No to hudud

Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Somalia, Sudan (and Taliban-ruled Afghanistan) are (was) governed by the hudud, yet I can write about the horrendous iniquity of the legal system against some of its citizens.

Therefore I do not support PAS’ proposal to introduce the hudud should Pakatan come to power. What for, when such religious laws can only worsen the situation. I don't accept that Malaysia's secular civil laws have failed - it's not the laws but some of the judges. Those civil court judges are already bad enough so let's not make matters worse by having clerics as judges. They'll be insufferable and the pits, unimpeachable.

Hudud or for that matter, any religious laws, puts too much unquestioned power in the hands of clerics, who I have to say, aren’t exactly the sort of people given to compassionate considerations. The fine steel of laws must be tempered by the flexibility of commonsense, compassion and contextual considerations.

Clerics (particularly of the Abraham-ic religions) have demonstrated 3,500 years of consistency in their proclivity for harsh and unchallengeable punishments, knowing full well (to their secret glee) that they themselves are exempt from the draconian treatment they propose to mete out to others.

Some years ago in Australia, Rev Fred Nile, notorious for his anti Muslim stand, attempted to link the wearing of Middle-Eastern traditional robes and headscarves by Muslim women with terrorism. In the NSW State's Upper House he called for a ban on the traditional dress. That bigot claimed such Muslim apparel could be used by terrorists to conceal weapons and explosives. Thanks to secularism his proposal was rejected, and the beautiful part about Australia is that many Christians immediately came out to cheekily question his views on the dresses of Catholic nuns wakakaka. That shut that idiot up.

Apart from the bigoted hatred of people like Rev Nile, clerics are also not above lying too. Recall the Mufti of Perak who sent that seditious SMS, inciting Muslims to stop a false charge of Christian proselytizing Muslims at a church? Why wasn’t he punished for seditious religious incitements, with a high probability of inter-ethnic violence? Pity the Sultan of Perak didn’t send that Mufti off to Somalia.

Then there have been Christian preachers in the USA who incited violence against Muslims, or extreme rightwing rabbis against Arabs. In India, an Australian Christian missionary and his three little kids were burnt alive by Hindu fundamentalists on religious differences. How could they justify such blasphemic violence in the name of their Divine Lord? In Indonesia the police have detained Bashir Ahmad, a cleric alleged to be the spiritual leader of the terrorist group Islamiyah, responsible for indiscriminate killing of both Indons and foreigners with bombs placed in public places.

And it doesn’t help when Dr Wan Azizah told us recently that her hubby is God’s gift to humanity. My matey Dean Johns, a Malaysiakini columnist who normally respects the good lady was driven to lambasting her (very gently) to Spare us the godswallop [a pun on the word 'codswallop' which means rubbish or nonsense].

Dean succinctly informed her that: For a start, it's a bit presumptuous to speak on God's behalf when you couldn't possible have the slightest idea of the Almighty's thoughts, intentions, ideas or ideals.

Like clerics and their flocks in Pakistan, Afghanistan and similar earthly paradises who imagine that God demands the death penalty for those accused of adultery, blasphemy, apostasy or whatever else they deem terminally sinful.

Our local versions do too, that is, demand (purportedly in the name of God) the death penalty for those accused of adultery, blasphemy, apostasy or whatever else they deem terminally sinful, like abandoning babies born out of wedlock.

He continued, not sparing the Christians as well: Or potentates like the Pope, who claims to be God's earthly mouthpiece in making such preposterous pronouncements as his recent one that the use of condoms is now okay for male prostitutes to use to protect their clients against HIV infection, but still against divine law for the prevention of unwanted conception.

At the end of the day, can we all spare a thought for God, you know the McCoy, who’s mighty pissed off with all sorts of people for misappropriating use of his name for the last 3,500 years. In fact, he just informed kaytee to tell you guys and gals to cease and desist wakakaka.