Screenshots

I have started to oppose the idea of an Islamic State since early this year (I was a believer of Islamic State since my youth days).

My similar posts below:

http://walkingquietly.blogspot.com/2007/07/islamic-state-why-i-am-against-it.html

http://walkingquietly.blogspot.com/2007/07/islamic-state-evolution-or-revolution.html

http://walkingquietly.blogspot.com/2007/07/do-we-really-need-islamic-state.html

Jeff,
I am sure our Jabatan Agama Islam can find supporting fatwa to declare our nation an Islamic nation. Even if its not supported by a fatwa, our PM can and he may well do declare ours as an Islamic country. As to the brand of Islam, I am not sure what type we will adopt, lets look at the numerous Islamic countries in the worlds and how they are goverened, none is as democratic as ours, lets say we fast forward this 50 years, can you imagine what happen when Islam is taken as a mere 'token' and the underlying corruption is not checked, then Islam will only be an accuse to perpetuate those that are in power - re-look :Pakistan just after independence to Pakistan today, or Afghanistan, or even look at Iran for example.

Actually, this is true and at the same time not inconsistent with the position taken by Dr M, Pak Lah and Najib.

The 3 leaders were alluding to Malaysia already being an 'Islamic State', not through any legal phraseology, but in the spirit where by the country is governed in line with Islam's teachings. What one would call a 'moral' principle, much as the US is guided by a Judeo-Christian ethos.

Their aim was to take the sting out of the Islamic State rhetoric that PAS was using.

You should check and share with your friends in PAS first Jeff, they are the ones hung up with the legal status of Malaysia as an Islamic State or otherwise.

Please note that I am not supportive of Islam Hadhari though, due to completely different reasons entirely.

I think it is not time yet to get excited over this. After all its only the Ulama in Indonesia who are saying this. And the Ulama are only limited to issuing interpretations and at best, fatwas. Our Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi is one above that. He has even created a new kind of Islam. Islam Hadhari. So you got to wait for him to render his verdict. And if he says this is an Islamic State, then Malaysia is an Islamic State.

The ulama is referring to the caliphate concept which is countering the khilafah movement which is a well known extreme organization. By there is no such thing as an islamic state they refers to the concept of all nation banding together under one unified khalifah rule. In the quran or hadith there is no commandment stating that we muslims must have that sort of political body.

However that being said, interpreting what was said in the article to counter what is being discussed here in Malaysia of an Islamic state does not count. Not only is the title misleading but it is would also be very irresponsible and a cheap shot if this article or just the title of the article were used as a point in a non islamic state argument.

Islamic state that is being debated by both Pak Lah and even PAS are not those of Caliph but more towards the implimentation of Islamic values in the nation. From the point of Law, commerce, politics and etc.. the Islamic state that both of the party (or at least PAS) wants is more towards implementations of Islamic value in the government which was somewhat similar in the days of the prophet.

Again after reading the article I think it is somewhat (in fact very) misleading is one were to use this to say that Islamic State concept never existed in the first place.

[ DELETED -- Political posturing ]

You don't have to call something this or that state in order to practise good moral principles.

If you call Malaysia an islamic state, then why a Nik Aziz can say women increase mens' tension? Why a religious dept officer was charged with blackmailing for sex? Why the cases of incest? Why across the border the bomber Ambrosi was interviewed saying he was happy he would be seeing seventy two angels but regret muslims were also blasted away by him?

In all cases what has happened to that thing called humanity reflecting Godhood that is the essence of all monotheisms?

Now if you say they are not reflective of the true aspects of the religion, why didn't any muslim stand up and publicly denounce them in no uncertain terms? The silence is deafening simply because in the contrary cases of other religions, they are quick to show grave insensitivities, from demolishing makeshift temples to uprooting interfaith meetings to courtroom dramas on apostasy, claimage of children and property, even burial rights.

You can't push for an islamic state as a vehicle for a way of life wrapped in moral principles on the one hand, and be seen by the world practising anything but moral principles and fairness to others on the other.

And we're not just talking about conspicuous consumption of public funds, erasure of official records, corruption galore, misue of power to diminish other communities and their faiths. The end result is to diminish the perception of the religion in the eyes of everyone.

These double standards have gone on long enough.

If something is right, it should be right independent of any religion and that has got to do with other human beings, regardless of what faith. Is this statement fair or not?

In our country where there are so many types of religion, do we see a clear realization of this and what is needed to be done going forward? I don't think so, and one suspects, neither do you.

We have known all along it has been nothing but only a matter of interpretation. What else can it be? Get the Originators of religions to come back and say exactly what They meant?

In the way they have made the interpretations, and you can see some of that in the audio bombardments on tv with the resultant semi-cowering behaviour all over their society, you begin to wonder whether all that human activity hasn't gone overboard.

The poor malay kid's under pressure. He has to learn BM in a world whose markets push to other languages. Then he has to learn English because apart from womens' magazines, little practical knowledge has been translated into BM. He clicks the web and it's all good stuff in English. He goes to China and India and sees a lot of potential for him to make progress in life but his MOE is doing anything but helping him and others acquire those language skills; in fact they are happier for him to learn Arabic so that he can later prostrate before the saudis. So the malay kid today has to learn three languages when he's already challenged in class, and then catch up on the knowledge, while trying to rationalise his semi cowering behaviour between the poles of arabic wahhabism, attaturk's liberalism, and perhaps a sprinkling of taliban romantism and indonesian pragmatism, AND at the same time try to extend the boleh-attitude of the malaynaut into his world today whose cost-of-living his parents won't be able to contain by january first two oh oh eight because some of them had years ago interpreted four and subsets will take care of their future, forgetting the world doesn't operate based on quantity anymore but quality.

Meanwhile he has no answer to his non-muslim colleagues at say UPM who asked him how come they have to take four units of islamic civilisation when there are plenty of other older and more meaningful ones around?

We all know what 'religious states' will become: once you have that sort of prequalified status, a zealot here, a fascist there, will take it upon himself to use his position to foist things on others, when nobody thinks anything of his ability or his qualifications.

All those mofos up there don't connect these dots, don't exercise their minds, talk-only about islamic state, and create more mischief and disharmony. Just by one stroke of the pen, they think they can screw in their brand of political ideology in order to nullify their opponents. Well, what we have seen spells things out clearly: what goes around comes around. But the point is this: at what costs such lessons to the people and the nation?

If the malay man wants to be rational, he can out-rationalise many others. In fact his cultured refinements are what need to be accentuated more because they can bring a special sublimity to the resolution of complex problems in the modern age.

But what we have been seeing lately is the use of singular arguments based on personal and political agendas to knock off all dissenting views in a way where reason, logic and rational have been brushed off without one speck of conscience, in turn generating so much conflict and disagreement between communities that all those special malay qualities end up either degraded by themselves, or looked at negatively by others.

So it remains to ask if the essence of all religions is the practice of conscience, aren't what they've been doing therefore irreligious?

The bottomline of everything is this:

The rakyat now feel they've all been had.

And they will look at all future statements on islamic state as the perpetuation of a great lie and a specious mistruth.

It's bad to use a lie, but worse to use it to propagate imprisonment of the mind and denudation of the state.

Who can possibly say that a someone in another faith won't be a better man?