Khatam e nabowat bill passed

[The Sandman]

They asked the wrong question.

Chlo j phr to baat hi khatam hogyi judges ko to pta hi ni kya puchna hai kya ni

Just anyone would if they had nefarious designs.

Not everything is a conspiracy against Islam.

 

[Jungibaaz]

What's the need to disclose one's religious beliefs? Religious beliefs are personal, most Pakistanis are Muslims and therefore believe in khatm-e-nabuwwat anyway. More importantly, how does any of this effect your own faith?

Pakistan wasn't built as a secular republic, nor was Islam used as a tool to subvert democracy and civilian institutions the way Zia did, and nor did Jinnah envisage the full implementation of Sharia the way mullahs who then opposed the creating of Pakistan would have us believe.

We know that Jinnah spoke at length about Islam and the identity of Pakistan. He also said this:

“You are free; you are free to go to your temples. You are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion, caste or creed—that has nothing to do with the business of the state.”

Note that he made no comment about an exceptions to Ahmedis and any others deemed heretics. It has nothing to do with the business of the state.

 

[Syed1.]

They asked the wrong question. Just anyone would if they had nefarious designs. The question that needs to be asked is: how can all Muslims live together. By the way, Qadiyanis are not Muslims so they won't get invited to the party even.

Are Shias non-muslim too in your particular view of Islam? What about Bohri are they Muslim? Non-Muslim? In-between?


So you have been appointed by Allah to decide who is Muslim and non-Muslim? Nausabillah

 

[AUz]

There you go, secularist wanna be losers

Stop dreaming about a liberal secular Pakistan. It’s not happening. Ever. Inshallah!

@Syed1. @HAIDER @The Sandman

Covered by ARYnews, also posted today Shiekh Rasheed parliament speech,In which he loudly address this reform. But, I know Dawn paper didn't address this bill intentionally. I think you can also see " the reporters/arynews " today's date.

“Can’t even think of removing Khatam-e-Nabooyat clause, Astagfirullah. It’s part of constitution itself.”

PML(N).

May be close this retarded thread now?

@Admins

 

[CriticalThought]

What's the need to disclose one's religious beliefs? Religious beliefs are personal, most Pakistanis are Muslims and therefore believe in khatm-e-nabuwwat anyway. More importantly, how does any of this effect your own faith?

Pakistan wasn't built as a secular republic, nor was Islam used as a tool to subvert democracy and civilian institutions the way Zia did, and nor did Jinnah envisage the full implementation of Sharia the way mullahs who then opposed the creating of Pakistan would have us believe.

We know that Jinnah spoke at length about Islam and the identity of Pakistan. He also said this:

“You are free; you are free to go to your temples. You are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion, caste or creed—that has nothing to do with the business of the state.”

Note that he made no comment about an exceptions to Ahmedis and any others deemed heretics. It has nothing to do with the business of the state.

Oh, but he never said you can meddle in the business of the state after belonging to any religion. C'mon, this has been discuss to death. This is cherry picking his words.

 

[oOo]

Its basically an electoral reform bill done drunk on cheap Spanish tequila.

Irrelevant in grand scheme of things.

Damn, I need to read more about it now.

Edit: @El Sidd How could I not know the actual term use to define the finality of prophet as last messenger. I heard in past that there is some clause in form to get voting right where you need to give your consent on finality of prophet, and thus keeping ahmadis away from taking part in elections. So this bill is only applicable for public representatives or a common voter as well. Can someone not in voter list be a public representative?

 

[CriticalThought]

Chlo j phr to baat hi khatam hogyi judges ko to pta hi ni kya puchna hai kya ni

Not everything is a conspiracy against Islam.

Ha! Cherry pick my words to suit yourself eh? My words are for Muslim schools of thought. Don't get happy, non-Muslims don't even get an invitation.

 

[Jungibaaz]

Oh, but he never said you can meddle in the business of the state after belonging to any religion. C'mon, this has been discuss to death. This is cherry picking his words.

What are you talking about? He said in plain words there that personal beliefs have nothing to do with the states. I can't decipher how you're turning that logic around here, please explain.

 

[CriticalThought]

Are Shias non-muslim too in your particular view of Islam? What about Bohri are they Muslim? Non-Muslim? In-between?


So you have been appointed by Allah to decide who is Muslim and non-Muslim? Nausabillah

Not me!!! But Bohris are a very tiny minority who don't even meddle with anything. They perfectly mind their own business. The main school of thoughts all have their own parties: Shias and Sunnis (Barelvi + Deobandi) + Ahl-e-Hadith. They represent the vast majority of Muslims. If you bring them together, you know what will happen first? They will kick out Qadiyanis and then resolve matters amongst themselves.

 

[The Sandman]

Don't get happy

You think i am Ahmadi don't you?

 

[CriticalThought]

What are you talking about? He said in plain words there that personal beliefs have nothing to do with the states. I can't decipher how you're turning that logic around here, please explain.

I am not turning around anything. This is pretty simple: It is not the business of the state to meddle in his affairs. That's what he said. He never allowed all and sundry to meddle in the state's affairs.

You may belong to any religion, caste or creed—that has nothing to do with the business of the state.

You think i am Ahmadi don't you?

Why do you need to ask that question?

 

[The Sandman]

Why do you need to ask that question?

Because the way you're passing sarcastic comments and taunts on me.

 

[Syed1.]

Not me!!! But Bohris are a very tiny minority who don't even meddle with anything. They perfectly mind their own business. The main school of thoughts all have their own parties: Shias and Sunnis (Barelvi + Deobandi) + Ahl-e-Hadith. They represent the vast majority of Muslims. If you bring them together, you know what will happen first? They will kick out Qadiyanis and then resolve matters amongst themselves.

In 1400 years Shia and Sunni haven't come to the conclusion that whether to pray with arms on the side or arms on the chest and here you are talking about consensus on the form of government.

 

[The Sandman]

In 1400 years Shia and Sunni haven't come to the conclusion that whether to pray with arms on the side or arms on the chest and here you are talking about consensus on the form of government.

Din me khawaab dekhna crime hai kya?

 

[CriticalThought]

Because the way you're passing sarcastic comments and taunts on me.

Wait a second. If you feel I am personally attacking you, then I apologize. That is not the intention. I was enjoying a debate in a very genial mood. Now you have dumped water on my happiness...

In 1400 years Shia and Sunni haven't come to the conclusion that whether to pray with arms on the side or arms on the chest and here you are talking about consensus on the form of government.

Din me khawaab dekhna crime hai kya?

Because it is possible for Shias to pray with arms on the sides and Sunnis to pray as they like in the same country. It suits you to create an artificial division. This is your agenda.