George Lee
Nowadays when we read news on Malaysia politics, we must not be surprised as things can change unexpectedly.
When I read “MCA lawyer apologise over azan row”, I really cannot “tahan”. I told myself that I must write to seek further explanation from Ng Kian Nam.
To me he is one confused lawyer. Let me pre-empt myself before I am indicted of belonging to the “hate MCA campaign”. Frankly, I have no ill-feeling towards MCA even though I strongly believe it can do better in the present political climate.
When Ng and one of the MCA vice-president uttered that they wanted authorities to set specific guidelines to control the volume of loudspeakers at mosques, I was rather pleased that someone was courageous enough to bring out such sensitive matter and suggested a very rational approach to prevent future misunderstanding.
I was thrilled that MCA on this occasion was going to do something constructive for other inhabitants, whom for years have kept their silence due to the peculiar Malaysia environment where in the eyes of the government, segments of the society are still not mature to deal with situation of religious nature. So, it is a case of why touch it when it is not broken.
Three days later, I read with incredulity that the eccentric lawyer apologised for his grievance, citing that he did not know how to differentiate between the azan (Muslim call to prayer) and kuliah Subuh (dawn sermon). I don’t get it.
I respect Muslim religious obligation towards the call to prayer and pre-dawn sermon. However, how can Ng’s failure to differentiate between azan and kuliah Subuh justify his apologetic action to nullify his early complaint? I don’t get it.
Did he imply that if the pre-dawn sermon voice level is louder than the one played out by the azan, it is alright to him but not the other way around?
Speaking at his press conference, I quote, Ng said “Everyone has their own weaknesses. As a non-Muslims, when I sent the letter I did not know the difference between the azan and the kuliah,”
This looked to be a very lame excuse to get him out of the hole he had shrewdly dig himself into. End result, his repentant action did much more damage than he thought as the notion given to many was that he had “chickened out” from his initial criticism from an incredulous reasoning.
In retrospect, this was an opportunity for MCA and Ng to push forward the guidelines to control the volume of the loudspeakers at mosques. Even though this could be a lengthy and complex process but sadly the guidelines are only good in words.
Again, I respect Muslim religious obligation but when the noise becomes out of control, guidelines must be set. I agree with the MCA president that mechanisms to regulate level of sound or noise, not only for Muslim prayer but for all religious gathering must be drawn out. Sadly, this comment is only good in gaining political mileage.
The minister in charge of “Unity” does not seem capable of solving any issue concerning religion sensitivity let alone this one. The best method for him is to do nothing and let many issues drag on infinitely. The minister has inherited a “dirty” job and he does not want to be detested and hope that issue would diminish or go away.
Ng Kian Nam’s ignorance of azan and kuliah Subuh will spur a particular segment of the society to become supercilious due to their religion status in the country. This does not help when politicians concur to disdainful actions (burning effigies) rather than using their rational analysis.
Ng’s apologetic action will surely become distasteful for the minorities because the praises sang to him by the likes of Umno, Perkasa and NGOs can only mean that when it comes to matters concerning the country dominant religion, any logical discussion or reasoning is deem not possible, and as a result, “the weak are the prey of the strong” (The law of jungle).
Ng Kian Nam, you are one confused lawyer. You have brought humiliation to your political master, the Malaysia Chinese Association.
You owe the minorities a clear and credible explanation over your perplexing action.
You should have walked all the way and rather than “patah balik”. I look forward to your next press conference. I wonder, will there be one?
- Malaysian Insider
When I read “MCA lawyer apologise over azan row”, I really cannot “tahan”. I told myself that I must write to seek further explanation from Ng Kian Nam.
To me he is one confused lawyer. Let me pre-empt myself before I am indicted of belonging to the “hate MCA campaign”. Frankly, I have no ill-feeling towards MCA even though I strongly believe it can do better in the present political climate.
When Ng and one of the MCA vice-president uttered that they wanted authorities to set specific guidelines to control the volume of loudspeakers at mosques, I was rather pleased that someone was courageous enough to bring out such sensitive matter and suggested a very rational approach to prevent future misunderstanding.
I was thrilled that MCA on this occasion was going to do something constructive for other inhabitants, whom for years have kept their silence due to the peculiar Malaysia environment where in the eyes of the government, segments of the society are still not mature to deal with situation of religious nature. So, it is a case of why touch it when it is not broken.
Three days later, I read with incredulity that the eccentric lawyer apologised for his grievance, citing that he did not know how to differentiate between the azan (Muslim call to prayer) and kuliah Subuh (dawn sermon). I don’t get it.
I respect Muslim religious obligation towards the call to prayer and pre-dawn sermon. However, how can Ng’s failure to differentiate between azan and kuliah Subuh justify his apologetic action to nullify his early complaint? I don’t get it.
Did he imply that if the pre-dawn sermon voice level is louder than the one played out by the azan, it is alright to him but not the other way around?
Speaking at his press conference, I quote, Ng said “Everyone has their own weaknesses. As a non-Muslims, when I sent the letter I did not know the difference between the azan and the kuliah,”
This looked to be a very lame excuse to get him out of the hole he had shrewdly dig himself into. End result, his repentant action did much more damage than he thought as the notion given to many was that he had “chickened out” from his initial criticism from an incredulous reasoning.
In retrospect, this was an opportunity for MCA and Ng to push forward the guidelines to control the volume of the loudspeakers at mosques. Even though this could be a lengthy and complex process but sadly the guidelines are only good in words.
Again, I respect Muslim religious obligation but when the noise becomes out of control, guidelines must be set. I agree with the MCA president that mechanisms to regulate level of sound or noise, not only for Muslim prayer but for all religious gathering must be drawn out. Sadly, this comment is only good in gaining political mileage.
The minister in charge of “Unity” does not seem capable of solving any issue concerning religion sensitivity let alone this one. The best method for him is to do nothing and let many issues drag on infinitely. The minister has inherited a “dirty” job and he does not want to be detested and hope that issue would diminish or go away.
Ng Kian Nam’s ignorance of azan and kuliah Subuh will spur a particular segment of the society to become supercilious due to their religion status in the country. This does not help when politicians concur to disdainful actions (burning effigies) rather than using their rational analysis.
Ng’s apologetic action will surely become distasteful for the minorities because the praises sang to him by the likes of Umno, Perkasa and NGOs can only mean that when it comes to matters concerning the country dominant religion, any logical discussion or reasoning is deem not possible, and as a result, “the weak are the prey of the strong” (The law of jungle).
Ng Kian Nam, you are one confused lawyer. You have brought humiliation to your political master, the Malaysia Chinese Association.
You owe the minorities a clear and credible explanation over your perplexing action.
You should have walked all the way and rather than “patah balik”. I look forward to your next press conference. I wonder, will there be one?
- Malaysian Insider
No comments:
Post a Comment