I was over at Percolator’s blog going through some comments that a Ms Lucia had left, slightly tangential to the issue under discussion there, and found my self here.

I typed up a long-assed comment, replete with quick assumptions to form an argument (not a very safe way to start debates, I’m sure) to see how far we can take arguments about imposing rules, and by what measure we impose certain rules.

Below is a comment I’ve tried posting in En Aizuddin’s blog:


***

The thing about media observations (i.e. what is reported in the news), is that they often leave out the view of the majority; its often the opinion of the minority that sensationalizes the news.

I think it would be more accurate to say, instead, that any news that can be sensationalized tends to be treated as the majority opinion.

To the substance of the latter half of your post, I think you’ve taken the whole discussion to one end of a logical extreme:

Firstly, one could make the argument that covering the aurah is a basic requirement of students’ dress code.

Is the above rule any more important that the consumption of halal food? Obviously not.

Therefore it follows that if rules regarding aurah must be applied, then rules regarding halal foods must be applied since there are no benchmarks by which we can distinguish between the importance of one rule over the other.

Secondly, if the above argument is the case, then it follows that all rules regarding the social conduct of students and/or people according to islam must be applied since, as above, there are no propositions to distinguish which rules are more important than the next (hence, either all must be applied or none at all).

That’s the logical consequence as far as I can work out.

If the above is the case, then we must take LKS’s demand seriously in a modified form: LKS complaints that such rules such as wearing the tudung is contrary to a “multi-religious society”. Let’s ignore that for a moment and say instead: the IIU, per the arguments above, must operate therefore as a religiously exclusive institution.

Instead, therefore, of complaining about rules one needs to adhere to, admitting instead that the IIU is religiously exclusive will therefore avoid any problems of complaints arising from disgruntled parties, yes?

Now, if the arguments are couched as above, the real issue becomes this: should practices by any university seek to be the most exclusive, or the most inclusive?

***

So, several issues I need clarification from those more versed in Islam, before I get accused of making hasty generalizations:

1. Are there guidelines or a basis of adjudicating the precedence of one “rule” over another?
2. Are there different classes of “rules” with respect to social conduct in Islam?
3. How would this affect the above argument?

And from the above, a more general question viz. to what extent universities should be inclusive or exclusive, which as a question in general can stand on its own for discussion.

What do you think?