LGBT Muslims: It’s Time For Acceptance?

19 07 2018

A Free Malaysia Today reader, who goes by the name of Dr. Moaz Nair, wrote an article published by the news portal regarding LGBT, which is currently one of the most talked about issue in the country.

With the title of “LGBT, homosexuality and Islam”, Dr. Moaz Nair discussed how he thinks the Muslims should treat the LGBT people including LGBT Muslims.

Even though Dr. Moaz Nair stated that “Islam forbids such behaviour” in reference to LGBT, Dr. Moaz Nair thinks that the Muslims should respect LGBT Muslims and “just leave it to them to live a life of their own”; or in other words, give the LGBT Muslims the freedom to express themselves in any way they wish to.

Dr. Moaz Nair wrote:

“Be that as it may, the LGBT issue should not be judged from a slanted religious or cultural perspective. It has to be looked at from medical and psychological perspectives.”

Interesting, Dr. Moaz wants the LGBT issue including LGBT Muslims “to be looked at from the medical and psychological perspectives” instead of being “judged from a slanted religious or cultural perspective”.

Hence, in order to do so, our main and most important reference should be the World Health Organisation’s International Classification of Diseases which is generally known as ICD.

ICD defines the universe of diseases, disorders, injuries and other related health conditions, listed in a comprehensive, hierarchical fashion and is used and recognised by the medical professionals worldwide.

Going through the list of internationally recognised diseases in the latest edition (2018) of ICD, categorised under, “Conditions related to sexual health”, is “Gender incongruence” which ICD-11 describes as:

Gender incongruence is characterized by a marked and persistent incongruence between an individual’s experienced gender and the assigned sex. Gender variant behaviour and preferences alone are not a basis for assigning the diagnoses in this group – (ICD-11)

Coded as HA60, “Gender incongruence of adolescence or adulthood describes the characters of LGBT people:

This means that LGBT people are internationally categorised as people with “Conditions related to sexual health”.

This proves that not only LGBT is prohibited in Islam but medically, it is recorded under “diseases and health conditions” classified under the code of HA60 in ICD-11, which is the latest edition of ICD.

ICD which is the foundation for the identification of health trends and the international standard for reporting diseases and health conditions, is the diagnostic classification standard for all clinical and research purposes.

Moaz also said that homosexuality and bisexuality can also be found in the non-human kingdoms including animals:

Again, homosexuality and bisexuality can also be found in the non-human kingdom, in animals and plants.

The same symptoms in animals and plants were created as such and this is not an issue at all to human beings. It’s only when human beings are seen as having these distinct traits that it becomes an issue in some societies.

I cannot understand what makes some people think that what is right for plants and animal must also be right for humans.

Or, as I once asked in my column in a news portal last year, do some people think that animals are smarter, more ethical and more civilised than humans that we humans need to follow their behaviours?

As animals practice jungle law, so must we too do the same and live a life without rules and orders where we can become our own kings and free to proclaim war anytime we feel like it?

If so, they might want to live in the zoo or forest or deep in the jungle where they can do what ever they wish and without any rules to follow.

Dr. Moaz Nair also wrote that:

There have been many cases of even religious figures who have children belonging to this category of people. Some have approached counsellors and doctors for ways out, but even trained psychiatrists cannot do much to change these congenital symptoms.

LGBT is classified as a disease, disorder, or a health condition and Muslims know that Islam forbids such behaviour, so not only if their children but if a so-called ‘religious figure’ belongs “to this category of people” or has a tendency to become an LGBT, then the so-called ‘religious figure’ must repent to Allah and seek forgiveness from Allah and then the person must seek help and wants to be treated.

But if the LGBT person refuses to be treated, then “even trained psychiatrists cannot do much to change these congenital symptoms”; not because it is impossible to do so, but because the patient does not want to be cured!

Next Dr. Moaz Nair said:

In Islam, it says Allah is compassionate (al-Rahman) and merciful (al-Rahim). Allah is also the forgiver and hider of faults (al-Ghafur).

So, just have faith in God for he knows best. Let the final judgment be God’s. 

Allah is compassionate, merciful, the forgiver and hider of faults; that is why we must obey Allah.

As Islam forbids LGBT, all Muslims must obey the words of Allah because we are Muslims and we love Allah.

If we truly have faith in Allah for Allah knows best, then we’ll obey and submit ourselves to Allah without any doubt, and not the other way around!

Dr. Moaz Nair also said that:

As human beings with many shortcomings in our judgments, we should not play God and pass spiteful judgments on the LGBT community.

I would like to say that it is not about to “play God and pass spiteful judgments on the LGBT community in Islam”, but it is about the concept of “amar ma’ruf nahi munkar” which means enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong.

In a hadith narrated by Imam -Tirmizhi, the Prophet s.a.w said:

”By He whom my life is in His hands, you shall call others to do good, and stop them from doing wrong. Or (if you do not do so) Allah s.w.t will bring to you a punishment and then you ask for His help and your prayers will not be answered.”

So, if the Muslims care tor the LGBT Muslims and think that they are an integral part of our society, then we should not let them live their lives in sin; instead we must bring them to the right path.

Are we going to do nothing and just let other Muslims taking the wrong path in life only because we think that they “are an integral part of our society and they should be given the leeway and latitude to prove themselves useful to all and sundry”?

As a Muslim, we judge what is right and wrong from the perspective of the Quran and the hadith; and not from human perspectives.

Related Posts:

Advertisements




Mengapa Perlu Saya Merangkak Ke Dr Mahathir, Kata Ku Li

10 06 2018

[FMT}- KUALA LUMPUR: Veteran Umno, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah tidak akan “merangkak” ke Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad sekiranya dia pemangku presiden Umno.

“Untuk apa? Mengapa saya perlu merangkak kepadanya? Dia dari parti lain. Dia sudah meninggalkan parti kita yang dia tubuhkan dengan Anwar Ibrahim,” katanya pada sidang media di kediamannya hari ini.

Tengku Razaleigh ditanya adakah beliau akan berjumpa Dr Mahathir sekiranya dia pemangku presiden Umno.

Soalan itu merujuk pertemuan Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi dan Dr Mahathir minggu lepas.

Razaleigh tidak mahu mengulas pertemuan itu.

“Orang tanya saya mengapa Zahid pergi jumpa Dr Mahathir dan minta nasihat daripada dia macam mana nak uruskan Umno. Itu dia punya hak, saya tak mahu komen,” katanya.

Ditanya adakah dia berdendam dengan Dr Mahathir, Tengku Razaleigh menjawab: “Tidak ada. Saya tak bergaduh dengannya.”

Beliau menambah Dr Mahathir kawan lamanya dan “dia seorang yang istimewa”.

Dr M bukan lagi diktator?

Tengku Razaleigh tidak percaya Dr Mahathir sudah berubah seperti yang diperkatakan peminat dan bekas pengkritik.

Beliau berkata Dr Mahathir masih orang yang sama.

“Beliau masih sama cuma pakai baju lain…baju lama dah buruk. Macam itulah orangnya 23 tahun lalu, dia seperti itu 22 tahun lalu, dan saya rasa dia masih begitu pada hari ini,” katanya.

Dr Mahathir pernah menjadi perdana menteri dari 1981 hingga 2003.

Tengku Razaleigh meminta media perhatikan PPBM yang baru ditubuhkan Dr Mahathir sebagai contoh.

“Anda nampak barisan kepimpinan parti yang baru ditubuhkan itu tetapi mengetuai kerajaan di Kedah, Perak, Johor dan di tempat lain, dan anda nampak bilangan jawatan Kabinet yang dipegang mereka,” katanya.

(PPBM hanya memenangi 13 daripada 116 kerusi Pakatan Harapan tetapi memegang 3 jawatan Kabinet setakat ini dan juga perdana menteri.)

Ditanya sama ada orang ramai akan akhirnya sedar Dr Mahathir belum berubah: “Saya tidak tahu. Terserah kepada orang ramai, bukan saya yang patut cakap.”

Tengku Razaleigh, 83, merupakan Ahli Parlimen yang paling lama berkhidmat, mewakili Gua Musang sejak 1986.

Bekas menteri kewangan ini pernah berkhidmat dalam Kabinet pertama Dr Mahathir.

Dr Mahathir, 93, kembali berkuasa bulan lepas sebagai ketua Pakatan Harapan selepas meninggalkan Umno pada 2016 dan menubuhkan parti baru, PPBM.





Penyokong Tun M Mahu Jatuhkan Sultan?

23 04 2018

Nampaknya sikap anarki sesetengah pihak di negara kita telah semakin teruk sehingga mereka tidak lagi menghormati undang-undang negara. 

Mereka merasakan bahawa mereka bebas bertindak tanpa batasan seolah-olah kita ini hidup di zaman yang tidak bertamadun.

Baru-baru ini, Tunku Mahkota Johor (TMJ), Tunku Ismail Idris telah membuat satu kenyataan panjang yang antara lainnya mendedahkan tentang individu tertentu yang menurut TMJ merupakan seorang “individu lidah bercabang dua seperti ular”.

Portal Free Malaysia Today (FMT) telah menyiarkan komen Pengerusi Pakatan Harapan, Tun Dr. Mahathir terhadap artikel TMJ itu yang mana telah mengundang berpuluh komen biadap dan kurang ajar terhadap TMJ, seperti yang telah disiarkan oleh FMT.

Lebih teruk lagi, terdapat komen-komen yang bukan sahaja mengutuk dan membangkitkan rasa benci terhadap Istitusi Diraja, malah menghasut orang ramai supaya menjatuhkan Institusi Diraja; contohnya di bawah ini:

Sedarkah mereka yang komen-komen mereka di atas melanggar Seksyen 121B Akta Kanun Keseksaan, kerana mahu menjatuhkan Yang Di-Pertuan Agong dan Raja-Raja Melayu?

Apakah mereka itu terlalu jahil undang-undang atau sememangnya mereka tidak peduli?

Sikap beraja di hati, bersultan di mata tanpa menghormati undang-undang adalah sikap oarang yang tidak bertamadun. 

Perlu diingat bahawa Wan Ji Wan Hussin telahpun merancang untuk menghapuskan Sistem Diraja menjelang tahun 2030, sila click si sini untuk video.

Dan orang itulah yang telah dilantik oleh Lim Guan Eng untuk memegang jawatan Pegawai Penerangan di Pejabat Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang!

Persoalannya apakah pihak pembangkang yang diketuai DAP merestui sikap anarki sebegini?





Pesanan Tok Mat Negeri Sembilan kepada Orang Melayu

7 04 2018




My Highlights of 2017

1 01 2018

With the arrival of the new year of 2018, I’m writing a post dedicated to 2017, listing out some of the things that happened around me in the previous year.

1. A surprise letter from Tun M, the former Prime Minister of Malaysia

On the 12th of January, I received a letter from Tun Dr. Mahathir, replying to my article,“Perjanjian DAP, PKR, PAN, PPBM Untuk Meminda Perkara 3(1)?” In the article, I did not even mention Tun M’s name but only commented about how the word ‘bebas’ in the agreement between DAP, PKR, PAN and Mahathir’s PPBM can undermine and violate the Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution. So Tun M replied to my article came as a real surprise but unfortunately I am sad to say that not only Tun M’s explanation does not answer my question, but it also makes the matter more confusing because the fact that the Article 3(1) is the Article that explains about Islam as the religion of the Federation and it’s position over other religions in Malaysia and not about the rights to convert to other religions. [Read more…]

2. Made the news on national media

I was interviewed by Berita Harian, Utusan Malaysia and Harian Metro and was featured on the front page of Utusan Malaysia which later led me to being reported on news portals including Astro Awani, MalaysiaKini,  Free Malaysia Today, Tanjak and many others receiving attention from several politicians like Mejar Jeneral (B) Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, Dr. Asyraf Wajdi, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah and Ibrahim Ali. [Read more…]

3. Meeting YB Datuk Md Jais Sarday on his last day as the Education, Information and Entrepreneur and Cooperative Development Exco of Johor

I had the chance to meet Datuk Jais Sarday in Pasir Gudang on his last day as the Education, Information and Entrepreneur and Cooperative Development Exco of Johor before moving to his new post as the Housing and Local Government Exco of Johor. [Read more…]

4. Attending the Bukit Aman Special Branch Aidilfitri Open House

On the 11th of July, I attended the Aidilfitri open house by the Bukit Aman Special Branch, where I had the chance to meet the then Deputy Inspector-General of PDRM, Tan Sri Nor Rashid Ibrahim, and even managed to get his autograph. [Read more…]

5. Witnessing the court case of Eric Paulsen v. Ustaz Hafiz Nordin

I attended the court proceedings of the High Court case of Eric Paulsen v. Ustaz Hafiz Nordin, where Eric Paulsen lost in a defamation case against the Chairman of Jaringan Muslimin Pulau Pinang (JMPP), Ustaz Hafiz Nordin, at the High Court of Kuala Lumpur. This is my first experience of witnessing the whole proceeding of a high profile case. [Read more…]

6. My first solo talk to a crowd of over 400 students in JB

I was invited as the official ambassador of Muafakat Pendidikan Johor, to give a speech to the students and teachers of SMK Tan Sri Mohamed Rahmat in Kempas, Johor Bahru as part of Muafakat Pendidikan Johor’s ‘Jelajah Kemerdekaan’ program, on the 21st of August. In my hour long speech, I talked about the basic foundation of our country, starting with the history of the formation of Malaysia, basic principles of the country, the sovereignty of the Federation, and also a brief introduction to the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. [Read more…]

7. Program Ibadah Qurban dan Majlis Ramah Mesra IKSIM

I attended the Program Ibadah Qurban dan Majlis Ramah Mesra IKSIM on the 4th of September, which was my first experience in taking part and helping out at a qurban event. [Read more…]

8. Meeting Tan Sri Shahrir Samad

I got the chance to spend some time talking to Tan Sri Shahrir Samad, the Member of Parliament of Johor Bharu. Despite how certain people tried to paint him, I find him as very polite, soft spoken, funny and very friendly. [Read more…]

9. The officiating program of the Pusat Latihan DIAN IKSIM (PLDI)

I attended the officiating program of IKSIM’s training centre in Batang Kali, Selangor; where I also met the Minister at the Prime Minister’s Department, Mejar Jeneral (B) Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom. [Read more…]





Institusi Agama Fitnah G25 & Shad Faruqi? Biar Betul!

18 12 2017

Is this merely a very foolish mistake or is it another spiteful spin with the intention to detriment the good name of Islamic agencies?

In an article, “Religious radicalism on the rise” published by The Star on November 23, 2007, Emeritus Professor Shad Saleem Faruqi made another attack on JAKIM before focusing its attack on another Islamic agency, Institut Kajian Strategik Islam Malaysia (IKSIM).

To be fair, since the allegations were made based on “a booklet by the Malaysian Islamic Research Institute (IKSIM)”, I checked the said booklet to see what was written by IKSIM and I found the source of the chaos.

IKSIM’s words were wrongly translated from “Awas! Sekularisme, Liberalisme dan Pluralisme merupakan agenda penghakis akidah Islam dalam meruntuhkan kedaulatan Negara” to “secularism, liberalism and cultural diversity are elements that will undermine the Islamic agenda and destroy the country’s sovereignty”!

Armed with the wrong translation, Prof Shad who is also one of  the contributors to the infamous book by G25,Breaking the Silence: Voices of Moderation‘ attacked IKSIM.

It is like putting words in one’s mouth in order to attack the victim:

  1. “Cultural diversity” has not been mentioned in the book by IKSIM.
  2. The English translation of the Bahasa Melayu word “pluralisme” is pluralism.
  3. “Pluralisme” in the above sentence obviously means religious pluralism as clearly explained in a chart on page 7 of the book.
  4. In Bahasa Melayu, “cultural diversity” is ‘kepelbagaian kebudayaan’.

I guess Prof Shad has not have the chance to read the book because it is almost impossible for a learned man like him to not be able to understand the thin, simple book, except, unfortunately the person does not understand Bahasa Melayu well.

Having said that, I really pity Prof Shad for being shocked and at the same time slandering others only because of his own mistake, “I am shocked to read that “cultural diversity” is seen by IKSIM as a threat to Islam and to our nation”.

Prof Shad also questioned, “although Malaysians can embrace other religious faiths, the country is not duty-bound to protect other religions”, claiming that, “The belief that we have no duty to protect other religions is both un-Islamic and un-Malaysian”.

I sincerely hope that Prof Shad is not trying to challenge the Oath of office of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong who is the Supreme Head of the Federation!

In taking the Oath of office of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, as set out in Part I of the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution, his Majesty declares, “……We do solemnly and truly declare that We shall at all time protect the Religion of Islam … “.

Hence, by law the Prime Minister, the ministers, the lawmakers and the government servants are bounded by his Majesty’s oath to protect the Religion of Islam as they are being tasked with the duty of administering the country on behalf of the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong.

In the Court of Appeal judgement of Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur v. Kerajaan Malaysia & Menteri Dalam Negeri, where YA Dato’ Abdul Aziz Rahim stated:

“I would add however that the position of Islam as the religion of the Federation, to my mind imposes certain obligation on the power that be to promote and defend Islam as well to protect its sanctity. In one article written by Muhammad Imam, entitled Freedom of Religion under Federal Constitution of Malaysia – A Reappraisal [1994] 2 CLJ lvii (June) referred to by the learned counsel for the 8th appellant it was said that: “Article 3 is not a mere declaration. But it imposes positive obligation on the Federation to protect, defend, promote Islam and to give effect by appropriate state action, to the injunction of Islam and able to facilitate and encourage people to hold their life according to the Islamic injunction spiritual and daily life.”

However, even though “the country is not duty-bound to protect other religions” but Islam, Malaysia still guarantees “freedom of faith and conscience and cultural and legal autonomy to all religions and tribes” as long as it is not against the law of our country.

One of the main elements of a secular country is, the country is not duty-bound to protect any religion; so using the same argument, are we saying that secular countries do not guarantee “freedom of faith and conscience and cultural and legal autonomy to all religions and tribes”?

Next, Prof Shad said that the Islamic agency is challenging the supremacy of the Federal Constitution by saying that Islam has a higher position than the Federal Constitution itself.

The provision on Islam as the religion of the Federation was inserted in the Part 1 of the Constitution, that is in Article 3(1) which indicates the importance of the provision in the Constitutional structure; whereas the supremacy of the Federal Constitution is positioned after the provision on Islam, which is in Article 4.

Tan Sri Apandi Ali in the high profile case of Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur v. Kerajaan Malaysia & Menteri Dalam Negeri stated that:

“The Article places the religion of Islam at par with the other basic structures of the Constitution, as it is the 3 rd in the order of precedence of the Articles that were within the confines of Part I of the Constitution”

In fact Article 3(4) which says that “nothing in this Article derogates from any other provision of this Constitution” has further accentuate the matter.

 Prof Shad words, “According to it, religious enforcement authorities come under the patronage of the Sultans, not state governments. This is a remarkable vision of an autonomous, almost all-powerful, religious elite that is like a state within a state”, for me is uncalled for because it questions the rights of the Ruler as the Head of the religion of Islam which is protected by the Article 181.

Section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act says, “A “seditious tendency” is a tendency to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III of the Federal Constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution”.

It was also reported that the false allegations by Prof Shad had led IKSIM to lodge a police report against him, The Star and Sin Chew Daily; which was responded by G25’s Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin as reported in Free Malaysia Today (FMT) under the title, “G25 calls for action against Putrajaya-linked institute”.

The G25 member went further saying, “Iksim had singled out Amanah, G25, Sisters in Islam (SIS) and Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) as liberals”.

She said, “If they (Iksim) can lodge a police report against Prof Shad Saleem Faruqi, similarly I am in a very good position to make a police report against them and sue them for defamation”.

This is the part where it gets very hilarious; G25, in another article, “G25: The word “liberal” has place of pride in Rukun Negara” argues that liberal is something positive so why is the fuss over the word now?

“Note that the word “liberal” is used in both versions in the context of something positive and beneficial to our ambitions to become a united, happy and prosperous country.” – G25 (FMT)

In her speech, “Malaysia as a Secular State”, The Malaysian Insight (TMI) reported G25’s Noor Farida as saying that Malaysia is neither a theocracy states nor secular state!

But I have to highlight that G25 also claimed that Malaysia is a secular state and at other time a secular democratic state!

It is very hard either to try to make sense of what they are trying to say or to take G25’s words seriously when its members keep on changing their minds and seems very confused, for example on their perception regarding the ideology of Malaysia.

To top it all, in its eagerness, FMT made a grave mistake in its reporting: 

  1. Iksim was established on Dec 9, 2014 after consent from the Conference of Rulers, with the objective of upholding Islam as the country’s official religion.
  2. According to its official website, Iksim was established to fulfil the wishes of the country’s Muslim community to defend the Malay Rulers and uphold Islam as the official religion of the federation.

IKSIM clearly states that Islam is the religion of the Federation hence not only FMT’s wrong reporting defames IKSIM, but also the Constitution itself since the addition of the word “official” undermines the position of Islam as the religion of the Federation.

Taking G25’s Noor Farida Ariffin’s advice, IKSIM should “lodge a police report or even take legal action” against FMT for defaming both IKSIM and Article 3(1) of the Constitution.

Rather than confusing others, G25’s Datuk Noor Farida should walk the talk by making a police report against IKSIM to settle the matter once and for all and to prove that she and her friends from G25 are not the ones who are really confused not only about the truth but also in making their own opinions and views.

Please be reminded that, causing disharmony, disunity, or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will, or prejudicing on grounds of religion” is an offence under Section 298 of the Penal Code. 

Related Articles:





G25 Yang Terlalu Keliru

29 11 2017

Saya amat tertarik membaca tajuk tulisan G25 yang disiarkan oleh  Free Malaysia Today (FMT), namun saya hairan kenapa G25 menggunakan ungkapan ‘place of pride’ sedangkan ungkapan yang betul dan tepat ialah “pride of place”, jika apa yang cuba G25 gambarkan dengan ungkapan itu ialah ‘mempunyai tempat yang penting dan istimewa’.

Menariknya kini G25 mengakui bahawa Islam adalah agama Persekutuan dan tidak lagi agama rasmi negara seperti dakwaan ahlinya Tawfik Tun Dr. Ismail: tetapi pendapat mereka masih sama; seolah-olah tiada bezanya di antara ‘agama negara’ dan ‘agama rasmi negara’.

Di bawah tajuk, “G25: The word “liberal” has place of pride in Rukun Negara”, G25 mendakwa perkataan “liberal” seperti yang dilabelkan ke atas mereka, telah digunakan untuk menghina umat Islam yang percaya kepada nilai demokrasi sejagat, hak asasi manusia, kesaksamaan gender dan menghormati kepelbagaian budaya dan segala bentuk kepelbagaian.

“G25 has often been labelled as “liberal” by its critics, using a word which is becoming a derogatory term in Malaysia to describe Muslims who believe in the universal values of democracy, human rights, gender equality and respect for multiculturalism and diversity.” – G25

Malah, G25 menuduh bahawa perkataan “liberal” disalahgunakan olen pihak penguatkuasa agama dan “ekstrimis” untuk memburukkan golongan yang mempunyai pendapat yang berbeza tentang bangsa, agama dan politik.

“It is a word which has been abused by the religious authorities and extremists to demonise those who have different opinions on matters of race, religion and politics.” – G25

Kenyataan-kenyataan di atas, jelas menunjukkan kumpulan G25 bersikap ‘double standard’, mereka tidak senang bila dilabelkan “liberal”, namun pada masa yang sama, G25 merasa mempunyai hak untuk mengutuk dan melabelkan orang lain sebagai “ekstrimis”!

Lebih teruk lagi, G25 berhujah bahawa perkataan “liberal” mempunyai ‘tempat yang penting dan istimewa’ di dalam Rukun Negara!

“We, the members of G25, would like to remind our critics that in the Rukun Negara, the word “liberal” has a place of pride in the five principles of the national ideology aimed at bringing the various races together for national unity and development.” – G25

Hujah G25 lagi “liberal” sebenarnya ialah satu sikap yang positif, malah menjadi salah satu hala tuju negara, selah-olah Rukun Negara dan hala tuju negara kita ini bersifat “liberal”. 

“In the preamble to the Rukun Negara, it states that one of Malaysia’s aims are: “menjamin satu cara yang liberal terhadap tradisi-tradisi kebudayaannya yang kaya dan berbagai corak”.” – G25

Nampaknya G25 sudah terlalu keliru sehingga gagal memahami maksud “liberal” dalam ayat di atas, yang hanyalah merujuk kepada kebudayaan sahaja; dan bukannya kepada soal agama atau kepercayaan.

Perkara ini disahkan sendiri oleh Prof. Dr Shamrahayu Abd Aziz, di mana Aunty Shamrahayu menerangkan kepada saya bahawa “liberal” dalam ayat tersebut bermakna keterbukaan menerima budaya pelbagai kaum, dan bersifat dan bersikap inklusif dengan prinsip asas; tetapi tanpa mengabaikan Tuhan dan prinsip kesopanan dan kesusilaan.

Ini kerana Malaysia adalah sebuah negara Islam, yang tidak mengabaikan prinsip-prinsip agama; sampai ke tahap Perkara 37 Perlembagaan Persekutuan memperuntukkan bahawa setiap Yang Di-Pertuan Agong sebagai Ketua Utama Negara mesti bersumpah atas nama Allah untuk pada setiap masa memlihara agama Islam sebelum menjalankan tugas baginda sebagai Ketua Utama Negara.

G25 adalah puak Islam liberal kerana mereka berusaha meliberalkan agama Islam, menolak, menentang dan mempertikaikan hukum-hukum Islam termasuk hukuman ke atas pesalah syariah.

Sebagai contoh, G25 mendawa kesalahan syariah hanyalah ‘personal sin’ di sisi Perlembagaan dan bukannya satu jenayah yang mesti dihukum oleh mahkamah, sedangkan kedudukan Mahkamah Syariah telah diperuntukkan oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan melalui Perkara 121(1A).

“… LGBT, free sex etc are wrong but that these are personal sins, not crimes as defined in constitutional law.” – G25

Nyata G25 gagal memahami Perlembagaan Persekutuan khasnya Perkata 3(1) dan sewenang-wenangnya telah memfitnah Malaysia sebagai sebuah negara demokrasi sekular!

 “We in G25 will defend the country’s secular democracy based on the Federal Constitution as the supreme law of the country.” – G25

Bagaimanakah Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang jelas mengangkat Islam sebagai agama negara boleh dituduh menjadikan Malaysia bersifat demokrasi sekular sedangkan perkataan demokrasi dan sekular tidak pernah tertulis di dalam Perlembagaan?

Saya mencabar G25 untuk membuktikan di dalam Perkara atau Jadual manakah dalam Perlembagaan yang  menyebut bahawa Malaysia adalah sebuah negara demokrasi sekular!

“The constitution was written with the intention that while Islam is the religion of the federation, the laws of the country should follow the universal values of justice which were in existence long before independence.” G25

Kenyataan di atas membuktikan bahawa G25 mesti kembali belajar daripada orang yang lebih pakar kerana G25 bukan setakat buta Perlembagaan, malah buta sejarah.

Sejarah negara membuktikan bahawa kerajaan-kerajaan Melayu dahulunya adalah Kerajaan Melayu Islam yang mana sistem perundangannya adalah berasaskan Islam dan bukannya mengikut nilai keadilan sejagat seperti yang direka oleh G25.

Maka, di atas dasar apakah G25 mahu berhujah jika ternyata mereka sendiri yang sebenarnya tersangat keliru dan yang gagal memahami asas kenegaraan Malaysia?

Malah, fakta yang mereka berikan bukan sahaja tidak benar, malah adalah bercanggahan di antara satu sama lain!

G25 memperakui bahawa Islam adalah agama bagi Persekutuan tetapi pada masa yang sama mendakwa Malaysia ialah sebuah negara demokrasi sekular serta menuduh pihak penguatkuasa agama melampaui batasan Perlembagaan dan menganggap perlaksanaan undang-undang Islam adalah melanggar prinsip-prinsip demokrasi dan hak asasi manusia!

Adalah tidak masuk akal jika sebuah negara Islam boleh bersifat sekular pada masa yang sama kerana sekular bermakna memisahkan agama dari pentadbiran negara sedangkan kerajaan Malaysia mempunyai tanggung jawab keperlembagaan untuk menjaga kesucian Islam di negara ini.

G25 lantang memburukkan pihak berkuasa agama yang menjalankan tugas mengikut Perlembagaan untuk mempertahankan kesucian Islam:

“… religious authorities go beyond the limits of the constitution in exercising their powers, and introduce laws to control and police the behaviour of Muslims against the principles of democracy and human rights, G25 has a duty to respond by raising the issues of law and order …” – G25

Lebih parah, G25 yang liberal ini mahu menyesatkan umat Islam di negara kita dengan mendesak kerajaan membenarkan golongan liberal dan sesat yang G25 dakwa mempunyai pandangan yang “controversial and radical” untuk bebas menulis dan berucap di negara ini, sebagai contoh buku mereka, “Breaking the Silence: Islam in a Constitutional Democracy” yang diharamkan oleh kerajaan; walaupun perkara itu bertentangan dengan undang-undang negara.

Penghakiman Mahkamah Rayuan kes Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur v. Kerajaan Malaysia & Menteri Dalam Negeri jelas membuktikan hal ini, di mana YA Dato’ Abdul Aziz Rahim menegaskan bahawa:

I would add however that the position of Islam as the religion of the Federation, to my mind imposes certain obligation on the power that be to promote and defend Islam as well to protect its sanctity. In one article written by Muhammad Imam, entitled Freedom of Religion under Federal Constitution of Malaysia – A Reappraisal [1994] 2 CLJ lvii (June) referred to by the learned counsel for the 8th appellant it was said that: “Article 3 is not a mere declaration. But it imposes positive obligation on the Federation to protect, defend, promote Islam and to give effect by appropriate state action, to the injunction of Islam and able to facilitate and encourage people to hold their life according to the Islamic injunction spiritual and daily life.”

Hujah dangkal G25 seterusnya yang menuduh ‘founding forefathers’ mahukan Malaysia menjadi sebuah negara demokrasi sekular yang liberal dapat saya patahkan dengan hujah Hakim Tan Sri Md Raus Sharif di dalam kes Mahkamah Persekutuan ZI Publications Sdn Bhd and Another v Kerajaan Negeri Selangor

“Federal Constitution allows the Legislature of a State to legislate and enact offences against the precepts of Islam. Taking the Federal Constitution as a whole, it is clear that it was the intention of the framers of our Constitution to allow Muslims in this country to be also governed by Islamic personal law.”

Seperti golongan liberal lainnya G25 sengaja memfitnah bahawa Perkara 10(1) memberikan kebebasan bersuara sehingga bebas menghina dan menafsir Islam secara liberal dan sesuka hati; atau menurut G25 pendapat yang “controversial and radical”, malah mendakwa pendapat sesat sebegitu adalah satu budaya yang sihat dalam memahami Islam.

Ini adalah satu lagi fitnah kerana di dalam penghakiman kes Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur v. Menteri Dalam Negeri and Kerajaan Malaysia, Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali yang ketika itu ialah Hakim Mahkamah Persekutuan, berhujah:

“[36] The alleged infringement of the fundamental liberties of the respondent can be negated by trite law that any freedom is not absolute. Freedom cannot be unfettered, otherwise, like absolute power, it can lead to chaos and anarchy. Freedom of speech and expression under Article 10(1) are subjected to restrictions imposed by law under Article 10(2)(a). Freedom of religion, under Article 11(1), as explained above is subjected to Article 11(4) and is to be read with Article 3(1).”

G25 dengan sendirinya telah membuktikan bahawa mereka adalah sebuah golongan liberal yang keliru, bercakap melawan fakta, ‘double standard’ dan tidak profesional; mereka bebas menuduh orang lain sebagai extrimis dan melanggar Perlembagaan sedangkan mereka sendirilah sebenarnya yang gagal memahami ajaran Islam yang sebenarnya serta buta Perlembagaan.

Anehnya bila mempertahankan suara liberal, G25 melaungkan hak kebebasan bersuara walaupun ianya “controversial and radical” namun menentang suara pejuang Islam yang mereka gelar extrimis serta tugas pihak berkuasa Islam yang mereka fitnah melampaui batas Perlembagaan, seolah-olah “constitutional guarantee on the freedom of speech and expression” hanya sah kepada puak liberal dan penentang Islam sahaja!

Semoga G25 yang telah sedar bahawa Islam adalah agama bagi Persekutuan, boleh belajar memahami ajaran Islam  yang sebenarnya  serta suatu hari nanti akan bersama-sama mempertahankan Islam Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah, mazhab Syafie daripada anasir yang mahu meruntuhkan akidah umat Islam di Malaysia, Amin.

Related Article:








%d bloggers like this: