Love Thy Neighbour
.
Our neighbour’s altar offerings blown by the wind so my bro pick and arranged them back. We have been neighbours for more than 10 years they have always been so respectful to my mom and late dad
.
Faith is a conviction of heart that need to be respected while humanity is a shared value that needs to be cherished
.
#zahidzin #ustazceo
Source: Zahid Zin
A lady worked at a meat distribution factory. One day, when she finished with her work schedule, she went into the meat cold room (Freezer) to inspect something, but in a moment of misfortune, the door closed and she was locked inside with no help in sight. Although she screamed and knocked with all her might, her cries went unheard as no one could hear her. Most of the workers had already gone, and outside the cold room it’s impossible to hear what was going on inside.
Five hours later, whilst she was at the verge of death, the security guard of the factory eventually opened the door. She was miraculously saved from dying that day. When she later asked the security guard how he had come to open the door, which wasn’t his usual work routine. His explanation: “I’ve been working in this factory for 35 years, hundreds of workers come in and out every day, but you’re one of the few who greet me in the morning and say goodbye to me when leaving after work. Many treat me as if I’m invisible. Today, as you reported for work, like all other days, you greeted me in your simple manner ‘Hello’. But this evening after working hours, I curiously observed that I had not heard your “Bye, see you tomorrow”. Hence, I decided to check around the factory. I look forward to your ‘hi’ and ‘bye’ every day because they remind me that I am someone. By not hearing your farewell today, I knew something had happened. That’s why I was searching everywhere for you.
Moral Lesson to reflect upon: Be humble, love and respect those around you. Try to have an impact on people who cross your path every day, you never know what tomorrow will bring. Let this story be an inspiration.
Let’s share to inspire others; someone else shared this to inspire me…
Source: David Lau
MS LEE Li Lian said something interesting yesterday about respecting the voters. Punggol East voters had rejected her, and it didn’t make sense for her to stay in Parliament as a Non-constituency MP (NCMP), she said. Some people applaud her for her principled decision, others wonder if this was just an excuse for her disenchantment with the election results.
She doesn’t want to be a voice in Parliament, never mind that she only lost by a whisker. If she takes up the seat, she would be the first rejected incumbent in Parliament, unless you count Mrs Lina Chiam as a proxy for her husband Mr Chiam See Tong in the last Parliament.
Actually, her position isn’t so different from how the Opposition viewed the NCMP scheme when it was first introduced in 1984. NCMPs can talk in the House but they don’t have the critical powers of voting over money Bills or constitutional amendments. The several loud objections to the scheme was considered a sop to the losers, and the resistance waned until it looked like a prize to be fought over within political parties. Remember how there was some talk that Mr Eric Tan wanted to be an NCMP but the Workers’ Party decided that the seat be given to Mr Gerald Giam? That seems to have resulted in some kind of rupture in the party.
In fact, the scheme appeared to have honed the political instincts of past NCMPs and given them a taste for the cut-and-thrust of debate. It is worth noting that the three NCMPs of the last Parliament have been extremely active in engaging the front bench. They took their jobs seriously, although it might be said that without a constituency to attend to, they have more time to bone up.
Never mind Ms Lee’s motive for rejecting the seat, the key phrase she used is: “respecting the voters”.
In this case, she behaved far better than Reform Party’s Kenneth Jeyaretnam who acted like a petulant child when he realised which way the wind was blowing on Polling Night.
“All this is, is a mandate for authoritarianism and brainwashing. It shows what you do when you control everybody’s housing, you control their savings, you control their jobs because you’re the major employer, you control all the media and there’s no independent elections department.
“So all I see is similar margins in North Korea and China, it’s just like the Chinese Communist Party and I guess Singaporeans get the government they deserve so I don’t want to hear any more complaints.”
That was highly disrespectful of the voter. Whether a person likes or dislikes the results, the fact that cannot change is that close to 70 per cent of voters voted for the PAP. This was not a split electorate. That’s the way the cookie crumbles in a democracy with a first-past-the-post electoral system. Live with it.
Most opposition politicians were, in fact, stinting in their remarks about bowing to the will of the people, preferring to attribute that collective will to the worry of a freak election result, the Electoral Boundary changes, the AHPETC and the propensity of the population for bribes. No one said that perhaps, their policies and programmes didn’t resonate with the people, that they had read them wrong, that they would have to recalibrate their positions to win them over. If they did, they didn’t say so in the fulsome way the PAP did after GE2011 – an expression of abject humility.
The WP’s Daniel Goh, however, was one person who took the humble route: “The people has spoken and the collective wisdom is always right. Analysts will fall over one another in the coming weeks to discern the hearts of voters. For me, the meaning of the results is clear. It is a ringing endorsement of the PAP’s programme of going back to its centre-left roots and PM Lee’s leadership”.
“It is also a nod to WP’s brand of rational and responsible politics, since the seats won in GE2011 were returned. But with caveats: work harder, and buck up, in both town management and Parliament; less egoism and opportunism, more depth, humility and courage, more listening and walking.” (PS. He got the bit about seats returned technically right; the one lost SMC was from a by-election).
Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam was very polite when he said that “it was important that the opposition reflect on what happened – not just in terms of whether the electorate didn’t know better or the electorate made a mistake – but how they could have done better in their strategies”.
You wouldn’t expect the PAP to advise the Opposition on how they could have better strategised, but one sure thing is this: Don’t always believe social media. This GE2015, social media distorted the extent of Opposition support. TNP quoted an academic based in Australia who said: “Imagine if you read the Facebook comments whacking PAP. Many PAP supporters would think it better to keep their mouths shut before they are (verbally) abused.”
In other words, the silent majority kept silent.
Singapore Democratic Party’s (SDP) Chee Soon Juan was quick to think of the future. He suggested a closer working relationship with the WP in preparation for the next GE. This will probably depend on, among other things, whether the WP will forget his earlier proposal that they collaborate in contesting the Punggol East by-election two years ago by having the SDP in Parliament and the WP run the town council should their candidate win.
Let bygones be bygones?
This seems to be the rallying cry of the PAP leaders post GE2015. DPM Tharman noted that shorn of the rhetoric, the Opposition proposals aren’t too different from what the PAP is doing. (Maybe this is a backhanded compliment: that the Opposition can’t come up with anything too different). The PAP seems keen to embrace the diversity of viewpoints and the need for alternative voices, which it probably realises it shouldn’t dismiss despite its huge mandate. You can view this cynically: it wants to co-opt opposition voices into its fold. Or you can keep an open mind and see whether it holds to its promise to engage the people more fully and, more importantly, early.
You have the younger leaders such as Mr Heng Swee Keat and Mr Tan Chuan-Jin calling on all sides, including Opposition supporters, to find common ground.
Given the way the (not metaphorical) wind is blowing, there’s plenty. There’s the haze above ground, for starters. We can at least close ranks against that!
Source: http://themiddleground.sg
I have been fasting in full every Ramadan for many years now and I admit, I do feel hungry and thirsty during the day and it isn’t totally comfortable all of the time.
But of course, like anything you do, if you put your mind to it and persevere, it eventually stops being a problem.
You get used to fasting and it actually makes your body feel good. But I won’t be talking here about the benefits of fasting on your health and well being.
What I do want to talk about is the fact that there are so many weak Muslims in Malaysia who can’t take fasting. I’m usually not one to judge, but well, this time I am going to!
We have a teacher in a school who asks his non-Muslim students to go to the toilet to drink during Ramadan, just so Muslim students won’t see them drinking.
It is ridiculous how some school canteens are instructed to close during the fasting month because it would mean non-Muslim students eating in view of Muslim students.
This issue of non-Muslims having to go out of their way, in the name of being respectful to those who are fasting, crops up every time Ramadan comes around.
I don’t understand how this is respect. All I can conclude from this is that some Malaysian Muslims are just too weak, and when they see someone drink water, their will to fast disappears.
I have many non-Muslim friends and I accompany them for lunch or even just for a drink at the mamak, even when I’m fasting, just so we can hang out and have a chat.
I see them eat and drink but I don’t get tempted. Sometimes, they tease me too and pretend to order for me a glass of teh ais and we all have a good laugh. But I still fast. No problems.
This fasting month, although only a week has gone by, I’ve even been accompanying my wife for lunch at restaurants whenever we are out and about.
She is in the final trimester of her second pregnancy and she needs the food and nutrition. So she doesn’t fast. We sit and chat as she has her meal and I still fast. No problems.
I’m not trying to say that I’m a perfect Muslim here. No way. I am far from that. What I am trying to say is that some Malaysian Muslims need to take a step back and look at their faith.
Fasting is an‘ibadah’and it is suppose to be challenging (although not torture!). And aren’t challenges suppose to make your faith and fast count for even more?
So technically, Malaysian Muslims should welcome people to eat and drink in front of them, and then resist, so they can collect more‘pahala’, right? Funny, isn’t it?
But no. Malaysian Muslims are just too weak. They fast but they can’t take it when they catch a glimpse of someone eating or drinking. Their faith starts to waver.
They can’t even take it when when non-Muslims use the word ‘Allah’ because they start getting confused and all with their own faith. Malaysian Muslims. What a weak bunch they are.
Source: http://english.astroawani.com
So you are fasting. The sun is bearing down on you, your stomach is growling and your throat is parched. It is only 12.30 in the afternoon; you still have hours to go before you may break your fast. All of a sudden, a non-Muslim person appears before you, enjoying an icy cold can of your favourite cola. He looks like he is savouring the cola. You could imagine the sensation of that very same cola filling your throat with diabetes-inducing caffeine goodness. So you flare up. How dare this person drink in front of you? Does he have no respect for the holy month of Ramadhan, to be wantonly quenching his thirst in full view of Muslims? Does he not know that Muslims form the majority of this country and therefore must be respected?
This is the basic premise prevalent amongst many Malay-Muslims in this country. Muslims form the majority and therefore they are entitled to be respected. Malay-Muslim sensitivities must not be offended; the Malay-Muslim public must be protected from harm, confusion and many other bad and insidious things that may threaten the ummah. In recent times, these deep rooted sentiments are brought to the fore by opportunistic politicians. Thus it appeared as if Malay-Muslims have become more and more intolerant of minorities.
Malay-Muslims are entitled not to have a Hindu temple in the vicinity of their housing estate. Malay-Muslims are entitled to dictate what names others may use to invoke the Creator. Malay-Muslims are entitled to stop the sale of alcohol beverages and deny the establishment of a cinema in Malay majority areas.
Every Friday, Malay-Muslims are entitled to abandon their civic consciousness and park all over the place as if the streets belong to them. Malays-Muslims are entitled to blare religiousceramahs to every corner of the neighbourhood and into the wee hours of the night.
The prime minister must be Malay-Muslim, the civil service must be filled with Malay-Muslims and government bodies are seen as Malay institutions, tasked first and foremost to safeguard Malay and Muslim interests.
This premise of entitlement has also been used to justify the persecution and discrimination against sexual and religious minorities, purportedly because Article 3 provides that Islam is the religion of the Federation. So we say that LBGTs do not enjoy protection of the Constitution because their sexual orientations are against Islam, although we conveniently forget that other things, like gambling, are also forbidden in Islam but are still legal in this country. Books are seized and banned and fatwas are made absolute. In a recent decision, the Federal Court went so far to say that the integrity of the religion needs to be safeguarded at all costs. Does ‘at all costs’ include the supremacy of the Federal Constitution as the highest law of the land?
Make no mistake, this is not about Islam. It is about how we justify the discrimination, persecution and blatant disregard for fundamental liberties, all in the name of religion. It is how we view and treat others as inferior to us because we believe that we are entitled to do so. We permit transgressions because we labour under this presumption that Malay-Muslims, by virtue of being Malays and Muslims, are entitled to the best of the country as they occupy a higher standing than the rest of the rakyat out there.
There is no legal or constitutional basis for this. Article 3 does not make Malaysia an Islamic state and Article 4 expressly provides that the Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Article 8 provides that every citizen is equal before the law and enjoys equal protection of the law. The oft quoted Article 153 does not make Malay-Muslims superior in law or fact, it only provides for the reservation of quotas for Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak in certain matters.
So what if Muslims are the majority? We have such a flawed understanding of democracy; as if in a democracy, the rights of minorities are inferior to the rights of the majority. That is why we have a Constitution, which protects and guarantees the fundamental liberties of citizens from the tyranny of the majority.
We find ourselves up in arms at the fate of Muslims minorities in other countries like Thailand, Philippines, Myanmar and China. We invoke freedom of religion when we hear of minarets being banned in Switzerland or burqas being banned in France. But if the rights of Muslim minorities should be protected in the face of the majority, why is it that we do not have the same vigour to protect the rights our non-Muslim minorities? Why must the rights of others here only be exercised if we deem those rights as exercisable?
So before you take offence at someone who is drinking in front of you while you are fasting, take a step back and think of your religion. Put aside your sense of entitlement and think; just because you are fasting, does it mean that everyone else around you must stow away their food and drinks?
Remember what Islam has instilled in you, not what Muslims have told you.
Source: http://www.loyarburok.com