Few things attracted me to this article. Firstly, the proposed land is given in an area far from the worshipping community (and in fact given in a place which is likely to be\u00a0unfavourable\u00a0towards the other religion). This is like asking for trouble (if the the report is correct). Who in their right mind will ask a temple to relocate to an area where the majority of them are of different religion?<\/p>\n
Secondly, there’s no mention on the status of the temple (legal or illegal). \u00a0If illegal, then the state government has to intervene. \u00a0Problem is to find a place to relocate. Not easy to find a place with sizeable Indian community, and even in those places, have plenty of temples.<\/p>\n
Thirdly, on a lighter note, the temple chairman’s name is Kevin Poh Ah Kow, which sound like Chinese name. \u00a0Interesting!<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\nMakkal Osai<\/em> reported that devotees of the riverside Kaliamman Temple in Pandamaran, Port Klang staged a peaceful demonstration carrying placards in the temple premises yesterday after a notice to relocate was sent by the landowners\u00a0Kumpulan Guthrie Bhd.<\/p>\n
The notice had said the 40-year-old temple would be demolished if it was not relocated.<\/p>\n
The alternative land offered by Guthrie, located about 4km away in Teluk Garing, had been rejected by the temple committee as there were no Indians living in the area.<\/p>\n
Temple\u00a0chairman Kevin Poh Ah Kow said that Teluk Garing was a Malay-majority area and anticipated it being a problem in future if Guthrie’s plan continued, hoping the Selangor Government would help resolve the problem.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n