Religious Freedom in Islamic Countries- can u plz explain this?

[ironman]

And we debated and condemned that. It was just one acceptional case where barbaric Feduls did that in Sindh. Sindh is still under practices of Hinduism prevalent in interior. The Muslim Feudal lords have adopted many discriminatory Hindu rituals.

On the other hand the practice of not eating in the same plat of even sit together with a low cast Hindu in Hinudism is still prevalent, this untouchable practice is there despite passage of thousands of Years.

And you can not call it isolated incident. The killing of Chrisitians not on few numbers but in thousands in orrisa can not be called isolated incident.


As far as misuse of blasphemy laws in our country than its not limited to non-Muslims, as many Muslims have been killed using this law which is unfortunate and should be changed.

Off-topic / Troll alert.

 

[humanfirst]

@jana
In 60 years of our history there is only one time anti christian riots happened,that's why i called it isolated incident.And we are ashamed of it just the same way you are ashamed of blasphemy laws misuse of which happens many times in a year(particularly against non muslims because testimony of a non muslim hold less value in sharia court)Now back to topic

*Is there any punishment as per constitution of pakistan for a non muslim if he propagated his religion?
*Is a muslim man free to convert to christianity or other religion in pakistan?

 

[chakra]

Hindus failed to prove that it was idols worship place.

The fanatic Hindus burnt Babri Mosque, not only that but we have seen they also burnt Christians alive for the reason that they converted from Hinduism and were preaching Christianity.

Please refrain from mentioning those incidents that will force to start another war of words and derail this thread.
As for your comment I only wish to state the following facts:

Archaeological excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in 1970, 1992 and 2003 in and around the disputed site have indicated a large Hindu complex existed on the site.

In 2003, by the order of an Indian Court, The Archaeological Survey of India was asked to conduct a more indepth study and an excavation to ascertain the type of structure that was beneath the rubble. The summary of the ASI report indicated definite proof of a temple under the mosque. In the words of ASI researchers, they discovered :
"distinctive features associated with... temples of north India".

The excavations yielded:
"stone and decorated bricks as well as mutilated sculpture of a divine couple and carved architectural features, including foliage patterns, amalaka, kapotapali, doorjamb with semi-circular shrine pilaster, broke octagonal shaft of black schist pillar, lotus motif, circular shrine having pranjala (watershute) in the north and 50 pillar bases in association with a huge structure".

I would any day go by the ASI's report rather than your baseless facts.

Muslims simply don't want to accept the truth. And the govt. is forced to not to release this report because of fear of another major religious backlash.

One more point i am unable to understand is out of india's vast area of lands, the general of babur was unable to find a suitable place other than a temple which is the heart of hinduism?

 

[Spring Onion]

That is not an argument but rather a justification for something you seem to be confused about yourself. Say the Pope restricts all non-catholics from entering the Vatican. I guess most people will be battering that point all the time.

Just saying.

Well i dont see anything wrong if the Pope restricts all non-catholics from entering Vatican ))) i dont see any reason for non-catholics to enter vatican other than clicking the architecture.

Check 9:28. Also, Mecca is bigger than just Ka'aba now. "Not having any reason to visit" should follow that they will not be present. A complete ban on entry is a different thing. Apologizing with something that simply is illogical and discriminatory is pretty wrong.

I said in that post i do not know what the reason Saudis gave for their action.

As far as i have seen in my own country anyone can enter even a Mosque irrespective of his religion.

 

[sparklingway]

*Is there any punishment as per constitution of pakistan for a non muslim if if propagated his religion?

No.

Article 20 of the Constitution:-

20. Freedom to profess religion and to manage religious institutions.
Subject to law, public order and morality:-
(a) every citizen shall have the right to profess, practise and propagate his religion; and
(b) every religious denomination and every sect thereof shall have the right to establish, maintain and manage its religious institutions.

The issue is that "subject to law, public order and morality" has been destroyed by post-Zia judges. If you're interested, I can send you papers on this issue. The judges, especially throughout the '50s and the '60s protected the fundamental right to profess and propagate religion so vehemently that it would seem to be the writings of judges in a country with complete separation of religion and state. In the wake of Ordinance XX (Ahmedi's banned), Judges have had to use ingenious, harebrained and useless arguments to justify limits on the freedom to propagate religion.

*Is a muslim man free to convert to christianity or other religion in pakistan?

As of now, No. However, this matter has never been brought to a court for interpretation. I'm sure the maulvi sahiban will go ape-**** over the issue, since all major sects and schools of thought hold that death is the right punishment for leaving Islam (with some differences over convert-revert and born-into-faith). Ghamidi and the likes who state that apostasy is not punishable now and was time bound are on the fringe, harassed and chased away from the country by the others.

The social pressures and known murders of "apostates" aside, the only case I know of where an "apostate" was brought before a court of law was back in the early '90s of one Tahir Iqbal. There was no legislation against this and the cleric therefore accused him of blasphemy. He died in a jail before proceedings could be completed.

 

[Spring Onion]

@jana
In 60 years of our history there is only one time anti christian riots happened,that's why i called it isolated incident.And we are ashamed of it just the same way you are ashamed of blasphemy laws misuse of which happens many times in a year(particularly against non muslims because testimony of a non muslim hold less value in sharia court)Now back to topic

I will come back to communal riots and their history in India later. Let me first reply your following points.

*Is there any punishment as per constitution of pakistan for a non muslim if he propagated his religion?

NO. Missionaries are working as much as in your country.

*Is a muslim man free to convert to christianity or other religion in pakistan?

Yes anyone can convert. There is NO punishment in Quran, or Islam or constitution for converting to other religion. There is only one draw back that after conversion you are considered a Non-Muslim.

 

[sparklingway]

There is NO punishment in Quran, or Islam or constitution for converting to other religion. There is only one draw back that after conversion you are considered a Non-Muslim.

99% of scholars in our country will disagree with you in entirety. I won't go into the religious arguments but as a political reminder, the MMA introduced the Apostasy Act 2006 for discussion in the Parliament. It wasn't voted on and was allowed to get buried under the burden of papers though.

 

[Iggy]

Please refrain from mentioning those incidents that will force to start another war of words and derail this thread.
As for your comment I only wish to state the following facts:

Archaeological excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in 1970, 1992 and 2003 in and around the disputed site have indicated a large Hindu complex existed on the site.

{}

One more point i am unable to understand is out of india's vast area of lands, the general of babur was unable to find a suitable place other than a temple which is the heart of hinduism?

You might wanna copy this and store this on your desktop because with in 1 month she will say the same thing again and you will have to retype it again ..Me and Jana are retyping the same thing we discussed earlier now in another thread

 

[KS]

Hindus failed to prove that it was idols worship place.

Hindus need not prove anything to any one regarding Ayodhya.

No offence ....but has Prophet Muhammed's existence been proved scientifically...similar is the case of Lord Ram.

It is our religion.Proof is not required

The fanatic Hindus burnt Babri Mosque, not only that but we have seen they also burnt Christians alive for the reason that they converted from Hinduism and were preaching Christianity.

Ever wondered hw the mosque came up there in the first place..? lol
it was built on top of a temple after razing it to the ground.So technically speaking if that is correct..this is correct.

As regards to Christians..was not 2 of then gunned down in ur country and the killers escaped under blasphemy laws..?
Atleast we dont have that kind of laws which help killers escape.

 

[sparklingway]

No more Babri Mosque debate. Transfer your debate to this thread if you wish to continue these arguments:-

http://www.defence.pk/forums/current-events-social-issues/7943-demolition-babri-mosque.html

 

[Spring Onion]

Please refrain from mentioning those incidents that will force to start another war of words and derail this thread.
As for your comment I only wish to state the following facts:

Archaeological excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in 1970, 1992 and 2003 in and around the disputed site have indicated a large Hindu complex existed on the site.

In 2003, by the order of an Indian Court, The Archaeological Survey of India was asked to conduct a more indepth study and an excavation to ascertain the type of structure that was beneath the rubble. The summary of the ASI report indicated definite proof of a temple under the mosque. In the words of ASI researchers, they discovered :
"distinctive features associated with... temples of north India".

The excavations yielded:
"stone and decorated bricks as well as mutilated sculpture of a divine couple and carved architectural features, including foliage patterns, amalaka, kapotapali, doorjamb with semi-circular shrine pilaster, broke octagonal shaft of black schist pillar, lotus motif, circular shrine having pranjala (watershute) in the north and 50 pillar bases in association with a huge structure".

I would any day go by the ASI's report rather than your baseless facts.

Muslims simply don't want to accept the truth. And the govt. is forced to not to release this report because of fear of another major religious backlash.

One more point i am unable to understand is out of india's vast area of lands, the general of babur was unable to find a suitable place other than a temple which is the heart of hinduism?

There are different versions to that i will post later for the time being i wish to post something from a book. And who know if this character Rama is real or fiction in the first place.


"Is Ayodhya is the birth place of rama?? This question raised a related one: Is present day Ayodhya the Ayodhya of Ramayana?
The events of the history of rama, originaly told by Rama-katha which is no longer available to us, were re-written in the form of a long epic poem, the Ramayana by Valmiki. Since this is the poem and much of it could have been fictional, including character and places.

, historians can not accept the personalities, the events or the locations as historically authentic unless there is other supporting evidence from sources regarded as more reliable by the historians.

According to Valmiki Ramayana, rama the king of Ayodhya was born in Treta Yuga, that is thousands of years before the Kali Yuga which is suppose to beging in 3102BC.



JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

 

[Spring Onion]

99% of scholars in our country will disagree with you in entirety. I won't go into the religious arguments but as a political reminder, the MMA introduced the Apostasy Act 2006 for discussion in the Parliament. It wasn't voted on and was allowed to get buried under the burden of papers though.

Who would prefer current day scholars over Quran and Islamic rules as describe by the Prophet (BPUH)


I am not talking about politics but about Quran and Sunnah according to which there is no punishment for converting to other faiths

 

[Spring Onion]

No more Babri Mosque debate. Transfer your debate to this thread if you wish to continue these arguments:-

http://www.defence.pk/forums/current-events-social-issues/7943-demolition-babri-mosque.html

Please ask the Indians to do the same and do not bring Islam into that thread about Christains in Manipur .

If they bring into debate something which goes back to Babri Mosque here in this thread then we are bound to reply them here

 

[chakra]

There are different versions to that i will post later for the time being i wish to post something from a book. And who know if this character Rama is real or fiction in the first place.

And madam you believe that only your versions are true!!
Are you a member of ASI??, because if not, i won't believe any of your BS posted here. Anyways, leave this issue.

 

[KS]

There are different versions to that i will post later for the time being i wish to post something from a book.

The book name please

And who know if this character Rama is real or fiction in the first place.

Miss...I asked a similar question..Has Prophet Mohammed's existence been proved scientifically..?

"Is Ayodhya is the birth place of rama?? This question raised a related one: Is present day Ayodhya the Ayodhya of Ramayana?
The events of the history of rama, originaly told by Rama-katha which is no longer available to us, were re-written in the form of a long epic poem, the Ramayana by Valmiki. Since this is the poem and much of it could have been fictional, including character and places.

, historians can not accept the personalities, the events or the locations as historically authentic unless there is other supporting evidence from sources regarded as more reliable by the historians.

According to Valmiki Ramayana, rama the king of Ayodhya was born in Treta Yuga, that is thousands of years before the Kali Yuga which is suppose to beging in 3102BC.

As I told u....Religion knows no history or rather needs no history..So please stay off uncharted waters...Its a sensitive issue for us.