MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku


Tuesday, May 31, 2016


You define the Perlembagaan Malaysia according to the Qur’an and not the other way around. Instead, Andy Yong is asking that the Qur’an be defined by the Perlembagaan Malaysia. Big mistake! No Muslim will agree to that.
Raja Petra Kamarudin
The Gerakan deputy youth chief, Andy Yong, wants to debate Islam with me (READ HERE). It appears he is upset with my article Chinese should stop trying to prove they are stupid’ (READ HERE).
“What is he trying to prove? First of all, I have never attempted to define Islam, but the constitutional aspect of it. What I explained was that it is inevitable that if Hadi’s bill comes into force, it will affect the non-Muslims as well,” Andy Yong, who is a lawyer, said.
Andy Yong added, “On Raja Petra’s confusion, like some others about Hadi’s bill… it is actually to extend the power of the syariah court to be able to implement Kelantan Syariah Criminal Enactment (II) (1993) 2015, that is, to impose hudud punishment. Simply put, (it is) to give freedom for the state to enact higher punishment. So I am actually a smart Chinaman.”
Well, if Andy Yong is a smart Chinaman as he claims he is, maybe he can then read the summary below and tell us where does it state that Kelantan wishes to impose Hudud punishment? Furthermore, in what way will this so-called Hudud punishment affect non-Muslims?
There is no punishment of amputation or death sentence by beheading. It only punishes Muslims who commit adultery. Non-Muslims like Andy Yong can go ahead and bonk anything that walks and talks and they will escape punishment, even if they bonk their own mother or sister.
This law also punishes Muslims who drink liquor (Hindus and Buddhists can go ahead and drink all the toddy and samsu that they want and still not suffer punishment).
Now please note, those laws are already in force and have been for a very long time. With or without the amendments to the Syariah, Muslims will still get punished for drinking and for adultery. And the punishment is up to each individual state and differs from state to state. And non-Muslims are not punished for drinking or for adultery. They can be as immoral as they wish and nothing will happen to them.
So what has changed and in what way will non-Muslims suffer if the amendments are passed by Parliament? These laws have been in force long before the Chinese and Indians first migrated to Malaya in huge numbers from 1850 to 1920.
Another amendment is if you swear a false oath in the name of Allah then you will be punished. Is Andy Yong saying that non-Muslims also swear oaths in the name of Allah? Why should non-Muslims get punished, as Andy Yong says they will, for swearing a false oath in the name of Allah when non-Muslims do not accept Allah as God? (Chinese will swear ‘potong ayam’ and not ‘dengan nama Allah’).
Then in this amendment proposal is the law of Qisas (and not Hudud, as Andy Yong says) where when you kill someone you can redeem yourself by paying compensation to the deceased’s family. This is provided for under Islam (which Andy Yong did not know) in the event the person killed is the breadwinner of the family and the first priority is to take care of the family rather than punish the perpetrator, which does not help the family’s finances in any way.
I am sure many families would welcome some form of an ‘insurance policy’ when the breadwinner of the family dies. And this is what the amendment hopes to achieve, protection for the family in terms of financial support.
Andy Yong said, “First of all, I have never attempted to define Islam, but the constitutional aspect of it.” And this is the biggest flaw in Andy Yong’s argument. What does he mean by the constitutional aspect of Islam?
Islam already has a Constitution or Perlembagaan and that is called the Qur’an. So when you discuss Islam you need to discuss it from the aspect of the Qur’an and not from the aspect of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia or Perlembagaan Malaysia, like what Andy Yong is doing.
You define the Perlembagaan Malaysia according to the Qur’an and not the other way around. Instead, Andy Yong is asking that the Qur’an be defined by the Perlembagaan Malaysia. Big mistake! No Muslim will agree to that.
This was what happened to Christianity soon after the death of Jesus. James and Peter wanted Christianity defined by the Bible, meaning the Old Testament. Paul, however, wanted to redefine Christianity. So he rewrote the Bible and came out with what today is known as the New Testament.
And that is what Andy Yong wants Muslims to do. He wants Islam to be redefined according to the Constitution and not according to the Qur’an so that we can come out with the New Testament Qur’an like in Christianity.
Christianity has already been corrupted by so many different versions of the Bible and by the New Testament that some Christians say must be read alongside the Old Testament and some Christians say must replace the Old Testament. And now Andy Yong wants the same to happen to Islam.
No, Andy Yong, Islam is defined by the Qur’an and not by the Perlembagaan Malaysia — like what you are trying to do — and Muslims are guided by the Aqidah — something a person like you would never understand. When Muslims swear an oath it is done on the Qur’an and in the name of Allah and not on the Perlembagaan Malaysia and in the name of the Agong.
So, Andy Yong, you are not really as clever as you think you are because nowhere in your comment have you once mentioned the word Aqidah and what it means to Muslims. You might as well go challenge the Aqidah of Christians by telling them that the Trinity is bullshit and that Jesus never died on the cross or came back to life three days later. If you can succeed in that then come back and try to convince Muslims that Aqidah is not an essential part of Islam.
1. Kesalahan khalwat, ketidakhadiran Solat Jumaat dsb itu bukan fokus utama dalam pindaan RUU355 ini. Ketidakhadiran ke Solat Jumaat telah pun dikuatkuasakan di Kelantan dan Kedah. Di Kelantan, ia termaktub di bawah Enakmen Majlis Agama Islam dan Adat Istiadat Agama Islam Negeri Kelantan.
2. Begini, ia perlu difahami dengan melihat satu ‘big picture’ terhadap perkara ini, berkait dengan RUU355 yang banyak diperkatakan hari ini.
3. Jadual Kesembilan Perlembagaan menetapkan senarai bidang kuasa Pusat dalam Jadual 1, Senarai Negeri dalam Jadual 2 dan Senarai Bersama dalam Jadual 3.
4. Apa yang dibawa dalam RUU355 merangkumi dua perkara;
i) meningkatkan kuasa Mahkamah Syariah terhadap orang Islam dalam Senarai Negeri Jadual Kesembilan ini.
ii) meningkatkan jumlah hukuman tertentu bagi kesalahan yang berada di bawah bidang kuasa Negeri.
5. Ertinya, pindaan RUU355 ini hanya fokus kepada kesalahan dibawah Senarai Negeri dahulu dan hanya memerlukan simple majority supaya hukuman tertentu dapat ditingkatkan seperti jumlah sebatan.
6. Apabila melibatkan hukuman mati (riddah), rejam (zina), potong tangan (mencurimerompak) dsb adalah kesalahan dibawah Senarai Kerajaan Pusat, Jadual 1. Ia memerlukan pindaan kepada Perkara 76A untuk melakukan pindaan perlembagaan bagi meluaskan kuasa Mahkamah Syariah dan Negeri seterusnya menjadikannya dalam Senarai Bersama.
7. PAS mengambil langkah dengan cermat. Menyelesaikan apa yang lebih ringan sebelum berpindah kepada yang lebih sukar. PAS juga mengikuti lunas perundangan kerana itulah laluan yang terbaik dalam menegakkan syariat Islam.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.