The Court of Appeal last month ruled that Negeri Sembilan ban of cross-dressing criminalises and discriminates against male Muslims suffering from Gender Identity Disorder, and therefore, in its landmark ruling, declared section 66 as unconstitutional and thus, void.
While I am not a Muslim, I cannot deny the fact that the Mufti and the relevant authority fails to address how Muslims who are sufferers of GID should be subjected.
In my opinion, time has changed, and the law has to change according to the time. While it is true Islamic laws are divine, enacted laws are man-made, and man-interpreted, and therefore subjected to errors and should be reviewed.
As I have read in an article previously, Hudud punishes those who steal with amputation of hand is because in the past, there was no technology to effectively sever one hand, and thus subject the thief to gross and brutal amputation of hand because there was no alternatives in the past.
The time has changed. While the law could be upheld, the way it is upheld can be amended.
It too baffles me when certain Middle East Muslims, and certain in Malaysia, view this as "a new wave of assault on Islam", and that such law "promotes cross-dressing, and unhealthy liberalism that leads to the degradation the haunts US".
While I have no grounds to comment on the first, I have comments regarding the latter.
This ruling does not promote cross-dressing, and it is insulting to Malaysians to think that just because there was no rule, civilisation will disappear and people will start acting in a crazy way. This rule simply de-criminalises those suffering from GID, because they were born this way, and they do not have a choice. It is a recognition that people should be treated equally.
There is scientific evidence to back that GID is an existent medical condition, and there is no scientific evidence as to how GID could be treated.
To say that such ruling promotes cross-dressing is preposterous, and such statement is without basis and mere speculation.
To say that such ruling encourages liberalism is not accurate. While we indeed does not agree with oppressive laws that discriminates against the minority, supporting this ruling does not mean we agree that US liberalism is what we seek after.
We seek after liberalism, but we have clear conscience that we do not wish to have the lifestyles the Americans practise. Having sex, switching partners constantly or sex party such things were, and will never be, part of Malaysian culture. To support liberalism is to seek after healthy thinking and healthy lifestyle, and it is not the Asian culture to practise American's liberalism.
What we more seek after is the culture those Koreans and Japanese practise. They have clear conscience, progressive, show huge interest in learning, and at the same time, clearly conserve their culture and religion. This is how a country should function.
There is no need to fear that Malaysia will degrade to American's morale because Malaysia will never degrade to such level. What is there to fear is that unless prompt actions and the silent moderate Muslim majority voice out against the extremists, Malaysia is more likely to go on a path that plunges into the darkness that currently surrounds Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, where extremists wrongly interpreted and politicised the teaching of the religion, and throw their own countries into turmoil.
At the end, it is their own people who suffer. And we, a rather civilised country who is rather developed, certainly can do more to better interpret the Islamic teaching that promotes religious tolerance, moderation, and equality.
On a side note, I disagree with UMNO that claims vernacular school inhibits racial harmony. This comment is as absurd as stating that religious schools is an obstacle to religious tolerance, or is that what UMNO is insinuating?
It is time for Malaysians to speak out against the tyranny, who have now frequently abused their power to oppress those who do not concur with them, and politicise a religion and render a peaceful religion into one that is breaking the practitioners apart.
No comments:
Post a Comment