'Justice For Pooja Kumari' – Hindu girl killed for refusing marriage proposal in Sindh

[TheSolution]

The way anti-Islam our government is I will not be surprised if they actually implement such a bullshit law (recently there was an Islam-hatred based anti-conversion bill)

How is the government anti-Islam?

IK literally screams about Islamaphobia all day

 

[Maula Jatt]

How is the government anti-Islam?

IK literally screams about Islamaphobia all day

when you have a crush on mullah fazalullah every other gov seems un-islamic

 

[Mujahid Memon]

How is the government anti-Islam?

IK literally screams about Islamaphobia all day

If I am in love with a Hindu girl and she too then who the hell is state to stop us from our natural instinct?

 

[K_Bin_W]

Capital punishment if not the state has failed its citizens.

 

[Warking]

But that way people will never inter-mingle. In India the progressives had created an environment for inter-faith couples ( actually couples in the first place ) but in recent times the Hindutvadis came from one side screaming "Love Jihad" and on the other side the Catholic Church was the first one to scream "Love Jihad" and on yet another side the Tableeghis came in with their own anti-progress ideas. So majority of India as of now is a mix of people who just mingle because of practical socio-economic and political necessities but on social side there is not much interaction especially between opposite genders.

A Muslim women islamicly cant marry a non Muslim man. if you say otherwise your in violation of Islam. Thus total ban on interfaith marriages is a good decision.

 

[TheSolution]

If I am in love with a Hindu girl and she too then who the hell is state to stop us from our natural instinct?

What is stopping you from enacting your natural instinct?

 

[Abu Shaleh Rumi]

Hang that mothertoast...

 

[Mujahid Memon]

What is stopping you from enacting your natural instinct?

Parliamentary panel rejects anti-forced conversion bill amid protest by minorities’ lawmakers

A parliamentary committee on Wednesday rejected the anti-forced conversion bill after the Ministry of Religious Affairs opposed the proposed law while lawmakers from minority communities protested the decision. The bill came under discussion during a meeting of the Parliamentary Committee to...

defence.pk

Read replies #2, 3, 8 and 9 in above thread

BTW my initial reply was to a guy who was advocating complete ban on interfaith marriages

 

[jamahir]

A Muslim women islamicly cant marry a non Muslim man. if you say otherwise your in violation of Islam. Thus total ban on interfaith marriages is a good decision.

Generally those who think so adamantly on that 1400-year-old rule will do the contradictory thing of not allowing a female relative to have her consent even in her marrying a Muslim male of her choice and that is a true violation of Islam. The rule you speak of should be seen in the context of the time Islam came about and the idea would have been :

1. To think of the day-to-day practical difficulties of a Muslim female in her non-Muslim husband's household because the husband's culture would be dominant.

2. The socio-economic situation of the Muslim wife in a non-Muslim husband's household would be uncertain which goes against the spirit of Islam which is to also deliver justice and rights to the females.

However, we are in modern times and in many Muslim-majority countries there are parallel courts that have laws updated for the modern condition. In 2017 in the African country of Tunisia which is peopled mostly by Arab-Berbers the Muslim females won the right to marry non-Muslims and that has to be taken as a precedent :

Tunisia has overturned a law that banned women from marrying non-Muslims.

A spokeswoman for President Beji Caid Essebsi made the announcement and congratulated women on gaining "the freedom to choose one's spouse".

Until now, a non-Muslim man who wished to marry a Tunisian Muslim woman had to convert to Islam and submit a certificate of his conversion as proof.

Tunisia, which is 99% Muslim, is viewed as one of the most progressive Arab countries in terms of women's rights.

The new law comes after President Essebsi pushed for the lifting of the marriage restriction decree that was put in place in 1973.

He said in a speech last month, during celebrations of the National Women's day, that the marriage law was "an obstacle to the freedom of choice of the spouse".

The restriction was also seen as violating Tunisia's constitution which was adopted in 2014 in the wake of the Arab Spring revolution.

Human rights groups in Tunisia had also campaigned for the law's abolition.

The order comes into force immediately and couples are free to register their marriages at government offices.

An important milestone​

Rana Jawad, BBC News, Tunis
Many Tunisians see the removal of the marriage restriction as another landmark in guaranteeing women's freedom in the country.
It sets apart Tunisia as the first country in the Middle East and North Africa to remove the legal hurdles to marrying outside the official state religion.

It is an important milestone in a region where religion in marital ties can be at the heart of many a family feud, and long struggles against state laws.

Unlike Muslim women, men can marry non-Muslim women without providing any religious documents.
Tunisia is also home to a Jewish, as well as a small Christian, minority and it is not entirely clear how the marriage restriction applied to them.

Scrapping the decree may not do away with the cultural and traditional obstacles women face with their families in cases of inter-faith marriage, but it now offers Tunisian women greater freedom of choice from a legal perspective.

In July, the Tunisian parliament also introduced a new law that abolished a clause that allowed rapists to escape any punishment if they married their victims.
The country banned polygamy as far back as 1956, setting it apart from other Muslim-majority nations.

However, women in Tunisia still face discrimination, particularly in matters of inheritance which still prioritises sons over daughters.

The Tunisian Association of Democratic Women estimates that nearly 70% of Tunisian women are victims of abuse.

Now that is a development for Muslims but what about for humans generally ?

Marriage is generally for two things : (a). Creation of children for reasons ranging from business handovers to selfishly having crutches in old life to just having children because local society expects that like in desi land, (b). To have companionship generally or because of being in love with a certain person. For the first reason what do you think should be the arrangement for all of humanity in the future ? When the USSR was established the revolutionaries experimented with setting up a thought process in the masses towards the abolition of the family system as the family was considered an artifact of historic Capitalism because the family was used to pass on the family wealth without distribution of it in society. The experiment did not succeed maybe because that subsystem was not set up right.

In the human future in 15 or so years it is inevitable for humans ( and a few other chosen animals ) to be birthed in artificial wombs and these wombs can be of two types : Those that birth a child newly and those that clone an existing human. The first type will be essentially asexual reproduction aka Parthenogenesis and this way the traditional method of birthing children through marriage will be replaced in favor of a system where according to situational population needs ( for example whether more males are needed or more females ) the children are birthed and raised in same-gender comfortable hostels. In such a system marriage will only remain for companionship. So, do you think when humanity has growing settlements on Mars starting the mid-2030s and then those settlements develop into connected governed areas should Muslims going there and being surrounded by an evolved social structure, otherize themselves in intimate relationships, not getting into relationships with non-Muslims ? Should Muslims take to Mars and even on an evolved Earth the pre-Partition Indian idea of "Hindu paani, Muslim paani" ? And taking forward the USSR's desire after the 1917 revolution what will be the structure of society, particularly between genders, in a situation where the society is harmonious with no need for people to worry about their socio-economic situation ?

@Joe Shearer @DrJekyll @Mentee @fitpOsitive @Mentee

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Bilawal should answer this rising wave of robberies and violence

 

[jamahir]

@Bilal9 @Atlas, didn't tag you for post# 69 above.

 

[Warking]

Generally those who think so adamantly on that 1400-year-old rule will do the contradictory thing of not allowing a female relative to have her consent even in her marrying a Muslim male of her choice and that is a true violation of Islam. The rule you speak of should be seen in the context of the time Islam came about and the idea would have been :

1. To think of the day-to-day practical difficulties of a Muslim female in her non-Muslim husband's household because the husband's culture would be dominant.

2. The socio-economic situation of the Muslim wife in a non-Muslim husband's household would be uncertain which goes against the spirit of Islam which is to also deliver justice and rights to the females.

However, we are in modern times and in many Muslim-majority countries there are parallel courts that have laws updated for the modern condition. In 2017 in the African country of Tunisia which is peopled mostly by Arab-Berbers the Muslim females won the right to marry non-Muslims and that has to be taken as a precedent :

Now that is a development for Muslims but what about for humans generally ?

Marriage is generally for two things : (a). Creation of children for reasons ranging from business handovers to selfishly having crutches in old life to just having children because local society expects that like in desi land, (b). To have companionship generally or because of being in love with a certain person. For the first reason what do you think should be the arrangement for all of humanity in the future ? When the USSR was established the revolutionaries experimented with setting up a thought process in the masses towards the abolition of the family system as the family was considered an artifact of historic Capitalism because the family was used to pass on the family wealth without distribution of it in society. The experiment did not succeed maybe because that subsystem was not set up right.

In the human future in 15 or so years it is inevitable for humans ( and a few other chosen animals ) to be birthed in artificial wombs and these wombs can be of two types : Those that birth a child newly and those that clone an existing human. The first type will be essentially asexual reproduction aka Parthenogenesis and this way the traditional method of birthing children through marriage will be replaced in favor of a system where according to situational population needs ( for example whether more males are needed or more females ) the children are birthed and raised in same-gender comfortable hostels. In such a system marriage will only remain for companionship. So, do you think when humanity has growing settlements on Mars starting the mid-2030s and then those settlements develop into connected governed areas should Muslims going there and being surrounded by an evolved social structure, otherize themselves in intimate relationships, not getting into relationships with non-Muslims ? Should Muslims take to Mars and even on an evolved Earth the pre-Partition Indian idea of "Hindu paani, Muslim paani" ? And taking forward the USSR's desire after the 1917 revolution what will be the structure of society, particularly between genders, in a situation where the society is harmonious with no need for people to worry about their socio-economic situation ?

@Joe Shearer @DrJekyll @Mentee @fitpOsitive @Mentee

Quite a wordy argument that holds no weight from a theological point and I am arguing from a theological point of view. As of now to my knowledge I haven't seen any verse in shai hadith or Quran or Ijma that says Muslim girls should forcibly marry men that their family tells them too. I am not supportive of anyone that dose that as it is against Islam. The points you gave on why Islam didn't allow Muslim women to marry are correct but I would like too expand on the 2 point so your saying a Muslim women would be able to fully practice religion while in household of a non Muslim and this would be protected by a court do you think courts didn't exist in ancient times in Muslim countries thus shouldn't it have been made legal at that time? If I may acquire what did you exactly mean by " Updated laws" you mean laws set forth by leftist liberalism. Brother do you consider word of Quran inferior to that of leftists or am I making a misunderstanding? So one African country with Arab population has legalized interfaith marriages now mean that Laws of Islam are void?

Geez that's one huge post I have exams its hard to respond to all of it, can you please write it to the point? Anyhow, the Islamic reason of marriage is to further human population and make sure we don't die out. what do you mean that it is selfish to allow your children to take over your business? What's wrong is if you have children just to use them for your work and not allow them to do what they want to do in life. second is as you mention is companionship and the joy to have your own children and rise them with Islamic values. wait are you in favor of abolishing family unit? bruh as your saying that system is doomed to fail anyway going against phycological human nature what did they expect lol reinforces my view that coomie system is retarded like their leaders.

Coming to that third paragraph oh boy did I get a good laugh! HAHA you realize why cloning humans is banned? Its highly unethical who would they see as family? family isn't a husband and a wife its a whole unit of society with grandparents, father a mother etc. In such a system you bet that the suicide rate would be extremely high as family caters to psychological needs as well. Also we cant make life in a way that we take non living materials and form them into living cells I mean we haven't even fully understood how to make basic cytoplasm with dead materials. Also Isn't having children to cater for material needs for more man power contradictory to what you said about having business handovers? having children only for work? I think you should stop treating humans as robots that when you need then you would produce a few more. we are an sentient species this is another reason I hate communism its deep materialism look at us as humans not robots lens.

Now the space part! why do people go directly to mars? we always forget about the moon, moon needs some love too man its going to deffo be the first celestial body that we colonize. Anyway sorry for the little rant, now to the point in this para u are saying that Muslim should seek non Muslim validation and leave Islamic values too assimilate with non Muslim society? Bro what's wrong with you also by partition "hindu muslim panni" I think your mistaking ethnicity for religion Islam doesn't work based on ethnicity a Muslim can be of any ethnicity. It doesn't matter if your from earth or mars.

 

[AlKardai]

No one cares she was only a Hindu


Before you jump on those words,let me repeat them

No one cares she was only a Hindu,.she has very low value in our society whether you like it or not, their is wide scale hatred for them and most people will not bat a eye lid

What the hell? People DO care
I care, and multiple others do too. Stop spreading hate.

 

[hussain0216]

What the hell? People DO care
I care, and multiple others do too. Stop spreading hate.

Hindus have less aukad then street dogs in Pakistan

They are largely reviled and hated, it's not spreading hate, it's just a statement of fact

 

[-=virus=-]

wtf are Hindus even doing in Pakistan ? .. serves em right