I refer to the letter Morality cannot be a private matter by Fathima Idris. I disagree with Fathima that Yasmine Merican, the author of the letter Unseen effects of the Jawi raid , was trying to undermine the Shariah.

Criticising Jawi does not lead to questioning Islam or undermining the Shariah. In fact, it was Jawi's infamous raid that undermined the image of Islam.

I also note that Yasmine is not trying to represent Yousef Al-Qaradawi as some secular Western liberal just because she quotes his views on extremism. I understand that Qaradawi was himself very much concerned about excessive religiosity and extremism, which the Jawi raid was an example of.

It was for that reason that Qaradawi never supported the Taliban because they severely undermined the image of Islam worldwide.

The Jawi raid was abusive, derogatory, dehumanising. Does Fathima endorse and approve of vigilantes putting people in cages, commenting on their private parts, denying them the use of the toilet etc? Does she support the systematic abuse of women in Malaysia?

A person's own faith is the best legislator for morality and not 'brute force' as implemented by morality police the likes of Jawi. Even in Wahabi Saudi Arabia, the morality police do not enter your homes unlike in Malaysia where they are allowed to barge into homes to look for Muslim couples committing 'khalwat' or close proximity, a offence under Shariah laws.

I am deeply saddened that not many have condemned the sexual abuse meted out by the Jawi officers onto the female detainees caught in the raid or the overall inhumane treatment dished to the 100 detainees.

Instead they are obsessed with 'dress codes' and 'alcohol consumption' in nightclubs at a time when Muslim males are gaining notoriety for incest in Malaysia. Shouldn't our resources go towards fighting rape and incest which are on the rise in our society instead of picking on youths and transgenders in nightclubs?

Leave morality to families. If it is true that there are young Muslim people who appear to be 'addicted' to nightclubs then the problem here is that of an 'addiction' and these young people will require professional counseling. Morality police and the closure of legal nightclubs are not the answers.

Fathima says that history has shown that the erosion of moral values was one of the factors that led to the collapse of civilisations and thus morality cannot just be a private matter because a Muslim society has a responsibility to ensure that the moral teachings of Islam are served.

Hence, the onus is on Fathima to show proof that morality policing will prevent civilisations from collapsing. And how does the writer reconcile morality policing with Allah's command that there is no compulsion in Islam (Chapter 2, Verse 256) ?

If at all, morality policing may well signal the loss of the rights of the individual, a contravention of Islamic teachings (Chapter 24: Verse 27 and 28). Instead, this may mark the beginning of a civilisation's decay instead of being a tool to arrest such a rot.

The impact on tourism resulting from the Jawi raid on the nightclub cannot be equated with police making arrests for acts of real crime. Raids by morality police on tourists' spots bring about damaging international publicity to Malaysia as a tourist destination. We might even end up as a country with no tourist industry not unlike Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

The concept of no compulsion in Islam, the concept of privacy in Islam and the abhorrence for scandals (Chapter 24: Verse 19) are not secular Western ideals since they are clearly written in the Quran and embraced by the Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) and his companions.

Perhaps, it is the writer who should re-read the Quran and Qardawi and try to grasp the inherently problematic aspects of morality policing.