Malaysian Court Restricts Use of ‘Allah’ to Muslims / NYTimes

[edhopper]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/15/world/asia/malaysian-court-restricts-use-of-allah-to-muslims.html?_r=0&adxnnl=1&ref=world&adxnnlx=1381860728-526ZODKBlgPMsu2X10E8Hg

A Malaysian court ruled on Monday that non-Muslims may not use the word “Allah” to refer to God, the latest decision in a long dispute that has polarized the multicultural country.

The decision, by a panel of three judges, was intended to protect Islam, the country’s official religion, from conversions.

“It is my judgment that the most possible and probable threat to Islam, in the context of this country, is the propagation of other religions to the followers of Islam,” the chief judge, Mohamed Apandi Ali, said in the decision, according to the news Web site Malaysiakini.

I hope we can agree this is a case where religion is a force of suppression and harm.

This isn't an middle eastern Theocracy, it is one of the "moderate" Islamic countries.

Very troubling.

[cbayer]

1. Analysts are saying this was a move to appease the right wing Islamists.

The more moderate Muslim groups don't agree with this decision and see it as feeding growing tensions between the majority muslims and other smaller religious groups.

At any rate, it's got very significant political undertones.

[cleanhippie]

2. Aren't ALL religiously based laws protecting the right wing fundamentalists?

[edhopper]

3. Sounds like the GOP and the Tea Party.

In the end though, the curtailment of civil rights is wrong no matter the cause.
And shame on the "moderates" for going along with this. A moderate going along with extremism is inexcusable.

[cbayer]

4. Actually, the moderates did not support this.

They saw it as being unnecessarily divisive.

[edhopper]

5. Oh.

Hopefully they can do something to change it then.

[cbayer]

6. It looks like it will be appealed, but from what I am reading both

ethnic and religious tensions are increasing dramatically in the area.

Hopefully, saner heads will prevail.

[cleanhippie]

7. Perhaps in THIS case that is true, but it is moderates that empower the radical right.

By insisting that their beliefs be respected, they empower the fundamentalists.
This is true regardless of the country or religion, wouldn't you agree?

[Dorian Gray]

8. nope

don't agree.

[cleanhippie]

9. That's nice.

Without substantiating your reply it is meaningless.

But you knew that already.

[rug]

10. "By insisting that their beliefs be respected, they empower the fundamentalists."

That is an unsupportable claim.

[cleanhippie]

11. Sure, totally unsupportable.

[rug]

12. Completely.

As has just been demonstrated. A smiley is poor support for a claim.

[cleanhippie]

13. Nothing of the sort has been demonstrated, so until it is...

A smiley is all that's needed to refute such a baseless allegation.

[rug]

14. Two posts. Still zero substantiation.

[cleanhippie]

15. Exactly. Two posts and you've not substantiated anything.

Glad we agree.


Now comes the part where you respond with yet another asinine comment because you are unable to control your last-word compulsion.

Go on, substantiate THAT claim for me. You know you will.

[rug]

16. Three.

[cleanhippie]

17. Four.

Four posts and you've still substantiated nothing except the fact that you still have a last-word compulsion.

[rug]

18. Your claim. Read #10 again, slowly if necessary.

[cleanhippie]

19. Your last-word compulsion. Seek help if necessary.

[Iggo]

20. Separation of church and state is a wonderful thing.

And don't any of you forget it!