I read with despair the recent newspapers reportings of the constitutional rights of the local town council to patrol and enforce moralities. The issue in contention maintained by city hall is, display of affection in the form of hug and kiss in public place is an act of indecency. A few months ago, a religious council tried unsuccessfully to form a volunteer group of snoop squad to patrol morality. Now, the city council seem to win the battle to have the constitutional rights to patrol and enforce morality !
What constitute indecency ? Maybe the Mayor through its vast team of legal experts should spelt out objectively, clearly, and technically the definitions and case references of immoral and indecent behaviors. Subjective interpretations of indecency by the city hall's “moral police” definitely nurture a fertile ground to breeds immoral selective enforcements and corruptions. And perhaps, the city hall should enlightened us on how these officers are trained and how they are certified to conduct enforcement of moralities ?
On the other hand, as a simple country bumpkin, I must admit I am not well versed in the priorities of city hall. But is it not that the City Hall's role is to serve the public welfares and comforts by ensuring the availability and quality of services and facilities to the public ? Then what in the hell are they doing snooping around in the town looking for “indecent couple” ?
With clogged drains, smelly leftovers of garbages uncollected, rampant vandalisms, street lights not workings, traffic lights malfunctions, unbearable traffic jams, disorderly public parks, etc. etc. etc. Don't you think it is more appropriate for these public servants to focus on the management of some of these despaired state of services and facilities ? Or Was it these public servants are not qualified to provide and manage public services and facilities ?
In the past, I have seen political leaders showing affections to their spouses in the form of hugging and kissing in public media. If the city hall is so insistent on the moral rights to conduct the policing of moralities, then why the double standard, and why there are no objective enforcement by these so call moralled officers to book these politicians. Why the discretionary and selective enforcement of the so called city hall's morality law on “weaker” citizens ?
If public display or showing affections is against the well beings and unacceptable to our Malaysian cultures, then please be objective, and specified clearly which aspect of our Malaysians' cultures and well beings are detrimentally affected.
On hindsight, with all the failing services and facilities provided by city hall, and with all the pressing issues unresolved, don't the city hall personnel has better things to do than going after the non important issues ? As a layman, I believe it is equally immoral and indecent for City Hall to not able to manage its priorities and resources. How do city hall account for the indecency of wasting limited resources on their inability to manage and prioritise ?
Is the church constitute a public place ? So for couples exchanging vows in the church, please refrain from holding hands and kissings in front of the priest who bless your marriage !
Maybe the city hall should conduct a advertisement campaign similar to the Health Ministry's anti cigarettes advertisement campaign ! Kissing ? Malaysia cakap TAK NAK ! Holding Hands ? Malaysia pun cakap TAK NAK. This TAK NAK, That TAK NAK........ Saman ? NAKKKKKKKK.
Let those who commit no sins cast the first stone.............