Categories
Liberty Society

[1817] Of just live and let live

Differences can be challenging. They assault routines and stereotypes to force modifications or even outright revamps of worldviews. When none of that occurs and the differences end up as irreconcilable, conflict may come to the surface. Some differences are worth fighting for while in other cases, respect and tolerance are the key to moving forward.

Conflict or not, the world is so full of individuals with different views and lifestyles from our own. More often than not, we have to live with it. This is especially so when a lot of these differences do not affect us whatsoever other than our sensibility or morality.

The requirement to respect differences is all the more important when individuals live according to different moral standards. Still, not all subscribe to the idea to respect differences. Some view the mere idea of differences as an abhorrence which must be contained in favor of only one standard.

The latest proof of intolerance for differences comes in the form of an edict recently announced by the National Fatwa Council, which declared that tomboys are now banned in Islam. Despite the announcement, various news reports have stated that the edict is not a law. As such, it is not legally binding.[1]

The edict is fine for those who wish for a guideline in practicing of Islam. From this perspective, there is really nothing wrong in the edict. This could be a source of reference for those incapable of undertaking the necessary logical steps required to reach a conclusion.

For those who wish not to submit to a group of self-elected guardians of the faith or are simply concerned with individual liberty, it is important that this edict continues to be toothless.

This is because a law based on the edict amounts to moral policing. Such laws would seek to shape individuals in a particular mould approved by self-appointed moral guardians. There would be a set of behavior for those whom the council of clerics deems to be under their authority to follow. Anything else would seem criminal.

The notion that a person could be seen as a criminal simply by behaving in a manner unsanctioned by a group of people is a scary thought. It is as scary as being prosecuted for having certain characteristics shaped by one’s environment. How would one feel to wake up one morning only to learn that one is now a criminal in the eyes of the state?

The problem in having such law criminalizing a group of people who refuse to be pigeonholed by the council is that there is no victim at all involved in the issue addressed by the edict. The tomboys behave as they do without causing harm to others or themselves. The only harm tomboys do is to the idea that a woman must behave in a certain particular manner.

To invest our legal system with the edict is to victimize the tomboys who have done no harm to others. In doing so, the state would be committing tyranny. That is an unpalatable prospect which must galvanize those who cherish individual liberty against making the edict legally binding.

For those uncomfortable with tomboys, they really do not need a repressive law to grant them some peace of mind. They are free to not interact with the source of their disgust. This includes those with religious objections against those who do not conform to female social gender roles. They just need to learn to let other people be, especially when other people let them be. Why are they so intent on making others live as miserably as possible? What malicious intent do they harbor against those who dare to be different, or those who cannot help being different?

The tomboys have done no wrong to anybody. That alone is enough for us all to just respectfully live and let live.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia (AP) — Malaysia’s main body of Islamic clerics has issued an edict banning tomboys in the Muslim-majority country, ruling that girls who act like boys violate the tenets of Islam, an official said Friday.

[…]

Harussani said the council’s ruling was not legally binding because it has not been passed into law, but that tomboys should be banned because their actions are immoral. [Islamic clerics in Malaysia rule to ban tomboys. Julia Zappei. The Associated Press. October 24 2008]

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

A version of this article was first published in The Malaysian Insider.

By Hafiz Noor Shams

For more about me, please read this.

3 replies on “[1817] Of just live and let live”

I think the mufti just did their job after perusing and studying the quran, hadith etc. However the TB should not be punished for dressing and behaving as such. As u rightly said, let them live. It is entirely their right to lead their life as they wish. If our Consitution allows the people to practice their own religion, why cant they also be allowed to behave and dress as they like, as long as they do not go agaisnt the law. For instance, should one day the council decides that not wearing tudung is wrong in islam, will this lead to the arrest of those not wearing tudung? i dont think so. So it is just a fatwa but each on his own. After all, Malaysian society is still tolerant compared to some developed nations that champion human rights.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.