Aman Shanti

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Because they love nurturing Islamists.

Nehru and Gandhi were bigger islamists than Jinnah.

The fact Gandhi supported Islamic extremism is conviently forgotten by these Indian seculars.

My point being, there are plenty of expansionist, fascist if you will, ideologies and movements out there, why pick Shariah (as an ideology/system that would have hypothetically taken over the world) specifically?

I am also curious as to why you believe Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah were Islamists (or Islamist supporters), and how exactly you define Islamism.

 

[Sekhon Rafiqui]

Don't know about that. All world would be under sharia law if people like you are elected to power.

Shariah Law and me? Whatever gave you that diseased idea?

 

[Nilu Pule]

My point being, there are plenty of expansionist, fascist if you will, ideologies and movements out there, why pick Shariah (as an ideology/system that would have hypothetically taken over the world) specifically?

Because Muslims living in non Muslim countries pop more children, engage in aggressive proselytizing and play the victim card to bait leftists. This is done convert these countries into Dar Al Islam.

People like OP who are idealists believe that Muslims can get along with others and they just need to be shown more love. Gandhi did that. And he got stabbed in the back in 1946 General Elections.

So in short, only Islamic fascism is supported by the leftist so it has a greater chance to take over the world.

The right does not support fascism or nazism. So I don't see them taking over the world.

Shariah Law and me? Whatever gave you that diseased idea?

Your original post enlightens us on your views. You scream " Evil British " and then refuse to talk about the evil committed by their predecessors for about 1000 years.

You are no different from that idiot Sashi Tharoor.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Muslims living in non Muslim countries pop more children, engage in aggressive proselytizing

While I personally disagree with having too many children from the perspective of the planet not being able to necessarily sustain the rapid growth of the human population, what crime is committed by one demographic group having, on average, more children than another?

Similarly, while I personally don't care for religious proselytizing of any kind, as long as the laws are followed, what's wrong with it? Shouldn't people themselves be responsible for making decisions on faith (or the lack of it)? This criticism of religious proselytizing is one that I have a deeper issue with, as a Pakistani, because it's part of the justification used to suppress Ahmadis in Pakistan - that allowing Ahmadis themselves to openly call themselves 'Muslim', or their places of worship 'mosques', or letting them proselytize will 'lead other, proper, Muslims astray'.

 

[Sekhon Rafiqui]

You are no different from that idiot Sashi Tharoor.

Please don't equate me with Mr. Tharoor. My wife is alive and doing well. I don't have a fake Eton accent.

 

[Nilu Pule]

While I personally disagree with having too many children from the perspective of the planet not being able to necessarily sustain the rapid growth of the human population, what crime is committed by one demographic group having, on average, more children than another?

Similarly, while I personally don't care for religious proselytizing of any kind, as long as the laws are followed, what's wrong with it? Shouldn't people themselves be responsible for making decisions on faith (or the lack of it)? This criticism of religious proselytizing is one that I have a deeper issue with, as a Pakistani, because it's part of the justification used to suppress Ahmadis in Pakistan - that allowing Ahmadis themselves to openly call themselves 'Muslim', or their places of worship 'mosques', or letting them proselytize will 'lead other, proper, Muslims astray'.

Propogating a hateful ideology or a hateful religious thought should not be allowed.

I am not a Buddhist. But I have no problem with someone propogating Buddhism.

But on other hand I don't want someone to propagate XYZ religion which encourages violence against non XYZ followers. Atleast in non xyz majority countries. And has only brought violence and misery it goes.

This is my personal opinion.

Please don't equate me with Mr. Tharoor. My wife is alive and doing well. I don't have a fake Eton accent.

A vegetarian marrying a carnivore to me is the biggest example of hypocrisy.

Reminds of Gandhi who used to preach women empowerment and beat his wife behind closed doors.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Propogating a hateful ideology or a hateful religious thought should not be allowed.

So you specifically have a problem with all of Islam, and consider it a 'hateful ideology/hateful religious thought'?

If so, is your solution then that Islam and Muslims should be eliminated in their entirety?

 

[Nilu Pule]

So you specifically have a problem with all of Islam, and consider it a 'hateful ideology/hateful religious thought'?

If so, is your solution then that Islam and Muslims should be eliminated in their entirety?

That's your assumption.

What would your compatriots do to me if I preach Buddhism in Pakistan?

Why do certain hypocrites want secularism in other countries and Islamic rule in their original countries?

I will tell you what I want.

I hope that only Muslims stay in Muslim countries and only non Muslims stay in non Muslim countries.

Muslim can do whatever they want in their own land. And we can live in peace in ours.

The oldest mosque of the world is in Kerala. The hindu king of kerala gave land to Arab Muslims and allowed them to propogate their religion. Arabs to-date haven't reciprocated that gesture. What Muslims did to Non Muslims in India is documented history.

As a Muslim you cannot understand what I am tryin to say. But it's ok.

You will do what you have always done. But we need to learn from our mistakes or we perish.

 

[OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ]

That's your assumption.

What would your compatriots do to me if I preach Buddhism in Pakistan?

Why do certain hypocrites want secularism in other countries and Islamic rule in their original countries?

I will tell you what I want.

I hope that only Muslims stay in Muslim countries and only non Muslims stay in non Muslim countries.

Muslim can do whatever they want in their own land. And we can live in peace in ours.

The oldest mosque of the world is in Kerala. The hindu king of kerala gave land to Arab Muslims and allowed them to propogate their religion. Arabs to-date haven't reciprocated that gesture. What Muslims did to Non Muslims in India is documented history.

As a Muslim you cannot understand what I am tryin to say. But it's ok.

You will do what you have always done. But we need to learn from our mistakes or we perish.

Would you call yourself hypocrite to promote Hinduism as state religion or a traitor because it is not Muslims that caused India to be a declared secular state? Muslims got their state!

Secondly, truth prevails and for it to prevail it doesn't mix nor reciprocates to falsehood! That is your choice and you made a choice or your parents did it for you. Either way you cannot blame those who prevailed and live for one upmanship.

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

You don't have to. We will.

You do whatever you want as long as u stay in the borders of India, step foot out and you wont have anything to rule

 

[Nilu Pule]

Would you call yourself hypocrite to promote Hinduism as state religion or a traitor because it is not Muslims that caused India to be a declared secular state? Muslims got their state!

Secondly, truth prevails and for it to prevail it doesn't mix nor reciprocates to falsehood! That is your choice and you made a choice or your parents did it for you. Either way you cannot blame those who prevailed and live for one upmanship.

Yes. Muslims treacherously created pakistan, refused to migrate and then forced the Muslim loving Hindus in power to make India aa secular country.

Yet you can't prove Islam is true and other religions false.

Your posts proves my point. You want rights which you aren't willing to grant others.

 

[OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ]

Yes. Muslims treacherously created pakistan, refused to migrate and then forced the Muslim loving Hindus in power to make India aa secular country.

Yet you can't prove Islam is true and other religions false.

Your posts proves my point. You want rights which you aren't willing to grant others.

This is both absurd and amusing simultaneously!
Either way you're right about one thing and that is I can't keep up with you if you keep manufacturing facts along the way.
So, first thing first no one "forced" India to be secular even if Muslims hadn't struggled for their own state. So I'm not going to repeat it again be as it may...

As to the veracity of Islam you can deny that but one thing you cannot deny is that truth cannot mix with lie! Now be as it may...

 

[Death Professor]

I am not Padamchen (whoever he/she might be) neither am I an avatar of Joe. Spar with me if you will on my terms.

Don't worry, no one is really blaming you to be. You can only stoop at that level, if something devastatingly big happened in your life, that scarred you in some way. The issue is the following:

Your reflections are unfortunate. I mistook you for a person of depth, knowledge and intelligence. My mistake and my apologies. I feel sorry for you and I regret having replied to your comments. You don't deserve my attentions.

As long as you stay true to your footnote, you don't really have to do anything else here. And if you really start to hate a person there is always an 'ignore option' if you click on a profile. It's a very stupid suggestion to create your own blacklist/flame-list or whatever you name it. I mean, why would you create a blacklist? You don't want to reply to them but still want to read what they have to say? that doesn't make sense, that only shows how little of a man you are.

Now the issue is this, every person has an opinion and he has full right to express it. You may not like that opinion but you have no right to demean him for having that opinion. The quoted comment shows you being passive aggressive, will it get you banned/warned? nope, but what purpose does it serve other than force a reply in kind? If you don't agree with the other person, just stop and don't reply. The issue is the Brahmanian attitude, where a person thinks he is always right, where a person thinks he has the authority to deem some-one worthy of his replies, where a person thinks just because he has 15000+ posts on a forum that every newbie who has less than 500 posts is a cockroach or scum in his eyes.

The bottom line is, as your footnote says: Give respect, take respect.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The issue is the Brahmanian attitude, where a person thinks he is always right, where a person thinks he has the authority to deem some-one worthy of his replies,

Brahmanian attitude? There are plenty of Pakistanis that subscribe to the same fallacy you described above, and I dare say they’d shudder at being classified as ‘Brahmins’.

I hope that only Muslims stay in Muslim countries and only non Muslims stay in non Muslim countries.

Thank you for clarifying your position, but since the world is (and continues to rapidly become even more so) a messy amalgamation of all manner of demographics, how do you propose to address it in, say, India?

 

[Death Professor]

Brahmanian attitude? There are plenty of Pakistanis that subscribe to the same fallacy you described above, and I dare say they’d shudder at being classified as ‘Brahmins’.

Why don't you make a thread about it and share your experiences? obviously not naming names. Sure there is some ego, but I can assure you it isn't as inflated as I have experienced while interacting with some of the Indians.