Pakistan should be a Secular State

[truthlover]

Quaid e azam was secular. He consumed alcohol,beers and other non Islamic items. He was broad minded man. All he wanted seperate Muslim "name" state for identity but country was hijacked by hard line Islamist after 1956.

I completely agree with you.If he lived some more years after the partition then i am sure there would be no "thekeydaars of islam" in our society.

 

[queerbait]

All minorities are recognized and protected under Pakistani constitution.

Theoretically...sure....nobody wants to mention ahmadiyya issue, or hindu villages attacked, blasphemy law.

 

[Leviza]

Theoretically...sure....nobody wants to mention ahmadiyya issue, or hindu villages attacked, blasphemy law.

Same is true with indian side, theoretically , all are equal but we see how minorities are being handled in gujrat and other areas of india specially muslims ...

 

[T-123456]

Two different societies. Secularism in Pakistan will prove to be a disaster.

Yes in this current situation it would be a big disaster.

 

[Kompromat]

Theoretically...sure....nobody wants to mention ahmadiyya issue, or hindu villages attacked, blasphemy law.

Ahmadi issue is solved and done for.

Pakistani Hindus here are more safer than Muslims in India.

 

[queerbait]

Ahmadi issue is solved and done for.

Pakistani Hindus here are more safer than Muslims in India.

Hope you are being sarcastic or else i have loads of counter evidence , anyway wont derail this thread...mod ke saath thoda careful rehna chahiye.

 

[IamBengali]

As a state head Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh) was secular. So what's the problem with secularism as a state policy?

Christian community of Najran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A part of the Najran Treaty between the Prophet Muhammad and the Christians of Najran reads as follows:

“

This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.

No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.

No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them.

If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.

Their Churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation (of Muslims) is to disobey this covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

 

[Jf Thunder]

As a state head Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh) was secular. So what's the problem with secularism as a state policy?

Christian community of Najran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A part of the Najran Treaty between the Prophet Muhammad and the Christians of Najran reads as follows:

“

that is not secular? it is in our religion to respect other religion, so its not secular

 

[IamBengali]

that is not secular? it is in our religion to respect other religion, so its not secular

If its not secular then what is? When our Prophet never imposed any Islamic Sharia law to non-Muslims who are we to impose the law to non-Muslims? You can't have two laws for your citizens. Its better to keep religious laws to personal and family matters. There should not be any death penalty in Pakistan (Blasphemy law) to non-Muslims for dishonoring Islamic beliefs or Prophet. Why do we care so much what others say about our Prophet? Just ignore. I read in newspaper that you guys even gave punishment to a Christian school girl for misspelling the name of the Prophet. This is too much.

 

[liall]

If its not secular then what is? When our Prophet never imposed any Islamic Sharia law to non-Muslims who are we to impose the law to non-Muslims? You can't have two laws for your citizens. Its better to keep religious laws to personal and family matters. There should not be any death penalty in Pakistan (Blasphemy law) to non-Muslims for dishonoring Islamic beliefs or Prophet. Why do we care so much what others say about our Prophet? Just ignore. I read in newspaper that you guys even gave punishment to a Christian school girl for misspelling the name of the Prophet. This is too much.

They wanted to kill a girl who burnt some papers saying those belonged to quran lolol

 

[IamBengali]

They wanted to kill a girl who burnt some papers saying those belonged to quran lolol

Here in BD, the Islamist party Hefajat-E-Islam (backed by Jamaat) burned copies of Quran but still there was no death penalty for those so called Islamists.

 

[liall]

Here in BD, the Islamist party Hefajat-E-Islam (backed by Jamaat) burned copies of Quran but still there was no death penalty for those so called Islamists.

Because I believe Pakistan is the only one in south Asia where they have blasphemy laws right out of 19th century.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

The answer is No...its not practical in our Country!!!

More over if u read more abt the concept behind secularism, its mostly based on the principals of Islam. So its rather better to have the core system then something else based on its ideas.

 

[Rashid Mahmood]

 

[hussain0216]

Our people are neither secular nor liberal


So any attempt to forces these ideologies on a conservative population will have a massive backlash