Take our money but tell us not to interfere

MM Online via Malaysia-Today - extracts from Boo Su-Lyn's worry about Hadi's Bill dragging us back to the Dark Ages:

Boo Su-lyn speaking at anti-355 rally 

[Boo Su-Lyn] feels oppressed that “people have been killed during khalwat raids” where some officers of the enforcement squads were alleged to have “behaved like thugs” or “acting like Peeping Toms who only have sex on their minds”.

halal? 

Indeed, I have to agree with her that it appears as if 'sex has always been on the minds' of some moral police as demonstrated by a Gombak JAIS officer and also the JAWI raid on the Zouk nightclub years ago - see BBC report here which in short (extracts) tells us that, among other nastiness:

... after the raid it emerged that dozens of young women were held for up to 10 hours without access to a toilet, long after male detainees had been released.

A number of women said religious officers ordered them to pose in their nightclub outfits while others were asked lewd questions about their genitalia.

Then Boo Su-Lyn vehemently objects to the idea that just “because Malaysia is supposedly an ‘Islamic’ country, all Malaysians, including non-Muslims, must follow Islamic laws”.

She might have been slightly mistaken in believing Malaysia is supposedly an ‘Islamic’ country when it was all based on the political say-so or politicised bullshit of Mahathir in 2001 and 2002.

Malaysia is definitely a secular nation but having the uniqueness of recognising Islam as its official religion (to respect the position of our Sultans as the head of Islam in each respective state and that of HM Agong in non-Sultanate states, and for official religious ceremonies).

I'm not making this up as the above have been told to us by our highest courts - more further down.

The proof of the pudding for the above assertion lies in the supremacy of our civil (secular) courts and our civil (secular) laws, and also the monstrous elephant in the room, that of the syariah courts being in a subordinate position to the superior civil courts.

Unlike the superior civil courts, the subordinate syariah courts' jurisdiction is LIMITED to Islamic MORAL affairs and Muslim family inheritance issues.

Uber and ultra-conservative Muslims don't want to know about it (or pretend not to) as the above mentioned elephant tramples on their power, pride and (in some cases) pretend-passion.

The syariah courts have zilch authority, and has NO say on criminal and constitutional matters, so how can Malaysia be an Islamic nation. Take it from me Mahathir in 2001 and 2002 was talking non-halal cock, wakakaka.

Even LKS mentioned Mahathir's bull in his 929 & 617 rants which eruditely said:

The position of the constitutional cornerstone that Malaysia is a secular and not a Islamic state was further reinforced in the negotiations for the formation of Malaysia in 1963, as Sabahans and Sarawakians were assured that Article 3 of the Constitution "does not imply that Malaysia is not a secular state." (Cobbold Commission Report).

The fundamental constitutional principle that Malaysia is a secular nation has been upheld by the highest court in the land in Che Omar bin Che Soh vs Public Prosecutor (1988).

Delivering the judgment of a five-man Federal Court panel, the then Lord President Tun Salleh Abas held that the Constitution and the legal system are “secular” and held that the meaning of the expression “Islam” or “Islamic religion” in Article 3 “means only such acts as relate to rituals and ceremonies”.

He said that “There can be no doubt that Islam is not just a mere collection of dogmas and rituals but it is a complete way of life covering all fields of human activities, may they be private or public, legal, political, economic, social, cultural, moral or judicial” but rejected the contention that the terms “Islam” or “Islamic religion” in Article 3 is “an all-embracing concept, as is normally understood, which consists not only the ritualistic aspect but also a comprehensive system of life, including its jurisprudence and moral standard” as this was not the meaning intended by the framers of the Constitution.

Salleh Abas’ judgment that Malaysia was a secular nation was in keeping with the interpretation of his predecessor, the late Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim who in 1962 defined the scope of Islam in the constitution as being primarily for ceremonial purposes, such as the permission for prayers to be offered in the Islamic way on official public occasions such as the installation of the Yang di Pertuan Agong, his birthday, Merdeka Day and other occasions.

There you are, my dearest Su-Lyn. My particular problem right now is not about Malaysia being an Islamic nation but LKS forgetting what the 929 & 617 Declarations were and WHO had said them.

Cina mudah lupa?

Furthermore, the syariah courts are limited in the punishments which I suspect they would love to dole out kau kau to the maximum extent, which brings us to Act 355 (or in Bahasa, UUD355).

Hadi Awang's private member Bill seeks to propose amending Act 355 to enable syariah courts to whip the hell out of immoral Muslims (immoral as decided/judged by ulama) among other punishments.

Hadi Awang's Bill seek to allow syariah courts to increase flogging from 6 to 100 lashes for MORALITY (not criminal) issues, which will be far far more than what the civil courts can pass down on offenders of CRIMINAL laws.

I recommend that the proposer tries it out on himself to see how many lashes he can tahan, where upon I'll volunteer to be the person to whip him, wakakaka.

Then my dearest Boo Su-Lyn complained about the Islamist moral police raiding non-Muslim businesses, confiscating bibles and passing down Islamic dress code for members of the non-Muslim public visiting government offices and hospitals.

Those would be correctly called ketuanan ultra-ulama, not ketuanan Melayu.

We can only appeal to the grace of HRHs to keep tight reins on those attack hounds, and at the federal level, to debate the questionable RM1 Billion budget of JAKIM - even HRH Johor wants to know about this flabbergasting quantum of budget.

Oh yes, you mentioned something about our tax money - OK, more of that further down. 

Boo Su-Lyn then pointed out that our dear Islamic religious authorities have become 'more and more paranoid over halal issues' to the point of forcing 'our children to eat in toilets at school during Ramadan'.

why were there only sweet tangachees?
hah, the lil' ah-moi's must have been at vernacular schools 

The 1st point ('more and more paranoid over halal issues') is cari pasal demi cari makan, wakakaka. Hope you like my phraseology, but it effectively says their paranoia might have been bullshit (a la demi cari makan).

The 2nd point ('our children to eat in toilets at school during Ramadan') is subjugation. Subjugation is defined by the dictionary as 'the action of bringing someone or something under domination or control'.

Nazis, Japanese military occupiers (in WWII), Ku Klux Klan, (former) White South African supremacists and the Israeli government of Binjamin Netanyahu all love to subjugate outsiders.

But having said all that, my dear Su-Lyn, much as I adore you, I think your accusations above have been misplaced, as the makan-in-toilet stupidity has more to do with fasting than halal-ness.

It was about not exposing observant Muslim students to temptation of food while fasting but conducted in a highly discriminatory insensitive way a la subjugation, probably because the person issuing that school rule was too Islamic-centric.

But when Muslims are NOT fasting as in 11 months of the year, JAKIM would then be far more concerned about the other issue of halal-ness, like birthday cakes in MacDonald eateries or 'dogs' in Auntie Annie or porcine DNA in chocolates, though mind you, not of blood and donated human organs.

I suspect that when those clowns run out of foodstuff to declare halal or non-halal, they will move on to the air we breathe.

Now, if some religious officers were NOT concerned about halal-ness in stuff such as having sex on their minds and even unto making a khalwat victim perform a jolly blowjob on them, that's their eventual problem with Allah swt.

My dearest Su-Lyn has felt so oppressed by the continuous but silly brouhaha over the halal vs haram so much so that she and her mateys “... feel too dirty for them [the religious officials], as if [the sweetie & mateys] very existence offends them”.

The MM Online article continued: It seems grossly unfair to Boo that she is being told to Balik Cina, treated like a second class citizen and warned not to interfere in Muslim matters when at the same time “they are interfering with our lives every single day”.

I love Tiongsun babes whether in Malaysia, China or anyway, wakakaka 

My dear, some religious people practise double standards lah, wakakaka, and believe me, 'some religious people' are not only Muslims. But those type of people (Muslims, Christians, Judeans, etc) are so blind they would never be able to see their own faults or double standards because they see the world through the prism of their respective religion.

Worse, they are usually hypocrites.

For example, non Muslims' tax money would presumably be deemed halal enough to form part of the financial budget for JAKIM, as would donations by non Muslims for the building of mosques like the Penang State Mosque.

Years back, when Jeff Ooi ruled supreme in the Malaysian blogosphere, he started a donation drive for a Muslim lil' girl who needed urgent financial support for a serious heart operation.

The response was overwhelming, leading the lil' girl's dad to say in surprise (words to the effect): "I did not expect non-Muslims to be so charitable and generous to my Muslim daughter".

Likewise with Penang's Malay fishermen in the aftermath of the Boxing Day tsunami when Penang Buddhists rushed to their kampongs to provide much needed help.

A fisherman was reported to have said (words to the effect): "The Chinese Buddhists are very generous and helpful, giving us aid without asking whether we are UMNO or PKR supporters".

Ms Boo has been much annoyed by the double standards of the religious authorities taking money from non-Muslim taxpayers, to fund their moral policing, when she felt that PAS ought to be funding the syariah courts since the political party wants to increase the court penalties.

Let us not conflate PAS with the syariah courts, though I accept that there would/could be brotherhood among the deplorables (to borrow Hilary Clinton's words, wakakaka).

Syariah courts in states are state responsibilities save for those in the FT and JAKIM which have to be funded by the federal government. So the PAS Kelantan government is responsible for funding syariah courts in that state, though I hope that state government won't chop down trees to do so.

Dearest Boo Su-Lyn has one final word, saying:

“Don’t tell us not to interfere but take our money!”