bobjots : redux

the unfinished story of grace

An Attempt At A Compromise?

This just came to my mailbox:

His Majesty’s Government Gazette
Jil. 53, No. 4; 16hb Februari 2009

INTERNAL SECURITY ACT 1960
Internal Security (Prohibition On Use of Specific Words on Document and Publication) Order 2009

In exercise of the powers conferred by paragraph 22(1)(c) of the Internal Security Act 1960 [Act 82], the Minister makes the following order:

Citation and commencement

1. (1) This order may be cited as the Internal Security (Prohibition On Use of Specific Words on Document and Publication) Order 2009.

(2) This Order comes into operation on the date of its publication in the Gazette.

Prohibition on use of specific words on document and publication

2. (1) The printing, publication, sale, issue, circulation and possession of any document and publication relating to christianity containing the words “Allah”, “Kaabah”, “Baitullah” and “Solat” are prohibited unless on the front cover of the document and publication are written with the words “FOR CHRISTIANITY”.

(2) The words “FOR CHRISTIANITY” referred to in subparagraph (1) shall be written clearly in font type Arial of size 16 in bold.

Made 21 January 2009

[KDN: PQ (S) 700-9/3; PN(PU2)216/IV]

Dato’ Seri Syed Hamid Albar bin Syed Jaafar Albar
Minister of Home Affairs

(download the Gazette in PDF)

What do you make of this? I still think it’s a sham and doesn’t solve the issue. It just reinforces the presumption that the authorities can dictate to us Malaysians what we can think and say – not to mention legitimising the continued use of the Internal Security Act.

The reason I’d disagree with labelling the Alkitab with a huge Cross would be the same reason why I’d disagree with the labelling of Christian publications with the disclaimer “FOR CHRISTIANITY”. Its akin to Jews wearing the Yellow Star of David in Hitler’s Germany!

Spot The Difference

 
My fear is, however, that many church leaders would think that this is a victory won and find this a convenient excuse to disengage. This is one of the few occasions where I sincerely hope I am proven wrong!

Post Metadata

Date
February 26th, 2009

Author
Bob K

Category


2 Comments

  1. Then again they have the religion on the IC, which is similar. It only make it easier for people to discriminate based on religion. I fear in the near future, when you want to do anything (buy/sell/vote/eat) they will determine your eligibility based on your religion / race, not that its not already happening now. Race & Religion should have no part in politics.



  2. Required

    Race and religion have no part in politics? how about money, that has no part in politics as well? what determines your ability to buy anything ? :)


Leave a Reply