Do I have the right to remain Ahmadi?

[illusion8]

That was the dream. The reality is now very different.

it wasn't a practical dream to begin with. Not when the state was formed on divisive and religious lines.

 

[livingdead]

You are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed. That has nothing to do with the business of the State. Muhammad Ali Jinnah

In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan. Muhammad Ali Jinnah

These all are attributed to him but not sure how authentic when they are unable to trace audio/video tapes from AIR library.

 

[INDIC]

You are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed. That has nothing to do with the business of the State. Muhammad Ali Jinnah

In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan. Muhammad Ali Jinnah

It was a dream very contradictory to Two Nation Theory.

it wasn't a practical dream to begin with. Not when the state was formed on divisive and religious lines.

Even with two nation theory, Pakistani society was still a bit liberal until 1970s when Zia ul Haq took it towards more intolerant.

 

[VCheng]

it wasn't a practical dream to begin with. Not when the state was formed on divisive and religious lines.

I would disagree. What Jinnah set out to do was eminently achievable, and indeed Pakistan did come close to that ideal in many ways. But then the unnecessary mix of Islam and State created the fatal flaw that is now drowning it all.

 

[illusion8]

It was a dream very contradictory to Two Nation Theory.

Even with two nation theory, Pakistani society was still a bit liberal until 1970s when Zia ul Haq took it towards more intolerant.

What would you attribute that brief spell of liberal society to?

 

[Irfan Baloch]

I would disagree. What Jinnah set out to do was eminently achievable, and indeed Pakistan did come close to that ideal in many ways. But then the unnecessary mix of Islam and State created the fatal flaw that is now drowning it all.

and its a downward spiral from that point onward

we are all smug and happy that it was Ahemdis before and now its Shias and our number will never come but if we pay attention to TTP agenda then the only legitimate "Muslim" is one thats of Deobandi faith. everyone else is "Boko Haram"

 

[illusion8]

I would disagree. What Jinnah set out to do was eminently achievable, and indeed Pakistan did come close to that ideal in many ways. But then the unnecessary mix of Islam and State created the fatal flaw that is now drowning it all.

The whole beginning was flawed, one cannot have both - an exclusive state for the Muslims of the sub continent, and one that wants to be secular at the same time.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

What would you attribute that brief spell of liberal society to?

the way it was supposed to be?

in case you didnt burn Jaswant Signs book on Jinnah before reading it... he clearly mentions why we were forced into seeking our own country.

had your Nehru been half as much compromising as Gandhi, Jinnah might not have parted his ways.. but thats history I think its best for India that we serve as a buffer from wahabification of India.

 

[INDIC]

What would you attribute that brief spell of liberal society to?

The deep dislike towards Hindus existed during those days but still it was tolerant towards different Islamic sects and also Pakistanis didn't try to be wannabe Arabs during those days and their many customs were very identical to Hindus. Zia ul Haq brought the complete change in the lifestyle of the Pakistanis.

 

[illusion8]

the way it was supposed to be?

in case you didnt burn Jaswant Signs book on Jinnah before reading it... he clearly mentions why we were forced into seeking our own country.

had your Nehru been half as much compromising as Gandhi, Jinnah might not have parted his ways.. but thats history I think its best for India that we serve as a buffer from wahabification of India.

So now it's India's fault for the existence of Pakistan and why there was a demand for it to begin with....ok, I can live with that.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

The whole beginning was flawed, one cannot have both - an exclusive state for the Muslims of the sub continent, and one that wants to be secular at the same time.

on the contrary sir
that was the idea .. Muslims were identified as a sizable nation. the idea was to keep their identity and live in a place where they had the say. being theocratic was not a prerequisite otherwise it would have happened while our founders were still alive.

(I strongly urge you to leave the partition bickering here. I respect your difference of opinion but lets stay focused on the plight of Ahmedis)

take declaring Ahmedis Kafir for example. it was an after thought.. just like declaring shia's as kafir is right now. Nawaz in his second tenure was being "advised" by his allies to bring legislation to have shias declared kafirs now they dont bother with that since they dont accept Pakistani constitution and are too happy to use the global Halal petro dollars to eradicate shias from the face of the earth from Syria to Pakistan.

 

[illusion8]

The deep dislike towards Hindus existed during those days but still it was tolerant towards different Islamic sects and also Pakistanis didn't try to be wannabe Arabs during those days and their many customs were very identical to Hindus. Zia ul Haq brought the complete change in the lifestyle of the Pakistanis.

How would you look at the break up of Bangladesh then? they were their own Muslim brothers weren't they? what happened to the liberal society that weren't willing to give a liberal space to Bengali speaking folks?.

on the contrary sir
that was the idea .. Muslims were identified as a sizable nation. the idea was to keep their identity and live in a place where they had the say. being theocratic was not a prerequisite otherwise it would have happened while our founders were still alive.

(I strongly urge you to leave the partition bickering here. I respect your difference of opinion but lets stay focused on the plight of Ahmedis)

take declaring Ahmedis Kafir for example. it was an after thought.. just like declaring shia's as kafir is right now. Nawaz in his second tenure was being "advised" by his allies to bring legislation to have shias declared kafirs now they dont bother with that since they dont accept Pakistani constitution and are too happy to use the global Halal petro dollars to eradicate shias from the face of the earth from Syria to Pakistan.

The whole concept of divisiveness in the society was inbuilt right at the formation period is my argument. That's when the flaw set in.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

So now it's India's fault for the existence of Pakistan and why there was a demand for it to begin with....ok, I can live with that.

meri Jaan ... no it wasnt India 's fault had you guys not burnt the books of your former foreign minister then you would understand but I can understand the overdoze of Modi---fication.. you get red mist in the eyes on the mention of Pakistan

please contribute to the subject otherwise let the moderators know you dont have anything to contribute.
honestly I find it very condescending to my fellow country men of Ahemdi faith

The deep dislike towards Hindus existed during those days but still it was tolerant towards different Islamic sects and also Pakistanis didn't try to be wannabe Arabs during those days and their many customs were very identical to Hindus. Zia ul Haq brought the complete change in the lifestyle of the Pakistanis.

get out of yourself please..........!!! topic is about Ahemdis

 

[INDIC]

How would you look at the break up of Bangladesh then? they were their own Muslim brothers weren't they? what happened to the liberal society that weren't willing to give a liberal space to Bengali speaking folks?.

I said a bit liberal in context of West Pakistan. The East and West had ideological difference right from the creation of Pakistan, Muslim League only brought regions with conflicting interest under the Pakistan movement, also both feared each others' dominance.

 

[illusion8]

I said a bit liberal in context of West Pakistan. The East and West had ideological difference right from the creation of Pakistan, Muslim League only brought regions with conflicting interest under the Pakistan movement, also both feared each others' dominance.

I guess we just need to discuss the plight of the Ahmedi's of Pakistan - I don't buy your ideological difference bit though.

What do you mean by "liberal" when one cannot accommodate ideological differences?,,,,beats me. I guess you have a different definition for "liberal when it comes to "West" Pakistan. But then we will leave it for someplace else.