freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2014 at 10:53pm:


Whenever I ask for evidence for your claim that the vast majority of non-Malays in Malaysia oppose Malays introducing hudud apostasy laws on themselves, you describe it as "common sense" that non-muslims would "oppose muslims killing people in the name of islam". You must know that describing it this way without even mentioning the word "apostasy" is misleading and dishonest.

You simply can't bring yourself to say "its common sense that non Malays would oppose Malays introducing execution for apostasy laws on themselves" - because you know it really isn't such a no-brainer, and you would have to acknowledge that some actual evidence is required to support your position.

freediver wrote on Jan 27^th, 2014 at 9:18am:


They were asked about hudud, and apostasy laws are part of hudud. But we've flogged that dead horse enough times. In any case, is your point about all this that its "common sense" that non-muslims would oppose execution for apostasy, but not chopping off limbs for theft? Doesn't seem very common sense to me.

freediver wrote on Jan 27^th, 2014 at 9:18am:


Well congratulations, you really are able to say it.

It is utterly absurd though, to assume this about a group of people in a culture and society you know nothing about. They are not in a westernised liberal demoracy you know.

freediver wrote on Jan 27^th, 2014 at 10:33am:


Really FD?  Ask someone about "hudud law" and its quite difficult to respond intelligently and not be thinking of apostasy and adultery laws - in fact I think its fair to say that these two aspects would be front and centre in most people's mind when they think of "hudud law".

But ask someone about "killing in the name of islam" then no one can seriously suggest its not a liitle bit more open-ended and non-specific phrase compared to "hudud law". "Killing in the name of islam" could be anything from terrorist acts (most likely) to an islamic state or group launching a jihad war, to finally (and least associated) - implementing islamic capital punishment.

freediver wrote on Jan 27^th, 2014 at 10:33am:


That depends entirely on what people consider "less barbaric". Some might consider being permanently maimed and disabled for life as being more barbaric than simply being killed off in one stroke. Here's a thought: maybe the higher level of support for maiming for theft as opposed to killing for apostasy has nothing to do with the 'level of barbarity' - but the fact that theft is something that is much closer to people's heart than apostasy (certainly in Malaysia where theft is rampant) - and they feel more strongly about people being severely punished for that than apostasy.

No doubt though FD knows best in the 'blindly assuming what people think" stakes. All I ask is that you don't once again take these musings of mine as *ME* blindly assuming what people think - again.

freediver wrote on Jan 27^th, 2014 at 10:33am:


Is that you trying to wriggle out of your previously adamant claim that non-muslim Malaysians would most definitely "passionately oppose" hudud apostasy laws for Malays?

Please tell me more about this "retrograde influence on the society" FD. I'm particularly interested in how the attitudes towards (say) hudud law of non-muslims under the this "retrograde influence" (as in the non-muslims in Malaysia) is affected, and how you can maintain so adamantly your position that its "common sense" that such non-muslims would oppose hudud laws so passionately.

freediver wrote on Jan 27^th, 2014 at 10:06pm:


You've never heard of it - living in a country that has a 2% muslim population, and likely never interacted with a muslim in the real world in your entire life - and you think people living in a 60% muslim country where daily interactions with muslims is literally unavoidlable - will be as ignorant about islam as you?

freediver wrote on Jan 27^th, 2014 at 10:06pm:


So you aren't adamant most non-Muslim Malaysians oppose the law?  You'll have to explain that one to me.

freediver wrote on Jan 29^th, 2014 at 7:55pm:


Actually I never assumed - continually trying to explain this to you is an exercise in futility.

But you are right, its possible they weren't thinking about apostasy and stoning, but that was never the point.

My only point has ever been that you have no basis to assume that the majority of non-Malays (non-muslims) oppose the implementation of these laws on Malays. But since you now seem to be denying this, there's not much else I can say.

freediver wrote on Jan 30^th, 2014 at 9:56pm:


lol *NO!*. When is it going to sink through FD? - I'm not the one making *ANY* hard and fast assumptions about what anyone thinks. Thats you remember?

freediver wrote on Jan 30^th, 2014 at 9:56pm:


Ah yes, "honest guesses" and "deferring to common sense", how could I forget 

freediver wrote on Jan 31^st, 2014 at 8:06pm:


You imagined that those posts was me making blind assumptions about what people think - yes.

freediver wrote on Jan 31^st, 2014 at 8:06pm:


Take a wild guess and tell me how many people you think will ever be stoned under this law?

I promise you, no one will ever be stoned legally in Malaysia - ever. So yeah, having a law on the books that will never be implemented is vastly different to asking someone to condemn an actual person to death by stoning.

freediver wrote on Jan 31^st, 2014 at 10:42pm:


I assumed nothing. Clearly its not getting through is it?

freediver wrote on Jan 31^st, 2014 at 10:42pm:


PAS state legislators in Terrenganu and Kelantan passed the laws by stealth 20 years ago, knowing full well that the federal would never allow it to be implemented. Voters in those two states never got to vote on it, and I'm guessing the vast majority of people there don't even know they have these laws on the books. Until someone is actually executed for apostasy (which will be never), it is absolutely still an abstract thing for Malaysians.

freediver wrote on Jan 31^st, 2014 at 10:42pm:


Pure conjecture. That is the reality you need to acknowledge.