one thing.

According to their laws, correct me if I'm wrong, it is allowed to have male-to-female or female-to-male sex reassignment surgery(SRS).

Hmmm.... Do you think it is Islamic? Or to put it in a better sentence, does Islam (the Quran, the authentic hadith and the sound ijtihad of Muslim scholars based on the Quran and the authentic hadith) allows such thing?

It is only a question. I don't have any intention to condemn you or your writing. Jangan marah yar (",)

dak setan 7.

a write up coming soon...

Let Syariah Court deal with issue

IKIM VIEWS

By Dr WAN AZHAR WAN AHMAD,
Senior Fellow/Director, Centre for Syariah, Law and Political Science, Ikim

Matters pertaining to Islamic law must be referred to the Syariah Court, as it is the main body entrusted with administering justice according to the confines of Islam.

ALL the hue and cry prior to and after the Federal Court’s judgment in the Lina Joy case are manifestations of ignorance, arrogance and sheer defiance of logic. It once again proves that the most unsettling problem afflicting our people is the problem of knowledge.

It’s alarming to encounter certain individuals or groups of people are ignorant of their ignorance and yet are bold enough to indulge in matters alien to their understanding. To further exacerbate the confusion, they choose to remain obstinate by discarding authority, i.e. true knowledge and erudite scholarship.

As was adjudicated in the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court, the case of Lina Joy is primarily administrative in nature. It essentially deals with the question of conversion procedure – whether or not a Muslim has to obtain a decree from the Syariah Court confirming one's apostasy.

A lot of people appear to consciously reject the fact that this country practices a dual legal system of parallel status – civil and syariah. This unique system is sanctioned, among others, by the Ninth Schedule and further bolstered by Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution, the supreme law of the country.

When it comes to matters pertaining to Islamic law, they must be referred to the Syariah Court, as it is the main body entrusted with administering justice according to the confines of Islam.

Conversion out of Islam is part of Islamic law, and therefore the Syariah Court is the only proper platform to resolve the issue. It is hard to believe that some people simply refuse to deal with the Syariah Court, assuming that justice will be denied.

The law is simple and straightforward.

There is no need to complicate matters by manipulating the issues to the extent of threatening national unity. If one is not happy with any decision of any subordinate Syariah Court, then one may appeal. But some seem to already admit defeat without even trying.

It is amazing to learn that segments of our learned citizens throw their allegiance to a “foreign” law as compared to our readily available own internal legal provisions.

It is well and good to acknowledge the superiority of the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 (UDHR) over our Federal Constitution, namely with regard to the freedom of religion.

But it appears to run foul if one were to make the same recognition, say, with the provisions of holy scriptures: the Bible, the Vedas, and particularly the Quran and Sunnah.

Many do not realise that in adopting any international document, we must first examine if it is binding. The UDHR is not legally binding even in countries which have agreed to adopt it.

Furthermore, in the Malaysian context, section 4(4) of the Human Rights Commission Act 1999 clearly provides that the application of any external laws must be filtered through the Federal Constitution.

Certainly, apostasy is currently the hottest issue at stake; it is an internal legal problem. Like it or not, in order to resolve the issue, we must first acknowledge and apply all rules and laws available in our own backyard. The so-called international law only plays a persuasive role that may be referred to as a guide, not the determining factor.

One must not approach apostasy strictly from its constitutional or civil legal perspective alone. Religious representation must be given, if not more, at least an equal consideration.

In the case of Muslim apostates and those who support them (especially fellow Muslims), it is inconceivable that they would willingly leave Islam or give tremendous support if they properly understood the religion of Islam.

This holds true even to the followers of other religions. One will only renounce one's own religion as a result of utter ignorance, frustration or disenchantment.

First and foremost, Muslims must understand that they have chosen Islam consciously and willingly as a result of understanding and knowledge. Even Muslims cannot take things for granted believing that they are Muslims simply by birth.

All Muslims, either by birth or by conversion, must be made to realise that they have actually entered into a primordial covenant with God in the supernatural realm long before they were born to this world.

And this divine contract, i.e. the pledge of recognition, trust and allegiance between all human souls and God, is recorded in the Quran, namely, in Surah al-A’raf (7): 172.

This recognition and trust needs to be observed accordingly. In fact, this is the very foundation where all aspects of human life originate. None can ever claim that he/she is not aware of this spiritual contract, as the Quran is the reminder.

Therefore, once a Muslim breaches this divine contract, he is subject to a certain kind of religious remedial measure or punishment. This situation is very similar to that of commercial transactions where, for instance, those who breach contracts are punished in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated in their agreements.

In the case of the Islamic legal system, there are provisions available pertaining to apostasy. If a crime takes place, then all parties involved are required to abide by them. In fact, every aspect of life, including the issue of freedom, has to be understood and exercised within the framework of religious parameters.

Certainly, the availability of fixed rules and regulations do not negate the possible and necessary modifications in the manifestations of justice according to Islam.

One of the substantial differences between Islam and the other religions is that, the latter possibly do not speak of a divine primordial covenant. This explains why the question of leaving one's religion for another is never an issue in non-Islamic religious traditions.

Muslims must not become Muslims simply because they are born within Muslim families or societies. For the converted Muslims, the motivation must not be for personal gain, be it in the form of marriage or other socio-economic and political benefits.

It is never too late to rectify any wrong once it is discovered. Gradually he/she must make efforts to increase his/her knowledge about Islam. In this regard, other Muslims, especially the loved ones (husbands, wives, parents, etc.), or those responsible for the conversion, must assist him/her along the way.

With proper understanding of religion, one will not easily leave religion for mundane reasons. A lack of compassion on the part of the Muslims will perhaps stifle any attempt to call the other to Islam.

Intolerance to Respects..

An article I took from ..

Volokh Conspiracy

The Boston Globe on Speech Offensive to Different Religious Groups:

Here's today's Boston Globe editorial on the Mohammed cartoons controversy:

Freedom expression is not the only value at issue in the conflict provoked by a Danish newspaper's publication of cartoons satirizing Islam's founding prophet, Mohammed. The billowing controversy is being swept along by intolerance, ignorance, and parochialism. The refusal of each camp to recognize and respect the otherness of the other brings closer a calamitous clash of cultures pitting Islam against the West.

No devotee of democratic pluralism should accept any infringement on freedom of the press. But the original decision of the Danish paper, Jyllands-Posten, to solicit and publish a dozen cartoons of the Muslim prophet was less a blow against censorship than what The Economist called a schoolboy prank. . . .

Other European papers reprinted the cartoons in a reflex of solidarity. Journalists in free societies have a healthy impulse to assert their hard-won right to insult powerful forces in society. Freedom of the press need not be weakened, however, when it is infused with restraint. This should not be restraint rooted in fear of angering a government, a political movement, or an advertiser. As with the current consensus against publishing racist or violence-inciting material, newspapers ought to refrain from publishing offensive caricatures of Mohammed in the name of the ultimate Enlightenment value: tolerance.

Just as the demand from Muslim countries for European governments to punish papers that printed the cartoons shows a misunderstanding of free societies, publishing the cartoons reflects an obtuse refusal to accept the profound meaning for a billion Muslims of Islam's prohibition against any pictorial representation of the prophet. Depicting Mohammed wearing a turban in the form of a bomb with a sputtering fuse is no less hurtful to most Muslims than Nazi caricatures of Jews or Ku Klux Klan caricatures of blacks are to those victims of intolerance. . .

___________________________________(ends here)

Being openmindedness does not include being disrespectful to religious Icons albeit the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h), Jesus (a.s), Buddha, Confucious, Moses (a.s.). etc. Drawing the line to a certain extents is needed to continue advocating religious harmony and eases enminity between religious group.

A recent incident involving a friend of mine and myself sparked a some what embering thoughts i had a few years back, and recently only resurfaces in regards to the situation i had. The problem was being 'Openmindedness'.

I believe the word was far too often and abused and understatedly misunderstood in its usage. Yes, it is good to being open to certain new things and to certain new ides, but where do we draw the line from being too perverse or too destructive?

10 years I didn't even know bestiality let alone never could have imagine what it could be, but now there's not only bestiality but also necrophilia to name another. In some cases being in the western culture, having intimate relationship with an animal being physical relationship in this case is to some considered acceptable, but do we in the advocation of Openmindedness must accept the same notion?

........... Lost of words, ideas swirling in my head like vanilla chocolate ice-cream. a