Talk:Islam Hadhari

The writer of the article, by stating it is redundant, assumes the reader knows the meaning of the word hadhari. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 132.79.14.15 (talk • contribs) .

One of the main characteristics of islam is that muslims are ordered to enjoin good and forbid evil. Islam Hadhari concept is obviously lacking in the forbidding evil part of islam. This is totally unacceptable for a government, who has greater power not only in enjoining good, but also in forbidding evil.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.32.10.217 (talk • contribs) .

That doesn't make much sense. For example "Protection of the rights of minority groups and women" is surely partially about 'forbidding' the 'evil' of certain people and groups who treat minorities and women with disdain. "Protection of the environment" is about 'forbidding' the 'evil' of those who those who seek to destroy the environment for selfish or whatever purposes. Etc, etc. There is no way you can promote the 'good' without in some way trying to stop or hindering those who will do 'evil'. Nil Einne 11:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Nil Einne, I am pretty sure that 82.32.10.217 is referring (complaining) to the fact that the Malaysian Government allows people to do what they please with a reasonably high degree of religious freedom (although not total religious freedom). People like 82.32.10.217 will not be happy until it is illegal for everybody to do anything in contravention of Islam. Let me ask you 82.32.10.217, do good Muslims regularly impose their will violently on others? Or is it just in special circumstances? Ryan Albrey 05:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Biased into negative only

I think this article is biased into negative things only. please cleanup. Zack2007 12:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what you're complaining about -- it's a moderately controversial topic, which has had vocal supporters and opponents, and both views are represented on the page. AnonMoos 13:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Both views? where is the other view? What I view is, what is in Islam Hadhari, and the critisms against it... is that both views? Zack2007

I would have to agree with Zack here. There is minimal explaination of what the concept is and what it's supporters claim is good about it. However there is a fairly long criticism section which makes the article unbalanced. The criticism section is largely unsourced so the article could be vastly improved by sourcing the criticism section and along with adding more detail on what it is and also on why it's supporters claim it's necessary or good. I should mention as someone said above that currently it doesn't really explain what Hadhari means nor does it link to an article explaining what the word means yet it mentions two different criticisms of the use of the word Nil Einne 11:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

There's a whole etymology section (based on the Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic. AnonMoos 15:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Please remove deadlinks - links for the Official governments about ISlamic Hadhari cannot be reached —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.95.148.201 (talk) 03:30, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:37, 15 June 2013 (UTC)