So today, I was looking at an article that my friend shared. It says that there are two doctors, more specifically, a surgeon and an anaesthetist, that volunteered themselves to carry out limb amputations in the light of the recent hudud enforcement in Kelantan. I was really taken aback by this. So, in the first place, did they even take the Hippocratic Oath. Even if they did, did they mean what they say?
After sharing the news on my own profile (along with a thought-provoking or rather just provoking statement) some Muslims commented on it and I found their replies very disappointing. To sum it up, it plainly say: If you know nothing about hudud, shut the hell up. Well, I am human enough to know that to amputate the limbs of others off is totally barbaric and heartless. Their reason for their support of hudud is that it is a form of deterrent to would-be criminals. Does this mean your people are so horrible that normal laws cannot govern their behaviour? I discussed the issue from the viewpoint of a rational human and they insisted I understand Islam before saying anything. In general, I would also say many non-Muslims also find hudud a little too extreme. Rather than forcing it down the throats of non-Muslims and calling us "kafir" and "jahil", why not take a little effort to understand our viewpoints. Don't Muslims call Islam the so-called religion of peace? If yes, then prove it. Take some time to ask around. All I can see is: You are a non-Muslim, what the hell do you know? What's more heartbreaking is, on social media, any Muslim that does not support hudud (just look at the comments in articles related to hudud on Facebook) will be branded "government ass-lickers", murtads and all kinds of insults. What Muslim are you when you call your own brethren such sickening names? My main concern regarding hudud is how it claims to not affect the lives of non-Muslims. I have to arguments I can make regarding this. Assuming hudud to be laws practised in Muslim countries, then let me take Turkey as an example. In the era of the Ottoman Turks, the Jannisary (Jannisari) was a special group of soldiers, supposedly elite soldiers with excellent backgrounds and especially in Islam. I came across a book in my university library while looking for information for my assignment. Lo and behold, I came across an ugly truth. In those days, firstborn males from Christian families are taken forcefully and are also converted to Islam forcefully, and they are then made to serve in the Jannisary. Secondly, in the pursuit of jihad, houses of worship are not to be harmed in any way or another. Then, why is Hagia Sophia converted into a mosque? Why wasn't it left as it is? Does this mean it was taken away by force from the Roman Catholics during the fall of the Roman empire? Why bring this up? The Medina Charter guarantees safe coexistence between Muslims and those who are not of the religion. However, one of the most successful Islamic empires have gone against simple rules written in the charter itself. Those were great Muslim heroes that have gone against the essence of the charter, so what more of Malaysian Muslims then, who do not have a history in Islam as old as the Turkish people? Could they guarantee that the rights of the non-Muslims be FOREVER protected? I doubt so. Let's also not forget that Malaysia is a multiracial country and it was never agreed upon that Islamic laws were to be used to govern the nation. Thus, in my opinion, EVERY citizen has the right to disagree upon hudud should they find it too harsh a law to be used, not just Muslims themselves. Muslims in Malaysia should prove that Islam is a religion of peace, not just claim it by mouth. If the Prophet can practise "musyawarah" then why can't you?
If this goes on throughout the nation, I am going to leave to another country. I can't stand seeing the minorities being suppressed. Perhaps, we should all move. I am far too disappointed with what I am seeing now. Oh, have I mentioned about GST, too? Not yet. End of rant for today.