That said, I reckon I am miffed about the whole thing not because of faith issues, because, let's face it, I am kind of a skeptic when it comes to religion. Besides, I'm of neither faith, and I almost never use the word. So risking being disrespectful and vulgar, I'd say I couldn't care less if both parties want to fight over it.
But then the 'exclusivity' issue. Bringing in "The Enactment". In the first place, why is an issue like this in the Enactment, which was created more than 20 years ago, only a dispute in recent years? It's like fighting with a neighbouring country about who came up with the idea to cook rice with coconut milk and then realising that 150 years ago, the native islanders of some pacific isle did it first because they got tired of cooking rice with seawater.
Stupid law. Stupid dispute. Stupid people making so much stupid noise and riot over it.
The news here
What's even more silly (sillier?) was that in the news regarding the 1988 non-Muslim Enactment prohibiting non-Muslims from using the 'A-word' is closely followed by, in the same page mind you, news regarding some local 'pop princess' and her RM40,000 Louis Vuitton handbag for her 31st birthday, in addition to other previous luxurious gifts (and their price tags).
Either the news is nuts or this is some subtle move to ignite the anger of "revolutionary radicals" to perhaps hurl molotov cocktails at the upper crust. Whichever, the news nowadays is really trash.
Thank goodness for free news online,
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment