Pakatan can't afford to be seen defying the sultan
YOURSAY ‘And DAP cannot be seen making a move perceived to be anti-Islam.’
Amendment move 'only a suggestion', says DAP
1Malaysia2Agama:
Rasah MP Anthony Loke, why the U-turn? DAP Aduns (state representatives) cannot issue press statements unless it is sanctioned by the national publicity head (Tony Pua), who is also DAP Selangor chief.
All the three Aduns involved are groomed and selected by Pua himself. Surely DAP cannot plead ignorance.
Why is Loke making a press statement when Pua is the national publicity chief? This a Selangor matter so how come a Negeri Sembilan MP/Adun can ‘campur tangan’ (interfere)?
Aswathaama: It is not clear what’s wrong in trying to seek clarification on a law that gave rise the Jais (Selangor Islamic Religious Department) action against the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM). This is what the three lawmakers wanted. They are lawmakers after all, are they not?
This really shows there’s no much difference between Pakatan Rakyat and Umno on these matters. And this is happening in Selangor, a state ruled by Pakatan. We have seen similar duplicity in the Penang DAP administration too on other issues.
These politicians, regardless on which side they are on, are all the same but just with different stripes. The longer we have of both parties in power, the more we will see this kind of meaningless politicking.
Proarte: This is a chance for Pakatan to convince the rakyat that the young leadership will not show the same vacillation, moral cowardice and even connivance with Umno as is the case with PAS and the PKR arch-fraud Anwar Ibrahim over this synthetic 'Allah' issue.
If the Quran explicitly says the Jews and Christians worship the same and one and only Allah, why is PAS and Anwar Ibrahim so shy of articulating this Quranic fact? Why are the Pakatan Muslim leadership supping with the Devil over this issue?
Not Convinced: Politics is about perception. Both opposing sides are engaged in an intense chess game and sometimes you need to sacrifice a few key pieces in order to deliver the checkmate.
Pakatan Rakyat cannot be seen to be going against the sultan as it would result in losing sizable Malay support. And DAP cannot be seen making a move that could be perceived as anti-Islam.
Indeed, both are checkmated by the ‘king’ and his ‘bishop’.
Pua: Trio does not reflect Pakatan's stance
1Malaysia2Agama: The DAP trio - Yeo Bee Yin (Damansara Utama), R Rajiv (Bukit Gasing) and Lau Weng San (Bukit Tunku) - may be smart but politically naive and may be committing political suicide.
Selangor can be like Sarawak - DAP wins all the urban seats but loses the state to BN.
Because of the foolhardy actions by the DAP trio, it galvanises a counter reaction amongst Muslims, and this may affect the chances of Pakatan Aduns in Malay-majority seats in GE14.
Goh Keat Peng: These Aduns have honourable convictions. That the Aduns should speak up and make proposals is the reason why they are elected as the people's representatives in the first place.
However to amend a controversial existing law is complex and involve multi-level consideration. It’s better to have internal discussions so that you don’t fall into the trap of the powers-that-be.
Basically: At least these three have the guts to do the right thing. What's the fuss?
If they have the guts, they would educate the Muslims on the issue and show them how to be fair to all. Besides, they missed the three reps second part of the amendment, that is to “protect Muslims”.
So why only attack the part about protecting non-Muslims? If Umno causes trouble, challenge them to enforce the Selangor enactment on the other states as well. See if they dare.
Onyourtoes: Told you before, Yeo, Ravi and Lau. You fellows need to learn to do more and talk less. You simply shoot and now you can’t handle it.
You came out with the proposed amendment (i.e. talk like heroes), but just as quickly you want to surrender it to the “wisdom” of the state government of Selangor. But who is this state government of Selangor. Does it include you as its legislators?
Tell you what, your latest statement sound this: you have no stand as Pakatan Aduns and you have no stand even personally.
At least I have one. I believe the Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation among Muslims) Enactment 1988 is unconstitutional and should be declared ultra vires the Federal Constitution unless amended accordingly.
1Malaysia2Agama: Once you hold public office you cease to have a personal opinion. Even if you have one, that should be expressed privately and not use your position as Adun mass broadcast it.
It may be prima facie a brave and principled move but it’s a political suicide for Pakatan, especially DAP, to move the amendments. DAP Aduns must be smarter than that. That are many ways to skin a cat.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .
YOURSAY ‘And DAP cannot be seen making a move perceived to be anti-Islam.’
Amendment move 'only a suggestion', says DAP
1Malaysia2Agama:
Rasah MP Anthony Loke, why the U-turn? DAP Aduns (state representatives) cannot issue press statements unless it is sanctioned by the national publicity head (Tony Pua), who is also DAP Selangor chief.
All the three Aduns involved are groomed and selected by Pua himself. Surely DAP cannot plead ignorance.
Why is Loke making a press statement when Pua is the national publicity chief? This a Selangor matter so how come a Negeri Sembilan MP/Adun can ‘campur tangan’ (interfere)?
Aswathaama: It is not clear what’s wrong in trying to seek clarification on a law that gave rise the Jais (Selangor Islamic Religious Department) action against the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM). This is what the three lawmakers wanted. They are lawmakers after all, are they not?
This really shows there’s no much difference between Pakatan Rakyat and Umno on these matters. And this is happening in Selangor, a state ruled by Pakatan. We have seen similar duplicity in the Penang DAP administration too on other issues.
These politicians, regardless on which side they are on, are all the same but just with different stripes. The longer we have of both parties in power, the more we will see this kind of meaningless politicking.
Proarte: This is a chance for Pakatan to convince the rakyat that the young leadership will not show the same vacillation, moral cowardice and even connivance with Umno as is the case with PAS and the PKR arch-fraud Anwar Ibrahim over this synthetic 'Allah' issue.
If the Quran explicitly says the Jews and Christians worship the same and one and only Allah, why is PAS and Anwar Ibrahim so shy of articulating this Quranic fact? Why are the Pakatan Muslim leadership supping with the Devil over this issue?
Not Convinced: Politics is about perception. Both opposing sides are engaged in an intense chess game and sometimes you need to sacrifice a few key pieces in order to deliver the checkmate.
Pakatan Rakyat cannot be seen to be going against the sultan as it would result in losing sizable Malay support. And DAP cannot be seen making a move that could be perceived as anti-Islam.
Indeed, both are checkmated by the ‘king’ and his ‘bishop’.
Pua: Trio does not reflect Pakatan's stance
1Malaysia2Agama: The DAP trio - Yeo Bee Yin (Damansara Utama), R Rajiv (Bukit Gasing) and Lau Weng San (Bukit Tunku) - may be smart but politically naive and may be committing political suicide.
Selangor can be like Sarawak - DAP wins all the urban seats but loses the state to BN.
Because of the foolhardy actions by the DAP trio, it galvanises a counter reaction amongst Muslims, and this may affect the chances of Pakatan Aduns in Malay-majority seats in GE14.
Goh Keat Peng: These Aduns have honourable convictions. That the Aduns should speak up and make proposals is the reason why they are elected as the people's representatives in the first place.
However to amend a controversial existing law is complex and involve multi-level consideration. It’s better to have internal discussions so that you don’t fall into the trap of the powers-that-be.
Basically: At least these three have the guts to do the right thing. What's the fuss?
If they have the guts, they would educate the Muslims on the issue and show them how to be fair to all. Besides, they missed the three reps second part of the amendment, that is to “protect Muslims”.
So why only attack the part about protecting non-Muslims? If Umno causes trouble, challenge them to enforce the Selangor enactment on the other states as well. See if they dare.
Onyourtoes: Told you before, Yeo, Ravi and Lau. You fellows need to learn to do more and talk less. You simply shoot and now you can’t handle it.
You came out with the proposed amendment (i.e. talk like heroes), but just as quickly you want to surrender it to the “wisdom” of the state government of Selangor. But who is this state government of Selangor. Does it include you as its legislators?
Tell you what, your latest statement sound this: you have no stand as Pakatan Aduns and you have no stand even personally.
At least I have one. I believe the Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation among Muslims) Enactment 1988 is unconstitutional and should be declared ultra vires the Federal Constitution unless amended accordingly.
1Malaysia2Agama: Once you hold public office you cease to have a personal opinion. Even if you have one, that should be expressed privately and not use your position as Adun mass broadcast it.
It may be prima facie a brave and principled move but it’s a political suicide for Pakatan, especially DAP, to move the amendments. DAP Aduns must be smarter than that. That are many ways to skin a cat.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.