Anyway, if the point of argument is that DAP is against hudud, and that MCA and MIC are not, think back and try to remember properly. In September last year, MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek made a statement that his party will leave Barisan Nasional if hudud was to be implemented.

Zan Azlee, The Malaysian Insider

For a newspaper that toes the government line, I am shocked to see that Utusan Malaysia did not heed the prime minister’s call to not politicise Islam.

Take the story that appeared on Wednesday (August 8, 2012) with the headline “Haram sokong DAP”; this was apparently the stand of an Islamic religious scholar.

Abdullah Sa’amah, from Tumpat, Kelantan, runs a “sekolah pondok” in Kampung Geting.

The story caused quite a buzz around the country and comments were made left, right and centre by all parties concerned.

Then yesterday arrived and Utusan again came out with a front page story on the same issue, with a headline that screamed “Lagi seruan tolak DAP.”

This time, the newspaper came up with a slew of other “religious” people to back up their first story declaring that it is “haram” (forbidden) to support DAP.

Apparently, supporting those who are “kafir harbi” (belligerent infidels) means supporting non-Muslims who are fighting against Islam. And what made DAP “kafir harbi” is the fact that they are against hudud law.

Also, as Abdullah Sa’amah was quoted by Utusan as saying: “DAP’s fight does not accept the country’s (Federal) Constitution, they want equality (for) Islam and non-Islam, temples and mosques (they) also want equality.”

These religious authorities added that supporting MCA and MIC is not “haram” since these parties are not “kafir harbi” as they supported Islam and were not a threat.

It is quite a dangerous and charged term to use. Back in the day, “kafir harbi” was used to label non-Muslims who didn’t have any rights, including the right to live.

This is opposite of “kafir dhimmi”, which refers to non-Muslims who have their full rights protected as equal citizens in a Muslim state.

In fact, many modern Muslim scholars don’t even make any distinction between a non-Muslim dhimmi and a Muslim citizen. And, as for what the so-called religious authorities were quoted by Utusan as saying that DAP wants equality... how is that against Islam?

Prophet Muhammad had this to say:

“Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, curtails their rights, burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I will complain against the person on the Day of Judgement.”

Surah Al Haj in the Quran states:

“And were it not that Allah checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of Allah is much mentioned. And Allah will surely support those who support Him. Indeed, Allah is Powerful and Exalted in Might.”

So, I don’t understand the basis of these so-called religious authorities when they say that supporting DAP is “haram” because they are against Islam. As far as I know, DAP has never said they were against Islam. Yes, they are against hudud (Islamic penal law), and yes, as Utusan has stated, they have made their statement public.

But then again, they are allowed to be against hudud law. Even Muslims are allowed to be against hudud law, if they feel it is flawed. Bear in mind that hudud and syariah rules are the interpretation of man and are known as fiqh, or jurisprudence, hence they are debatable.

Anyway, if the point of argument is that DAP is against hudud, and that MCA and MIC are not, think back and try to remember properly. In September last year, MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek made a statement that his party will leave Barisan Nasional if hudud was to be implemented.

He even said that that if Malaysia was to implement hudud, the country’s economy would suffer, and that the stock market would probably fall 10 to 20 per cent.

MIC have remained quiet although its CWC member N. Rawisandran did mention that hudud is inappropriate for Malaysia’s multicultural country, as reported by The Malaysian Times. However, this was quite a while back and MIC is very much an irrelevant mosquito party in the bigger scheme of things anyway.

At the end of it all, I’m just wondering: Whatever happened to Ridhuan Tee and why isn’t he a part of this whole Utusan “campaign”? Here’s hoping he’s well.