Article 11 of the Constitution Specifically Phrased so as to Forbid Conversion?
Written by johnleemk on 11:27:47 am May 18, 2005.
Categories: Malaysian Government
Note: This is part of a series in which I rebutt remarks I disagree with posted on the malaysia-today.net May 2005 debate.
This article is in response to the following comment:
Anon 6.57 pm,
I would answer you on the freedom of religion in the Federal Constitution (FC). On the other things, I say to you, "Lay off! You are interfering. SUHAKAM is there for him to complain to".
Article 11(1), FC says "every citizen shall be free to profess and practise his religion". THE KEY WORD IS 'HIS' WHICH MEANS THE CITIZEN HAS ALREADY GOT A RELIGION. So if he is a Hindu, his religion is Hinduism. He is therefore free to profess and practise Hinduism which inter alia does not prohibit him from changing religion. If the citizen is a Muslim,his religion is Islam. He is therefore free to profess and practise Islam which inter alia prohibits him from changing religion. So where do you come in?
Article 11(1) was not written to read "every citizen shall be free to profess and practice any religion of his choice" as you non Muslims make belief it was. You want to know the reason why? Because Lord Reid, the Architect of the Constitution, was fully aware that almost all Malaysians are born with a religious faith and that Muslims unlike non Muslims are not allowed to change religion.
Ignoring the issue of non-Muslims "butting in" into Muslim matters, which I have tackled earlier in this series, we now move on to this interesting argument proposing that article 11 of the constitution somehow forbids Muslims from converting.
The following is the text of article 11:
Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it.
Now, can anyone tell me what this means to you, at first sight? It states that every person may profess (make publicly known) and practice (engage in all rituals and traditions as necessary) his religion. Now, for those of you who may not know what inter alia (as it was used in the quoted comment earlier) means, it is a Latin phrase meaning "among other things".
Basically the premise is: A Hindu is not forbidden to convert by his religion. Therefore, a Hindu can convert, because his religion expressly allows it; converting would be practicing his religion. A Muslim is forbidden to convert by his religion. Therefore, he may not convert, as it would not be practicing his religion. Ignoring the apparently, ahem, illogical proposition that conversion is not forbidden by any religion other than Islam and that conversion is part of practicing one's religion, does the thesis make any sense at all? It's absolutely ridiculous!
I don't know how in a million years anyone could come up with such an idea. If a Muslim desires to convert, is he not no longer a Muslim since he does not believe in Islam any more? Therefore, are not the practices of Islam inapplicable to him? Even putting that aside, it logically follows from the thesis that:
- One must practice his religion; not doing so can lead to prosecution by the government under the constitution;
AND - The government has the right to prosecute anybody who converts from a religion which expressly forbids conversion.
Now, I know it sounds a bit crazy, but you'd think almost any religion with set of codified teachings would forbid conversion, wouldn't it? Christianity and Judaism both use parables and examples in their teachings indicating conversion is forbidden. So why hasn't the police arrested any heretical Christians yet?
Oh, right. Because somehow only Islam forbids conversion. Alright, we can live with that. But I hope you'll abide by article 2 of the constitution, then:
No person shall be compelled to pay any tax the proceeds of which are specially allocated in whole or in part for the purposes of a religion other than his own.
After all, arresting, jailing and prosecuting apostates so that they may practice their religion (despite how little sense this concept makes) costs money. And this money comes from Malaysians' taxes. So, show me the money!
Here are the most popular articles in Malaysian Government:
If you'd like to keep informed about updates to the site, consider subscribing to our web feed:
(Infernal Ramblings is a Malaysian website focusing on current events and sociopolitical issues. Its articles run the gamut from economics to society to education.
Infernal Ramblings is run by John Lee. For more, see the About section. If you have any questions or comments, do drop him a line.
Comments
Thoughts? Comments? Discuss this and other ramblings at the forums.
(Alternatively, contact the author privately.)
| Related comments from forum thread "RE: Pan-Asian Models and the Road to Apartheid": | |
|---|---|
|
kufar
Member Posts: 23 IP Logged | Posted at 2:23:37 am Feb 24, 2007
johnleemk wrote at: http://www.infernalramblings.com/articles/Malaysian_Socio-Politics/134/
Are not Malaysians Asians too? Obviously, you are ranting nonsense and do not know the root cause of the ban is not skin colour (as Malaysia does not discriminate by skin colour) but rather religion. Tudungless women are not allowed and a Chinese man must wear Baju Melayu and Songkok, while a Chinese woman must wear Baju Kurung and Tudung. No sexy Malaysian is allowed in accordance to Islam Hadhari.
How do you know it is about looks of people? Did the government tell you they discriminate by skin colour? Or you are writing a spin like self-proclaimed pro-blogger Jeff Ooi, which got him ultimated sued by NSTP? The special status of the Melayu is hardly racial as a Melayu could be any Muslim (or Muslimah) regardless of skin colour. A yellow-skin Chinese Muslimah is also legally an ethnic Melayu.
What is wrong with chauvinist policies? Cultural chauvinism is hardly racism. UMNO is the most multi-racial party with ethnic Melayu of various skin colour, such as Yellow-skin, Brown-skin, Black-skin and White-skin. Any Pan-Asian model must be dressed either as a Muslim or Muslimah. This could give job oppurtunities to Chinese Muslimah instead of non Muslim women.
Skin colour was never a factor for 49-years of Malaysian history as a Melayu is hardly a race in the sense of a Chinese, as Melayu has various ancestry, Chinese-looking Malays (such as Pak Lah's late wife, Endon) or Pakistani looking Malays (such as Tun Dr Mahathir). Only those who love to propaganda opposition propaganda would claim Malaysia is a "racist" state and call concept of Ketuanan Melayu as racist, when it is not but Muslim supremacy.
Are you suffering from mental illness? You keep insisting Malaysians have to be brown-skin to enjoy a 7% discount on housing! I am a Chinese convert to Islam and look very Chinese, and am proudly an ex-MCA member who now is an UMNO member. Yes, yellow-skin Chinese-looking Malaysians can join UMNO if they masuk Melayu (convert to Islam). I support ban on Pan-Asian models as most of them are tudungless and this will be against UMNO policy of Islam Hadhari.
Only according to *you* will the Bumiputra be jobless! Why do we need tudungless Pan-Asian models to be advertised in the newspapers and TV? To be a citizen of Malaysia is to be Malay (which includes not only those who are ancestrally Malays but also Chinese Muslims and Indian Muslims who are naturalised Malays). Unconverted Chinese like yourself John Lee Ming Kuan should be deported to Singapore and stripped of your Malaysian nationality. Malaysia is for the adherents of Islam only.
You are guilty of misusing words. The word "apartheid" refers to organised racism - racial discrimination. There is absolutely *no* racism in Malaysia as concept of Melayu as in "Ketuanan Melayu" refers to any adherent of Islam irrespective of race. According to the 1957 Federal Constitution and 1946 UMNO Party Constitution, every Muslim and Muslimah regardless of skin colour or ancestry is considered a Melayu. So, Palestinians, Iraqis, Afgans and Somali (though ethnically Arab) are also Melayu in the same way Chinese Muslims are Melayu. |
| Last five replies (3 comments not shown): | |
|
johnleemk
Infernally Rambling Thoughtless Mind Head Administrator Posts: 953 IP Logged | Posted at 12:14:27 am Jun 12, 2007
Actually as I recall it, the Straits Chinese/Peranakan/Baba/whatever you call them have never been fully accorded their due. Even in the 1920s and 30s, they were revolted by being treated the same as any other recent Chinese migrant - even though the latter probably deserved second-class treatment, why should those who could trace their roots back be treated the same? In the 1940s, there was even a secessionist movement in Penang because the Straits Chinese thought they were not treated fairly. |
|
Michael Chick
Member Posts: 7 IP Logged | Posted at 8:47:41 am Jun 19, 2007
And to that effect, the Baba's are supposed to be rightfully restored as Bumiputeras. If you read my above post, even the Indians should be accorded Bumiputera status, coz they were here 2,000yrs ago at Lembah Bujang, and converted all the Malays to Hindus. Where's the fairness? And yet, the recent Chitti's (in comparison) are Bumiputera. Heck!!! Even an Indonesian who arrives in a boat tomorrow can claim to be a Bumiputera. What insignificant definition is Bumiputera now? |
|
Mujaheed
Member Posts: 1 IP Logged | Posted at 12:03:16 am Apr 13, 2008
[Potentially offensive/illegal and nonsensically incoherent post removed by admin] |
|
tigasuku
Member Posts: 1 IP Logged | Posted at 7:42:24 am Apr 20, 2008
Michael Chick, I really like your long article Posted at 11:26:00 am Jun 11, 2007. A little bit too late to discover this subject but I hope other Malaysians read it too. Why are we bickering about Malay, Chinese, Indians, Bumiputra bla..bla..bla when maybe tomorrow the world will come to an end? Or one of us will die unexpectedly. We should just enjoy our life when we still can. For those who don't want to share the living space with others or other races, then they should live in a cave. By a brown color Malay. |
|
darkgold
Member Posts: 1 IP Logged | Posted at 12:10:25 pm Apr 23, 2008
Funny this...how many mixed raced people are actually replying? Not that many! I've read your responses and frankly I don't see why you would give a darn about mine since I happen to be a 'dumb and confused' monrel but I'll say it anyway. Mixed race - the term doesn't apply just to half whites. It applies to a mixtures of cultures be they black brown or yellow. I have no idea whether my future kids who might be part African/Middle Eastern/Indian will face this ban-under my household they better look good because hey, that's part of being a Mongrel. That said what really tees me off is the amount of people who are proudly proclaiming they are Malay just because they are Muslim. So what does that make the other Muslims all around the world? Are you going to dictate their race to them too? Or are they not 'Muslim' enough because they don't have a clue what Malay as and frankly would give a c**p? You want Muslim models, go ahead. There are lots of Muslims who are mixed race-I'd say they set an even more better example of Islam because Islam is not about 'sticking to your own kind'. If I saw a part Trinidadian, part Maldivian Muslim model on Malaysian billboards, I would say he/she is just as Islamic as as a thousand tudungs and skullcaps. Islam is not just about dress. What about looking after the environment and not gossiping in the Surau or wolf whistling at other women? You see signs crossing out mini skirts and bare hair-what about a sign that bans Mat Rempit and snatch thieves? I would never tick the box that autiomatically denomenates me to Malay-it would only negate my Chinese and Indonesian race. And before you start going on about how Malays are a mix of this and that, sure they are, but what culture do they follow? I'm not into having babies by the time I'm 22 (past that already) nor leaving it all to 'riski' or 'tiada apo'. Neither would I go near that Bumputera benefical system with a bargepole. My family are Malay, Chinese and Indonesian and adopted ones are Indian. If they're not entitled to this bumiputera system, why the hell should I be? Most likely my children's dad will not Malay-what will they be entitled to when they want to buy a house because my race as 'only the mum' means diddles**t (apart from the fact that I don't call myself Malay anyway) So for all you purists-stop thinking you have a claim on us. You don't speak for us mixed raced Malaysians-that is our job. We don't care about your racial spats. We don't care about your pure 'pride' because like it or not it's ours too. Call it selfish but we prefer not to make your problems ours because you disowned from the very day we were born and implemented such stupid rules such as banning our united blood. |
