Malaysian exodus coming?

[Turbineguy]

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/are-malays-starting-to-leave-the-country

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 18 — The South China Morning Post has suggested that Muslim Malays are starting to leave Malaysia as the country’s lurch towards authoritarianism and fundamentalism starts to bite.

A report in the weekend edition of the Hong Kong paper, titled: “Malay Muslims fleeing country as fundamentalism takes hold” painted a grim picture and suggested an exodus of members of the majority race but gave no numbers or hard data.

It cited a female researcher so disgusted with the state of affairs after her shared accommodation with other women was searched for the presence of a man by Islamic authorities on a morality raid that she has resolved to leave the country in two years.

“An anonymous phone call to the religious department alleging a man was seen entering her flat was all it took for the religious officials to descend on her home,” the paper said, adding that six or seven men from the Selangor State Islamic Department (Jais) had entered her flat.

[Fred Sanders]

1. The very thought of a State Christian Morality Department has the fundies drooling for such a thing here.

[leftynyc]

3. Do let me know when

I expect to have men breaking in to make sure I don't have another man in my apartment. I wouldn't want to miss that. Your moral relativism is predictably boring.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

5. "Your moral relativism is predictably boring."

Bigoted moral relativism, at that. The comment serves no purpose except to serve as a platform to bash The Hated Other.

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. Not that long since men were charged with homosexual activity in their own home in the USA

Last edited Thu Dec 18, 2014, 08:03 PM - Edit history (1)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

Scalia and Thomas are still on the Supreme Court. It's no stretch to say fundies would like homosexuality to be illegal in the USA. Look at Scott Lively pushing for that in African countries. Or "Arizona pastor predicts ‘AIDS-free world by Christmas’ if all ‘homos’ are killed".

Despite the landmark Supreme Court Lawrence v. Texas case that invalidated anti-sodomy laws and, therefore, essentially made sodomy legal, there are still 14 states in the country where sodomy is on the books as “illegal,” plus an additional four where sodomy is illegal only if you’re gay.

Mother Jones notes: All Sodomy Outlawed: Idaho, Utah, Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana Just for gays: Montana, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas.

“Texas isn’t the only state that’s still legislating bedroom activity,” Tim Murphy wrote at Mother Jones last year. “Fourteen states currently have laws on the books outlawing anal sex between two consenting, unrelated adults—referred to variously as ‘deviate sexual conduct,’ ‘the infamous crime against nature,’ ‘sodomy,’ and ‘buggery. And it’s taken a concerted effort to keep those laws on the books. Since Lawrence, efforts to formally repeal laws in Montana, Kansas, Utah, Louisiana, North Carolina, and, most notably, Texas have all faced resistance before fizzling out in their respective state legislatures. Conservatives in those states know they can’t enforce the laws, but by keeping them in the code, they can send a message that homosexuality is officially condemned by the government.”

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/1-the-10-states-illegally-make-sodomy-illegal-plus-4-only-if-youre-gay/politics/2012/03/09/35913

[Bluenorthwest]

8. Anti-LGBT laws: Malaysia

Malaysian law currently provides for whipping and up to a 20-year prison sentence for homosexual acts involving either men or women.
http://76crimes.com/anti-lgbt-laws-malaysia/

[leftynyc]

9. And they hang them in the territories

About six months I got sick and tired of people trying to deflect from the actions of some by pointing to something either here or somewhere else and saying "oh yeah, well look at that instead". You think you're making some kind of point (which would be appropriate as a history lesson in a OP dedicated to the issue). But using it as a deflection is quite simply bullshit. I'm tired of the moral relativism because it shows a complete lack of respect to what gays and others have to live with TODAY, EVERY FREEKING DAY. What puzzles me is why you would think showing it WAS bad other places makes what's happening TODAY, EVERY FREEKING DAY any better at all.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. The post you seem to object to doesn't say "look at that instead"

It just says that American fundies would like to have similar laws here. I don't think that's 'moral relativism'; it looks like "Christian fundies are awful too, but we've got them under control". It's not deflection.

Are you saying that American fundamentalists are a lot better, morally, than the Muslims in Malaysia doing this shit?

[leftynyc]

11. Yes - because I can't think of even one

that has any voice whatsoever that would call for lashing or hanging a gay person. If someone like that is in our government, please enlighten me. If you're talking about that family that protest funerals holds up odious signs, you must be kidding to think that's equivalent. Pretending otherwise is just a deflection from what gays and minorities have to deal with every single day - they face whippings and death. We have nothing, NOTHING, that even comes close.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. Reply #1 didn't say anything about 'in government'

It's about 'fundies', and what they'd like, not what US laws say (though the anti-constitutional laws do remain, as the article I linked to points out, and that indicates that significant numbers of state legislators won't support a simple declaration that gay sex is OK, by repealing the laws). I've already given an example of a pastor calling for the death of gay people, in the USA, in the past month. And 2 of the current Supreme Court justices were happy for anti-homosexual laws to have real force in the USA.

30% of Americans still think gay or lesbian relations should be illegal. That's the fundies.

[leftynyc]

13. So you're comparing a small minority

of people who support an unconstitutional law with laws that are actually on the books, supported by the vast majority of their citizens and you think that's a fair comparison (we wont even discuss why you felt the need to make ANY comparison to the US). Well, I think it's a ridiculous comparison and simply a deflection from the reality gays face every single day - corporal punishment and death - in many of these countries. In my opinion you're only minimizing what they have to go through every single day.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. I'm saying "the fundies" are about 30% of Americans; I don't call that 'small'

The comparison of the fundamentalist Muslims in Malaysia and the fundamentalist Christians in the USA was made in reply #1. You're the one who brought gay laws into it (the OP article was about a woman's apartment being searched for a man). You think that mentioning American fundamentalists in reply to an article about Malayisan fundamentalists is 'moral relativism' (even worse, Nuclear Unicorn then called it 'bigoted'). It's not; it's pointing out that fundamentalists wishing to set moral laws is a universal problem. It's pretty much the opposite of 'moral relativism'.

[leftynyc]

16. There are nowhere near 30%

of Americans that would call for beatings and death to gays or invading a woman's apartment, or cutting off heads for not practicing the same religion as others. That's simply ridiculous.

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. I didn't say that

What the OP was about was religious police forbidding a man going into a woman's apartment. Not about beatings or death.

[Fred Sanders]

18. You got led down the Strawman's Highway by someone not totally familiar with logic.

Comparing America's flawed policies and attitudes to other flawed policies and attitudes and saying one is by degrees not as bad as other unrelated policies is a debate I would not have, but thank you for engaging.

And winning.

[Throd]

19. And 87% percent of such claims on DU are pulled directly from the poster's ass.

I always love it when reports of bad shit actually happening elsewhere is met with "well, they'd do it here too if they could".

[Quantess]

15. I'm going to start bringing up Muslims in threads that are critical of Christians.

For example, when I see a title such as: "X% of Christian Fundamentalists say Women Should Not Drive Cars", I'm going to immediately start making comparisons to Muslims.

Want me to?

[Warpy]

2. Did any of those damned men realize he was breaking tribalist law

when he entered her apartment to check for another man?

Separation should mean just that. If they can't come up with female relgious police, they need to stay away from women completely, especially in their homes.

If I lived there, I'd leave, too. It would be either that or I'd go nuts and start hunting religious police as a pastime, seeing how many I could damage badly enough they'd need to retire from abusing women.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

4. The elites, regardless of the system or its underlying premises, never

abide by what they enforce.

Crony capitalists take government money, morality police impose themselves on the innocent, commissars have plush dachas not available to the proletariat -- on and on it goes.

[Warpy]

6. The religious vigilantes are not the elites

They're workers, fired up on religion, who take to the streets outside work to abuse women they see not abiding by their incredibly narrow definitions of how women ought to behave.

They beat the ones who flash a bit of ankle when the wind's up or show a lock of unruly hair at the edge of a veil.