Saudi Arabia Has Devastated Pakistan’s History of Religious Tolerance and Diversity

[VCheng]

Well i truly didn't, i am a man of simple words sir, didn't understood the complex dual meaning words from you, sorry! For now, i stand by what i was saying, it is the WRONG interpretation that is causing the problem, not the religion it self. Secularism or liberlism is not the solution to our problems, i don't even have to point to ENORMOUS problems these secular states face. So if you can kindly tell is simpler words what you were saying that might make me understand.

You see, nobody is arguing for removal of Islam from all spheres of life. To say this is wrong and disingenuous. The argument is that, for a government and state that works equally for ALL its citizens, religion must not form part of the State. It can remain dominant in the private lives of most of its citizens as they see fit, without any imposition from the State itself. This keeps Islam vibrant and strong for its followers without any concerns. Religion as State policy has been an utter disaster for mankind as we can learn from history and the present.

So true, and, a very basic choice in Islam. Quran do not ask you to be a shia or a sunni. That gets us back to the point where i say that if we start following religion to its true essence, we wont have this problem of forcing ones brand on other. People are open to choose as you say and that creates a uniform system of governance and social justice as you asked for

Okay, as long as you are free to follow your chosen religion as you fit, and grant me the same freedom, then what is the problem? Accept diversity of beliefs and respect all believers the same if you want your own beliefs to be respected. Hence, no religion should be imposed, and it will remain where it belongs - in the personal domain.

 

[Arsalan]

But Sir, isn't any religion exactly, and nothing more than, what its followers interpret it as and practice it? What they do in its name is far more important and evident than what they claim or say.

No doubt that what the DO is far more important. However if they do it as per there poor understanding it is them and there teacher who is to be blamed. I mean, you cannot simply call the religion wrong if someone wrongly claim that suicide bombing is what the religion teach them and carry out this act killing innocents. The culprit was that particular person, or the group of person who told him that this is what religion asks from him even though it was not remotely true, in fact, quite the opposite. That person is the culprit of state, society and religion...

 

[pakdefender]

Saudis sponsored Sipah e Sahaba , the Iranians sponsored Sipah e Muhammad , takes two tango

 

[VCheng]

No doubt that what the DO is far more important. However if they do it as per there poor understanding it is them and there teacher who is to be blamed. I mean, you cannot simply call the religion wrong if someone wrongly claim that suicide bombing is what the religion teach them and carry out this act killing innocents. The culprit was that particular person, or the group of person who told him that this is what religion asks from him even though it was not remotely true, in fact, quite the opposite. That person is the culprit of state, society and religion...

Where did I call any religion wrong? No religion is wrong as they are ALL equally valid and to be respected as personal systems of belief. That is all.

 

[Arsalan]

You see, nobody is argues for removal of Islam from all spheres of life. To say this is wrong and disingenuous. The argument is that, for a government and state that works equally for ALL its citizens, religion must not form part of the State. It can remain dominant in the private lives of most of its citizens as they see fit, without any imposition from the State itself. This keeps Islam vibrant and strong for its followers without any concerns. Religion as State policy has been an utter disaster for mankind as we can learn from history and the present.

But what if the religion, if you talk about in true sense and true teaching, itself asks, in fact, insists and make it COMPULSORY for the governance to be uniform and definitions to justice to be the same and opportunities of growth to be equal across all the people of all different faiths living under that government. Wont it be the same and still resolve the problem? albeit the way to resolution is different but still it will resolve the issue.

Where did I call any religion wrong? No religion is wrong as they are ALL equally valid and to be respected as personal systems of belief. That is all.

You never did, i am not pointing you or anyone out. Just speaking my mind out.. However i bit tired now and it is time to break fast (it is ramzan) so i am signing off. Was good to be with you guys and discuss all this. @levina @Atanz

 

[VCheng]

But what if the religion, if you talk about in true sense and true teaching, itself asks, in fact, insists and make it COMPULSORY for the governance to be uniform and definitions to justice to be the same and opportunities of growth to be equal across all the people of all different faiths living under that government. Wont it be the same and still resolve the problem? albeit the way to resolution is different but still it will resolve the issue.

In essence, the said religion demands absolute uniformity of faith. It just ain't gonna work.

 

[Patriot Pakistani]

Trust me most of us want to see a modern and vibrant Pakistan,not a nation which feels proud holding a AK 47.

But we don't want a secular modernism and if you really want a peaceful Pakistan they you should let Kashmiries do their job + you should stop intervening in the internal affairs of Pakistan. Our dream is Islamic and prosperos Pakistan. You should stop thinking about Pakistan future and look deep into your own country.

 

[Tiger Genie]

But we don't want a secular modernism and if you really want a peaceful Pakistan they you should let Kashmiries do their job + you should stop intervening in the internal affairs of Pakistan. Our dream is Islamic and prosperos Pakistan. You should stop thinking about Pakistan future and look deep into your own country.

it is Pakistan that has been, and its leaders have had to admit so under weight of evidence and getting caught, that sending terrorist jihadi nuts into India to disturb peace in Kashmir. The current rash and whine of your leaders crying out is due to the frustration of their soldiers' inability to guise themselves as jihadis and infiltrate!

 

[Arsalan]

You cannot read English i think.
What i meant to say was that if your are making the Attacks by religious psychos as your standards of portraying Pakistan and Policy of Government of Pakistan then best of luck on your analysis.
If you cannot understand what other person is saying ask him for clarification before opening mouth

no need for getting offensive for no reason. I have been following the thread and no one is blaming any particular country, not at least the person you tagged. It is better if we talk in more civilized tone rather than jumping gun and abusing/insulting others.

 

[Zhukov]

no need for getting offensive for no reason. I have been following the thread and no one is blaming any particular country, not at least the person you tagged. It is better if we talk in more civilized tone rather than jumping gun and abusing/insulting others.

Yaar i was talking politely and he was like "Stop talking like that or i will report you" That is not nice at all
BTW i haven't used any harsh language or abuse here. or have I?

 

[Arsalan]

Yaar i was talking politely and he was like "Stop talking like that or i will report you" That is not nice at all
BTW i haven't used any harsh language or abuse here. or have I?

The discussion here is going in a constructive way with out blaming or pointing fingers so why not let it carry on this way? about use of abusive words or harsh language, i guess it depends upon what one considers HARSH or ABUSIVE, your post would have contributed a lot more in a positive way only if you chose better words and refrain from personal attack or insulting other.
Saying "You don't know shit" in any different words to anyone in a debate is not civilized now, is it?

Thanks anyway for paying attention, i hope we can continue from here is a positive manner, ALL of us and that will be good for everyone.

Regards!

 

[VCheng]

Saying "You don't know shit" in any different words to anyone in a debate is not civilized now, is it?

Good point. (Where have I heard that before? ) May be you want some other TTAs to understand this point too, Sir?

Back to the topic, Pakistan's decision to join the Saudi war on Yemen will have a huge impact, don't you think? For how long can Pakistan afford to stay away from it?

 

[Meengla]

Non sense.
It was General Zia ul Haq who, by the time of his death in 1988, ruled Pakistan for almost 25% of Pakistan's existence. Zia was such a fanatic that writing about his negative impact can justify a few PhD Dissertations.
While ZAB has been justifiably accused of some cowardly appeasements of the religious lobbies around the 1977 elections he did not fundamentally alter the basic fabric of the Pakistani society--it was not in his psyche and his party, to this day, remain the most favored by Pakistan's minorities.
Imagine any country in the world where a quarter of its nascent life is under a ruler like Zia? No wonder hardly anyone weeps at Zia's grave despite its central location.

 

[niaz]

I would agree that before we start blaming other countries, we should do some introspection. Saudi Arabia was able to spread bigotry & sectarianism only because the bigot Zia ul Haq & his Jamaat Isami allies facilitated this. People witnessed public flogging in Zia’s time, did it reduced the crime in Pakistan? Does anyone really think that Hudood Laws reduced sexual exploitation or extra marital fornication?

Let us face it, 12 years of dictatorship under Zia ul Haq remains the worst thing that ever happened to Pakistan. In the name of making us better Muslims; Zia’s authoritarian rule gave us sectarian killings, drug & Kalashnikov culture. Even the Lal Masjid thugs are his gift to the nation as it was the very villain that allotted the plot of land to Mulla Aziz’s father.

 

[[Bregs]]

Non sense.
It was General Zia ul Haq who, by the time of his death in 1988, ruled Pakistan for almost 25% of Pakistan's existence. Zia was such a fanatic that writing about his negative impact can justify a few PhD Dissertations.
While ZAB has been justifiably accused of some cowardly appeasements of the religious lobbies around the 1977 elections he did not fundamentally alter the basic fabric of the Pakistani society--it was not in his psyche and his party, to this day, remain the most favored by Pakistan's minorities.
Imagine any country in the world where a quarter of its nascent life is under a ruler like Zia? No wonder hardly anyone weeps at Zia's grave despite its central location.

very well summarized,