So because be concerned about either a chairman is true or gay? Straight Muslims have been starting to ruin according to a Christians as good as true Christians have been starting to ruin according to a Muslims. Hence no one is starting to sky even if they have been straight. So, if we have been all starting to ruin anyway, what does it make a difference any longer if we have been happy or straight?
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
(NST) - There were no sales of a controversial bookAllah, Liberty as good as Loveby Irshad Manji in Johor following a check upon all bookstores statewide.
State Religious Committee authority Datuk Zainal Abidin Osman pronounced a writer's influence, together with which of compelling lesbian, gay, bisexual, as good as transgender (LGBT) enlightenment was non-existent.
"As of now, a Johor Religious Department has not received any complaint upon a enlightenment being widespread by any group or individual; or of any special programmes related to a LGBT culture.
"The state supervision has additionally taken stairs by giving out explanation as good as inform to a village through seminars as good as workshops which were organized to widespread a word upon a dangers of a culture."
Zainal Abidin pronounced this when replying to a subject from Jaffar Hashim (BN-Senggarang) upon a border of Irshad Manji's change in Johor.
He pronounced Irshad's latest book, which was published in June 2011 in a United States, Canada as good as alternative countries, contained elements which angry a teachings of Islam.
"The Home Ministry criminialized a book after reception a inform as good as examination from a Islamic Development Department (Jakim). The directive was ! issued u nder Section 7(1) of a Printing Presses as good as Publications Act 1984 given a contents could disrupt a thinking of a people as good as adversely start confidence as good as open order."
Zainal Abidin pronounced a LGBT enlightenment is an insult to a syariah as good as civil laws of a country.
He pronounced a enlightenment could additionally threaten a country's stability as good as peace.
He pronounced a couple of LGBT advocates active in a nation were severe a in front of of Islam in a Federal Constitution, as good as to illustrate scornful a conduct of a religion, a Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
**********************************
Johor State Religious Committee chairman, Datuk Zainal Abidin Osman, said: LGBT advocates active in a nation were severe a in front of of Islam in a Federal Constitution, as good as to illustrate scornful a conduct of a religion, a Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
Now, as an EXCO part of as good as Chairman of a State Religious Committee, Zainal Abidin Osman has to do some-more than usually make a controversial statement. He contingency insist in greater clarity what he equates to by what he says or else he competence as good usually contend which a look upon your face is scornful to me as good as leave it during that.
Article 3(1) of a Federal Constitution of Malaysia says which Islam is a sacrament of a Federation. That is all it says: Islam is a sacrament of a Federation.
Now, initial of all, what does 'Islam is a sacrament of a Federation' mean? Can Zainal Abidin Osman insist that?
The Malayan Tiger orHarimau Belangis a inhabitant animal of a Federation. The Hibiscus orBunga Rayais a inhabitant flowering plant of a Federation. Bahasa Malaysia is a inhabitant denunciation of a Federation. The Stripes of Glory orJalur Gemilangis a inhabitant dwindle of a Federation (we have state flags as well). The Yang di-Pertuan Agong is! a Supre me Head of a Federation (we have state rulers as well). And Islam is a sacrament of a Federation.
So how do we insult a tiger, a Hibiscus, Bahasa Malaysia, a Jalur Gemilang, a Agong, Islam, as good as so on? In what approach would all these be deliberate as carrying suffered insults? We need to know what constitutes an insult so which we will know how to equivocate scornful tiger, a Hibiscus, Bahasa Malaysia, a Jalur Gemilang, a Agong, Islam, as good as so on.
Note which a Malayan Tiger is a inhabitant animal of a Federation, a Hibiscus is a inhabitant flowering plant of a Federation, Bahasa Malaysia is a inhabitant denunciation of a Federation, a Jalur Gemilang is a inhabitant dwindle of a Federation, a Yang di-Pertuan Agong is a Supreme Head of a Federation, as good as Islam is a sacrament of a Federation. Hence, as loyal as good as law-abiding Malaysians, we would similar to to equivocate scornful all these. But to be equates to to equivocate insults we initial need to know what constitutes an insult. Can Zainal Abidin Osman, a Johor State Religious Committee chairman, illuminate us upon this?
The concentration of this contention is what Zainal Abidin Osman said: LGBT advocates active in a nation were severe a in front of of Islam in a Federal Constitution, as good as to illustrate scornful a conduct of a religion, a Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
Hence we need to know what would be deliberate 'challenging a in front of of Islam in a Federal Constitution' as good as in what approach would this be 'thus scornful a conduct of a religion, a Yang di-Pertuan Agong'. we am currently really 'blur' upon a implications as good as we consider my authority of a English denunciation as sincerely good. Yet we still can't learn what this matter means.
If we contend which we cite French Poodles to a Malayan Tiger as a residence pet would we be scornful Malaysia? If we contend which we cite Orchids to a Hibiscus would we be scornful Malaysia? If we contend! we am s ome-more gentle with my 'mother tongue', which is English, than my 'father tongue', which is Malay, would we be scornful Malaysia? When would we be deliberate as carrying angry Malaysia?
we wear a Ralph Lauren shirt with a British dwindle upon it. Am we scornful Malaysia? we have a picture of a Queen hanging upon my wall. Am we scornful Malaysia? Tell me during what theatre we would be scornful Malaysia as good as to illustrate scornful a Agong who is a Supreme Head of a Federation of Malaysia?
Let me share a little secret with you. we have read countless books upon a history of Islam (let me repeat that, we read books upon history, not books upon theology) as good as we am of a perspective which Ali should have been a First Caliph instead of a Fourth Caliph. Would we be deliberate as carrying challenged Islam as good as to illustrate additionally carrying angry a Agong who is a conduct of religion?
Note which we am not a Shiah supporter though even if we am so what? Would we be deliberate as severe Islam as good as scornful a Agong who is deliberate a Sunni Muslim if we am a supporter of a Shiah doctrine?
Why is it at your convenience we have an perspective this is regularly regarded as severe Islam as good as to illustrate scornful a Agong?
Let me put it another way, as good as this applies not usually to Islam though to all a alternative religions as well. Is what we do motionless by God (the will of God) or is it formed upon freewill? If it is motionless by God, or is God's will, then how can we be guilty of any sin (or crime) as good as how can we be punished for what we do? It is God which motionless what we do. We have no power over what we do. So how can we be punished for a acts?
However, if it is freewill, as good as as a result we will be punished for what we do, then who have been we to decide what we can as good as cannot do? Freewill equates to usually which -- freewill. We have been free to decide upon a ac! tions gi ven we, as good as not you, have been starting to face a low mark of a actions.
Muslims as good as a Malaysian supervision similar to to discuss it us what we can as good as cannot believe. However, we have been told which if we hold in a wrong thing then God is starting to retaliate us for these misled beliefs. If it is us as good as not we who have been starting to face punishment, should it not be us who decides what we should believe?
Say, we discuss it me what we should hold and, say, we follow what we discuss it me and, say, we have been wrong as good as as a result we finish up believing in a wrong thing. Would we then be free of blame as good as would we escape low mark or would we still face low mark anyway?
According to a Quran, if we follow a wrong teachings of a ancestors we cannot after claim which we were taught a wrong things as good as as a result this is not a error as good as therefore we should not be punished. The Quran says we will still be punished in spite of a actuality which someone taught us these wrong teachings as good as it is not a error given we were misguided.
In short, even if it is not a error which we followed a wrong teachings as good as a error lies with a chairman who taught us a wrong teachings, we have been still starting to face low mark given we should not have blindly followed what people discuss it us. Hence we contingency be really careful about what others learn us given they might be wrong as good as we will finish up being punished for this.
So, who have been we to discuss it me what is right as good as what is wrong? If we consider which a conflicting to what we discuss it me is right then we have to do a conflicting of what we discuss it me or else we am starting to be punished for following a wrong teachings.
Those who have a sacrament regularly consider which they have been right as good as all others have been wrong. And they will force us to comply with their ideology ! as good as would condemn us if a ideology occur to be conflicting to theirs. And if we refuse to follow what they consider is right they will contend we have been severe Islam, scornful Islam, as good as whatnot.
If we am gay, will we be positive of starting to hell? If we am true as an arrow, will we be on trial of starting to heaven? If we am not happy though am true as an arrow though we screw around with most women will we be starting to heaven? If we am not happy though am true as an arrow though we take bribes will we be starting to heaven? If we am not happy though am true as an arrow though we cheat in a ubiquitous elections will we be starting to heaven? If we am not happy though am true as an arrow though we attempted murder people as good as beat up detainees in a police station will we be starting to heaven? If we am not happy though am true as an arrow though we rig trials as good as fashion justification will we be starting to heaven?
So we see, a issue is some-more than usually about gays starting to ruin as good as true people starting to heaven. But because have been Malays as good as Muslims so focused upon happy as good as true sex when even is we abstain from sex all though do most alternative things your essence is still condemned?
In fact, Muslims hold we need not be happy to go to hell. All we need to do is reject Islam as good as Prophet Muhammad as good as we have been starting to hell. Christians hold which a highway to shelter is through Christ as good as unless we accept Christ then we have positively no possibility of being saved.
So because be concerned about either a chairman is true or gay? Straight Muslims have been starting to ruin according to a Christians as good as true Christians have been starting to ruin according to a Muslims. Hence no one is starting to sky even if they have been straight. So, if we have been all starting to ruin anyway, what does it make a difference any longer if we have been happy or straight? Read More @ Source
More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
Courtesy of Bonology.com Politically Incorrect Buzz & Buzz
No comments:
Post a Comment