The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion
The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion |
| Religious institutions, beware the scourge of the Internet Posted: 18 Feb 2013 03:38 PM PST FEB 19 — The Malaysian Insider had to take down a story a week and a half ago on Malaysian religious authorities spreading hatred against Valentine's Day celebrations — after a complaint was made by said department. It was no big deal, because by the time it was taken down, possibly hundreds of people would have read it. Out of those hundreds, some would have shared it on Twitter or Facebook, some would have commented on the story, and many more will continue to talk about it off the Net for days to come. It is the age of the Internet, and what the religious do behind closed doors no longer stays that way. An article by Valerie Tarico, "Does the Internet Spell Doom For Organised Religion?", describes the situation succinctly. It posits that religions are on the decline all over the world because humans nowadays possess a terrible weapon of reason: the Internet. Tarico explained that a traditional religion, one which is built on "right" belief, requires a closed information system. The beliefs only work when the adherents believe solely in what they have been taught, with no output outside the closed system. You can see such system at work in how Islam is practised in Malaysia: Muslims are only allowed to marry other Muslims, and their children automatically become Muslims. Websites are blocked. Books are banned. Speakers are denied from entering the country. One needs a specific permit or licence to preach. Religious sects other than the "right one" get vilified. Then there is that ban on the A-word, which goes along with a ban on the Alkitab, the Bible in Malay. Both having their roots in the constitutional — but anciently absurd — requirement that while Muslims can preach to others, non-Muslims just cannot do the same towards their Malay brethren. Again, no outside information is allowed, just information which has been deemed "correct" by the holy gatekeepers. Because information will lead to questioning, and questioning will lead to a wavering faith, and a wavering faith will eventually lead to abandonment. Malaysian Islam knows that should it allow its believers open access to everything, it might meet that one end: irrelevance. And that is as good as doom. In Tarico's article, two out of the six ways the Internet is contributing to the doom of organised religions are by presenting curated collections of ridiculous beliefs, and the kinky, exploitative, oppressive, opportunistic and violent sides of religion. Perhaps the religious authorities were aware of this, for they realised that everybody with access to the Internet could now know that they were spreading hatred towards something as insignificant as the Valentine's Day behind closed doors. This hatred, mind you, came just two weeks after a call-of-arms towards "enemies of Islam" in the country. It was followed by another sermon a week after which seemed to backtrack by calling for interfaith tolerance instead. With the Internet, citizens can find out that the oft-quoted article by one Ken Swieger (sic) deriding Valentine's Day for promoting idolatry was just an online post by a pastor to his Knoxville, Tennessee congregation, the Seventh Day Christian Assembly. The sermon claimed that the word "Valentine" was used to exalt two ancient Roman deities, Lupercus and Nimrod. Meanwhile, in his article Swiger (the correct spelling) linked the celebration to a pagan festival of intimacy dedicated to a deity called Lupercus, which might be the biblical Nimrod the great hunter, great-grandson of Noah. He then claimed that the Latin word "valens", meaning "the strong, powerful or mighty one", was the root word for "Valentine", and was in reference to Nimrod, thus making the celebration a "blatant idolatry". It can be noted here that the supposed research was less than stellar, and an Islamic studies student armed with Google might fare better. If a sermon itself pays this much (or less) attention to facts, what hope do we have for the rest of the teachings? The mother of irony then — that an institution so adamant of not sharing a religious term with the Christians is using a minor church leader from infidel USA to justify a nationwide crusade. It is the age of the Internet, of open information available at your fingertips. I will not hold my breath waiting for the religious institution to finally join the 21st century, but I will enjoy seeing them grasp at the invisible doors of the Internet as they attempt to board them up. * This is the personal opinion of the columnist. |
| Posted: 18 Feb 2013 03:19 PM PST FEB 19 — I want to start a campaign. Would anyone like to join me? I want to start a campaign to make FIFA — football's global governing body — change one of the game's most fundamental laws. Actually, it's not that strong. I don't want a law to be changed; I want it to be improved. Re-worded. Clarified. Made less ambiguous and subjective. But which one? Which law of the game is driving me to such desperate (and, let's face it, doomed) measures? It's handball. On Sunday night I watched Real Madrid take on lively little local neighbours Rayo Vallecano at the Bernabeu. For the opening 20 minutes, it was an entirely enjoyable affair. Madrid were in an effervescent mood, sweeping into a 2-0 lead with goals from debutant striker Alvaro Morata and defender Sergio Ramos, but Rayo were also threatening when they attacked in an entertainingly open game. Then referee Jose Paradas ruined it. Or, rather, Paradas' interpretation of the handball law ruined it. Ramos had just been harshly booked for an insignificant little foul when Rayo played the resulting free-kick out to their left flank, allowing their winger to advance towards Ramos before delivering a cross towards the penalty area. Quite reasonably — because he is an athletic human being and didn't have his hands tied behind his back — Ramos reacted by closing down the ball before attempting to block the cross by leaping into its path with his arms slightly outstretched to provide him with balance upon landing. From a distance of approximately three metres, the firmly struck ball crashed against Ramos' arm. There was nothing he could have done to get out of the way; he had jumped in an entirely natural motion in a genuine attempt to block the cross, and had certainly not deliberately put his arm into the path of the ball to invite the contact. Good old Senor Paradas, though, did not see it that way. Without hesitation, he ran superciliously towards Ramos, reached inside his top pocket and brandished first the yellow card — Ramos' second in the space of a minute — and then the red card. Ramos had been sent off, for doing nothing other than performing an act of defensive football which involved jumping. Yes, his arms were somewhat outstretched, but that's an entirely natural physical movement — I know because I've just tried it in my living room. If you attempt to jump, high and slightly at an angle, with your hands stiffly by your side (go on, try it), the feeling is extremely unnatural and it's difficult not to fall over when you land. Yet, thanks to Paradas' apparent misunderstanding of the mechanics of the human body, Ramos could play no further part in the game against Rayo and will also be suspended from next weekend's trip to Deportivo La Coruna — a game that could have significant ramifications for many clubs considering Depor's struggle against relegation. Furthermore, Ramos' absence for the final 70 minutes of the meeting with Rayo meant that the game was ruined as a spectacle. Understandably, Madrid boss Jose Mourinho reacted with a conservative move after his team was reduced to 10 men, replacing promising young striker Morata — whose debut had provided the game with an interesting angle — and introducing defender Raul Albiol. Madrid lost their earlier attacking endeavour, retreated to protect their two-goal lead and the remainder of the game provided very little by the way of goalmouth drama. The red card for Ramos irritated me so much that I decided to seek out FIFA's official laws of the game just to check whether the referee had acted correctly in judging his "handball" so severely. The laws can be viewed here and although I won't quote its entirety here, the key wording in the section relating to handball (on page 113) is this (my italics): "Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. The referee must take the following into consideration: ● the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) ● the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) ● the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement." That's clear then. Well, about as clear as mud. Unlike the offside laws, which are nicely embellished by seven pages of illustrations to explain possible scenarios, there is no further explanation to help referees understand how they should judge "handballs". So much of the law quoted above is left to subjective opinion: the referee must "take the following into consideration"... but how? When it comes to "the movement of the hand" or "the distance between the opponent and the ball", exactly what should the referee be looking for? And if the position of the hand "does not necessarily mean" there is an infringement, when does it? And when doesn't it? No wonder, then, that there's such a disparity of opinion from one referee to another about how they should penalise the act of a ball striking an arm or hand. With the law so inadequate, we can scarcely blame officials for erratically dealing with a situation that isn't properly explained to them by the official laws of the game. The problem is a particular blight on La Liga due to the tendency of Spanish referees to punish virtually any handball offence with a card. So far this season no less than 16 players have been sent off for receiving their second yellow card for handball, most of them no worse than Ramos' supposed offence on Sunday night. But it's also a widespread issue throughout the game — witness the furore sparked by Luis Suarez's goal for Liverpool against Mansfield in the FA Cup earlier this season. And until FIFA decide to act by improving the law and giving better guidance to referees, it will continue. So why don't we all use the contact form on their website to send the message "Please change the handball law because at the moment it's rubbish," and see what happens. Probably not a lot, but hey, Rome in a day and all that. * This is the personal opinion of the columnist. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan