Yes, it’s back to Malaysia. Those of you loyal readers know that in June of last year I visited the quagmire that is the Malaysian Constitution. Well, you’ll be pleased to know that the kids there still aren’t playing nice with each other.
This time it’s all about Mazu, the Taoist goddess of the sea. More precisely, it’s about the construction of the world’s tallest statue of the goddess that is causing trouble. The selected site for the statue is the coastal town of Kudat in Sabah state on the northern tip of Borneo Island. Seems appropriate, right? Guess again! According to AsiaNews.it, “After the state government halted construction Sabah’s mufti issued a fatwa saying the statue was ‘offensive to Islam’ because it was too close to a mosque.” The Associated Press (via International Herald Tribune) points out that the statue is being constructed on private property.
Obviously this is annoying, but why is this issue getting so much attention? As the Tribune points out “Malaysia has prided itself on decades of multiracial harmony”. Those of you who read my last Malaysia blog know that this is simply not the case, and hasn’t ever been, thanks to the conflicting messages of their Constitution.
AsiaNews.it says, “Malaysian commentators and minority leaders have sounded the alarm over the growing ‘Islamisation’ of the country.” Seems to me, they have reason for concern.
Category: Politics
Sometimes a Con IS Magical
Okay, so it wasn’t actually magic, but sometimes, in my opinion, a quality con is simply magical. This is the case with my magician of the day, Rotina Mavhunga of Zimbabwe. According to an article at allafrica.com, “The Financial Gazette reported last month that the government had squandered $5 billion worth of taxpayers’ money and given away a farm to a pseudo medium, Rotina Mavhunga, after she claimed she could extract diesel from a rock by just pointing her magical stick at it.” I guess no one in President Magabe’s Cabinet could persuade him that diesel is extracted from crude oil through a purification process, and that it seemed highly unlikely that Rotina could not only get crude oil, but purify it too. Also, the concept of paying after getting results seems to have alluded them all as well.
Now Zimbabwe is preparing to haul Rotina into court for pulling one over on the government. My question is, who is punishing the government for being this dense? I think in all fairness, Rotina should give back the money, etc., not be punished and everyone walks away. You don’t take Rotina to court, you don’t have to admit that you fell under her spell.
FREE ROTINA MAVHUNGA!
Freeze! It’s the Vice Squad! Part 2: The Rap Edition
Recently we discussed Iran’s new, improved, and super charged vice squad. It appeared, at first glance, it was more about fashion than morality, with the targeting of those racy Iranian women who wore make-up or showed off some hot ankle. Now Iran is learning what pop culture junkies here in America have known forever, fashion and music go hand in hand. So while those feisty ladies have been rebelling in fitted jackets, the disenfranchised male youth of Tehran have turned to a musical culture founded on the struggle of impoverished youth battling against authority…that’s right, hip hop.
The use of profanity has made rap music the latest cultural endeavor to end up in Iran’s vice police cross hairs. As those of us “old school” rap fans here in America know, sure, the swears words concern Iran, but the anti-authority, revolution inspiring themes, are what is really causing the Culture and Islamic Guidance Ministry to crackdown on the genre. According to Mohammad Dashtgoli, the official for music at the Ministry, as quoted in a Breitbart.com article, “Illegal studios producing this type of music will be sealed and the singers in the genre will be confronted.” He also states that “a large number of illegal rap singers have been already identified.”
Can you imagine an America where Public Enemy not only had to struggle with the conditions of their communities, but also with the sticky wicket of getting arrested for expressing their concerns musically? “Fight the Power” indeed. I don’t even want to imagine what would have happened if N.W.A. released their classic track “F*** the Police” in Iran. But, don’t despair, just like the rap hustlers of the early 80’s discovered, there is always a way to get the music out to those who want it. There is a brisk black market trade of rap albums in Iran.
Iran has cause for concern. This is a symptom of a greater disease for their government. Iran is coming down with a bad case of democracy.
On a related, but unrelated note. To the American public: Let musicians express themselves however they want to in their music. You don’t like an artist’s language or message, don’t buy their music. If I ever, ever, hear another round of politicians suggesting that there must be a way to quasi legislate an answer to the fact that rappers use the n word and call women hos I will be forced to take drastic action. In an effort to not incriminate myself, I will just say that it will probably involve Al Sharpton and a pair of hair shears.
Freeze! It’s the Vice Squad!
On November 13, 2007 news sources began releasing the list of moral vices that had been debuted in Iran. I tried to dig up what would be a 100% full and accurate list of these vices, but unfortunately I can’t read Persian! Here’s the jist of what we’re looking at:
Terrorising people by quarrelling and feuding in public
Women failing to cover up in a suitable way, such as wearing short trousers revealing the leg, hats intead of scarves, small and skinny scarves that do not cover up the head, and make-up that is unconventional and violates public morality
Wearing decadent Western clothes and displaying signs and insignia of deviant groups
Procuring decadent films
Procuring alcohol and drugs
(List from BBC News, who cites E’temad Newspaper as their source. The BBC has people that speak Persian!)
So what does this list mean you ask? According to Arabian Business the list is part of an ongoing "moral crackdown". The article states that "police have raided underground parties, seized satelite dishes and conducted street checks on the improperly dressed." And that "Between April and October police warned 122,000 people, mostly women, about flouting dress codes, of which almost 7,000 attended classes on respecting the rules."
Iran has Islam as its state religion. This post isn’t anti Islam, it’s against the idea of state or national religions entirely. Religion and government have no reason to be mingling. Why not? Well, in America I can spend all weekend on the couch watching "Mythbusters" and no one comes into my home to bust me for Sloth.
I Now Pronounce You Husband and Wife. Terms and Conditions May Vary.
Technically this is old news, but it has recently been brought to my attention by my Pennsylvanian Pagan peeps (that’s right, I have peeps). What it comes down to is that marriage laws, are in fact, horribly confusing…and just got made worse.
Here’s the set up. On August 24, 2006 a couple from York County Pennsylvania married. The ceremony was officiated by a friend, who obtained internet ordination from the Universal Life Church Monastery. Seven months later they decided the marriage wasn’t working out, so they split. Then they read in the paper that unions performed by internet ordained ministers may not be upheld if they went to court. So they took it to court.
On Friday September 9, 2007 they found out that their marriage never existed. Talk about the quickiest of divorces!
This is the first instance in Pennsylvania and according to a solicitor for the state association of Registers of Wills and Clerks of Orphans Court as quoted in The York Dispatch “All persons issuing marriage licenses should comply with the precedent-setting decision.”
What was the problem? In York County it was many factors. The friend who performed the ceremony was not a member of the Universal Life Church before receiving his ordination, he doesn’t have a congregation that meets regularly or a place of worship, neither the bride or groom were members of the of the ULCM, also, there were no witnesses.
Honestly, the state of marriage laws these days are enough to make you pull your hair out. In a fantastic article by The New York Times, they point out that “Connecticut is one of a half-dozen places that do not recognize marriages performed by someone who became a minister for the sole purpose of marrying people.” That same article focuses on a pair of attorneys that had a friend, who again received ordination from the Universal Life Church Monastery, marry them only to find out it wasn’t a valid marriage. The groom is quoted as saying, “If two lawyers can be duped into getting married illegally, then anybody can.” True dat!
In fact, did you know that Connecticut, Alabama, Virginia, and Tennessee prohibit weddings performed by ministers who do not have active ministries? As pointed out in the Times’ piece, “Even in Las Vegas, that city’s no-holds-barred image notwithstanding, it is illegal for individuals to perform a marriage if they do not have a congregation.” They go on to quote a clerk at the Marriage License Bureau in Philadelphia as saying, “People call us and ask if it’s legal or not, and we don’t know if it’s legal.” You’re beginning to get the idea, right? It’s a mess out there and no one knows how it works. (My girl Shira at www.handfastings.org can tell you ALL about it. We still haven’t figured out what makes an officiant in NY, well, official.)
Back to the York County precedent. G. Martin Freeman, Universal Life Church Monastery president, is quoted in The York Daily Record calling the ruling “capricious” and “arbitrary”. He goes on to say, “It violates the First Amendment to the Constitution.”
Emily MacDonald, who is a member of the South Central PA Pagans, agrees with Freeman. “Many people have chosen to be ordained in this manner because they ideologically eschew more popular denominations of ‘organized religion’ and physically established mainstream churches in their geographic area. Often, as a result, they do not have a physical meeting place and sometimes do not have a congregation who meet regularly as such (although what one may mean by ‘congregation’ and ‘regular meetings’ is certainly an open question). Does this make a person’s belief system, experience and ability to officiate a ceremony less valid than someone from a mainstream church with a regularly meeting congregation? I do not believe so. I believe this is discrimination and a flagrant violation of our religious freedom protected by both the US and Pennsylvania Constitutions.”
What’s got my PA Pagans all riled up? Well, as Rev. Brandy Boswell, of Nature Church in York, PA, points out, “Religions like Paganism, Wicca, and Witchcraft are usually very private. It is extremely difficult to gather a group together when each person’s experiences in connecting with Divinity are so personal. On occasion groups do pop up, like the Nature Church. The unfortunate thing is these places are few, and far between. As you can see, finding an already established “church” for Wiccans, Witches, Pagans is difficult.
To add salt to the wound, Wiccans and Witches do not always meet in churches. They have Covens, Groves, and sometimes Circles. PA does not recognize these forms of religious organization. The fact is, PA is again not being told to see beyond what is most predominate.”
As you can see, some followers of certain faiths may only be able to study and achieve ordination online. They may never be able to set up a congregation, or may have no desire to do so. That’s not what you really want to talk about though, is it? What you really want to discuss is not true religious seekers only able to find faith through connections online, but average Joes getting quickie ordinations online to marry friends.
What about it? Seriously. You have a problem with this, then hey, don’t ask your buddy to marry you. The now invalidated bride in the York County case is quoted in The York Daily Record saying, “It makes a mockery out of the whole marriage system.” Hey lady, you know what’s really a mockery of the system? Couples, who aren’t religious, shelling out wads of cash and devoting their time to classes at a church they don’t attend, just to have a marriage ceremony. What about a Justice of the Peace or a Court House wedding? Well you know what? Excuse me for wanting something more romantic than filing paperwork in triplicate for my wedding. The duped attorney in Connecticut told the Times, “The most important thing to us was that someone who we knew and liked wo
uld marry us.” Why not? Why not have a close friend, who more often than not is who you turn to in times of joy and sorrow, be the one that oversees one of the most important days of your life? As long as they know how to fill out the paperwork and you pay the state, who’s it hurting?
Consider yourself warned Pennsylvania, my friends are ticked off and I don’t think they’re going to settle for the new status quo. Rev. Boswell says. “PA is clouded in their views of who is worthy of officiating marriages and it is up to us to tell our leaders what way they need to lean. Write letters, send e-mails, stand on the street corner and hand out flyers! Do something, anything, to get the word out! Let the people and our leaders know that our religious rights are being violated.”
Osama bin Laden+Jesus=Art?
On August 29, 2007 the winner of the 2007 Blake Prize was announced. According to the Blake Prize website, “The Blake Prize for Religious Art is one of the more prestigious art prizes in Australia. For 55 years it has been awarding a prize for works of art that explore the subject of religious awareness and spirituality.” This year’s winner was Shirley Purdie and her piece “Stations of the Cross”. However, the winning piece isn’t what people are talking about.
“The Fourth Secret of Fatima” by Luke Sullivan and “Bearded Orientals: Making the Empire Cross” by Priscilla Bracks are all anyone wants to discuss. “The Fourth Secret of Fatima” is a statue of Mary wearing a burqa and “Bearded Orientals” pairs a portrait of Christ with one of terrorist Osama bin Laden looking like Jesus. The inclusion of these two pieces are causing quite a stir in Australia. To see these pieces click here.
Australian Prime Minister John Howard was quoted in “The Daily Telegraph” saying, “The choice of such artwork is gratuitously offensive to the religious beliefs of many Australians.” Sydney’s Catholic Archbishop, Cardinal George Pell, has been quite vocal with his displeasure, “Some contemporary art is tedious and trivial. These couple of works demonstrate this. Regrettably, attempts to insult Jesus and Mary have become common in recent years, even predictable. Too often it seems that the only quality which makes something ‘art’ is the adolescent desire to shock. If this is the best the Blake Prize can do, it has probably outlived its usefulness.” (I have to point out here, that obviously these two pieces weren’t “the best the Blake Prize can do” since a totally different piece won the $15,000 prize.)
Enough about the Catholics, what do Australian Muslims have to say about all this hooplah? Ikebal Patel, the President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils offers some unique perspectives. He is quoted in the “Sydney Morning Herald” saying, “So [Mary wearing a burqa is] no different to how our mothers and sisters are expected to be modest in their dressing.” He explains that the statue is not at all offensive because both the Virgin Mary and Jesus are revered figures in Islam. However, Patel was offended in many different ways by “Bearded Orientals”. “You have a revered prophet of Islam (that would be Jesus) being equated to somebody like Osama bin Laden. Also in Islam, we don’t have any paintings or drawings depicting any of our prophets, so I find it quite offensive,” he states.
Look at all this debate! The Anglican Bishop of south Sydney, Robert Forsyth, is quoted saying, “Is the one of Mary having a go at religions for oppressing women?” (My new friends at Roman Catholic Womenpriests, probably have something to say to that!) According to the “Washington Post”, Bracks (the artist who did “Bearded Orientals” told Australian radio, “I’m interested in having a discussion, and asking questions about how we think about our world and what we accept, and what we don’t accept.” Reverend Pattenden, Blake Society Chairman, says neither of the two artists had set out to offend anyone, and he was not personally affronted, “They are both works which made me stop and think.”
Now I ask you this, isn’t that what art is all about?
The Malaysian Conundrum
On Wednesday May 30, 2007 Malaysia’s highest court ruled that they did not have the authority to help Lina Joy, a Malay Muslim, officially convert to Christianity and have that change reflected on her National Identity Card. Depending on what you know about the Malaysian Constitution and their judicial system, this may or may not surprise you. Obviously, I found it distressing. When I then learned that Article 11, clause 1, of the Malaysian Constitution states, “Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and, subject to Clause 4, to propagate it.” I grew more confused. I should also mention that Article 3, clause 1, is “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.” So why is Lina Joy screwed? Welcome to the nightmare of the Malaysian Constitution butting heads with the Malaysian judicial system, and religion.
“This Constitution is the supreme law of the Federation and any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with this Constitution shall, to the extent of inconsistency, be void,” Article 4, clause 1, the Malaysian Constitution. Of course, the Malaysian Constitution is enough to make the average person bash their head against the wall, or maybe that was just me. The Constitution became official in 1957 and has been amended approximately 42 times up through 2005. The wrinkle is that every batch of amendments only counts as one, regardless of how many changes were actually made each time the Constitution was amended. Thus, some scholars estimate that the true number of amendments has been more like 650. Ouchie. To help with your perspective, the United States Constitution, including the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments, takes up roughly nineteen 81/2×11 pages. The Malaysian Constitution, in a similar font and format, uses up one hundred and sixty three 81/2×11 pages. Most authorities agree that the Malaysian document was deliberately vague, because the founding fathers were unwilling to upset any of the three dominant groups at the time of independence from Britain, when building a multiracial and peaceful nation was more important. Upon reading the document, a brain buster to say the least, I can safely say that the Malaysian Constitution is a somewhat conflicting piece of governance. Among loads of things, it allows for the freedom of faith, yet it says that Islam is the official religion. Anyone who understands the importance of separation of Church and State knows that this is a recipe for disaster.
I found several different numbers, so I’m taking the average. Approximately 54% of Malaysians are Muslim, with the remainder being Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, and Sikh. Malaysia has long served as an example of the world’s most progressive and modern Muslim democracies. I don’t want to put down Malaysia, it’s blend of religion and cultures is impressive and made for an awesome episode of “No Reservations” with Anthony Bourdain, but the more I’ve been learning, the more I have to say that Malaysia has some issues that terrify a born and raised American. Here is where the fun starts. Most native Malays, like Joy, are Muslim and have been for generations. Muslims, by order of their faith have certain requirements, and in an effort of the Malaysian government to better serve the Muslim needs, which have different laws that apply to them, a Muslim’s National Identity Card identifies them as Islam. In addition, to better serve the Muslim populations, they have their own court, the Shariah courts. These courts deal in the family and personal affairs of Muslim citizens. Civil courts see to the affairs of everyone else. Bumiputra, Malays and other indigenous people, who are primarily Muslim, benefit from a 30 year-old program of privileges that require certain levels of ownership by bumiputra to be maintained and enforce hiring quotas within large companies. Obviously, those standards continuing are dependent on the bumiputra staying a majority in Malaysia, and that religious conversions potentially can mess with those numbers. All of this lays the groundwork for how Lina Joy was screwed.
In 1990, Azlina Jailani began attending a Christian church. In 1998, she became baptized and filled out the paper work to have her name legally changed to Lina Joy. She also requested that her religion on her National Identity Card be changed to Christian, so that she could marry her Christian fiancé. Muslims in Malaysia are not allowed by law to marry people of other faiths. The intended spouse is expected to convert to Islam. Her name was legally changed, but both times she made the request to have Islam removed from the card, it was refused because she was ethnic Malay and was legally Muslim and could not change religions. Citing Article 4, 3, and 11 of the Malaysian Constitution, Joy took her case to the civil courts, because she was a baptized Christian and felt that the Shariah courts should not be involved in the matter.
The Federal Court was divided 2 to 1 in its decision that the matter was beyond the jurisdiction of the country’s civil courts and must be handled by religious authorities. Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Abdul Halim said that the government agency responsible for identity cards acted reasonably when it refused to change Joy’s religious status. According to the International Herald Tribune, he was quoted as saying, “She cannot at her own whim simply enter or leave her religion. She must follow the rules.” Yep, 8 years is very whimsical. Silly girl.
What are these rules that Joy should follow? She must offer proof in a special Muslim court that she has abandoned Islam and that the civil courts cannot interfere. Oh, that’s not so tough. Bearing in mind that according to Leonard Teoh Hooi Leong, a lawyer representing the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism, and Taoism (they’re called MCCBCHST for short…I’m serious), Joy will have a very difficult time getting the Islamic authorities to allow her to leave Islam. No one in recent years has done it in the federal territory of Kuala Lumpur, where Joy is registered. He says that those who have tried have been threatened and cajoled. Um, okay. That’s tougher. Oh, by the way, the abandonment of Islam is called apostasy, is deplored by many Muslims, and in several Malaysian states is punishable by fines and imprisonment. (To show how progressive Malaysia is, in other Muslim countries the punishment could be death.) Lina Joy’s fate now rests with the Shariah courts, and that would be why she is screwed. The Malaysian Constitution does not clearly state who has the final say in such matters and so by default it goes to the Islamic court.
Judge Richa
rd Malanjum, the one dissenting opinion, was quoted in the International Herald Tribune as saying Joy’s “fundamental constitutional right of freedom of religion” had been violated. Also, “She is entitled to have an identity card in which the word Islam does not appear.” Calling the agency’s refusal to officially change her religion “an abuse of power.”
Well amen brother! The older I get, the more I appreciate the simplicity, yet effectiveness, of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. After trying to learn and weave my way through this mess, I would kiss every last person involved with the Philadelphia Convention. Moreover, I don’t mean that figuratively. Go! Dig up their bones! After learning all this, I appreciate them enough I would French kiss their decomposed remains! Take heed friends, Malaysia is a shining example of what happens when there isn’t an effective separation of Church and State, and when civil liberties are whittled away at. The next time someone is willing to make a concession and gives away even a sliver of our rights, all it’s doing is making it easier for them to take more away.
In honor of Lina Joy and her plight, take a moment to read the Constitution of the United States of America, its Bill of Rights, and subsequent amendments. Savor the freedoms that our Constitution gives us that poor Lina Joy does not have access to. http://www.constitutioncenter.org/constitution/constitution.pdf
Obviously, a dumb average American like me does not innately know all about the Malaysian Constitution and justice system. I read many articles and visited many sites to cobble this together. If you want to walk in my footsteps, here are the many websites I visited and articles I read:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/30/news/malaysia.php
http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=9403&size=A
http://www.nysun.com/article/55680
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Malaysia
http://www.pogar.org/publications/other/constitutions/malaysia-e.pdf (all 163 pages of Malaysian Constitutional headache!)
http://article11.org/
http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/1834/27/