Pakistan should be a Secular State

[MM_Haider]

What evidence do you offer for your assertion of Pakistan being a 'Semi Secular' state, please help me understand.

there is no Khilafat in country.. Pakistan is bound to UN charter and cannot ask for jizia etc from non Muslims but at the same time there are clauses that every Muslim in the country must be taught Arabic in school, in our constitution, blasphemy laws are there, at key post no non Muslim can come, Ahmadis have been declared non-Muslims by state.. this makes Pakistan hanging between Islamic laws and secular laws.. you may call it semi secular..

I refuse to accept your idea because i wholeheartedly subscribe to Iqbal's ideas on this debate.

------------------------------------------

these are you own views to subscribe to Iqbal's views.. I respect that.. but let me tell you one thing.. Iqbal was very much in favor of English rule.. even his address at Allahbad mentions separate state under English rule..

Allahabad Address - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

read that Islam is not a church and Within or without British Empire.

Further I don't think you have happened to read Iqbal's Marsya on the death of Queen?

Which Pakistani citizen does not have Equal rights?

every non-Muslim has no equal rights to his/ her Muslim fellows.. just one example Hindus in Pakistan have no marriage act in place and pir bharchundi shah type morons are fond of converting hindu women into Muslims .. but after conversion she always becomes wife of some pure momin.. not daughter or sister..

If a country is a 97% Muslim country, why is it wrong to have such a provision, moreover how would it help Pakistan become a better state if we were to have a Hindu, Christian or a Sikh President? - How would it help our economy, social structure and else?

Since the population is 97% Muslims why are Muslims afraid of removing this clause? It is democracy and by any mean Muslim shall be elected on a key post.. isn't it? (& you asked about equal rights above?? lol)

How are kids discriminated in Pakistan upon birth, please explain.

???

Dreams are not enough, in order to become the PM or President you need to be able to attract votes. You are not talking about equality in regards to minorities, which i refuse to accept because the idea of equality is bogus. We can create an egalitarian/pluralist state and that should be our aim not appeasing minorities. If we were to have a Christian PM today, would that solve all of the issues, the Christians have? - Exactly how Obama has solved all of the problems Blacks have in America and Manmohan has solved all of the problems Sikhs have in India? - What sort of bogus logic are you presenting here?

problem solving is a socio-economic issue which is related to corruption, soiety values, WTO, IMF etc etc.. why are thinking that it is related to religion only??

They are free to call themselves whatever they want and we are free to refuse to accept them as one of us. Both parties are free, the bigger party wins and runs the state according to its wishes, isn't that called democracy [Majority opinion wins] ? - Whats wrong with that?

Peace.

yea you are right might is right.. but it is not good for a social structure of society..

 

[doppelganger]

there is one ESSENTIAL component missing in the Pakistani population that NOTHING good can happen to it.... the component is unquestionable nationalism... we are an extremely confused bunch without an identity of our own........ the history that common man is aware of is limited to what he/she was taught in "official" text books, coupled with Islamic history from Islamiat... we can not even discern if we are Arabs or what?

Your nationalism was robbed from you at the time of Partition. The same thread that managed to bind India together in spite of different languages, ethnicities, and faiths. Remember, there is no place for nationalism in Islam. Hence if you belong to a state created on the basis of Islam, you cannot have nationalism as well. You have only a common faith to bind you. And if it does not, you have the Pakistan of today. Or on a broader canvas, any other Islamic nation in strife. The only difference being, none of those nations was formed anew on the plinth of Islam. Only Pakistan was. So I repeat, you last chance at nationalism passe you by as a population in 1947.

 

[d-fence]

Thank you for the effort .

Even though it is none of my business , sir , but are you a Pakistani , because you mention how you thought about the great divide in Pakistani society , however you carry both Argentinian flags ? If you wish not to answer it for any reason , simply ignore it . It doesn't matter , really . Now , that is interesting to hear that you have written a book , may I have a link or name too ? I commend your efforts though , most appreciable .

I started this analysis , when I had just started college , seeing the same divide between both groups , at that time I used to sympathize with Islamic parties - seeing their standing in the political arena , losing elections every time , failing to secure a majority or even a respectable number of seats and piggybacking on other parties . Then , I never thought of them being a part of problem , that Pakistan faces - extremism , intolerance and terrorism even though they had wholeheartedly supported and endorsed the actions of Commander of the Faithful in the 80's . But , then I realized their hypocritical approach towards thing , ready to talk the talk , but not walk the walk , not to mention - their dreams of idealistic system with a God chosen ruler - the details of which are hazy and vague and from the personal discussions with religious people - doesn't really seem really able to exist with the modern world in its old form and I came to understand a little , why the people of Pakistan who are considered Islamic aren't ready to vote for the same religious parties - because they aren't realist , do not consider the ' ground realities ' and they cant really be hoped to solve the problems of the nation - even though the other liberal ones haven't really been saints but full of corruption , misgovernance and mismanagement but people are usually quite pessimistic towards the ' Mullah brigade ' fearing them to perform worst than their secular or liberal counterparts .

Yeah , always the need to find an scapegoat for our own failures and blunders , not man enough to acknowledge our mistakes , in this case , U.S./Israel/India/Namibia/RAW/Mossad/One World Govt/Martians/Jews/Illuminati/Free Masons and God knows what-not ! Such has been , the mode of operation of Muslims from a long time now . Denial is the order of the day and Muslims are ready to take rumors/hearsay/conspiracy theories over established facts and recorded history at any time of the day .

I would go with the second , since there's no unity and no consensus on what exactly is this ' Shariat ' and ' Khilafat ' because there are a million and one sects , each having different versions and variants of Islam , lack of tolerance for other's viewpoints and gross misinterpretation of the religion , according to my analysis .

Feel free to contribute and add more to that .



Still a thousand times better than the so called Islamic countries ? Because Muslims enjoy more religious freedom and characteristics of a welfare state under infidels than they do , under the same Muslim brethren today ?

Thank you so much, dear brother Secur for your touching reply. I merely opened this account as an observer, but every now and then end up posting. I didn't choose a nationality and I think the default is Argentina, or I used the first one that came. Truth be told, I am not sure what nationality I belong to or am loyal to anymore. As to who I am - a couple of things but I'm the grandson of the Joint Secretary of All India Muslim League, the late Formuzul Haque. Basically, before Pakistan was a 190 million strong nation with nuclear weapons, it started as an idea, and a small head office in Calcutta. If you entered that office, the first person you'd meet sitting at the typewriter was my grandfather. So at some level I have some filial affinity with Pakistan. For a while I was an assistant coordinator at PTI's research wing.

Concerning my researches, you can google the following (don't have 30 posts so can't post):

1. Marching Beyond Waziristan Hussain
2. Reviving the Ummah, A Diagnosis of our Circumstance Hussain
3. Insaf for our children Hussain
4. Defending Pakistan::Insaf for the Armed Forces Hussain
5. Economic Insaf: An Islamic Economic Framework Hussain

Its good to meet another who has pondered over these issues that seem to have haunted us for the last 60 years or so.

In addition, thanks to Br. Aeronaut for the pictures, sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words.

 

[HRK]

I have some counter points to that. But I would rather not write it here. Who likes getting banned anyway? No offense mate.

it means you have no point to argue because any sensible & logical reasoning in academic manner will not attract band by any mean......trolling would be other thing.....

 

[HRK]

Your nationalism was robbed from you at the time of Partition. The same thread that managed to bind India together in spite of different languages, ethnicities, and faiths. Remember, there is no place for nationalism in Islam. Hence if you belong to a state created on the basis of Islam, you cannot have nationalism as well. You have only a common faith to bind you. And if it does not, you have the Pakistan of today. Or on a broader canvas, any other Islamic nation in strife. The only difference being, none of those nations was formed anew on the plinth of Islam. Only Pakistan was. So I repeat, you last chance at nationalism passe you by as a population in 1947.

dear do you know when the idea of Nationalism or Nation state emerged.....???

And from which year it is in Practice....???

You are stepping into whole new debate here....

 

[doppelganger]

dear do you know when the idea of Nationalism or Nation state emerged.....???

And from which year it is in Practice....???

You are stepping into whole new debate here....

Nationalism sadly has the baggage of extremist ideologies to carry and hence can often be painted as yet another radicalizing and exclusionist viewpoint.

So to make things easier to comprehend with regard to my post on why nationalism and Islam cannot and will not co-exist, please replace "nationalism" with the more benign and easily palatable "national identity".

You cannot have a national identity when your state is created on the basis of a religion which does not condone such. It will result in the kind of confusion and polarization of opinion as witnessed amongst the Pakistanis here, born as they were long after the events that shaped the birth of their state, citizens of the modern world, wanting and needing to come together as a nation, yet torn apart by the fundamentals of the state.

It is a topic that deserves strong debate amongst you. Probably a national rethink and amendment of the Constitution. Depending on which side finally holds sway of course ....

Till then we debate on PDF.

 

[HRK]

Nationalism sadly has the baggage of extremist ideologies to carry and hence can often be painted as yet another radicalizing and exclusionist viewpoint.

So to make things easier to comprehend with regard to my post on why nationalism and Islam cannot and will not co-exist, please replace "nationalism" with the more benign and easily palatable "national identity".

You cannot have a national identity when your state is created on the basis of a religion which does not condone such. It will result in the kind of confusion and polarization of opinion as witnessed amongst the Pakistanis here, born as they were long after the events that shaped the birth of their state, citizens of the modern world, wanting and needing to come together as a nation, yet torn apart by the fundamentals of the state.

It is a topic that deserves strong debate amongst you. Probably a national rethink and amendment of the Constitution. Depending on which side finally hods sway of course ....

Till then we debate on PDF.

Good points my dear but look it in this way......Nationalism was the concept 19th century which was suitable for that particular time and to some regional and Global power like Great Britain, Spain, France......

now in 21st century it is the era of Globalization were the matter of "National Identity" (plz do not mix it with Nationalism) is having its value, but on secondary grounds......which with the passage of time would get more fade.....the coming era is of blocks and interests.....here we can debate on two things.....

Why Israel & Pakistan were created on the basis of religious Ideologies not on " Nationalism or National Identity"....???

Would religion have any role in the formation of future in the era of Globalization....???

debate on "Past Events" are useless as nobody can undo the past.....hope you get my point...

 

[doppelganger]

Good points my dear but look it in this way......Nationalism was the concept 19th century which was suitable for that particular time and the some regional and Global power like Great Britain, Spain, France......

now in 21st century it is the era of Globalization were the matter of "National Identity" (plz do not mix it with Nationalism) is having its value, but on secondary grounds......which with the passage of time would get more fade.....the coming era is of blocks and interests.....here we can debate on two things.....

Why Israel & Pakistan were created on the basis of religious Ideologies not on " Nationalism or National Identity"....???

Would religion have any role in the formation of future in the era of Globalization....???

debate on "Past Events" are useless as nobody can undo the past.....hope you get my point...

Sir there is a very thin line that separates benign national identity when things are hunky dory to militant nationalism when things are not.

They are two sides of the same coin, and as an Indian I can safely tell you that nationalism is neither dead nor a vestige of a bygone era.

It bubbles under the surface, and comes forth when the national identity is attacked from without. When attacked from within, in extremis, it leads to civil war.

 

[haviZsultan]

Secularism is a beautiful concept about which Pakistanis do not know much. Secularism has been demonized by Zia Ul Haq and his cronies as an Anti Islamic concept when it only gives full rights to minorities and everyone else. With examples such as pir roshan's roshaniya movement and Akbars din e ilahi we should not be afraid of secularism.

Instead Pakistanis have a built in fear of secularism believing it will destroy Islam in Pakistan. I wrote an article about secularism and its possible benefits to Pakistan a long time ago. I would share it but my website is down. I pointed out several things in the article:
1) We have despite trying for 60+ years failed to impose Islam. What guarantee is there that we will manage to do so suddenly now.
2) There is no common ideology. Islam is divided into various schools of thoughts and there are hundred or so different rulings about various topics by scholars. How are we going to decide who's version to follow. Lets take a simple thing such as the beard. Some people believe it is allowed, some do not.
3) Who decides what is allowed or not. When one person is saying women must cover their faces and ensure only their eyes are seen and another scholar says the face need not be covered, whose version do we go by.
4) What about the minorities? Why should they have to live with Islamic rules and in a mullahcracy.
5) The usage of Islamic laws for personal gain by terrorists and criminals. For example the hudood law and blasphemy law. How both laws have been used to frame innocent people in Pakistan.
6) Imposing religion is not an easy thing. Instead everyone should be given the freedom to practice whatever he believes in without imposing anything on anyone. Freedom for all oppression for none.
7) 3 in 4 terrorists escape conviction. The entire system inherently favours evil mullahs and terrorists. The Jadoon case and Mian Mithoo case should be highlighted here and it should be known how both got away with framing an innocent christian girl and forced marriage of Rinkle Kumari. We can't beat terrorism with laws that favor intolerance and bigotism other than teaching us hatred for other religions rather than promoting inter-faith harmony.

Furthermore I would like to add that Secularism is not a western concept. Secularism was first introduced as a method of governance by a Muslim Moorish philosopher named Ibn Rushd, or known by others as Averoes. So secularism and Islam are compatible. I believe Pakistani society should follow Turkey and go for secularism.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

I beg to differ. If you wish to feel superior go right ahead. But I dont want to discuss religion in a defense forum anyway.

it means you have no point to argue because any sensible & logical reasoning in academic manner will not attract band by any mean......trolling would be other thing.....

 

[Dubious]

Did you see the ' so called ' Islamic countries thing ? My point was simple , they aren't following Islam hence the near perfect condition of the half of the Muslim world . How hard was it ?

Be a realist now . I know about transgressors . Unfortunately , the world doesn't run by your books . There are religious extremist/over zealous/fanatics too , here .

Try turning your head the other way too...there are EXTREMIST on the OTHER side of the spectrum too whom people dont talk about because they say YES SIR IT IS OK to EVERYTHING!

Of course , then why operate on the assumption that the other person is ignorant of the subject , he is talking about ? Why ?

There is assumption and there is actions of the other person esp when they start coining oxymorons the same way as the media! Its like a carbon copy of what the media is saying rather than what the person is thinking....So all I say is use your coconut

Agreed 1-0-0 % , now please read my posts in this thread with a cool mind and see what I have been talking , all along instead of getting angry over sarcastic tone

I rarely get angry...annoyed maybe but not really angry because mind you I walk this earth viewing weird people rather than challenging them online

They claim they are following Islam which is why , I call them following Islam despite knowing , what they are following , is anything but Islam . Because they are doing and following , their version of Islam . It is like saying , what a Mullah once said about weapons in mosque , he went like ' Weapons shouldn't be stored in mosque ' then he said ' wherever the weapons are found , do not call it a Mosque ' . Million and a one , remember ? I have to do so , otherwise this whole thing makes no sense . Does it ?

Nope you dont HAVE TO DO SO...All you have to do so is tell them the REAL Islam if they try to call something foreign as Islam...THAT is all ALLAH told the prophet and his ummah to do..To tell FULL STOP not criticize, not point fingers, not PAINT EVERYONE with the same brush and paint!

 

[HRK]

I beg to differ. If you wish to feel superior go right ahead. But I dont want to discuss religion in a defense forum anyway.

My dear It not about superiority of any person or his beliefs.....nor its about religion of any person in your initial post you called Mr. Jinnah a very contradictory person your post is mention under for your reference.....I would not ask you to change your views but its my right to know your logic and arguments......

BUT as a good technical troller...you are diverting discussion from Jinnah to religion......my dear if you wish to initiate a debate you can, but keep in mind some very genuine Questions which you have answers first about your knowledge and intellectual standing.....

your post

Jinnah was a very contradictory person. While he was personally secular and gave secular speeches... at the same time he also catered to Islamist ideology.
Jinnah

On the other hand - being secular is fine...but then will it be acceptable to the majority of Pakistanis?

 

[Anotherangle]

Secularism is a beautiful concept a...................................
1) We have despite trying for 60+ years failed to impose Islam. What guarantee is there that we will manage to do so suddenly now.

Yes agreed, there is no Islam imposed in Pakistan, but there has been a serious effort in last 60 years? it is rather controversial, I do not see any real effort to implement' Islam.

2) There is no common ideology. Islam is divided into various schools of thoughts and there are hundred or so different rulings about various topics by scholars. How are we going to decide who's version to follow. Lets take a simple thing such as the beard. Some people believe it is allowed, some do not.

Strong disagreement, there are some differences in interpretation but the ideology is the same- and where are hundred rulings?? I have never read any such thing in last 20 years of studying Islam; Anyway if there is a scholarly difference you can follow the one you like.

3) Who decides what is allowed or not. When one person is saying women must cover their faces and ensure only their eyes are seen and another scholar says the face need not be covered, whose version do we go by.

Quran and hadith decides and covering the face is not among the basics in Islam. If scholars have differences people are allowed to follow any- people usually do not understand the differences among basics, primary, secondary and tertiary lairs in Islamic laws.

4) What about the minorities? Why should they have to live with Islamic rules and in a mullahcracy.

Why should the majority live according to the wishes of minority and listen to every Tom, Dick and harry badmouthing about Islam? [unless they conquer you or your mind (which they have actually,)]

5) The usage of Islamic laws for personal gain by terrorists and criminals. For example the hudood law and blasphemy law. How both laws have been used to frame innocent people in Pakistan.

1. 2, 3, or any small number cannot decide any fortune of the nation. It shows the illogicality of the secular. If 52% majority vote and un-measurable blood of Muslims is not enough to implement Islamic law and expose the barbarianism of so called secular powers, how can such a small number decide the fortune of nation? Insane argument.
2. How criminals used the Hudood law? or do you understand what are the Hudood laws?
3.framing people?? do you think there are no people framed today under English laws. Go to jails and research for yourself- only these innocents do not have secular NGOs and media behind them; ignorant comment, without any study!

6) Imposing religion is not an easy thing. Instead everyone should be given the freedom to practice whatever he believes in without imposing anything on anyone. Freedom for all oppression for none.

Yes! Agreed -Your comment has two parts:
first, implementing religion is difficult unless you have the majority of practicing muslims and today unfortunate dilemma is where the pro-islamic are in majority (Egypt, Algeria etc), even there they cannot implement Islam because of the French backed secular forces;
Second, YES!YES!YES! Every one can practice what he believes, Islam does not say non-muslims, practice Islam; there is freedom for every one unless it encroaches on the norms of the society; YES! Freedom for All and oppression for none what a principle that spits on the face of the secular every now and then! what a freedom when the officers of armed forces of Islamic republic of Pakistan will not be promoted if they have beard, and the people of Egypt, Tunisia and Turkey are prosecuted for having beard, because the secular does not like it. What a freedom to practice your own religion in your country when officers had to drink wine in the name of the president every year! yes what a freedom of religion when muslims are forced to listen abuse to their beloved prophet (S.A.W) and they should not do anything in their own country. The secular is the most in-secular and intolerant party of our society. Basically they cannot do justice because they are not the secular but the mental slaves of the west and front line of the western hegemony in our countries.

7) 3 in 4 terrorists escape conviction. The entire system inherently favours evil mullahs and terrorists. The Jadoon case and Mian Mithoo case should be highlighted here and it should be known how both got away with framing an innocent christian girl and forced marriage of Rinkle Kumari. We can't beat terrorism with laws that favor intolerance and bigotism other than teaching us hatred for other religions rather than promoting inter-faith harmony.

According to your point 1, There is no Islam implemented in Pakistan so far, so Which system are you talking about? it is not Islamic, so point of argument? Only stretching the point 5.

Furthermore I would like to add that Secularism is not a western concept. Secularism was first introduced as a method of governance by a Muslim Moorish philosopher named Ibn Rushd, or known by others as Averoes. So secularism and Islam are compatible. I believe Pakistani society should follow Turkey and go for secularism.

It might be true but, looking at the Egypt, the secular and general public majority of Islamic countries are not compatible with each other

 

[SarthakGanguly]

"BUT as a good technical troller...you are diverting discussion from Jinnah to religion......my dear if you wish to initiate a debate you can, but keep in mind some very genuine Questions which you have answers first about your knowledge and intellectual standing....." - Thanks for the compliment, Sir. I honestly appreciate it.
If you read the article of Mr. Shahid Kuldune you will come across some points. Those are my points too.
http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2013/08/13/comment/columns/jinnahs-pakistan-2/
Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...an-should-secular-state-15.html#ixzz2c930mttS

My dear It not about superiority of any person or his beliefs.....nor its about religion of any person in your initial post you called Mr. Jinnah a very contradictory person your post is mention under for your reference.....I would not ask you to change your views but its my right to know your logic and arguments......

BUT as a good technical troller...you are diverting discussion from Jinnah to religion......my dear if you wish to initiate a debate you can, but keep in mind some very genuine Questions which you have answers first about your knowledge and intellectual standing.....

your post

 

[HRK]

"BUT as a good technical troller...you are diverting discussion from Jinnah to religion......my dear if you wish to initiate a debate you can, but keep in mind some very genuine Questions which you have answers first about your knowledge and intellectual standing....." - Thanks for the compliment, Sir. I honestly appreciate it.
If you read the article of Mr. Shahid Kuldune you will come across some points. Those are my points too.
Jinnah
Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...an-should-secular-state-15.html#ixzz2c930mttS

Link was previously posted: what do you want to prove my dear.....that article has previously answered at that thread..... the writer is a confuse and self proclaimed intellectual persone.....

I had read that article....If you want answer plz do personal research....it wont take much time....would you...???