"Germany well on the way to becoming a Muslim state by 2050

[x42bn6]

The party that controls the state of Kelantan is a radical Islamic party (not extremist) that believes that Malaysia should be an Islamic state and be run by syariah law. That party was almost defeated in the general elections by the ruling coalition that took all the states but that one.

Generally, because PAS believes that Malaysia should be an Islamic country, it applies that idea to Kelantan. It has barred plenty of things - male-female fraternisation (during concerts, they have to stand apart), traditional activities (the wayang kulit described above), alcohol (as above), and a lot more. Kelantan's economy is almost stagnant because businesses must conform strictly to Islamic law, and because almost every form of entertainment is restricted.

In the capital and around the major cities, they have openly rejected the notion that the country should become fully Islamic - they are fine with the current system where Islam is the official religion, but the Constitution stays.

I think that if PAS manages to take control of the country (the Chinese would hate it because they love pork and wine... :-/), then yes, they will start building more mosques. Not sure what they will do about the churches, though - because they haven't dealt with other religions... At least I don't think so.

So yes, Malaysia does have problems but Kelantan is one of the methods at which the country is run.

In Kuala Lumpur, the system is much different. Sure, there are a lot of mosques but that is by virtue of there being a large Muslim population. There are plenty of churches and synagogues too. There are Taoist and Buddhist shrines and statues, and Hindu temples and shrines too. Quite a lot of the young population would rather declare themselves "Malaysian" rather than "Chinese", "Malay" or "Indian".

There are racial problems, however, related with it - but these are generally isolated.*

 

[B~E]

Still, it doesn't seem like diveristy contributed anything positive to Malaysia.

 

[Arxces]

On the contrary: it is diversity that allows Malaysia to thrive as it is. Only with a vibrant mix of cultures are we able to bring ourselves to face issues such as intercultural and interfaith issues. When there is a large majority and a relatively small minority, the minority ends up being oppressed (as in North America and Western Europe). In Malaysia this is different; there is a balance, and an open, but polite debate on interracial matters.

 

[B~E]

Only with a vibrant mix of cultures are we able to bring ourselves to face issues such as intercultural and interfaith issues

So... only with diversity can one cope with the challenge of... diversity? Sorry, I dont think I got what you mean.

How are minorities opressed in the West? Assuming that you're refering to the pre-60s periode of segregation, it isn't an increase in cultural diversity that allowed minorities to emancipate themselves, it is activisme on their part and the majority's willingness to accept a multicultural society and to build insitutions ensuring the equal and something preferencial treatement of the minorities. And the philosophical basis justifying this emancipation was tought up by.... the white majority. I my opinion, I dont think that diversity itself had anything to do with it.

Unless that you honestly believe that minorities are always at disadvantage in the presence of a majority.

 

[Arxces]

So... only with diversity can one cope with the challenge of... diversity? Sorry, I dont think I got what you mean.

How are minorities opressed in the West? Assuming that you're refering to the pre-60s periode of segregation, it isn't an increase in cultural diversity that allowed minorities to emancipate themselves, it is activisme on their part and the majority's willingness to accept a multicultural society and to build insitutions ensuring the equal and something preferencial treatement of the minorities. And the philosophical basis justifying this emancipation was tought up by.... the white majority. I my opinion, I dont think that diversity itself had anything to do with it.

Unless that you honestly believe that minorities are always at disadvantage in the presence of a majority.

YES! Only when there is diversity can one confront with it's challenge. A society that lacks diversity does not confront this issue, as it will likely be an insignificant issue.

With regards to how minorities are oppressed in the west, it is a matter of the minority lacking a voice. As you pointed out, the apartheid of the pre-60s was an example of how the majority oppressed the minority. This issue was solved by the willingness of the majority to break the status quo, and allow the minority equal representation.

However, when there is more diversity (such as in Malaysia), a situation is created by which the various factions can compete for representation on an equal platform. This is evident in Malaysian politics, where the ruling party is actually a conglomerate of parties of different races, all of whom have a proportionate voice. As such a system is created where the demands of each group are met. In Malaysia we have one state which is under the Islamic Sharia'h because the people there voted for it. We also have states and areas (such as the capital) which are essentially secular. Because of the demands of the non-Muslims, KL has a thriving night life of clubs, pubs and hangouts, a world away from the Islamic state of Kelantan.

 

[Tipsy]

Tipsy:

- So there's an absurdly high demand by the aging population on the welfare system, and the government's solution is to bring in more taxe payers; foreigners en masse with their families. The longterm logical consequence of this is a lost of social identity, and all the social trauma caused by rapid demographic changes. A good case exemple would be Iliaran's Malaysia.

I'm not saying it is neccesarily a good idea, I was more trying to say that the absurdly high demand was because of the failure of the social program and that the only way to preserve a program that is overwhelming failing is to take an extreme course of action, this change in immigration policy.

Why, lets hear it from the Pope himself.

Marriage derived from the Bible? is that true? And the familly unit as the building block of society, how important and unique was that for Europe?

I've never been one to force my religious beliefs upon others even if I believe it is in their own interest.