Internet debate February edition
While disputing my "Chariots of Fire" cover YouTube copyright claim, I suddenly remembered the Internet debate from the February edition where MUDA member Fayyadh Jaafar argued with former Mufti Dr. Zulkifli Mohamad Al-Bakri regarding secularism on X. First of all, to add more fuel and potentially get myself canceled, Islam is the official state religion of Malaysia, as stated in Article 3(1):
Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.
Yeah, human rights in Article 10(1) and 11(1)? Nah, Tan Sri Apandi says: Article 10(1) is subject to restrictions imposed by law under Article 10(2)(a). Freedom of religion, under Article 11(1), as explained above, is subject to Article 11(4) and should be read in conjunction with Article 3(1). Nice try, Diddy.
Okay, since I don't want to get trapped in a world of text without context, basically Fayyadh Jaafar says: "Iman tak perlu dipaksa." I don't know, he's kind of stuck in his idealistic world where everything doesn’t need to be forced or influenced. Dude doesn’t even realize that advertising and propaganda exist because of our cognitive processes regarding perceived things. Meanwhile, Sahibus Samahah Mufti himself brings dalil, not logical rhetoric or conspiracy. However, Fayyadh refuses to discuss in the context of Islam itself and instead approaches it through a logical rhetoric conspiracy lens. If I use a secular example: anything you watch influences you, scientifically speaking, due to the amounts of information processed by our brains and the connections formed by previous stimuli. The cognitive processes that shape perception are so complicated they can be simplified. Plus, the Mufti himself is involved in dialogue with LGBT groups, unlike those elitists who harbor irrational dislike towards some people without engaging in dialogue.
Anyways, bro got character development.(Yes I use Nitter)
 |
| From conservative |
 |
| Contradiction is pride 🗿 |
