Say, there is a country where the national speed limit is 120kph. One day, the minister in charge of regulating the speed limit saw a pothole on the road and he thought it was too dangerous. Certainly, the potholes can be undone but making sure the road is absolutely smooth is unrealistic. So he lowered the speed limit to 100kph.
The next day, he saw a mini hatchback on the road doing 100kph and it was so unstable and almost caused an accident. Again, the speed limit is lowered to 80kph.
Then, he saw a motorcyclist on the road doing 80kph and he thought it's not safe to be doing that fast on such a small motorcycle, so he set the speed limit to 60kph.
Then he thought overtaking was too dangerous of a maneuver, so all the roads in the country were changed into a single lane.
So the people got angry and burned his house down.
Anyway, the reason he lowered the speed limit is perfectly acceptable. Driving at such speed was dangerous. But his solutions could have been better. He could have made driving schools produce better drivers so that they are able to drive safely at high speed. If anyone wanted to remove danger absolutely from driving, then that person should walk if he wants to go somewhere. No matter how good the road condition is, how safe the car is, how careful the drivers are, there will always be danger on the road. So it is not a question of removing danger. It is a matter of making drivers more prepared for such events.
By that logic, people don't need authorities to ban or prohibit anything they see as a possible danger. There's been talk about how it is "haram" to celebrate mother's day. Let's recall what has been banned for the sake of keeping Muslims safe from derailing. Celebrating Valentine's day. The use of the word "Allah" in the Malay version of the Bible. Joining rallies. The best has to be the poco poco though. No one saw that coming.
Whether such issues pose a threat would be another matter. Banning everything just because there is a threat that it would demoralise Muslims is not the right approach. Because then, they might as well ban Avengers because Thor is a demigod, or ban Harry Potter because it promotes magic.
Given the right exposure and proper education, such "threats" are nothing.
Instead of banning everything, why not produce better Muslims? One who would not be swayed from his beliefs and morality from doing the poco poco dance while wearing a Manchester United jersey who also celebrates Valentine's day and Mother's day.
While you're at it, make sure they stick to the left lane if they think I'm driving too fast.
Protection
No, it's not safe sex. Even if some people think it would promote promiscuity and would be quite a matter to discuss, I'll save it for another day. We are constantly being protected by the authorities. Think of the concerts cancelled, the song lyrics censored, the books banned and my personal favourite, the tax on imported cars. All this done in the name to conserve our culture, to keep the young from negative influences, to prevent us from being social degenerates and of course to prevent Proton and Perodua from sinking.
But now, there is a more pressing issue. The BBC coverage on Bersih 3.0 has undergone a censorship by Astro to cut out the unpleasant bits, making it more newsworthy. Indeed, we need to be protected so that we won't do anything stupid like you know, vote for the opposition and stuff. I'm not a fan of the opposition despite my disagreements with the government.
I truly understand what Bersih is fighting for and I'm all for it, although Ambiga needs to plan a little better next time. The majority of the Bersih participants are only exercising their human rights, but with such a crowd, you'd need more control. It takes one idiot to make Bersih look bad and on Saturday, there were more than one.
Back to the main point, if there's any. If international news can be censored, what would stop a vote for the opposition from being ignored or tossed away just to "protect" us?
But now, there is a more pressing issue. The BBC coverage on Bersih 3.0 has undergone a censorship by Astro to cut out the unpleasant bits, making it more newsworthy. Indeed, we need to be protected so that we won't do anything stupid like you know, vote for the opposition and stuff. I'm not a fan of the opposition despite my disagreements with the government.
I truly understand what Bersih is fighting for and I'm all for it, although Ambiga needs to plan a little better next time. The majority of the Bersih participants are only exercising their human rights, but with such a crowd, you'd need more control. It takes one idiot to make Bersih look bad and on Saturday, there were more than one.
Back to the main point, if there's any. If international news can be censored, what would stop a vote for the opposition from being ignored or tossed away just to "protect" us?
we separated ourselves from animals, claiming our intelligence are far superior.
we drew a line on the map and we distinguish ourselves from our neighbours.
we gave names to those born in different colours.
we fought amongst ourselves in the name of our god and religion.
we created our own version of the truth.
we desperately tried to prove our strengths but conveniently made exceptions to our flaws.
we think so highly of ourselves that we perceive differences as imperfections.
the enemy only exists in the minds cluttered with irrational fears and the weak only exists for those who put themselves on pedestals.
humanity. what a joke.
we drew a line on the map and we distinguish ourselves from our neighbours.
we gave names to those born in different colours.
we fought amongst ourselves in the name of our god and religion.
we created our own version of the truth.
we desperately tried to prove our strengths but conveniently made exceptions to our flaws.
we think so highly of ourselves that we perceive differences as imperfections.
the enemy only exists in the minds cluttered with irrational fears and the weak only exists for those who put themselves on pedestals.
humanity. what a joke.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)