Hey, Naif, I don’t know if you still read my blog or not, but today’s the day I could be arsed to write a reply.

Not that I didn’t want to, but I was just gawddam lazy. Meh.

:o)

-

-

First of all, thank you for making the effort to write the longest single feedback I’ve ever read about my blog. I’m going to reply to your essay message based on the sequence of your paragraph.

Ah, Najat, yes, I know the online her. I used to see her quite frequently in my site. Occasionally, I would go to her ever-changing blog(s) and see her rant of the day. I’m quite flattered that you decided to stay after clicking on my link in her blog.

And I’m glad to know that we share most views like promoting the overdue liberalism in Malaysia, freedom of speech, and more open debates.

I respect your stand on homosexuality. I appreciate how you cited a dead renowned philosopher to justify your beliefs. However, I find that you mentioning that you’re “totally against” gay rights questionable as it seems to contradict your support for liberalism and freedom of speech. Under what context did you mean when you said that homosexuality is “against nature”? In terms of biological reproduction? Sexual attraction? Emotional attraction?

Perhaps, you’d like to reread The Closet Monster (the elaboration) (it’s been edited on 7th Jan 2007, in case you didn’t know) and read Why a Closet Monster? (I assume that you’ve yet to read the latter), and then further elaborate your cause.

You spoke of my reasoning of giving “the same rights to gays based on the grounds of ‘equality and justice for all’”. Based on that, you then relate that to prostitutes by saying “what then will stop us from giving the same rights to prostitutes? Just because they sell their body for a living arent they accountable for the same rights as normal citizens?”

Well, my friend reader, under what basis do you think that prostitutes cannot have the same rights as “normal” citizens? So what if they sell their bodies? Is it any of our business to care what they do with themselves, if they do not affect our lives?

I have a feeling that you’re bringing your religious sentiments into this, which I frankly feel will not be solid enough to support any logical reasoning. With due respect, please keep your religious beliefs to yourself and not impose them onto other people. Not only because religion is a very subjective, personal, and especially faithful topic, but also because I think religious debates will end only when kingdom comes.

And I prefer discussions to debates.

Heh. You mentioned how you think “the slogan ‘equality for all’ has gotten out of hand’”. And then you said that “if everybody was equal, then parents should obey to their childern, employers must obey to their employees, leaders must obey to followers just because everybody is ‘equal’.”

Now, what is a slogan? A slogan is a motto; a catchword; a catchy phrase. It’s usually designed in a way that it annoyingly sticks in your head. In other words, it has to be short to be remembered.

Usually, short sentences don’t have enough words to cover all you need to know, so they can’t be taken for granted either.

Like how the hippie “Make love not war” slogan is not preached solely to encourage soldiers to rabbit-hump enemies instead of kicking their butts. I think it’s mainly meant to encourage people to make peace but the word “peace” is very boring and a letter longer than “love”, so takjadi. :o)

Well, my point is that when it comes to equality, if you were to observe the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), what the creators of this constitution fundamentally meant is that people should respect one another.

So to talk about your reference to obedience, I think that respect should be earned accordingly. Children should obey parents out of gratitude for their lives and paid living. But once they’ve paid off their financial debts, theoretically speaking, children are no longer financially obligated to their parents.

And if the children had real assholes as parents, I don’t see how obedience can be expected of the children.

Same goes for employer-employee and leader-subject/follower relationships. Look at how billions of people go against Saddam and Bush, despite their presidency status. There must be give and take. Yin and Yang. Respect and the world goes round.

Even the churches/mosques/whatever religious organization had to say that this God dude sacrificed a whole lot of “goodness” to humanity in order for the masses to submit themselves to “Him”.

People don’t obey for nothing, you know, if not for respect.

I thank you for respecting my views on God. I’m glad that you have many friends who are free thinkers too. This goes to show me (and now, my blog readers) that you have a lot more sense than our ever friendly religious fundies. Dogmatism is never the way to go. :o)

Yes, I agree that Islam is not “backwards”, based on what I have read from what our ever diligent education ministry had fed me in the Form 4 + 5 “World” History textbooks. It is likely that Islam was highly advanced knowledge during the medieval times and have contributed much to the academic, scientific, arts, and business world.

But do remember that Islam is not the only advanced religion in the world. Buddhism, which have long existed before Islam and Christianity, have been the footnote of numerous profundities which even our favourite genius, Einstein, have quoted to be the religion that could cope with modern scientific needs.

In my humble opinion, most religions want world peace. I say “most” because I dare not proclaim that I know everything in this world.

So yeah, I think those who deviate from the original teachings of any religion, even Islam, most probably have their own religion rooted from their innovative minds. I don’t judge a religion based on their followers much, mind you. O: )

I don’t know whether the contents of the Quran (or any scriptures for that matter) was ever altered or not. But I don’t think you know for sure, too. Because what has happened in the past had happened too damn long ago and we’re only educated by history.

I should like to repeat and emphasize that history, is highly influenced by humans. What we actually know today is the works of the media.

I thank you for your sympathy with my encounters with mongoloids Malays. But do keep in mind that I don’t despise Malays, as much as I would naturally prefer to develop relationships with my supposedly own race, Chinese. I naturally don’t prejudice against any race or creed much, thinking that everyone is born mentally equal to a large extent, but are subsequently subjected to their environmental changes.

Which is why I tend to sympathise with my stalker/terrorist/Bodolander for their lack of education and possibly traumatic childhood. *nods solemnly*

And like you said, the NEP was vital. Without it, many Malaysian Malays could have remained fishermen and farmers. Yes, you’re quite right that it’s quite a dilemma because without special rights, many Malaysian Malays could be left behind in the economic world, but with special rights, somehow they’ve become fucking lazy.

Keyword: Lazy.

That’s the dilemma there. Whether you have the “rights” or not.

Those Malaysian Malays back in 1971 to 1990 “needed” an economic stepping stone.

But not those in 2005.

And certainly not those in 2007.

Racial tension and war due to laziness? You gotta be kidding me. I would say that this is purely a matter of ego, pride, and greed.

You don’t have to apologise “on behalf of those dumbass malays who msged” me “with sexual intents“. Like I said, I only sympathise them for their cultural background.

I apologise if I’ve offended you in my “Pigs blood” post. Frankly, I don’t see much of a reason for you to feel hurt, unless you felt hurt because you felt ashamed with that Malay’s very illogical interesting response to the rather amusing scintillating discussion.

Because all I’ve posted up was a reflection of that religious dickhead believer’s mindset.

Yes, I’m all out to make a difference. Not just in Malaysia, but in the world too. (Yes, very idealistic, I know) Come to think of it, we criticize because we care, no? Otherwise, we’d just shut up and spend our time away from awesome blogs like mine. :o)

Malaysia can change. But only if the government would realize the importance of education for the citizens, not only in the academic sense, but in the worldly sense as well. Especially with the liberation of free speech.

Lastly, I think it’s normal to just talk about inane things like snooker, hanging out in overpriced malls, and watching ridiculously censored films in the cinema, etc. Nobody offline really expects anybody offline to start preaching their intellectual gibberish to random strangers anyway.

I for one would support shopping for new Eclipse shoes or watching Daniel Wu The Protégé than going to the Philosophy or Politics section in MPH.

Once again, I’m glad that you enjoyed my blog. Hope to see more of your participation as a reader in the future!

-

P.S. I’m currently pursuing a Mass Communication major in an American Degree Transfer Program.