This chapter examines Islam, Reformist discourse and human rights in a particular Muslim nation – Malaysia – offering that the close analyses provided of a particular context could be usefully applied to other contexts in examining resonance and difference. This analysis examines the issue of freedom of religion in Malaysia – guaranteed by the Malaysian Constitution and articulated in the discourse of universal human rights, specifically focusing on debates around apostasy or the right of a Muslim to change his or her religion, the proposal and draft legislation towards an Interfaith Commission for Malaysia, and an initiative that describes itself as Article 11, a reference to the section of the Malaysian Constitution that stipulates freedom of religion. Focusing on the arguments, reasoning and language used, this chapter uncovers how those arguing for freedom of religion invoke the concepts and language of international human rights and its norms, while examining how opponents use the concepts, arguments and language of theology, a narrow vision or version of nationalism and national security, as well as racial elitism and domination as Islam and Malay ethnicity are conflated in the Malaysian Constitution. The discourse in essence could be described as a dialogue of the deaf: speaking beyond each other, or refusing to take the Other’s position as a starting point. Through this examination, it will be revealed that an aspect of human rights in Malaysia – freedom of religion for Muslims and non-Muslims – is a more messy account, with even movements that fall well within the ambit of being “reformist” privileging other factors over fundamental rights and freedoms.