A genuine secular democracy would not be so insecure

The article by Dr Bronwyn Winter “Why 'questioning secularism' destroys religious freedom”, published On Line Opinion, May 2, 2008, goes further to drag several names into this including mine, Hanan Dover, Sheik Shady and others, based on allegations and without initially acknowledging my published rebuttal of these allegations. She then makes the claim, without any substantiation, that a certain event at which I spoke was organised by a “fundamentalist” student association. This is simply untrue, it is not factual and is not relevant to the debate.

The issue in question is whether this so called Centre of Excellence is living up to its name. I have no problem in Dr Habib teaching erotica. In my younger days, I wrote a 20-page thesis on love, attraction and emotions that is so complex (or so they tell me) that many readers drop with emotional exhaustion after the first few pages. It was an expression of my thought processes at that time in my life which neither defines me or my faith, even if that experience compelled me to purchase Professor Milad Doueihi’s well presented and researched A perverse history of the human heart which, despite being a very good book, is still waiting for me finish reading.

A genuine secular democracy should not be so insecure: I should be able to present arguments in defence of my faith and also my point of view, even if either of these is unpopular. This secular democracy should be willing to accord me the right to criticise it, particularly if it expects me to allow it to criticise my sanctities. I should be able to present my argument without the emotive accusation that I am somehow undermining or questioning secularism, which in this particular case is another excuse for bullying rather than convincing me into an opinion that differs to mine.

For the record, I am not seeking to dismantle secularism, but attempting to be constructive in approaching its application.