In response to the article written by Farish A Noor entitled No bated breaths for result of out-Islamising race in malaysiakini, I feel he has given a false impression of what an Islamic state is.

He says: "Belonging to a religious state where religion X is the dominant religion means that a different understanding of citizenship itself will be introduced, where those who belong to religion X will be the 'natural citizens' of that state and others not.

The Islamists' claim that their model of an Islamic state will give equal treatment and status to all members of the Malaysian public has to be challenged for the contradiction that it is. This is not to say that Islam alone discriminates against non-Muslims.

The sad fact is that all religions discriminate as they single out and identify their respective constituencies and the Other.

From the excerpt above, it is clear that Farish came to the conclusion of an Islamic state being discriminatory to non-Muslim based on nothing but logical gymnastics.

In truth, the Madinah constitution states that:"All of us are considered as one ummah"

Farish's argument is far from the realities of an Islamic state and the Madinah constitution negates Farish's assumption very clearly.

Maybe Farish can explain how a Jewish man can win a case in a court of law presided by a Muslim judge against the caliphate at that time? If this is not non-discriminatory, then what is it?

Farish needs to refrain from resorting to hypothetical arguments of this sort and start getting in touch with reality.

In fact, Farish is actually wrong when he claims that: "Political Islam is no different in this respect that the political expression of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism or any other religion".

In actual fact such a notion is never proven and Farish is wrong for making such a claim. Maybe he can come up with some proof to back this claim.

Furthermore, a secular state is not free from discrimination based upon language, religion, race or even beliefs. For example, the secular South Africa discriminates against blacks for their race, religion, culture and even language. And the secular Soviet Union discriminated solely on religion.

How can Farish claim that secularism can provide a just atmosphere when history tells us otherwise?

My conclusion is that Farish's argument is not in touch with reality. He needs to prove his claims and logical gymnastics alone is insufficient.