Does Race define Religion?

Wednesday May 30, 2007
Crucial decision in Lina Joy case
By SHAILA KOSHY
KUALA LUMPUR: The Federal Court judgment today on the Lina Joy appeal will be a historic one with legal and social repercussions, whichever way the decision goes.
This decision by the apex court will affect one’s constitutional freedom to choose one’s religion as well as who one can marry, especially for those who want to renounce Islam and for people who convert to Islam but later want to revert to their former religion.
The judgment, which was reserved on July 4 last year, will clarify whether conversion is a religious matter or a constitutional matter.
Lina Joy, 42, who was born to a Malay Muslim couple, became a Christian when she was 26.
The sales assistant has taken her case all the way to the Federal Court because unless the government recognises her conversion, she cannot get married under civil law.
While Lina managed – the second time around – to get the National Registration Department to change her name from Azlina Jailani in 1999, accepting that she had renounced Islam, it refused to remove the word “Islam” from her MyKad.
The NRD said it could not do so without a syariah court order certifying she had renounced Islam.
As long as the word “Islam” remains on her identity card, Lina cannot marry her Christian boyfriend, a cook, under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976.
In 2001, she took her case against the NRD director-general, the Government and the Federal Territory Religious Council to the High Court.
She lost – Justice Faiza Tamby Chik held that Malays could not renounce Islam because a Malay was defined in the Constitution as “a person who professes the religion of Islam,” adding it was the syariah court that had the jurisdiction in matters related to apostasy.
Lina appealed to the Court of Appeal and lost again, this time in a majority decision – Justices Abdul Aziz Mohamed and Arifin Zakaria upheld the decision of the NRD but Justice Gopal Sri Ram said it was null and void.
In 2006, she got leave to appeal to the Federal Court and asked the panel comprising Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richard Malanjum and Federal Court Justice Alauddin Mohd Sheriff these questions:
WAS the NRD entitled to require a person to produce a certificate or a declaration or an order from the syariah court before deleting “Islam” from his or her identity card;
DID the NRD correctly construe its powers under the National Registration Regulations 1990 when it imposed the above requirement, which is not expressly provided for in the regulations?; and
WAS the landmark case Soon Singh vs Perkim Kedah – which held that syariah courts have the authority over the civil courts to hear cases of Muslims renouncing Islam – correctly decided?
While Datuk Cyrus Das appeared for Lina Joy, Senior Federal Counsel Datuk Umi Khaltum Jamid appeared for the NRD director-general and the Government and Sulaiman Abdullah appeared for the religious council.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lina Joy loses appeal
News update by The Star's newsdesk
PUTRAJAYA: Lina Joy lost her final round of appeal when the Federal Court dismissed on Wednesday her appeal against a ruling that the National Registration Department was right not to allow her to remove the word "Islam" from her identity card.
Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim and Federal Court judge Justice Alauddin Mohd Sheriff delivered the majority decision dismissing her appeal.
Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Justice Richard Malanjum dissented.
On Sept 19, 2005, the Court of Appeal decided that the NRD director-general was right in refusing her application to drop her religious status from her IC on the grounds that the Syariah Court and other Islamic religious authorities did not confirm Linas renunciation of Islam.
************************************************************************************

So Lina Joy (or in this case "no Joy") lost her case. Surprise, surprise? NOT. One should have expected that the outcome is a foregone conclusion. In the 21st century, I am disappointed that the thinking of the society and law in Malaysia have not come to maturity. Justice Faiza Thamby Chik said that the constitution defines "a Malay as one who professes to be a Muslim". I am not that familiar with this piece of constitution, but I am surprised to discover that religion has now got a Mendelian inheritance. It is like saying that a Chinese must be a Buddhist, or an Indian must be a Hindu, and a Caucasian must be a Christian. So, if you do a DNA fingerprinting, you can find out the religion of your great, great, great, great grandfather! Ridiculous or what?!

I thought that the Malaysian constitution ensures freedom of religion. Surely this ruling is unconstitutional. Or else, we need to change the constitution, do we not?

Please find Madeleine 3

Update : This is the last photo of Madeleine before she was kidnapped. Taken by her mum. If you have any information of her whereabouts, please contact via the website (see previous post) dedicated to find her. Thanks.

Please Find Madeleine 2

The following is a poster prepared by her family. Please disseminate it as widely as possible. You can provide information by ringing the number. Alternatively, go to www.findmadeleine.com.

You've Been Blogged...errr...Blocked!

Internet censorship grows worldwide: study

AFP - Friday, May 18 06:50 pm

LONDON (AFP) - Internet censorship is growing worldwide, with 26 out of 40 countries blocking or filtering political or social content, a study reported Friday.

(Advertisement)

The survey carried out by experts at four leading universities found that people in Asia, the Middle East and North Africa were often denied access to information about politics, sexuality, culture or religion.

Conducting the first of what is planned to become an annual survey, the experts at the universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard and Toronto found that the approach varied according to the country.

For example, South Korea heavily censored only one topic, North Korea, while Iran, China and Saudi Arabia blocked both a wide range of topics and a great deal of content related to those topics.

The experts with the OpenNet Initiative, who carried out their research last year, listed six countries as "pervasive" filterers of political information: Myanmar, China, Iran, Syria, Tunisia and Vietnam.

They categorized seven countries, all of them Muslim, as "pervasive" social filterers: Iran, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

Topics blocked are those considered antithetical to social norms, such as pornography, gay and lesbian content, and gambling.

Social filtering also was carried out by countries like France and Germany, where websites that deny the Holocaust or promote Nazism are blocked.

The survey found that Myanmar, China, Iran, Pakistan and South Korea have the "most encompassing national security filtering," targeting the websites of insurgents, extremists, and terrorists.

"The survey shows us that online censorship is growing around the world," said John Palfrey, executive director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society, and clinical professor of law at Harvard Law School.

"Some regulation is to be expected as the medium matures, but filtering and surveillance can seriously erode civil liberties and privacy and stifle global communications," he added in a statement.

However, the survey found that a handful of countries where Internet filtering might be expected -- such as Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Malaysia, Nepal, Russia, Venezuela and Zimbabwe -- were found not to filter.

The survey said that Internet filtering techniques have evolved with the growing complexity of content.

"Instead of just blocking static Web sites, such as pages online that show pornographic pictures or information about human rights, online censors are blocking entire applications, such as YouTube," it added.

Other applications that are often targeted are internet telephony service Skype and Google Maps. Still others are blogs, political parties and local non-government organisations.

"In the case of blogs, a number of countries, including Pakistan and Ethiopia, have blocked entire blogging domains," it said.

The survey said the United States and European countries did not come in for testing, as the filtering practices were better understood than in other parts of the world.

The survey marked "the first step towards a comprehensive global assessment of Internet filtering practices," said Oxford University professor Jonathan Zittrain,who expects to find more countries that filter the Internet as testing is expanded.

Just thought that this article might be of some interest to all bloggers, in view of the interesting discussion in Susan Loone's blog about the formation of All-Blogs, a National Alliance of Bloggers in Malaysia. It seems surprising that Malaysia, a country known for its tendency to control the media, is one of the few countries that does not filter its internet traffic. There has been talk of forming a register of bloggers by the government, presumably a move to control the topics discussed by the bloggers. Is that a possible task? Can a blog registered with a domain outside the country be easily blocked?

Does anyone think that internet censorship in Malaysia is imminent, and it is only when and not if? What can Malaysian bloggers do to convince the government not to do so, or are we powerless? Would it be a retrograde step or is it necessary for the security of the country?

Please find Madeleine

PRAIA DA LUZ, Portugal (AFP) - The family of the missing four-year-old British girl announced Thursday they would step up the search for her as Portuguese police said they still lacked enough information to make any arrests.

ADVERTISEMENT

Posters bearing the face of Madeleine McCann, will soon appear across Europe, Michael Wright, a relative of the girl's parents told a news conference.

The posters have already become a common sight in Portugal, since she vanished from a hotel bedroom at a resort in Praia da Luz in the Algarve region on May 3.

"If Madeleine is not in Portugal, we want to make sure people have an image of her across Europe. This can only help," Wright told reporters.

He was speaking outside the whitewashed hotel from where Madeleine disappeared as several police stood guard nearby in bright sunshine.

"Our target is to reach the saturation that we know has been achieved in the UK and certainly in the Algarve," he added.

A fund and accompanying website, which the family launched on Wednesday to gather donations and other forms of help in the search for the little girl, has been flooded with offers, he said.

The help, from individuals, small firms and multinationals had made the European-wide campaign possible, he added.

The fund's website www.findmadeleine.com received over five million hits on Thursday, Wright said.

British television channel Sky News said an airline and a major restaurant chain were among the multinational firms that had offered to put up posters of the missing girl at their premises across the continent.

Police meanwhile said they were still gathering evidence but did not yet have enough information to make any arrests.

"The investigation is going on. Until this moment there is not enough evidence to arrest anyone," said Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa, who is heading the probe. He was speaking to reporters in the southern city of Portimao.

Ok....................I am getting pissed off. Why, you say? Because after almost 2 weeks, there is still no clue where Madeleine is. How come? Are Portuguese police that useless? Surely, all these super clever people from the intelligence community from Interpol, MI6, MI5, CIA, Mossad, KGB etc, etc should have some clue leading to her whereabouts. No, I am not pissed off...................I am super pissed off!!!!!!

So, I decided that I am not going to do nothing at all. I am appealing to all you good people who read my blog.................yes, the number may be small..........thou shall not mock...................,to write something about Madeleine and encourage all readers of your own blog to do likewise. Please paste her pictures on all your blogs and replicate it as often as possible. Let's increase the publicity in blogosphere. A very remarkable identifiable mark of Madeleine is her RIGHT EYE. If you look closely, you will see that there is a deficient IRIS mark at about 7 o'clock.

If any of you out there has any information leading to her, please don't keep it to yourselves. Inform the authorities! Have some compassion! Supply information in their official website- mentioned above . Do it for the love of the child. If not..........for Pete's sake....do it for the money! There is a large reward available.

DON'T MAKE ME ANGRY........................YOU DON'T LIKE ME WHEN I AM ANGRY!!!!

Rough Justice

Only Malays can buy reserve land

By : V. Anbalagan

Email to friend Print article

PUTRAJAYA: Non-Malays who inherited Malay reserve land can only sell the property to Malays.

The Federal Court has ruled that any such transaction involving a non-Malay is illegal.

However, the non-Malay owner can transfer his inheritance to his beneficiaries.

The court made these pronouncements in allowing an appeal by the legal representatives of Lee Keng Liat to recover about RM620,000 in compensation when the Malacca government acquired eight acres (2.6ha) of such land in Mukim Klebang Besar to build houses about 25 years ago.

Keng Liat had acquired the land at the turn of the 20th century after he received a certificate from the governor-in-council that entitled him to hold the customary land.
Under the Malacca Lands Customary Rights Ordinance, only a Malay living in the state or a person holding such certificate from the council was entitled to inherit such property.

On Keng Liat’s death, the property was transferred to a son, Chim Giang, who in 1935, sold the land to Tan Tai Lip.

In 1982, the authorities were ready to pay about RM1 million in compensation to Tan’s heirs. A total of RM420,000 was paid for loss of property and livelihood.

In 1986, Keng Liat’s personal representatives filed a suit at the Malacca High Court, claiming that the compensation for the loss of land was rightfully theirs.

Judge Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamad said Tan should not have been allowed to purchase the land as he did not have a certificate from the council.

He said the transaction was illegal due to non-compliance of the ordinance.

He said he could not validate the original sale of land "as this would completely defeat the purpose of the creation of the Malacca customary land and Malay reserve land".

Sitting with Hamid were Datuk Arifin Zakaria and Datuk S. Augustine Paul.

Hamid said Malay reserve land came into existence after laws were enacted in the Malay states and the Straits Settlements to protect the land rights of the Malays.

He said the British saw it necessary to do so.

"If at all, it is for the legislature to repeal or amend the laws, not this court," he said of the unanimous ruling delivered on Friday.

Hamid, who wrote the 27-page judgment, said the court gave serious thought to the issue because of "what was happening on the ground".

"Customary land and Malay reserve land may be no more than a beautiful but empty package while the contents are enjoyed by people who are prohibited by law to own it," he said.







Don't you think that it is unfair? After all, Lee Keng Liat had acquired the land legally. He had a certificate from the governor-in-council to authenticate his purchase of the land. Why overturn the legality of the document after about 100 years? OK, one may need to sell it back to the Malays, but can a fair market price be gotten for it? Isn't it time that this ruling be reviewed and changed? After all, we are now in the 21st century? Should the term "bumiputera" be redefined to all that is born in Malaysia, instead of just to the Malay race? For the country to mature and come to adulthood, perhaps it is time that we should shed our xenophobic inheritance and have a real debate about integration in the country. If practices like the current Maybank fiasco where a law firm must have a 50% bumiputera ownership before it is able to do business with the bank persist, then all the interfaith dialogues (as promoted by the government) in the world will not achieve what it sets out to do.

Doctors are Liars

Deception flowchart

Case study: the unhopeful anaesthetist
A patient with a ruptured aortic aneurysm is rushed to the operating theatre. The anaesthetist knows the patient's chances of survival are poor. Just as preoxygenation is about to begin, the distressed patient asks "I am going to be all right, aren't I, doctor?" Can the unhopeful anaesthetist justifiably deceive the patient?

Brief flowchart analysis
The strongest reasons for deception here are to prevent great psychological harm and compassionate (humane) deception. As the patient will be conscious for only a short time, the deception is likely to succeed. A truthful alternative needs quick thinking and careful phrasing and therefore runs a higher risk of distressing the patient. As non-lying forms of deception (such as the evasive "we'll do our very best") might arouse suspicion, and as the likelihood of eventual discovery is minimal, lying is preferable for reducing such harm.

The main objections to deception are violation of the duty to be truthful, respect for patient autonomy, and the "right to know." Given the anticipated intensity of the distress, however short lived; the lack of realistic alternative clinical options; the negative impact of delay on an already poor prognosis; and the improbability in the remaining seconds of the patient coming to terms with the grim truth, the balance might justifiably be judged to fall on the side of deception. In light of the reasoning above, I would be willing to justify my decision to colleagues and the General Medical Council and believe many reasonable people might want to be deceived in such circumstances. I conclude that the proposed deception is morally acceptable.

Article published in BMJ on 12 May, 2007


It's official. Doctors do lie! Is it ever ethical to lie to the patients? Do you want your doctor to lie to you? Is there a therapeutic benefit in lying to the patients? Will the truth kill off the patients earlier?

You would be very angry if your banker lies to you, right? Or for that matter anyone else. So, why is it ok ( or not?) if its your doctors, especially if your life is in their hands? The Casual Philosopher is in a dilemma....

Hypocrisy

Overseas doctors with NHS experience are being refused visas on the grounds their medical degrees are not equal to those in the UK.

The BMA international committee has been contacted by members whose application for a HSMP (highly skilled migrant programme) visa was turned down because their degree was deemed equivalent only to a UK HND (higher national diploma).

HSMP visas are awarded on a points basis and qualifications must be evaluated by NARIC (the UK National Recognition Information Centre). However, NARIC is giving no points for some overseas medical degrees despite applicants being registered with the GMC and having UK medical experience. HND-holders would not be awarded points towards the total needed to gain an HSMP visa.

BMA council chair James Johnson and IC chair Edwin Borman have both written to higher education minister Bill Rammell asking him to review NARIC's methods.

If you have been refused an HSMP on these grounds, contact the international department at internationalinfo@bma. org.uk


The above is yet another example of hypocrisy of the British government's policy. These doctors have already worked in UK for a number of years, been given registration with the GMC, and have been treating patients here for a number of years. All of a sudden, their qualification is inferior, and therefore would not be granted the HSMP. Blatant discrimination!! I am not surprised at all by this. About a decade or so ago, I had also had the dubious "privilege" of experiencing this. I had gained my qualification from Ireland. While my Irish classmate, and fellow housemen was granted Full Registration, I was only granted Limited Registration with the GMC. My qualification and housemanship experience was deemed inferior to his. I had to jumped through hoops for the next couple of years before being granted the Full Registration status. Later, I heard that any non-EEA graduates from Irish Universities who applied to work in the UK had to sit an English exam, before being accepted for registration. How do they think lectures in Irish medical school were delivered....Urdu??

I have no problem that jobs in the country should be given to the locals in the first instance. But to discriminate based on qualifications when it is convenient to do so is just baseless and stupid.

Everlasting Love

" I live in a council flat. I am a widow. My husband died 3 years ago. We looked after each other for 46 years. We went everywhere together. I still miss him very much."

I came across this statement today. It stopped me in my tracks. No, I did not read this in a lifestyle magazine or heard it on a live chat show. It seemed so out of place, and yet so much in context. It was a response to a question about her home living condition. I usually just gloss over the nursy bits of the preoperative assessment form and zoom in on the medical section. I could sense that this was a very special lady. She has so many problems and yet was upbeat about everything. "Till death do us part" was a vow that she obvious clung onto to well beyond the grave. I was touched......I was impressed........and I was humbled. It was just so profound. It just resonates with something deep within myself..........perhaps a part of myself that I have yet to comprehend. It caused me to reflect. Am I also capable of such depth of love?? Amazing love!

Goodbye Tony

So we have it at last. Uncle Tony will be leaving on June 27. He will use his last 7 weeks touring the world, no doubt saying goodbye...and more importantly saying hello to new money from lectures circuits. The Americans love him, and I am sure they will pay him handsomely to hear him speak. Well, good luck to him.

I voted for Labour in 1997. Personally, I think he has done quite well for the economy for Britain. However, like many, I was against him invading Iraq. I think this will taint his legacy, which he so obviously wants to protect. I also think that he has done some harm to the public sector by trying to control it too much. For example, even though, lots of money has been poured into the NHS, morale is quite low in the workforce, and he has turned doctors and nurses into clock-watchers. Goodwill has been destroyed. The recent MTAS process has also been a shamble. For the first time in NHS history, doctors will be unemployed by the thousands. Ironic isn't it, when only about 5 years ago, we were so short of doctors that we had to send team of NHS managers abroad to recruit. Now we are exporting doctors overseas; Australia being the popular choice.

So, the coronation of Uncle Gordon is in the process. I have admired his intellect over the last 10 years. I do not think that he will make a lot of difference compared to the Blair years. This is because I think he was behind a lot of Blair's policies anyway. Certainly, he has done a good job as Chancellor of the Exchequer, although some would disagree with that. Nevertheless, because of his intellect and also I admit it, I felt sorry for him for having to wait for so long, I think he should have an opportunity to exercise his intellect openly, rather than just behind the scene.

So would I vote Labour again in the next election? Yes, I would like to do so for the above reason. However, I would be voting Conservative as there is no hope that Labour would win in my constituency. But, I am fairly sure that it would be a Labour 4th. term, as the Tories have not present the case to be the new party of government.

Non PC.....Gulp!!

Sir Patrick: Blame women for bad TV

Press Assoc. - Tuesday, May 8 10:03 am

Eccentric astronomer Sir Patrick Moore has claimed that TV is worse today because the BBC is run by women.

(Advertisement)

The presenter of The Sky At Night also belittled female newsreaders in an interview with Radio Times, describing them as "these jokey women".

Sir Patrick, 84, criticised the BBC for showing interesting programmes very late at night, especially the 650th edition of The Sky At Night, which was put out at 2am.

"The trouble is that the BBC now is run by women and it shows: soap operas, cooking, quizzes, kitchen-sink plays. You wouldn't have had that in the golden days," he said.

"I would like to see two independent wavelengths - one controlled by women, and one for us, controlled by men. I think it may eventually happen."

The TV veteran also said he would "rather be dead in a ditch" than appear on Celebrity Big Brother and he compared the soap opera EastEnders to diarrhoea.

When asked about his television "guilty pleasure", he said: "I used to watch Doctor Who and Star Trek, but they went PC - making women commanders, that kind of thing. I stopped watching."

Sir Patrick has presented The Sky At Night since April 1957, making him the longest-serving television presenter.

The xylophone-playing cricket enthusiast was knighted and appointed as a member of the Royal Society in 2001.

His interview in the next edition of Radio Times is part of the magazine's Great British TV survey, which asks TV celebrities for their thoughts on the current state of British television.

Copyright © 2007 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

I can't believe that folks are still making such a Non-PC statement in the 21st Century! But, ladies perhaps you should forgive him...............look, he's an octogenarian. Ha! Ha! Did someone not tell him that we survived the millenium bug, and fast approaching the end of the first decade of this century? Gosh! Did I just make a non-PC statement myself and be opened to the accusation of ageism? Tut-tut!

On the serious side however, I can see his point of view. Not the one about the women producing poor quality programmes, of course. I think he meant that the BBC is producing more sensationalism programmes, rather than the traditional high quality documentary style programmes which were more educational. I think this is because BBC has to compete with commercial TV channels like ITV and Channel 4. Although they get all our license fees, BBC also has to pursue additional funding from advertising. In the past, they were the only broadcasting company with no competition, and therefore has a freer hand in producing what they like.

Having said all that, I still think that BBC does still produce some good programmes. My all time favourite would have to be "The Blue Planet". The shots are just amazing!. My other daily or weekly favourites would still be Question Times and This Week with Andrew Neil, Dianne Abbott and Michael Portillo. On most days, I would tune in to BBC News, although I think Channel 4 News with Jon Snow is giving them a run for their money. However, when I am back from work and tired out each day, I may not always want to watch the cerebral programmes. I would gravitate to "less intelligent" programmes like The Apprentice tonight. Yeah...I thought Sir Alan fired the wrong guy tonight. Katie should have gone. I think her integrity is in suspect. My two favourites to win this series would be Tre and Christina.

To be honest, I thought that most directors and producers of BBC programmes are men. But what do I know? The only names associated with BBC that comes to my mind are Greg Dyke and Andrew Gilligan; who were both either sacked, or made to leave.

Psssst! Can someone tell Sir Patrick that Celebrity Big Brother is produced by Channel 4 and not BBC? And oh! It can actually be quite a lot of fun.....ask George Galloway!

A British Flaw

Police investigating the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine McCann are considering the possibility of a British abductor.

(Advertisement)

Madeleine, from Leicester, disappeared from the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Algarve, on Thursday night.

Her parents Gerry and Kate were eating dinner a short distance away and returned on a regular check to discover their daughter was gone.

Police have found evidence that she was abducted but have not disclosed details. On Monday newspaper Correio da Manha reported that police suspect a British captor.

Broadcaster RTP also interviewed Barra da Costa, a former inspector in the Judicial Police, PJ, who said that sources within the force believed that Madeleine's abductor could be from the UK.

He said that contacts in the investigation team had told him that a working description detectives are using suggested someone of English appearance.

He said there was also a feeling that the apparently meticulous planning, without leaving evidence, could also point to a British rather than Portuguese intruder.

Police have not commented but earlier, when asked specifically whether the suspect was British or Portuguese, the PJ refused to specify.

Experts have put together an artist's impression of a "suspect" but have not publicly revealed details. It is believed however, that the image shows only the rear view of a man - the back of his head and hair more than the features.

It was also reported on Monday that police are investigating a claim that a man was seen dragging a young girl along towards a marina in the nearby town of Lagos.

"Her parents were eating dinner a short distance away"; according to other earlier reports, the restaurant was 180 metres away. Is this a short distance? Don't get me wrong . I fully sympathise with the family and feel for their loss. However, my feelings are even more acute for the little girl. I do not condone with the act of kidnapping of anyone.

One has to asked," If this is a Spanish family, would it have happened?" You see, a Spanish family would have their child out to dinner with them. They would have no problems that their kids are out late with them. They would not have left their kids at home. However, a British couple wants to spend time on their own. They want "quality" time away from their kids. No matter that they had checked every half an hour interval. The fact of the matter is that their children were not supervised at all times. Disaster only takes a second to happen usually, and it did on this occassion. What I cannot understand is that both parents are doctors; one is a consultant cardiologist, and the other is a general practitioner. Surely, they could afford a childminder.

Living in UK, one of the things I dislike is that kids are not always welcomed in the restaurants; especially in the evening. It may be difficult to find a family -friendly restaurant at times. Why is that? Is it not possible to enjoy ourselves in our children's company? The Casual Philosopher is confused......

Brotherly Love

PATNA, India (Reuters) - Villagers at a wedding in eastern India decided the groom had arrived too drunk to get married, and so the bride married the groom's more sober brother instead, police said on Monday.

(Advertisement)

"The groom was drunk and had reportedly misbehaved with guests when the bride's family and local villagers chased him away," Madho Singh, a senior police officer told Reuters after Sunday's marriage in a village in Bihar state's Arwal district.

The younger brother readily agreed to take the groom's place beside the teenage bride at her family's invitation, witnesses said.

"The groom apologised for his behaviour, but has been crying that word will spread and he will never get a bride again," Singh said by phone.

Above is yet another example of a man taking his brother's place. It is interesting to know that in different cultures and times in history, a man takes his brother's place in marriage. I am of course referring to the first account of this type of "sacrifice", which is mentioned in the Holy Bible in Genesis 38: 8-9. This passage talks about Onan, who had to marry his brother's wife after the brother died. This is so that she can have a son, to be raised as his brother's heir. He did not want to give his brother an heir; so he spilled his seed on the ground, while making love to the woman ; and thereby giving root to the term "Onanism".

Thankfully this practice of marrying a brother's wife (should anything happen to him) is no longer prevalent in society today. However, is the principle of a brother taking over the responsibility of his brother's family still practiced widely in society today? And did it all begin with Onan? The Casual Philosopher ponders......

Equality for Women

Is equality possible without discrimination? Are they in contradiction, or can one exist without the other? Let's look at some example.

When New Labour had their landslide victory in 1997, they had a lot of women MPs, so called Blair's Babes. This was because there was a women's shortlist. Positive discrimination! Tony Blair, then decided to appoint quite a few of them to be his cabinet minister, instead of the traditional male dominated club. Positive discrimination! When a plane crash or when a boat or ferry is about to sink....."women and children first".... Positive discrimination! When a door is opened, ladies first. Positive discrimination! The partner in a relationship that gets sterilised.....woman first. Positive.....errr, maybe negative discrimination! It's not over till the fat lady sings. Positive discrimination! Who always have the prerogative of being late? Women...........it starts at the altar. Damn, knew I got it wrong somewhere. Positive discrimination! Who gets the only bathroom first? Women....positive discrimination! Who gets the last seat on a bus? Women...positive discrimination! Who gets to plea the "headache" excuse? Women....positive discrimination!

Perhaps, discrimination is essential to swing back decades of inequality to women, and improve their lot in society............or is it?? The Casual Philosopher muses....

48 hours to live..

Have you ever been in a consultation with a doctor and he tells you that your loved one has only 48 hours to live? Or have you been told by a cancer specialist that you would only have another 6 months of life left in you? How do the doctors know? Do they keep a life-o-meter that they can be almost exact in predicting the duration of life left of a person in their care? Are all these evidence- based or evidence-free medicine? Is it helpful for the patients and relatives when these proclamations are made? Perhaps, it may spur them into making those decisions that they have always procrastinate on, e.g. in making a will, or making amends with their estranged ones? Or worse, could these be the beginning of a self-fulfilling prophecy? And heaven forbids....could the doctors be suffering from their schizophrenic god-like delusions again..????!!

The Casual Philosopher ponders on...