In response to Fathi Aris Omar's article titled Ruang awam: Kemelut Puak Islam? , I would like to point out that Islamic discourse is not a free-for-all ideas festival.

The heart of the matter is that Islam has yet to reconcile itself with the ideas of scientific rationalism and secular humanism, that shaped the Enlightenment. That being so, some aspects of Islam are obviously beyond rational understanding and may even appear somewhat arbitrary.

But that is the nature of organised religion; it contains elements which are beyond reasoning - call it 'faith' if you will. Questioning these aspects of organised religion will certainly invite a questioning and doubting of one's faith.

I believe that is why Islamic activists are loathe to discuss these aspects of Islamic teachings. They prefer to stick to what the Qur'an teaches them - 'we hear and we obey'. Absolute faith!

I am not sure that Islam is compatible with Western liberal democracy because there are many teachings in Islam which cannot be altered simply on the basis of a majority vote. These teachings are to be interpreted, upheld and explained to the layman by those who are the heirs to the Prophet - the Muslim scholars or ulama. That is their role in Islam.

Hence, it is often the case that Islamic discourse revolves around the ulama only, and not around Western-educated yuppies who end up frustrated that no one takes their views seriously.

What is needed here is a common language between the professionals who have been educated in the probing language of rational science on one hand and the traditional ulama who have been raised to be models of absolute faith unquestioningly on the other.

They must first have common ground before Islamic discourse can include the participation of the 'Western-educated yuppie'.