Wait, wait, wait...what?!
Firstly, why only boys? The WOMEN, Family and Community Development Ministry decided that sex education is only for boys? How sexist can you possibly get?
Secondly, what survey has Durex (a condom supplier) and Strategic Perspectives done to assess sex education? You mean there was sex education before? I didn't leave school that many years ago, but the nearest we got to sex education was the chapter Reproduction in Form 3 Science. What sex education have they been assessing then? Unless I'm wrong, and if so, can someone please enlighten me?
You know what's weird? The fact that there is so much content here from the worst critics of Mother Teresa, and none from her supporters. Your article title seems to give the idea you were actually going to answer the question fairly, but there is nothing but the most unsupported, biased and evidence-free criticism of an individual who is one of the few people who is celebrated not only by members of all religions, but also within secular circles. The fact that she received the Nobel prize should sufficiently deter anyone from making the utterly dumb conclusion that she is celebrated only from a religious perspective.
Also, thank you very much for calling the process of sainthood 'superstition', because it's dependent on 'dubious' miracles. It's clear that though you've left the faith and turned your back on Truth, (yes, I'm a Catholic), you still feel the need to violently insult and make derogatory remarks about the faith you've left in the public sphere. I suppose it's easier for opponents of a religion to make the most shallow remarks without actually going through the evidence used for the process. It's much easier to ignore the due diligence and the strong skepticism the Church has for miracle claims.
However, ignorance and shallow slander shall never prevail against truth. The world, religious and non-religious alike, recognizes the power of Mother Teresa, and she has inspired thousands, maybe millions, in her love for the less fortunate, and to follow in her footsteps in big and small ways. History will remember that, you and people like you will always be the minority and will be forgotten in the passage of time.
By the way, there was never a saint who was considered perfect. In fact, many famous saints were flawed people who made a hell of a lot of mistakes before turning over a new leaf and abandoning all to God. You're not criticizing. You're making blind, hate-filled remarks which never result in anything positive except putting you in the limelight. May the tribe of Mother Teresa increase, and may yours decrease.
Dude...your maths...for LRT, she doesn't work 30 days per month, man. About 4 weeks per month, and 5 days per week, so about 20-23 days at the most per month = Rm7 x 23 = RM 161. That's a huge saving, man, about RM 80 per month, or more. Not to mention that only the most fuel-economizing cars use RM 50 per week for petrol while driving to work. With a Volvo or a Mercedes, which is not that rare, can go up to RM100-150 a week just from driving to work.
To be honest, as a heavy public transport user for a few years now, I can say that the public transport in Malaysia still has a lot of problems. It's true. Yet, I feel the star among all the public transport systems that Malaysia has is the LRT. Very, very few times I have experienced delays or down times for the LRT and their frequency is suitably high for all peak times. The LRT management has done a great job for many years since its start, and this extension is most welcome.
You complain about over-pricing. I can assure you, public transport may be less inconvenient, but it is definitely more cost-saving than petrol. One example is the one I calculated above, but it is pretty much the same across the board for all long-distance travels. Of course, you going nearby 5-10 mins then don't use train la, but for longer trips, buses and trains definitely save cost in the long run. You complain about timing. Most public transport users know how to wake up earlier and make sure they leave at a time suitable for reaching work on time. You know it will take longer with walking and train arrival times, so there's no problem with waking up 20-30 mins earlier. Unreliability may be there for buses and sometimes the KTM (though nowadays the KTM is doing much better), but the LRT is very reliable.
Take a chance, guys. Malaysians really like having the convenience of cars, yet they never stop complaining about petrol and toll prices and suffering through traffic jams. Give the trains, especially LRT a chance. I assure you, you will benefit greatly in the long-run.
Ah well. ISMA at its best. In all my years in Malaysia, I haven't seen a single Jew. As far as I know, Christians in this country are perfectly comfortable to mind their own business and worship in peace. The only corrupt people influencing policies are the racist and extreme Malays, who also subjugate other Malays who don't play their corrupt game. Sure, a liberal Malaysia would be bad, considering the damage it's done to the US and europe, where liberal secularism is wiping out all morals from people. But I highly doubt it'll happen in Malaysia. Contrary to the beliefs of these extremist goons, there are countless Muslims who love Islam AND are not extreme and bigoted. WOW, a big revelation, eh? Malaysians also have their morals, which must be protected from Western secular influence, not stupid, made-up Jewish monsters. Seriously, don't you have any other cards to play than the Jewish one? You don't even realize that you're being racist and bigoted against Jews? But seriously, everything has to be about Muslims vs Jews? Geez... Even the issue of the usage of the word 'Allah' in the Herald was a freaking plan by the 'Yahudi'. Goodness. Get a life, man. Or a brain, if it's at all possible.
Brilliant move by Utusan, as usual. I fully believe that they knew perfectly that that piece of news was bogus. They ran it anyway because it appeals to the less judging population that reads that slimy paper. People who would read and instantly assume its truth because 'it's in the newspaper!' This 'apology' would only be seen by a select few, whereas the paper may be read by many who wouldn't see this 'apology'. They should be forced to publish this 'apology' in their sorry excuse for a newspaper.
Beware of this article. Do not fall into its trap of sounding humanistic and innocent. Beware, for it contains the same sort of sentiments that the West first put forth, and the result is clear in today's times. Let's not confuse humanism and tolerance with the stand for what's right & wrong. No transgender or person with different sexual orientations should ever be discriminated against, abused or treated in a derogatory manner in their workplace, schools or anywhere else. The hand of society must always be extended with warmth and welcome. Nevertheless, the very fabric of that society must never allow its destruction, its tearing apart by confusing and circuitous reasoning. The natures of man and woman are intrinsic to nature as well as to humanity. The sexual call in Nature has but one purpose: to create new life. All other purposes must be hand in hand with this, otherwise we WILL sink into the deplorable sexual promiscuity we see so rampant, and even praised, in the West, and also encroaching on beloved Malaysia. True, the sexual act is also a bonding experience, but left without procreation, it becomes entertainment. So yes, Malaysia as a whole, as a wonderful diverse society should never treat transgenders and homosexuals as lesser humans, but never, ever, for the sake of our society and humanity, should we allow their sexual acts to be legal and allowed. We should never be cruel, but we must also uphold morality and the cause of right.
Oh come on. The problem with political unrest and upheaval is people like this jumping on the bandwagon. The constitution of this country as well as most western countries are based on solid reasoning and principles found mostly in Christianity, as well as Islam. The very law of the land pertains to and instructs the people using these laws and principles. Without general principles that are not founded on anything more than human reasoning, we would be doomed. Religious freedom? Christian. Human rights? Though this has been twisted by modern times, it was Christian originally. I'm not saying we're a Christian state. I'm just saying that the Rukun is merely showing the spirit the people should have. I'm in no way a supporter of the currently intolerant and bigoted government, but please, people like you, please don't smear the honest and clear-minded zeal of citizens looking for a brighter, better Malaysia. After all, the constitution protects your freedom of religion. I don't see anyone caring about prosecuting pantheists. The intention for people to believe in God, to be loyal to king and country, to acknowledge the primacy of the constitution, to ensure the rule of law and to practise and abide by courtesy and morality is the one thing we should never change and never bother about. Stop jumping on the bandwagon to further your personal interests.
I think that this article talks too much about commonly known facts on evolution & natural selection. I think that this articles tries to seem modern, open-minded, and very scientifically sane, but it has a hidden agenda. That agenda is apparent in the line 'You would then think that perhaps religion too, is a by-product of our advanced minds. That humans might have recognised patterns in the world and we attributed it to a higher being.' Clearly, the author is making religion, in general, seem downright scientifically ridiculous. Setting aside all forms of extreme religious imposition on scientific truth, religion and science actually go hand in hand in discovering truth. That means neither can contradict the other. In Darwin's Origin of Species, there was a clear philosophical and cultural challenge when the book was finally published. The scientific community that wished to challenge religion and its dominion on knowledge of how the world works pushed the idea that with Darwin's book, religion became irrelevant, inaccurate and full of useless words. That same crusade is still being fought today, and with the extreme ostracisation of all religion-based approaches to the world as we know it, scientific fact is fast becoming the only acceptable truth to be spread. I'm not saying creationist views are to be taken as scientifically sound, but the idea that scientific fact (in the agenda at least) means that everything was created randomly and based on nothing but some things dying and some things living is profoundly against all religion, especially Abrahamic religions. The divine plan within Creation must be acknowledged, with its engine, the menial, physical workings being present in evolution. The divine must be held superior to the physical. This is the approach that must be taken, and this is what the entire atheist scientific community, with Darwin as their spear, is trying to fight. Who's to say other readers of this book might not take on the same state of mind as the author? Who's to say they might not one day join the legion of science fighting religion, as so many have? This is a justified fear.
I think that the assertion that comprehensive sex education that includes info about contraception has proven effective is shady at best. Premarital sex, STD's, abortions, HIV spreading, promiscuous behaviour have all increased in countries that have promoted contraception, particularly the US, whom the author has wrongly characterized has being very abstinence-based. Even in the HIV crisis within south east asia, countries that promote contraception have higher HIV rates compared to countries that promote abstinence, and this is mirrored in countries in Africa. The details of this are many and varied, but there are significant parties present in 'conservative' countries such as Malaysia that oppose contraception for extremely tangible and logical reasons, and they can't just simply by labelled as 'religious pressure'. The author is the typical modern tyrant where everything technological and secular is the light and anything that religious people say is darkness, regardless of the basis of either side. Even without contraception, promiscuity resulting in baby dumping has increased, and the author's grand solution is to make promiscuity less risky, more attainable, and therefore more rampant. I say keep your typically deformed-Western ideas out of the surviving mess of Malaysia, where Western ideas of sexual freedom have rampaged through its streets and left people mauled, alone, and dead on the inside.
But the thing is, you don't get to debate that, do you? You, as a Muslim, cannot say that the word 'Allah' can't be used for a purpose so fundamental to Christians, simply because you don't have the right to do so. If you have whatever interpretations and uses for the word for God, as you see it in the Quran, you are free to do so if you wish to, right? Why is it the Christians can't? Why deny us that right? It cannot be religious reason, because we are simply not of the same religion.