RUU355: Muslims are as ignorant as non-Muslims

Muslims are ignorant about Islam and non-Muslims are even more ignorant. And the last two years’ controversy regarding RUU355 has proven this. They say they do not reject the Sharia but only reject the punishment for the crimes under the Sharia. Why? Because, according to them, the punishment is unconstitutional. The Sharia laws, however, are constitutional. Only the punishment under those laws are not. This makes as much sense as saying we must make drunk-driving a crime but it is unconstitutional to punish drunk drivers.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The Sharia Amendment Private Member’s Bill or RUU355 that was presented in Parliament yesterday revealed one very glaring thing. And that thing is Muslims are as ignorant about Islam as are non-Muslims.

Of course, in some cases the non-Muslims (and even Muslims as well) actually know the subject but they pretend they do not and come out with confusing arguments in the spirit of ‘if you do not have a good argument then confuse them’.

Kit Siang understands but buat bodoh and pretends he does not so that he can whack the Sharia and get away with it

Did you think people like Lim Kit Siang and those other DAP leaders did not read up on Islam considering that race and religion are very important in Malaysian politics and if you do not know how to handle these two matters properly you are at a disadvantage? Of course they all know. But they are just pretending they do not so that they can come out with silly arguments and then blame it on ignorance.

Education, religious education included, is GIGO (garbage-in-garbage-out). If we feed our brain with crap then crap will be in our brain. Our brain is like a sponge. It just absorbs both good and bad. So what we have been taught will be what we know. And if we have been taught the wrong thing then we will know the wrong thing. Simple logic. And we are the product of our teachers. So if our teacher is ignorant then we will become ignorant.

When I was in Kamunting a number of ustaz or religious teachers were sent ‘to bring me back to the right path’. The government felt that my religious knowledge is lacking or that I had deviated from the right path. So the government wanted to indoctrinate me with the correct religious teachings.

Do moderate or liberal Muslims like Taufik Ismail reject the entire Qur’an or just chapter 24 of the Qur’an?

One ustaz spent more than an hour talking about the Hadith. He just spoke in general without going into any specifics. He wanted us to know that we must follow the Hadith because Muslims must follow the Qur’an, Sunnah and Hadith to be a Muslim or else they are not Muslims.

I then stood up to ask the ustaz which Hadith in particular he is talking about and he replied he is not being specific but is just speaking about all Hadith in general. I then asked him how many Hadith are there and the ustaz could not reply.

I then told the ustaz there are 700,000 Hadith and he was surprised. He then confirmed, yes, there are 700,000 Hadith. I then said: but only less than 7,000 Hadith are accepted as authentic and he said: this is why such sessions are good because the ustaz can also learn new things from the student.

But then this is not ‘new things’. This is information already 1,000 years old. I then asked the ustaz to give us one example of an accepted or authentic Hadith and he could not reply. He said he does not remember all the Hadith by heart. But I did not ask him to quote all the 7,000 Hadith. I asked him to quote only ONE Hadith.

And this ustaz was from the Perak Religious Department in Ipoh, which means he works under the infamous Perak Mufti, Harussani Zakaria. And this is the same Mufti who came out with a fatwah (religious decree) that Friday prayers for detainees is not compulsory.

Harussani Zakaria has idiots working under him who cannot even explain a simple thing properly

So there you are. GIGO. When you send such idiotic teachers how can you expect the students to be brilliant? And the RUU355 drama over the last two years has shown that Muslims know nuts regarding Islam while non-Muslims are even worse.

Non-Muslims and ‘liberal’ Muslims oppose RUU355, which is merely an amendment to existing laws. They say they do not oppose the laws itself (the Sharia). They just oppose the punishment under those laws. Taking of drugs, gambling, drinking, adultery, same sex relationships, extramarital sex, and so on, can be declared crimes. That is no problem. The only thing is the punishment should not be too harsh. Light punishments are enough.

That, they say, is the main issue here. But is this really true? Do they agree that whatever Islam forbids should be declared as crimes? But then why must the taking of drugs, gambling, drinking, adultery, same sex relationships, extramarital sex, and so on, be declared crimes? Since they argue that RUU355 is unconstitutional, would not declaring gambling, drinking, adultery, same sex relationships, extramarital sex, and so on, as crimes not also violate the Federal Constitution of Malaysia?

If you insist we must follow the Constitution then the government should not interfere in the right of Malaysians to gamble, drink, engage in sex outside marriage (even if they are already married and even if it is with your same sex), and so on. The non-Muslims and liberal Muslims agree that gambling, drinking, adultery, same sex relationships, extramarital sex, and much more, be declared crimes for Muslims and that Muslims should be punished for these crimes. The non-Muslims and liberal Muslims, however, want to dictate what and how severe that punishment should be.

So what guidelines are these people using? Are they using the Qur’an, Sunnah and Hadith as their guideline or are they using Christianity as the guideline? And which is more superior? The Qur’an or some other ‘fatwah’ by religious people who do not even know how many Hadith there are and cannot quote even one Hadith from memory?

Muslims can follow Islamic laws but must follow Christianity to punish anyone who breaks those laws

Look at Surah An-Nur or the 24th chapter of the Qur’an (Chapter of the Light) below. Now tell me, has this chapter been abrogated? Does this chapter no longer exist? Do Muslims need not follow this chapter any more? If we can reject chapter 24 of the Qur’an or no longer follow this chapter does this not mean we can also reject all the other chapters as well? And does not rejecting one charter of the Qur’an mean we are, in fact, rejecting the entire Qur’an because Muslims are not supposed to reject even one word from the Qur’an let alone an entire chapter?

Now read chapter 24 of the Qur’an. What it says is very clear and it deals with one of the laws of Hudud. So, if you oppose or reject Hudud then you also oppose and reject chapter 24 of the Qur’an, and which also means you oppose and reject the entire Qur’an.

It is actually very simple. If you accuse someone of sexual misconduct you need four witnesses to support your allegation. If you do not have witnesses then you swear an oath that what you allege is true. If not you will be punished for making a false allegation.

For the accused, she (or he) can also produce four witnesses to rebut the allegation (or support her alibi). If she does not have an alibi or any witnesses, then she also swears an oath that she is telling the truth. If not she will face punishment. Once that oath has been sworn (and since the accuser has also sworn an oath) the matter ends there. No one is punished and it is now left to God to act.

That is what it says in the Qur’an regarding this particular Hudud law. And yet they twist and turn and talk about rape (which does not come under Hudud laws) or the Federal Constitution of Malaysia and so on. And the ironical thing is the non-Muslims are teaching Muslims how to interpret the Qur’an and the Muslims follow the teachings of the non-Muslims.

And stop using Iran, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc., as examples as to why Malaysia needs to reject the Sharia. Should we also use America as a good example as to why a republic does not work and change Malaysia into an absolute monarchy like Brunei? After all, Brunei is one of the richest countries in the world, which also uses Sharia laws, and which also means absolute monarchies and Sharia laws are better than democracies and republics (since the Pakatuns and Dapsters measure success in terms of money).

*****************************************************

Surah An-Nur or the 24th chapter of the Qur’an (Chapter of the Light)

[This is] a surah which We have sent down and made [that within it] obligatory and revealed therein verses of clear evidence that you might remember.

The [unmarried] woman or [unmarried] man found guilty of sexual intercourse – lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah , if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment.

And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses – lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient,

Except for those who repent thereafter and reform, for indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

And those who accuse their wives [of adultery] and have no witnesses except themselves – then the witness of one of them [shall be] four testimonies [swearing] by Allah that indeed, he is of the truthful.

And the fifth [oath will be] that the curse of Allah be upon him if he should be among the liars.

But it will prevent punishment from her if she gives four testimonies [swearing] by Allah that indeed, he is of the liars.

And the fifth [oath will be] that the wrath of Allah be upon her if he was of the truthful.