A I S E H M A N . O R G

Someone once said this: "If a nation has one religion, it would characteristically persecute all others. If it had two, they would fight against each other. Where it had many, they had to find ways to get along."

For many, religion is a personal and private affair. If we keep religion out of the public space, it is said that we shall be less likely to experience communal tension and conflicts.

But how can we keep religious debates in the shadows when there is an official religion in this country and its tenets are sometimes being used to regulate public morality?

The fact is that we cannot have justice without argument. The issue is not to hide the argument but to make it civil. I believe that a civil society is made up of people engage in civil debate. The more conversations and dialogue the better, the better the debate, the more civil life will benefit.

The media therefore can play a important role in positively highlighting situations in which dialogue, religious debates, mutual respect and the search for common solutions have been successfully proceeded. They can help to clarify what role religion should have in public life.

Instead of using fear, warnings and intimidation, it is not better to establish some guidelines and rules of engagement for religious debates in the public space so that people of faith can engage in constructive dialogue in order to have a positive impact on our society?

"The preponderance of a liberal slant in religion-related content, in total, published by The Sun and NST put conservatives on the defensive" Far from it !!!!

You would have added greater balance to your piece if you had instead said:

"Given the preponderance of a religious slant at all levels of government aimed directly or otherwise at disenfranchising Non-Muslim & Fair-minded Muslim Malaysians off their rights and entitlements, is it any wonder why there's no more clamour for open discourse?"

Zainah Anwar’s column in the NST is indeed excellent !! She alluded to the fact that for far too long, “government leaders have wrung their hands over the widening ethnic divide”. Article 11 forums had merely represented one of the many small initiatives where issues can be raised and discussed in a non-threatening and rational manner. Your readers may want to read an excellent letter by Malik Imtiaz Sarwar’s to Malaysiakini titled “Article 11 – Setting the record straight” http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/54522

For too long now, non-Muslim Malaysians have been made to feel as if they are “ancilliary residents” in their own country. The word “Pendatangs’ often used in reference to them is offensive to say the least!! Non-Muslim and Muslim Malaysians are merely reaffirming their Constitutional rights as Malaysians. They are also reminding the government that more needs to be done to check on religious zealots hell-bent on destroying our nation’s rich cultural heritage and diversity.

village_ahpiau:

I don't deny the validity of your argument.

But I was lamenting the fact that if the papers had been more balanced, the doors would not have been shut so abruptly.

One step at a time -- opportunities such as these do not come often.

Whether they realise it or not, The Sun and NST, in its haste, blew it.

Pardon my language, but it's as if this gorgeous woman tells you that she wants you, now! And what do you do?

You go and cum in your pants before she even takes her clothes off.

Aisehman, I don't read the Malay language papers, whats your take on their objectivity/balance with regards to religious debate?

kengleong:

The Malay papers remain largely parochial and chauvinist, but more and more, you see a trend towards giving space to alternative views.

But there's still a long way to go, as far as Utusan (especially) and Berita Harian are concerned.

Ironically, the threats from Pak Lah/Zam could result in more balance/less chest-thumping in the Malay papers.

How is it with the Chinese papers? I don't read them, but what sort of slant is there in the Chinese papers and how will all this affect the content they publish?

Anyone?

If I understand your response to village_ahpiau correctly, you are suggesting that if The Sun and NST had tread softly and slowly we wouldnt be having this nonsense now. Your opinion may have merits but how slowly and softly is always a relative matter isnt it. I would be more convinced that you are right if I believed that the disquiet raised by the "conservatives" was a spontaneous response to reading these newespapers. My view is that the "leaders" of these conservatives are more to blame for the current predicament because they whipped up their followers for their own political gains instead of leading their followers down a path of reasoned discourse.