Only 11% want Democracy

[B@KH]

so just like if Religion is taken out from Politics it becomes barbaricism
similarly
if Religion is taken out from Democracy it too becomes barbaric in sense it ignores minorities.

so Islamic Democracy is valid as per majority's view and the appointment of the first caliph is a proof of that.

Democracy that allows to make cartoons and do insults is satanic and this is happening in west as there is no place of religion in their democracy.

 

[Janubaba]

so just like if Religion is taken out from Politics it becomes barbaricism
similarly
if Religion is taken out from Democracy it too becomes barbaric in sense it ignores minorities.

so Islamic Democracy is valid as per majority's view and the appointment of the first caliph is a proof of that.

Democracy that allows to make cartoons and do insults is satanic and this is happening in west as there is no place of religion in their democracy.

Sir Abu Bakar was not appointed because of Democracy that was Khilafat sir procedure is different check for youself

 

[B@KH]

Sir Abu Bakar was not appointed because of Democracy that was Khilafat sir procedure is different check for youself

its Islamic Democracy. the link is there. None other thing approves him being a khalifa.

 

[Janubaba]

Sir their is no such thing as Islamic Democracy their is a system of Khilafat and their is hell of a difference between Khilafat and Democracy

 

[Kikki]

Sir their is no such thing as Islamic Democracy their is a system of Khilafat and their is hell of a difference between Khilafat and Democracy

The very fact that a poll is taken and a majority is given rights points to democracy

 

[B@KH]

Sir their is no such thing as Islamic Democracy their is a system of Khilafat and their is hell of a difference between Khilafat and Democracy

if there is no islamic democracy, the question is simple, how a khalifa will be appointed?

 

[B@KH]

thats because of islamic fucks

Not Islam, you can only blame muslims.

 

[B@KH]

The very fact that a poll is taken and a majority is given rights points to democracy

but minority suffers in democracy. so democracy is not good for minority.

there should be a system where no one is sufferer.

 

[Kikki]

but minority suffers in democracy. so democracy is not good for minority.

there should be a system where no one is sufferer.

With respect, ideal as it may be , you cannot please everyone. Similarly in the world there will be sections who suffer . ( I am not saying that it has to be the minority)

 

[Vibs]

but minority suffers in democracy. so democracy is not good for minority.

there should be a system where no one is sufferer.

If you mean minority by religion, then it is a flawed version of democracy you have. Democracy is different from secularism.

 

[B@KH]

If you mean minority by religion, then it is a flawed version of democracy you have. Democracy is different from secularism.

i didn't mentioned any thing about religion or what we have.

In general, in democracy only majority rules. or the rule of majority is called democracy.

 

[B@KH]

With respect, ideal as it may be , you cannot please everyone. Similarly in the world there will be sections who suffer . ( I am not saying that it has to be the minority)

so the minority will always be the looser in Democracy.

this is the problem. where is the perfect system that accomodates all ??

 

[Vibs]

i didn't mentioned any thing about religion or what we have.

In general, in democracy only majority rules. or the rule of majority is called democracy.

Not always. During Geogre Bushes 2nd term he had less votes overall. But when you counted the number of constituencies he won in, he was able to hold office. Same in India. Congress does not have a clear majority. Hence coalition government which keeps their agenda's in the picture. During the initial decade of democracy, the minority does suffer but over a longer period everyone starts getting the benefit. Pakistan at one time was a running democracy (initial years) and at that point in time was doing quite well on all fronts.

---------- Post added at 04:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:55 PM ----------

so the minority will always be the looser in Democracy.

this is the problem. where is the perfect system that accomodates all ??

There is a reason every religion believes in heaven. Because that would have the ideal system that humans on earth cannot provide my friend .

 

[B@KH]

Not always. During Geogre Bushes 2nd term he had less votes overall. But when you counted the number of constituencies he won in, he was able to hold office. Same in India. Congress does not have a clear majority. Hence coalition government which keeps their agenda's in the picture. During the initial decade of democracy, the minority does suffer but over a longer period everyone starts getting the benefit. Pakistan at one time was a running democracy (initial years) and at that point in time was doing quite well on all fronts.

---------- Post added at 04:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:55 PM ----------



There is a reason every religion believes in heaven. Because that would have the ideal system that humans on earth cannot provide my friend .

well said.

It is Pity that People expect an ideal system from God in Heaven. Why they do not expect an ideal system from God for this world too if he is a creator ?????

someone has to be blamed for the missing Perfect System, Either God or People.

If God has given the system and people Lost it then people need to find it out.
If God havn't given the system then for sure its not the people fault, the culprit infact is GOD and not the people.

but it is clear that democracy is not a perfect system.

 

[*Awan*]

Don't mind my being frank.

If one cannot resolve the violent difference of the various sects in Islam, thinking of a Khalifat is a very esoteric desire.

you muslim?
I want you to go in technical detail over sects.
there is a difference b/w belief and fiqah.in sunni sub-sects we are ok with fiqah difference come in belief.mean deobandi and barelvi both are hanfi.African are malki,and arabs are hanbli and shafi.every sunni can follow these imams no problem and it is accepted practice.with only difference with salfis/aehle hadith.who say we follow imams other than Prophet Muhammad saw.but they are wrong.this thing neither made us or them kafir.
shia are complete different story.we can have some exceptional laws for them.for example it is complusary for muslims to pay zakat.but shia dont pay zakat.and in Pakistan we have law for them.while opening bank account if a person declare himself shia bank will not deduce zakat.
second thing considering the consider the example of Pakistan if we can tolerate a shia President and sunni pm why we people cant tolerate suuni caliph.its just divergence created by liberals nothing else.

Let us not blame the enemy alone for being outmanoeuvred for the Caliphate to fail. If one wants something to succeed, one has to also see the reasons for failure without finding excuses.

agreed

If 'enemies' can outmanoeuvre, then the foundations are not quite strong as one believes. Another issue is that it is natural for each man wanting to overpower the other and be the leader. This is what causes the rot!

if basis are not strong how there remains khilafat for 1300 years.fall of khilafat is a different topic and require a complete different thread to discuss.like how enemy outmanuvered us and how they penetrated our line etc etc.

Islam may have destroyed whatever you claim, but why delve in history?

Look at the present and see where one is and what has brought them to that state.

That will provide the answer.

actually there is slight misunderstanding.in original pole if you replace khilafat with shariat then you are in batter position to understand the situation.
Pakistan alone cannot implement khilafat.khilafat require lot of home work.regarding khilafat we know only that before the coming of Mahdi there was khilafat.there was great anarchy and blood shed among muslims thats why he come.
but Pakistan alone can implement shariah.now i hope poll will make sense to you that only 11% want democracy,52% want khilafat which actually mean shariat.
although working for the restoration of khilafat is duty of every muslim.

Turks are not as good Muslims as any other Muslim?

why?who told you this?