Not surprising, since he lives in a world where as long as you aren't starving to death, or earning less than USD1 a day, it's not so bad.

As reported in http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/03/04/stop-whining-poor-sabahans-told/

Initially, PKR had only wanted to contest in 25 seats where it had established a presence and was confident of gaining support.

But it was forced to contest in these 24 other seats because neither of its partners wanted to step up and “share the burden” of standing against the BN, Rafizi said.

So let me get this straight. You were all negotiating to field candidates, and now you are saying there were not enough candidates who were interested to contest?

Sounds like a lot of backdoor deals to secure the most winnable seats, or the tale of sour grapes to me.

You must be intentionally thick if you believe such overtures of religious discrimination does not count as an infringement on rights to belief.

You have presented a false equivalence, for:

That may be true. But it isn't government funded now is it?

1. Not questioning Islamic principles. It was questioning the decency of claiming the body of a dead person in the name of a faith, in violation of the person's will, and the bereaved family.

2. Questioning Islamic principles. Freedom of belief is a fundamental right of all humans. Forcing others into a belief is evil.

3. I am most certainly not grateful that a court system which is prejudicial towards all who do not adhere to Islam exists in parallel to the secular courts.

I say now. Do you have even a bone of honour and decency in you?

I am an atheist. My politics are progressive.

I am no Christian, but I assert my right to defend your right to read whatever books you want in whatever language you prefer. It is not the business of governments to tell you what you should or should not read.

Let's try this. I am a supporter of progressive politics, so that makes me an MCLM supporter. Will you prejudge me based upon what I say next?

Banning gambling practices is just as logical as banning alcohol. It is a question of imposition of morals upon others, just because you don't like how some people spend their money, doesn't give you the automatic right to take their rights away.

In the end, it's hurting none but those who gamble, if it is even considered harm for most of them. Point is, none of us can impose our morality upon others in such a case, as there is no detriment to these people (and I know a few old ladies who love to spend a few ringgit a week for a bit of thrill in their lives - are you going to take that away?), and lotteries are an efficient way to fill public coffers.

“Egypt’s parties law will be amended after the referendum takes place to allow parties to form simply based on notification,”

My goodness. That nearly made me weep in joy. Something we here in Malaysia should probably amend as well.

Belief is a personal matter, so you do compare and contrast the different philosophies do you not?

And that is the crux of the article. Not all beliefs are equal (in morality, truth claim, community.)

Lim Guan Eng is doing the logical choice in a secular country.

Either have departments for defending the rights of all religions, or have no such institutions to begin with.

Seeing as there are more than a few thousand of them, I would suggest doing away with all these religious departments altogether for rational reasons.

Better to spend all that cash on more scholarships for deserving students rather than religious departments who will probably use it to enforce some form of morality.