haram – Page 25 – Rilek1Corner

Bengawan Solo is NOT HALAL

My dear brothers and sisters. Please take note that Bengawan Solo is NEVER halal certified because of the usage of RUM in their food.

Please spread this around.

When choosing an eatery, ensure it’s Halal certified and don’t just assume, especially if only verbally mentioned by the staffs. When in doubt, avoid.

Jazakallah Khair,

Authored & contributed by Shred Novice

###

EDITOR’S NOTE

FYI, if you want to search for local HALAL food, you can click on the links below:

MUIS HALAL-CERTIFIED EATING ESTABLISHMENTS (UPDATED AS OF 25 APR 2014)

So, next time if you see a particular restaurant or food brand names that is almost malay-like or indonesian-like, please look for HALAL certificate displayed or HALAL logo to be sure or you can call this number to confirm its authenticity – 6359 1167

May 6, 2014

Muslim Organisation PERGAS Support for NUS Lecturer Syed Khairudin Aljunied on LGBTQ Issue

A letter of support by Mohamad Hasbi Hassan, President of Singapore Islamic Scholars & Religious Teachers Association (PERGAS) to Dr Syed Khairudin Aljunied.

Source: PERGAS, Facebook Page Dr Syed Khairudin Aljunied

March 17, 2014

Pink Dot Penang 2014 Dikecam ABIM

Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM) membantah penganjuran acara “Pink Dot Penang 2014” di George Town, Pulau Pinang yang didakwanya bertujuan meraikan kumpulan Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT).

Poster acara tersebut telah dimuat naik di Internet, dan ia akan berlangsung di 1926 Heritage Hotel pada Mac 29.

ABIM berpandangan bahawa acara sebegitu amat bercanggah dengan nilai-nilai pelbagai agama dan adat budaya di Malaysia, kata Setiausaha Agungnya Muhammad Faisal Abdul Aziz.

Katanya, berdasarkan rujukan terhadap laman Pink Dot Singapore, pada tahun 2013, acara seumpama itu telah diadakan secara besar-besaran “dengan tujuan menyeru persamaan hak bagi komuniti LGBT agar hubungan sesama jenis tidak dianggap suatu yang negatif”.

“ABIM memandang berat penganjuran acara sebegini sebagai satu usaha yang biadab dan jelas tidak menghormati sentimen majoriti masyarakat Malaysia yang rata-ratanya berpegang teguh dengan ajaran agama.

“Acara sebegini seolah-olah ingin membawa anasir kebebasan percintaan songsang yang telah kedengaran di merata pelosok dunia termasuk di negara-negara maju seperti UK, Perancis dan lain-lain,” katanya dalam satu kenyataan hari ini.

“Namun ABIM juga menilai acara tersebut sebagai reaksi dari sikap dan persepsi buruk masyarakat yang amat keterlaluan hingga mengakibatkan hilang pertimbangan keadilan dalam keadaan tertentu ketika menghukum mereka sebagai seorang warganegara hanya atas dasar mereka cenderung dengan kelompok LGBT,” tambanya.

Bagaimanapun, katanya, ABIM melihat memadai untuk kelompok ini didekati dan diberikan bimbingan tidak sehingga diberikan pengiktirafan meluas menerusi acara seperti yang dirancang.

Sehubungan itu, katanya, ABIM akan menghantar surat bantahan kepada kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang, Jabatan Agama Islam Pulau Pinang, Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (JAKIM) serta Pejabat Menteri serta Pejabat Ketua Pembangkang.

Selain itu, katanya, ABIM juga akan membuat laporan polis menuntut siasatan dilakukan kerana ia bercanggah dengan semangat yang terkandung dalam Perkara 3 Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang secara terang-terangan mengiktiraf Islam dan agama-agama lain sebagai teras kepada nilai kenegaraan.

Malaysia tidak mempunyai undang-undang terhadap homoseksual, tetapi liwat adalah satu jenayah di bawah Kanun Keseksaan yang boleh disabitkan hukuman penjara sehingga 20 tahun.

Pada tahun 2011, acara yang sama ‘Seksualiti Merdeka ‘ di Kuala Lumpur telah diharamkan, di mana kira-kira 30 anggota polis menyerbu majlis itu semasa ia sedang berjalan.

Source: Malaysiakini, ABIM

March 15, 2014

Homosexuality and Liberal Islam are Dangerous to Singapore

I was recently made aware of the uproar over my dear friend Prof Dr Syed Khairudin Aljunied and his post on the wall of his personal Facebook account.I do not see why is there a need to make a big fuss over his post in the first place. There were some who took offence as they see it as him replying in his official capacity just because the word “prof” appeared. I find it daft really. It was the questioner who addressed him as “prof”. Prof K was replying in his personal capacity and nowhere did he say he is replying in his official capacity. (note that I too personally address him as Prof K)

Next, there are those who took offense at the words “diseases”, “cancerous” and “cleanse”. The ones starting the petition are being mischievous when they took those words out of context. It is literally putting words into his mouth when they angle it the way they are doing it now. The hypocrisy……

And if he edited the post, isn’t it good in some sense as perhaps he did see value in some of the complaints brought forth and corrected it accordingly. Or perhaps he realised it himself. I am just speculating here.

Most seem to fail to note who the post was addressing it to. Prof K was addressing it to the Muslim faithful. A Muslim not adhering to the teachings of Islam can’t be called the faithful can he? Nor can a Non-Muslim be part of the Muslim faithful. He is addressing to the in-house crowd. (though what Prof K is suggesting can be used by the other religions in their own religious context).

He is replying to a Muslim. How do you expect him to reply then? There is no way we can compromise on the issue. Islam abhors homosexual acts and we can’t condone nor compromise on it. As a scholar, he is obligated to stand up to deviant ideologies and practices. Read below:

“Scholars and religious teachers (asatizahs) must speak up and write against these ideologies and practices. They are obligated to explain to the public the true meaning of what Islam is and sexuality as defined by the Quran and Sunnah. When the scholars and asatizahs are silent about these issues, corruption will spread like wild fire.”

Same goes to Liberal Islam as they bring about a dangerous ideology that runs contrary to the teachings of Islam. They discard 1400++ years of scholarly research, debate and rulings and bring in instead deviant interpretation of the religion claiming that theirs is most up to date. And most of them who are advocating it are not even learned enough in the knowledge of Islam in order to make any new rulings. The ideas and ideals brought forth by the proponents of these ideologies and practices brings about many social ills and it is detrimental to the well being of any society. Any part of the body that is not normally there and brings diseases to it is cancerous. Then there is a need to cleanse it. Cleanse not in the sense of killing them but to do it spiritually in the context put forth by Prof K.

If we do not make a stand, society will degenerate faster that it is now. What next? If the pedophiles decided to form a lobby and lobby for the age of consent to be lowered further, what do we do? Do we let them be coz it is their rights? Freedom to love mah…Some European countries approve of Bestiality and some in fact have animal brothels. If ever we have a bestiality lobby here, do we allow them through also?

Where do we draw the line on the morality of society?

Many too failed to notice the words that come before and after those words mentioned above. They also fail to see the overall meaning he is conveying. Put it in context people! Nowhere is he spouting hatred for a certain group of minorities. It is conveniently angled in such a way by the authors of the petition. He is in fact advocating early detection and seeking early treatment. Read below:

“Parents and school teachers must be made aware of these challenges. They must detect early signs of waywardness from their children and students. Give advice, send them to proper religious classes and seek help from counsellors, if necessary. Win over the hearts of the misled youths and explain to them what’s right with knowledge and wisdom.”

We condemn homosexual acts but we do not condemn those who have homosexual tendencies or those who are transsexuals. We welcome them with open arms,always ready to listen to them and offer them advice if need be. We will accept them as who they are but we will never fail to remind them to return back to the true path. Coz we love ’em.

Peace.

PS. To all those who support Prof K can like his fan page created by some supporter out there. Haters need not come.

Source: Written by and taken from Mohamed Saiddhin Abdullah

Read the ENTIRE chronology of saga in category ‘AGAMA’:

March 1, 2014

The Idolisation of Tolérance & Its abuse

By Muhd Noor Muhd Deros.

Recently our esteemed brother, Prof Syed Muhd Khairudin Aljunied, courageously wrote a couple of short postings that state the truth about homosexuality. It caught the attention of some LGBT students from the NUS whom later wrote a petition against him.

This short writing of mine seeks to address one of the central argument that they and their likes have never failed to summon while trying to defend homosexuality, it is none other than the idea of Tolérance, or its new form; Recognition, as used in the petition.

1. We have seen the idolisation of the word Tolérance and the destructions it brought during the French Revolution where it was given the status of a dogma and endowed with the sanctity of a religion together with its share of fanaticism and blind herds. During that time, those who were intolerant of their brand of tolerance were sent to the guillotine. It was and never is a neutral word nor does it bear any positive connotation in itself. Of course it can be and was already used as a tool for oppression.

“It is preferable that we use the term (Tolérance) in its French orthography, since it was consciously conceived as one of the power instruments of the emerging atheist state following the French Revolution. It is a significantly irrational doctrine, while it poses as being the opposite. If examined, it is clear that it is a power instrument aimed at one group to subvert them to the value structure of the opposing group. In other words, it has a uni-directional dynamic. We mean by that, a doctrine of tolerance orders the accused group, “Tolerate us!” It contains in it no possibility of a reverse process by which the group demanding tolerance offer tolerance to the accused group.” – Shaykh Abdal Qadir As-Sufi.

Hence, the act of tolerating or ‘recognising’ something in itself is not necessarily good. The main issue lies in the object of your tolerance. What are you tolerating?

2. The dangerous appeal and the control power of the word Tolerance lies in its deep and subconscious attachment to the basic need of the human self, and that is the need to be accepted, which – like tolerance – is not necessarily good in itself. But whenever the word is summoned today, you can almost see its spell breaking through any defense mechanism of the mind and leaving it defunct.

We need to break its spell by being aware of its neutrality.

3. We must know that it is perfectly fine to be intolerant of certain things and ideas. The health of the society is in danger when it becomes tolerant of everything as the body breaks down when it loses its ability to be intolerant to sickness. Even those who idolised tolerance or ‘recognition’ never failed to be intolerant towards those whom they perceive as a threat to their idol.

But when I say that I can’t tolerate the idea of homosexuality it does not mean I can’t have a coffee with a homosexual while calling him to heterosexuality. We just need to grow up and leave either-ors to kids.

4. As a person who believes in a Higher power who is conscious of Himself and all of His creations, free from any physicality and humanness, and that He sent prophets to guide human beings to spiritual happiness till the end of time, I would like to reiterate that The Islam of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w – not the Islamic “Islam” – views homosexual inclination as a sickness that must be treated. It is no different from incestual inclination, and that act of homosexuality itself is one of the most abhorrent sins.

Some general suggestions from a Muslim’s perspective:

Re-inculcate the belief in The higher power that is Most Merciful and Compassionate yet Majestic in the same time. And that we are the created not The Creator, we are here not by ourselves nor are we a product of a random activity of an unconscious cosmic soup.
Punish child molesters severely.
Make marriage easy to those who are ready.
Women must be allowed to be women and men to be men. Homosexuality will emerge in a society whenever the economy forces the majority of the women to take up the responsibilities of men.
Protect the institution of marriage with the Divine law.

5. Homosexuality is a cancer to the society, yes it surely is. This is an objective and unemotional statement. Unlike the term ‘hate speech’ used in the petition, it seeks to convey the scale of threat and destruction brought about by the homosexual lifestyle. Whereas the term ‘hate speech’ is a direct accusation to a person. If we are serious for a healthy debate we should avoid such jerky misconstructions.

6. What we want is a healthy and a harmonious society, a society that is free from the stench of moral relativism and is built upon the firm belief that truth is not subjected to time & context, instead it is the other way round. Therefore we should stop demanding people to be tolerant of immoralities such as homosexuality.

God knows best.