Malaysia's Moderate Muslims Call For Sharia Law Reform

Extremist Muslims have been taking center stage in what's supposed to be a secular democratic Malaysia, and the moderates are finally taking a stand.

[snip] An open letter urging a rational discussion on religion signed by 25 former senior servants and addressed to Prime Minister Najib Razak has gained popular support. The group, which came to be known as the “prominent 25,” is petitioning Najib to lead a peaceful dialogue about the application of Islamic laws in Malaysia.

The letter raised several issues concerning what they think is the excessive and unfair implementation of the shariah law in many aspects of governance. They questioned why some religious bodies are “asserting authority beyond their jurisdiction,” such as in the issuance of various fatwa that violate the Federal Constitution. They also cited the indifference of authorities over the “rise of supremacist NGOs accusing dissenting voices of being anti-Islam, anti-monarchy and anti-Malay.” And they pointed out how the Sedition Act “hangs as a constant threat to silence anyone with a contrary opinion.”

“These developments undermine Malaysia’s commitment to democratic principles and rule of law, breed intolerance and bigotry, and have heightened anxieties over national peace and stability,” they added in the letter.

They wanted Najib to “assert his personal leadership” in reviewing the implementation of Islamic laws in the country: “Those who act in the name of Islam through the administration of Islamic law must bear the responsibility of demonstrating that justice is done, and is seen to be done.”

In recent years, some hardcore Islamic and nationalist Malay leaders inside Malaysia’s ruling coalition have successfully lobbied the government to act against perceived threats to Islam and the dominance of the Malays in the affairs of the country. Those who opposed or criticized their views are often accused of conspiring to undermine either Islam or the state.

They have support from activists and academics who were ignored or chastised in the past for their criticism of religious intolerance. And support from others who were too fearful to speak out.

After the letter went viral in the cyberspace, other moderate voices were encouraged to speak out against religious and racial discrimination. Ninety-three NGOs declared support for the letter signers. They were joined by the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism, which praised the group for drafting the letter. Internet users circulated online petitions using the Twitter hashtags #KamiJuga25 (We are also 25) and “I am #26” to show support for the stand taken by the group of 25, “by standing together in solidarity as #26.”

No response from the government. Yet. But as expected some of the radical elements have piped in.

I wish them luck, because the hardcore Islamists aren't going to give up their fight for supremacy that easily.

Mauritanian Muslim Sentenced To Death For Apostasy/Blasphemy

You don't hear much about Mauritania, the West African former French colony. It's a piss-poor Islamic Republic led by a military junta,that still allows slavery (though now illegal). Other abuses include:

-discrimination against its black population and women.
-child labor
-female genital mutilation (FGM).
-child marriage
-leblouh, the force feeding of young girls to make them obese- a sign of beauty and wealth.

And they love their sharia. They have sentenced a Muslim 30-year-old man, Mohamed Cheikh Ould Mohamed, to death for apostasy, although it sounds more like blasphemy.

Mohamed has been detained since January 2 and pleaded not guilty to the charge when proceedings opened on Tuesday.

Mauritania has the death penalty but has not executed anyone since 1987, according to human rights organisation Amnesty International.

During the hearing the judge told Mohamed that he was accused of apostasy "for speaking lightly of the Prophet Mohammed" in an article which was published briefly on Mauritanian websites. In it he challenged some of the prophet's actions, the source told AFP.

Mohamed explained that it was "not his intention to harm the prophet", the source added.

His lawyer asked for leniency as he said his client was repentant but the judge agreed to the prosecutor's request for the death penalty.

Although it is said they rarely enforce strict punishments like death or floggings- and one can only hope it's the case with Mohamed- he's still going to rot in jail for the rest of his life for nothing.

More here.

FSA General Wants Shariah For Syria, Demands West Supply Arms

Interviewed on Al-Jazeera, General Abdel Baset Tawileh, the Free Syrian Army (FSA) Northern Front commander, was asked what "form of state" did he support. His answer:

"I would like to see a civilized state, with Islamic law."

Civilized and Islamic law in the same sentence is a joke, but he goes on to say that he also wants the army to have a "clear Islamic nature."

He also demands that the international community supply the FSA and rebels (the jihadist, Islamist militants who behead and eat people's internal organs) with arms and ammunition. He gives the world 1 month  to supply the weapons or the FSA will "reveal all the evidence we have (about use of chemical weapons)."  Not sure when the interview took place, since the alleged evidence has already been provided.

Of course, no mention of the fact that the rebel opposition have been caught with their own chemical weapons.

His interview here.

However, Bashar al-Assad is totally to blame for what is going on in that country. He's a nasty dictator. Had he made some changes when the people first started protesting, it would never have escalated to a civil war, and opened the door for the Islamists to take over.

UK Muslim Doctor Loses Shariah Law Divorce Settlement Fight

Rheumatologist Dr Zaid al-Saffar thought he could get away without paying his wife alimony (or maintenance as they call it in the U.K.) because he's Muslim, but a British judge told him, sorry we go by Uk laws not Shariah law. Lord Justice Ward informed Saffar that:

‘The rule in this country is that you share and the starting point is equal division.

“You came out of the marriage without having made your wife any substantial capital payment.”

“Life is sometimes hard; do not be consumed with bitterness.”

Divorce can be nasty, but his last statement is very good advice for anyone going through a divorce, regardless of religious affiliation- not that it's easy if your ex is insufferable. But that's the way it goes.

After the verdict, Saffar was quoted by The Daily Mail as saying:

“Family law in this country is biased against Muslim people."

No, it's just that the law is the law, and England is not an Islamic state, at least not yet.

Saffar will have to pay his ex-wife, Hanan al-Saffar £60,000 ($94,249). I'm not sure if that's a one time payment,back payment, and/or whether he will have to pay monthly or yearly  maintenance. There's no mention where they were married, but apparently it was a traditional Muslim wedding where Saffar had to pay a gift to his bride, like a dowry. Because of this,  Saffar thought he had no post-divorce financial obligations, in spite of the fact that he has two children from the 8 year marriage.

“Dr. Al-Saffar also assumed he had no obligation to make maintenance payments, and that, following Islamic practice, his former wife’s family would support her."

Representing himself, the doctor told the court: “I’m hard working. I pay my taxes and look after my community. I have nothing but respect for the court’s order, but I only stopped paying because all her family were telling me she’s got millions. She doesn't need it.”

After the case, Saffar told the Daily Mail: “By playing the system and pretending to be a victim she got everything, which I think is totally unfair.

Perhaps unfair, but it happens all the time, and with non-Muslim families.  But when you live in a foreign country, you follow the laws of the land.

Death Penalty For Iran's 3 Strikes You're Out Alcohol laws

It doesn't take much to warrant the death penalty in Iran. You can be executed for anything from being a political dissident to being gay to drinking alcohol. Yes, in Iran, you can lose your life for drinking one too many beers, one too many times. In a 'three strikes and you're out' type of law offenders are sentenced to death, and two people are currently facing that punishment.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) is trying to get Iran to end death for drinking and for "crimes that are not considered serious and exceptional under treaties that bind it," but the Iranian government isn't about to listen to some human rights organization, or anyone else for that matter. They'll continue to pop off anyone they have a problem with, including those who consume alcohol.

According to HRW the prosecutor said the two  “had consumed alcoholic drinks for the third time” and that authorities were prepping for the “ the implementation of the execution order."

HRW's Sarah Leath Whitson said,

“Sentencing Iranians to death for consuming alcohol is a scary signal of how little Iran’s judges value Iranian lives and how casually they can make a decision to end them. Iran’s courts apparently have nothing better to do than harass and even kill Iranians for engaging in dubious ‘crimes.'"

According to shariah law, alcohol consumption is a

hadd offense, or a crime against God, and receives specific punishment under Islamic law. Usually, a person caught drinking alcohol gets 80 lashes, according to Human Rights Watch. But an article in the Iranian penal code stipulates that persons will be sentenced to death on their third conviction.

If alcohol violators repent following conviction of the "crime" based on their own confessions, a court is allowed to seek clemency from the nation's supreme leader or his representatives. But if a conviction was based on witness testimony, clemency is not applicable.

Despite the prospect of severe punishment, alarmed Iranian officials warn that alcohol use is increasing.

Earlier this month, Deputy Health Minister Alireza Mesdaghinia reportedly bemoaned "abnormal behaviors such as alcohol consumption" apparently being on the rise. Also this month, Iranian newspapers said that the amount of confiscated booze had gone up by 69% just in the last year.

Is it any wonder there's a problem with alcohol in a country that is so repressive and oppressive?