Bar Council's forum on conversion to Islam

With due respect, I would like to comment on the recent storm-in into the forum on "embracing Islam" organised by the Bar Council, which lead to the forum's unfortunate early demise. Our DPM said he had expected that the forum will trigger extreme reaction from certain quarters and that it will jeopardise the harmony of the country. Well. I am not sure whether he willed it to happen or it is just that the society of Malaysia is just not mature enough to make such a big fuss over everything religion and race. Today's news in Nation, Star:

Monday August 11, 2008

Najib: Bar Council’s persistence caused extreme reaction

KUALA LUMPUR: The Bar Council’s persistence in going ahead with a forum on conversion to Islam has triggered extreme reaction from certain quarters, which in turn would threaten the country’s harmony.

Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said he had expected the extreme reaction to occur as the council ignored advice to call off the forum.

“We had expected this to happen. I’ve already said this before, don’t make it an open forum, do it behind closed doors. There will surely be some form of extreme reaction that will occur (if it was held openly).

“We’ve expected the incident to happen because the issue that was to be discussed is sensitive,” he said after launching the Federation of Malay Economic Bodies (Gabem) exhibition and convention at the PWTC here yesterday.

Najib was commenting on the abrupt conclusion of the Bar Council’s controversial forum on conversion to Islam on Saturday, in which groups of protesters held a noisy gathering outside the Council’s headquarters demanding that the organisers stop the function.

Asked if the Internal Security Act would be used against the forum’s organisers, he said that would be up to the police and Home Ministry.

Najib also said that the basic pillars of the Constitution should be accorded full respect if Malaysians wanted to live peacefully and harmoniously.

He added that Malaysians of different races should respect the sensitivities of each racial group and the basic tenets of the Constitution.

“As a society comprising different races, Malaysians have displayed the spirit of tolerance and respect to the other races.

“If we try to dissect or argue against the basic terms that was agreed upon in the Constitution, then it will surely cause endless arguments which can affect our country’s peace and stability,” he added.

It is just a forum. What is the big deal? Although it is an open discussion, it is still a discussion. A discussion is a pow-wow partaked by people of the same mind (or different mind-since we cannot have a forum when all are in consensus with the topic for discussion). It should be dawned on those who are involved in the storm-in that the certaion quarters affected are only them. The rest of the public might not know a forum was organised, or they might not know what the forum discussed about, or they are merely suitably interested in the outcome of the discussion but most are indifferent. Who cares what the lawyers going to talk about. They are people who earn their living talking, and organising forum is another talking task for them. It is their way of life. Besides, having them around are quite fun. You will never know how many perspectives and opinions they can come out with on a boring subject which is so well covered.

DPM talks about basic pillars of the Constitution be respected. Well, freedom of expression is enshrined in the Constitution, isn't it not? Hence the act of threatening people who wanted to express themselves in a gentlemanly way, ie via discussion will be taken action against under ISA (no less) (while those who do storm ins and rowdy protestation are impliedly encouraged where the DPM himself said that the occurence is expected) is an act of respecting the pillars of the Constitution?

Does that goes on the show that the country's leader-DPM himself allows assertion of force if certain quarters do not want something to be done while disallowing gentlemanly discussion? I guess the saying that 'words are mightier than sword' are applicable here.

Furthermore, the DPM propounds that we, as an aspiring nation, should not argue or dissect what was agreed in the Constitution-no discussion on the matter (subject matter will be stipulated by him and the GANG). It goes on to directthe nation to follow the principle of 'Do As You Are Told' and 'Ask No Question'.

If such, how could a nation lead other nation when the people are encourage to follow the mould?

WHERE is the notion of think out of the box and say no to complacency? Where is the spirit of research and question the present?

Does our DPM wants us to follow what was laid down and agreed upon and do it without question? Does that means the article which provides for amendment of the Constitution is redundant?

Come on... Does he knows what he is talking about???

And this guy is suppose to be the future leader of this country (2010??). I guess with such 'quality' leaders, our country will be a very advanced developing country. We are mentally and pjysically trained to 'follow what as agreed and laid down'.

What a laugh.

Coming back to the issue, there are certain quarters who take it upon themselves to dictate what and what nots, should or should nots in a society and a country. They feel that they are responsible in preventing mayhaps to the country and the people, or rather their own people. They had not realized that they are the only people who are keen on forceful demonstrations, uttering barbaric and uncivilised words and the likes.

As we are progressing into a more civilised and mature society, the freedom of expression should have come of age amid major developments proposed for the country. However, just like the supposed developments, (or the amendments to the College and University Act) major fanfare but no substance.

If we make race and religion a taboo subject, based on the supposedly unacceptable level of the people, the people will never be able to accept the subject matter. They will always think that race and religion is very sensitive and that the moment someone wanted to talk about it, their rights and privileges will be affected by it.

Why did they always apporach a matter pessimistically? Does it ever occur to them that something good might come out of it? People might be more understanding and tolerable towards the subject matter concerned. People may understand them and the religion better. Etc.

Through the well conducted forum, more information on the matter can be disseminated to the mass or general public. Wouldn't it be nice that the public are benefitted through the forum?

However, they are certain quarters that take it negatively. Why are they so afraid of the discussion? Is it because they know that deep down they are not mature enough to handle it? Are they so insecured over their own capabilities or abilities that they are afraid that the rights or privileges accorded to them will be adversely affected and hence, forbid all talks on the matter?

Islam is a beautiful and at the same time, a tolerant religion. It is only the people who make it so look so barbaric and uncivilised. As the chinese saying goes, 'true gold is not afraid of a cauldron's fire'. I am always of the opinion that if a person is confident of himself, no acts or words will bring him down. Similarly, if something is good, no amount of bad words will be able to affect it. If the group had taken the stance that the forum will brings calamity, does it goes on to show that they are not confident of the subject matter itself and all talks on it is prohibited because they can't handle it???

I wonder...

Kulim's MP, a lawyer as well.... Hmmm... seems like even a professional degree (or any amount of education) will not be able to change a person's thinking or mentality. Such shameful behaviour.