I value country over religion whats wrong with that attitude?
Being secular doesnot mean being irreligeous it means the state as an institution has no religion
No more draconian laws like Qasas and Diyat
Why do u value country over religion? Where is this notion that valuing country over everything (nationalism) is something admirable , coming from? The very notion of nation-state first emerged in the west. Its coming from the west which has a superiority complex regarding their culture just like the pre-islamic pagan arabs who judged people based on tribes and ethnicity. Why do u believe it any way? Is it because you think that since the west champions it , it must be something good? Their beliefs and cultural standards doesn't even have a foundation. Such beliefs are nothing but conjecture and as such inherently flawed. But islam is based on firm foundation. U value the religion/way of life send by the Creator of the heavens and the earth. How crazy it is to be believing in something else other than what the Creator of the heavens and the earth revealed. What a sad state of affairs you people are in.
Your understanding of secularism means that u don't even have an iota of idea abt secularism. Secularism was born out of apathy towards religion. It was born because of liberalism's tussle with christianity. Liberalism has all the features of a new religion. It has its own set of beliefs , methodologies , and laws and even sects/groups. Secularism is governance with laws derived from liberal socio-political beliefs. It doesn't separate religion from state , rather it replaces all religion with liberalism which rules the state. Secularism is the epitomization of tyranny .
Also by espousing secularism you are mistakenly conflating islam with Christianity (which was corrupted my man over time). Can you contemplate that , you are actually questioning the fact that Islam is a divinely revealed religion? Due to your ignorance abt Islam , you are mistakenly viewing the muslim world from a liberal western perspective and coming to absurdly wrong conclusions.
Islam doesn't allow separation of religion from state. And calling islamic laws draconian , is blasphemy. DO u have the conscience , knowledge , and understanding to even contemplate that?
We have examples of perfectly functioning secular countries without oil.They are ranked higher than us on gender equality,labour rights,income equality and religeous freedom
Your inferiority complex and ignorance is glaring here. DO u question these notions of gender equality , religious freedom , labor rights etc? or just accept them at face value because its coming from the west? Why do u take these notions as something good?
Muslim countries can never ever compete with western countries in these indicators until or unless muslims give up Islam and that's exactly what the west wants. All these western notions of rights , freedom and equality is based on western beliefs of liberalism and thus antithetical to Islam.
Western notions of human rights blatantly oppose Sharia. It is not only antithetical to Islam but is antithetical to every other non-western societies and culture. These western beliefs r based on conjecture and flawed societal norms of the west.
You r actually judging your country and society based on their standards , terms and conditions without even realizing that. You are an epitome of intellectually colonized liberal.
It also proves that you are ranting against islamic laws based on sheer ignorance. U have made up your mind that u like western values of liberalism and now trying to force your beliefs on the whole country. Now that's intolerance and extremism coupled with ignorance. Why should your beliefs and values rule over the rest?
The Ottoman Caliphs abandoned shariah in the early nineteenth century. Do you consider their doing so "treason" as well? Do you think it worthwhile for Pakistanis to ask why the Caliphs gave up on shariah rather than keep it?
If u r referring to the western imposed reforms of mid 19th century (tanzimat reforms) , then that was one of the primary factors of the collapse of the ottoman empire. If you force a lion to eat grass it will die.
What was the true identity of Pakistan?
So that people like you can destroy the country?
In what state is our country thanks to the sultan and followers?
We have a diyanet isleri bakanligi (ministry of religious affairs)
http://www.diyanet.gov.tr/ taking care of religious affairs.
We never banned Din,Ezan Kuran-i Kerim,you are talking bs.
Ahlaq is what you get when you grow up,it has nothing to do with Din but with culture and society.
Who gave you Ahlak dersi(lessons)?
Dont talk bs to score points with Pakistanis,even M.Ali Jinnah(Grey Wolf) was an admiror of Ataturk and wanted the same system for his country but the Islamist lobby was to strong so he had to go with Islamic Republik of Pakistan,and after his passing away,the Islamists turned Pakistan into what it is now.
Maybe you should take some history lessons about the creation of Pakistan first?
A tip,start with the meaning of the flag.
Ataturk banned Azan in arabic , changed your script to latin, banned the fez and closed madrassas. The whole world knows it.
Jinnah was a human and thus would inherently make mistakes and he having good views of ataturk was one such mistake. Even so unlike ataturk , he was pragmatic and tolerant enough to realize that secularism doesn't work and as such he didn't want secularism in such a diverse country like PAK. History is proof of that.
Islamic political forces never ever ruled PAK. PAK has always been ruled by secularists who also turned out to be ruthless dacoits and corrupt zealots. Islamic law in PAK is only on paper while in reality its a secular state..................a good example of secular muslim state i must say.
The name was ''Republic of Pakistan'' but changed into ''Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 1956,how and why did that happen?
This was not what Quaid-e-Azam wanted.
And what about Zia ul Haq?
Dictator Muhammad Zia ul Haq was the sixth President of Pakistan from 1978 until his death in 1988. Having declared martial law for the third time in the country’s history in 1977, he ruled for 11 years. His period is known as a black period in Pakistani history, particularly due to increased discrimination against religious minorities and women.
Proactive Islamization started in Zia’s period. He introduced many discriminatory laws. These laws and institutions include anti-blasphemy laws, separate votes for minorities, Hudood ordinance and law of evidence (Qanoon-e-Shahadat), ushar and zakat (Islamic taxes), establishment of Shari’ah court, laws according to Islamic injunctions and establishment of Council of Islamic Ideology. These laws were obviously made to Islamize Pakistani society.
Zia introduced the Shari’ah court by amending the Constitution, which promoted religiosity and ultimately strengthened Islamic fanatics and extremist organisations. The purpose of the Federal Shari’ah Court not only jeopardised the judicial system of the country, but also impaired the independence of Parliament. The Islamic values enshrined in the Qur’an and Sunnah became part of that country’s criminal law.
These provisions and the Islamic punishments—which included stoning to death, amputation of hands and feet and flogging in public—were also made applicable to non-Muslim citizens of the country. Minorities have consistently raised their voice against the application of the Shari’ah to which they do not belong. Women have been very critical of the enforcement of these laws too, particularly the laws relating to adultery and rape.
The Constitution of Pakistan contradicts itself in many ways. On the one hand, it ensures protection of minorities and on the other discriminates against minorities and treats them as second class citizens. Some of the articles in the Constitution of Pakistan guarantee equal rights and protection of minorities. Article 20-21-22 guarantees religious freedom and safeguards to all its citizens; Article 19, freedom of speech and expression. Article 25 says that all citizen are equal before the law.
Article 36 assures that the state shall safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of minorities. Yet, Article 2 says Islam shall be the state religion. Similarly, Article 41 says that the President of the state must be a Muslim. In addition, the prime minister of Pakistan must also be a Muslim.
1. Blasphemy laws in Pakistan are in conflict with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in particular with Article 7 (equality before the law and protection against discrimination, Article 19 (freedom of opinion and expression) and Article 18 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion).
2. Blasphemy laws in Pakistan are also in violation of Articles 2, 3 and 4 of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion and Belief, which categorically prohibits religious discrimination.
3. Blasphemy laws violate articles 2 and 4 of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, too, which seek to protect fundamental freedoms “without any form of discrimination” and the right to freely “profess and practice their own religion”.
Islamist ruined Pakistans future and with most of the population being ''Islamists'',what is there to say?
DO u realize that the laws you quoted are Islamic laws based on Quran and Sunnah. These laws are ordained by Allah (swt) as a mercy to mankind. No sane muslim would dare slander Islamic law if he/she has a conscience and the most basic knowledge about his/her religion.
And are you putting "western human rights" as an argument against Islamic law ?
You should know that "Universal declaration of human rights" is antithetical to islam.
What makes western values universal? Why do u even consider that universal? The only answer can be that you have accepted western values as your own i.e you have been converted to liberalism mind , body and soul.
Btw this liberal imperialism of "universal human rights" is one of the reasons why , the west dare poke their noses into affairs of muslims , carpet bomb lands and do regime change.
IF u believe in western human rights , you should have no problem changing anti-terror laws as per EU demands and allow the secular PKK pillage turkey.
Btw,im also a Muslim but religion has no place in government,ill leave it here.
What would you call an mathematician who does not know and also doesn't believe when told that 2+2=4? Btw don't get me wrong. I am NOT saying that you are not a muslim.
