Trade Chinese education for Sharia laws

If DAP and the Chinese want the Malays and Muslims to give up the Sharia then they should also be prepared to give up Chinese schools and Chinese education. That would be a very reasonable trade-off. The Chinese give up something for what the Malays would be giving up. The Chinese cannot expect to have everything while expecting the Malays to give up everything.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The non-Malays and/or non-Muslims are actually very stubborn. In fact, some Malays and/or Muslims are as well.

To maintain their stubbornness and not be seen as stubborn, they pretend they do not understand the issue. Pretending to be ignorant is actually a very clever strategy to adopt to hold your ground and to not budge or give in.

They will keep arguing the same point over and over again even after they have been told that that point has no merits. They actually understand but they are merely pretending to not understand so that they can continue using those points to argue their case.

For example, they will insist that the Sharia Amendment Bill or RUU355 is a Hudud Bill. When it is explained that it is not a Hudud Bill but merely a Sharia Amendment Bill they pretend they did not hear us or they cannot understand what we are saying. This is so that they can continue to use the term ‘Hudud Bill’.

They will also say things like PAS left Pakatan Rakyat when that is not true. What really happened was that DAP, without the consent of PAS or PKR, closed down Pakatan Rakyat and announced that the opposition coalition no longer exists. Then DAP formed a new coalition called Pakatan Harapan and refused to invite PAS to join the new coalition.

Lim Kit Siang and DAP are adopting the same disinformation campaign that Chin Peng and the CPM (Communist Party of Malaya) used to engage in back in the days of the Emergency. Considering Kit Siang-DAP and Chin Peng-CPM have the same kepala otak that does not really surprise me.

The anti-Sharia people keep arguing that the Sharia violates the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. In what way does the Sharia violate the Constitution? Which Article of the Constitution does the Sharia violate?

They do not say. They just say the Sharia violates the Constitution without giving any details in what way the Sharia violates the Constitution or which Article of the Constitution it violates. They leave that matter vague and considering most Malaysians are dumb and have never even read the Constitution they take this statement at face value.

It is like saying that the Qur’an forbids Muslims from eating food cooked by non-Muslims because the food cooked by non-Muslims is not halal. They do not mention where in the Qur’an it says that or which verse and chapter of the Qur’an they are referring to. They just say the Qur’an forbids Muslims from eating food cooked by non-Muslims and leave it at that. No one is going to research the Qur’an to confirm or rebut this.

The next argument they use is that the Constitution says that Malaysia is a Secular State. Hence the Sharia should not be applied in Malaysia. And then they quote Tunku Abdul Rahman to confirm that Malaysia is a Secular State.

Is it really mentioned in the Constitution that Malaysia is a Secular State? In fact, the Constitution says that Islam is the religion of the Federation. The Constitution never says that Malaysia is a Secular State. And why just quote Tunku Abdul Rahman? Why not quote Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who announced in 2002 that Malaysia is an Islamic country?

Since Mahathir’s announcement is more current than the Tunku’s earlier announcement, should not the latest announcement replace or abrogate the early statement? For example, the Federation of Malaya was formed in 1948 while Malaysia was formed in 1963. So should not Malaysia replace Malaya? Version 2.0 replaces version 1.0, is it not?

Anyway, the Tunku also drank and gambled. So just because the Tunku says something it does not mean he was correct, just like he is not correct about Malaysia being a Secular State, whether expressed or implied — and for sure it is not expressed if you were to read the Constitution like I have probably 40 or 50 times in the last decade (whenever I need to do research for my articles).

The other stubborn stand the anti-Sharia people take is they say that laws must come under the federal government and not the state government. So, when they argue against the Sharia, they categorise the Sharia as a legal issue.

Actually the Sharia is not a legal issue. It is a religious issue. If it is a legal issue then the government cannot arrest me if I drink, do not fast and eat in public during Ramadan, check into a hotel room with a woman who is not my wife, live with another man or woman as husband-and-wife without getting married, and so on. No doubt the government can arrest me for sodomy (even between husband and wife for that matter) but not if I live with another man as husband and wife.

But then the government can arrest me if I drink, gamble, have sex with a woman who is not my wife, etc. Why is that? There is no law that says all these are crimes. Non-Muslims will not be arrested. Only Muslims will get arrested.

Well, that is because those are not issues related to laws. Those are issues related to religion. And under the Sharia if it says those are crimes then they become crimes even if there are no laws that say they are crimes.

In short, the Sharia is about religion and not about the law. That is why you non-Muslims can bonk those China Dolls to your hearts’ delight (which many of you do anyway) while we Muslims will get arrested if we do the same. That is the evidence that the Sharia is about religion and not about the legal system. Now, which part of that do you non-Muslims (and some Muslims as well) still do not understand?

So, in short, you are interfering with the right of Muslims to practice their belief when you interfere with the Sharia. And you non-Muslims, especially DAP, are interfering in the rights of Muslims. Do we Muslims tell you to stop believing that Jesus was crucified, resurrected and is the Son of God because that violates what the Qur’an says? You are contradicting the Qur’an and are suggesting that the Qur’an is wrong or lying so you should be punished for doing so.

But then that is your belief so Muslims do not interfere in your beliefs (even if you believe that white angpaus for Chinese New Year is bad luck — although every Muslim will agree that that is silly nonsensical superstition). Muslims allow you to believe what you want to believe but you do not allow Muslims to believe what they want to believe. Can you see how selfish and unreasonable you non-Muslims are?

Anyway, if you want to abolish the Sharia then you need to first amend the Constitution. And you need at least 148 votes in Parliament to do that. So why not DAP launch an anti-Sharia campaign and try to get at least 148 votes in Parliament?

Can you see that DAP talks outside Parliament where nothing can happen but refuses to raise this in Parliament where the real power to amend the Constitution lies? Amend the Constitution and abolish the Sharia.

Note that Islam comes under the states. So you need to amend or remove the Article in the Federal Constitution that says Islam comes under the states and that the power lies in the hands of the State Rulers. In fact, the opposition controls three states (Penang, Selangor and Kelantan) and DAP controls two of them (Penang and Selangor). Then we have Sarawak, which is not under Umno.

So why not work on those states first? You can abolish the Sharia in Penang and Selangor and maybe even in Sarawak as well. Can you see that the opposition refuses to do this and yet makes so much noise complaining about the Sharia? Remove the Sharia in Penang, Selangor and Sarawak first and then let us talk about the rest of the country. In time Malaysia will be a fully Secular State and Muslims will be allowed to drink, gamble and bonk China Dolls.

Better still, the Chinese and DAP should trade-off Chinese education and Chinese schools for the Sharia. Since they oppose the Sharia and want to see the Sharia abolished then they should offer to close down all Chinese schools and end Chinese education if the Malays can agree to abolishing the Sharia and ending what they call the dual-legal system.

That sounds like a very reasonable trade-off, does it not? The Sharia and the dual-legal system for Chinese schools and Chinese education. The Chinese and DAP should make that offer.

Those who want Chinese schools can send their kids to China