Mian Atif, PTI and Oriya Maqbol Jaan..

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

We could have opted this let ALLAH decide it in many other cases, where you wouldn't have approved its application.

Like what? Examples?

What you keep repeating in your defense of a minority (that doesn't share the same beliefs as majority in Pakistan), is something like telling the majority not to protest over identity theft and remain silent over it, and let ALLAH decide it for them. Lame argument laced in a total religious packing, a hideous blackmail chip in the hands of Mullah and the fraudsters, mention ALLAH, Quran and Hadeeth ..... and render the Muslims incapable of arguing.

The Mormons have done almost the exact same thing in the US and the 'heavens' have not fallen on mainstream Christianity. This is not 'identity theft' any more than the Shia & Sunni accusing each other of 'identity theft' In fact the ideology behind Daesh uses the same types of arguments to declare the Shia 'Kafir' & justify their massacre under 'Quran & Sunnah'.

At its core this is a theological dispute and the government has no place adjudicating theological disputes. Mainstream Muslims are free to, privately, hold conferences, seminars & perform Tabligh attacking the Ahmadi faith. My point is merely that the government should not be involved in this.

 

[TMA]

I have no issues with appointment of Mia Atif as an economic adviser. But that is not the debate anymore, the debate has taken a total U turn (which was expected) and I feel it's okay to share my views now ........

What you keep repeating in your defense of a minority (that doesn't share the same beliefs as majority in Pakistan), is something like telling the majority not to protest over identity theft and remain silent over it, and let ALLAH decide it for them. Lame argument laced in a total religious packing, a hideous blackmail chip in the hands of Mullah and the fraudsters, mention ALLAH, Quran and Hadeeth ..... and render the Muslims incapable of arguing.

We could have opted this let ALLAH decide it in many other cases, where you wouldn't have approved its application.

The debate is simple, Qadiyani hazraat believe Mr Ghulam Ahmed to be the promised prophet and Messiah ...... (the Lahori group may differ) ........ and anyone who doesn't share their belief is out of the fold of their religion ..... 95% of people have no issues being out of fold of Qadiyani religion ...... but when the 95% say the same thing about their beliefs, Qadiyanis somehow don't like it and they start giving justifications of how the non Qadiyanis (The Muslims) are intolerant, extremists, and don't let ALLAH decide it.

Per Quran, Messenger Muhammad Peace be upon is Khatim Un Nabiyeen. It's the interpretation of this word only that should have been the debate. If this word means Attestation / or a stamp of approval for the rest of Nabis, Mr. Ghulam Ahmed failed to give proof of that Stamp of approval, if this words means Seal, that is no more Nabis, that makes claims of Mr Ghulam Mirza false and him a liar. And Per Quran every Nabi was given a divine book ........ lets see book of Mr Ghulam Mirza, the one that is popular cannot be a divine message ....

Plus I have asked this several times but none of the Qadiyani hazraat has ever replied to me, in case of conflict of interest what takes precedence, the word of Caliph of their religion or interest of State of Pakistan? Will they be willing to solemnize this in writing? It's a normal practice to give written notice of conflict of interest and make it public. @TMA if you remember.



Yeah say the kalima and become janati ............... easy tension ki koi bat nai kalima hy na.

Reciting kalima is not a condition nor a confirmation for entering Islam. The conditions are very clearly mentioned in Quran, total five of them. And kalima is no where in those five conditions.

You have actually hit the hidden nail on the head.
Like you I don't have a problem with his appointment as an advisor as long as it is legal. Which I think it is. And as long as he is honest about his religious affiliations. But the real issue is that there are those who want to change the constitution on this matter and the only way is by generating social pressure by media...And they hate it when their arguments get challenged...and all they can resort to are accusations of intolerance and backwardness. As if Mirza Ghulaam Ahmed was tolerant of of those who did not accept his claim. Or what about the state should not interfere in religious matters as a matter of principal...so I want my wife to burn with my corpse when I die as it is our religion....should the state stand idle? Or its my personal belief that I should dress up like a police men and walk around in public, the state should not dare to interfere in my beliefs even though I would be committing a deception....

 

[Verve]

deception

That's the key word.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

so I want my wife to burn with my corpse when I die as it is our religion....should the state stand idle? Or its my personal belief that I should dress up like a police men and walk around in public, the state should not dare to interfere in my beliefs even though I would be committing a deception

The State should stay out of religion so long as there is not tangible negative impact on citizens. You want to wear a burqa because you believe your faith requires it? Sure, absolutely, but the State also has requirements for ID cards that require clear facial features to be see on the ID, so no, you cannot wear a burqa when your picture is taken for an ID card.

Similarly, you believe that followers of an XYZ faith are Kafir? Absolutely, go ahead, that is your right. The State cannot however allow you to go around and massacre people from that faith because you believe it is 'ordered by Quran & Sunnah'.

If your faith wants your (living) wife to burn with you, then that isn't acceptable because at that point your faith presents a tangible negative impact on other Citizens.

Does that make it clearer, in terms of where the role of State in religion should or should not exist?

 

[Finer]

Quit being dense. It was an unlearned opinion of a poster that tried to misconstrue the fact that Mormons are a Christian community. The very fact that one discusses Catholicism and Christianity does not make them separate. Same thing with Sufism and Islam. Or Sunnism, Shiasm...

Calling me dense while your post as indicator to being one does exhibit certain iota of irony.

Catholic and Christian have bad history. Mormon also has bad history with them. I live in Canada where the sects of Christianity dictincts itself as individuality and even to the point as the label of the church to avoid confusion. There is section for luciferan or Christianity where it prides itself as one distincting itself from the rest of the Christianity.

Whereas in Pakistan tries to Ahmediya as Muslim like the rest of Muslim when Ahmediya should be distincting itself as separate from the rest of the Muslims.

Ahmedhiya community is not Muslim community because finality ends with Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as last of the Prophets as mentioned in Holy Quran. It may mean little to the Ahmedhiya community but in Islam, it means a lot and very important to distinct.


Besides, Pakistan follows the same system as the western worlds where each section is given as dictinction and acknowledgement as label of the church to avoid confusion as long as they are given rights to practice their religions their ways.

 

[saif123]

When his community is marginalized, , threatned, places of worship attacked , indivisuals / intellectuals are selectively picked up , targeted killed & worst of all discriminated constitutionally .. you want him to shut the f up , not utter a sound suck it all up & not even tweet !!?? ignorats and intolerants like you understand when other sects and factions do the same to your sect and kind ..

Most of it is propaganda. Much much more other people are being killed by TTP and other terrorists in Pakistan. BTW we can hope that the new govt will take stringent measures to stop the sporadic attacks happening here and there on Ahmedis by extremists. To keep the religion section in a form is not a descrimination. Why they want to hide their identity? to conspire more by entering sensitive positions by collaborating with Western Imperialists and Zionists where their leaders are based and getting financial aid?
He is not even born in Pak or a Pak National. Let him keep his degrees and intelligence with him there will be lot more better people then him. How a person with hate for a country can work for the betterment of that country.

 

[StandForInsaf]

LoL , and imran khan cannot withstand pressure build by molvis.

How stupid we started feeling IK is brave man standing against America.
Well may be he is still better then nawaz but not brave enough to face extremist .

 

[My-Analogous]

What about people that don't even believe in our Nabi? woh qabool hain aap ko?

Do they call them self Muslims? Do they say that Prophet Mohoammed (PBUH) is not last Prophet while they claim they are in circle of Islam? They can be anything but not Muslims and they have to take back their claim. Called them self anything we don't mind but when you said you are Muslims and attacking our Rasool preaching at the same time make you bully and reaction definitely occurs.

 

[TMA]

The State should stay out of religion so long as there is not tangible negative impact on citizens. You want to wear a burqa because you believe your faith requires it? Sure, absolutely, but the State also has requirements for ID cards that require clear facial features to be see on the ID, so no, you cannot wear a burqa when your picture is taken for an ID card.

Similarly, you believe that followers of an XYZ faith are Kafir? Absolutely, go ahead, that is your right. The State cannot however allow you to go around and massacre people from that faith because you believe it is 'ordered by Quran & Sunnah'.

If your faith wants your (living) wife to burn with you, then that isn't acceptable because at that point your faith presents a tangible negative impact on other Citizens.

Does that make it clearer, in terms of where the role of State in religion should or should not exist?

What about matters of deception? Should the State stand idle? It is my opinion and the opinion of the vast majority of the People of Pakistan that the claim(s) of Mirza Ghulaam Ahmed and his followers of being Muslims is/are deception...or a fraud....this represents a negative impact on Citizens...therefore the State has the right to intervene to remove and clear up that deception or fraud....

What about matters of deception? Should the State stand idle? It is my opinion and the opinion of the vast majority of the People of Pakistan that the claim(s) of Mirza Ghulaam Ahmed and his followers of being Muslims is/are deception...or a fraud....this represents a negative impact on Citizens...therefore the State has the right to intervene to remove and clear up that deception or fraud....

What is a tangible negative effect? Who determines this?

 

[M. Sarmad]

LoL , and imran khan cannot withstand pressure build by molvis.

How stupid we started feeling IK is brave man standing against America.
Well may be he is still better then nawaz but not brave enough to face extremist .

No one can withstand pressure built up by Mullahs in Pakistan, not even Pak Army ..

We as a nation have become insanely radicalized, thanks to decades of state-sponsored religious-chauvinistic indoctrination via distortion and continuous patronizing of religious extremists by successive Pakistani governments (and the establishment of course).

 

[TMA]

No one can withstand pressure built up by Mullahs in Pakistan, not even Pak Army ..

We as a nation have become insanely radicalized, thanks to decades of state-sponsored religious-chauvinistic indoctrination via distortion and continuous patronizing of religious extremists by successive Pakistani governments (and the establishment of course).

Still Pakistan is not as bad as other countries...

 

[M. Sarmad]

Still Pakistan is not as bad as other countries...

Everyone is entitled to his opinions no matter how stupid they are.
I however am sure that no sane person (regardless of what nationality he is) would agree with your opinion

 

[TMA]

Like what? Examples?


The Mormons have done almost the exact same thing in the US and the 'heavens' have not fallen on mainstream Christianity. This is not 'identity theft' any more than the Shia & Sunni accusing each other of 'identity theft' In fact the ideology behind Daesh uses the same types of arguments to declare the Shia 'Kafir' & justify their massacre under 'Quran & Sunnah'.

At its core this is a theological dispute and the government has no place adjudicating theological disputes. Mainstream Muslims are free to, privately, hold conferences, seminars & perform Tabligh attacking the Ahmadi faith. My point is merely that the government should not be involved in this.

Whilst theological debates took place in the National Assembly in 1974 with scholars from all schools of thought including the Ahmadiyya, the decision to not recognise Ahmadis as Muslims for the purposes of Law was done mainly on a reciprocal basis. Mirza Ghulaam Ahmed had declared those who do not accept his claims as non Muslims. Read what Yahya Bakhtair had to say on this matter. The report is out and has been out for a while.

Watch this for more info....

Also it is my opinion that the State can judge on theological matters...but only on an individual case by case basis.... like the State judges on lots of matters...after all it is the Islamic Republic of Pakistan...ostensibly....

Furthermore, Shia do not claim to be Sunni and neither do Sunni claim to be Shia.
Also ISIS types and their ideology have not been recognised as Ahle Sunnah Was Jamah by a broad consensus of Sunni Scholars that met in Chechnya in the recent past.

Everyone is entitled to his opinions no matter how stupid they are.
I however am sure that no sane person (regardless of what nationality he is) would agree with your opinion

Nice attempt at subtle insult...

 

[M. Sarmad]

What you keep repeating in your defense of a minority (that doesn't share the same beliefs as majority in Pakistan), is something like telling the majority not to protest over identity theft and remain silent over it, and let ALLAH decide it for them....

No my friend ... It is not a case of identity theft by a minority ... it Rather is a case of the Majority infringing on the right to self-identification/personal religious identity of the minority, and refusing them equal rights as the citizens of the state ....

 

[TMA]

No my friend ... It is not a case of identity theft by a minority ... it Rather is a case of the Majority infringing on the right to self-identification/personal religious identity of the minority, and refusing them equal rights as the citizens of the state ....

The opinion of the State is different to your opinion. You are entitled to yours and State is entitled to hers...