SC ponders over whether Pakistan can be declared a secular state
- Thread starter third eye
- Start date
Indus Pakistan
BANNED
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 20,487
- Reaction score
- 182
- Country
- Location
I fastidously avoid any subject that might be divisive however since you ask I cannot ignore your request. I would rather reserve my thoughts but if I do express them I will be honest to my feelings.
The biggest and I mean the biggest disaster that ever hit Pakistan was the Objectives Resolution and the subsequent slow but sure road to where we are today. My dad is very political and was a lawyer and is passionate about Pakistan. From very young I had debates with him and questioned him on some concepts that my immature mind could not rationalize. All these years later we still debate and we both can't seem to agree some things and my questions have not been answered satisfactorily. Here they are.
1. If Pakistan's existance and creation is premised on Islam then there are certain self evident effects that flow from that premise. The premise being Pakistan is for Islam and therefore Muslim's. This is simple enough but if a 10,000 Nigerian Muslims, 10,000 Somali Muslims, 10,000 coming knocking at our door do we let them in? Yes if you stand by the principle of Pakistan is for Islam and therefore Muslim's.
2. If you decide to qualify that principle "Pakistan is for Islam and therefore Muslim's" by adding a geographic restriction like "Muslims of South Asia" your cheating. The geographic limiter is a secular concept and your creating fundamental contradiction by employing a religious rationale "Pakistan is for Islam and therefore Muslim's" with a secular construct "South Asia". This geographic division is contradictory to the Islamic concept of Ummah.
3. This is not a minor matter. It is fundamental. Before 1947 most of Islamic parties opposed the very creation of Pakistan because of this very contradiction. The nation state that was being demanded was a secular construct. In fact the very basis of a modern nation state came about in Europe in 1648 with Treaty of Westphalia from which evoloved the Westphalian sovereignty.
Westphalian sovereignty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
4. There is no doubt that before 1947 ML used religion to galvanize Muslim support in the demand for Pakistan. That can be looked at as a determinant. In other words as a means to a end. Not the end to the means. I actually ascribe to this view. However the very religious parties who opposed creation of Pakistan by saying it was "Na Pak-istan" subsequently and in particular post Objectives Resolution decided to to hijack Pakistan by turning truth upside down and saying Pakistan now had to be a Islamic state.
5. After Pakistan came into existance 1947 the determinant had been met, that is end had been achieved. However contrary to what Mohammed Ali Jinnah and Sir Allama Iqbal had said two years into the new nations life after Objectives Resolution was passed which effectively killed Jinnah's Pakistan. Jinnah would only live on in Rupee notes.
6. The Objectives Resolution for the first time infused the state with religion. This was disasterous day for Pakistan because in doing so the state conceded that any demand made by Mullah's on religious grounds would be conceded. After all if you make state Islamic then the experts on Islam are Mullah's therefore by default your empowering them and you can't ignore them. In fact they could argue they ought to be running the state as they are experts on Islam. We all know where that took us. Today every two penny Mullah will go on the streets at the drop of hat and start demanding something because he has decided on our behalf what Allah says and which Muslim is going to oppose Allah's law? The Mullah is the expert on Islam and what he says goes and nobody can dare question Allah.
In fact we have given licence to Mullah's to apply Allah's law and they being the experts regularly choose to apply it - Go ask Lal Masjid.
7. However there is even bigger disaster written into our dna by allowing religion into the state. In 1953 a Judicial Commision was set up to investiagate and report on the Ahmedi riots of 1952. The Munir Commision Report 1953 is a must read for every Pakistan who wants to know what went wrong with us. The first thing you will notice is the report is almost 800 pages of the most concise, accurate all comprehensive nature in terms of quality. I have yet to read a report in the West that can match this report. Clearly since 1950s our public service have dropped in quality.
The report asked various divines (Mullah's) to define what a Muslim was.
"Keeping in view the several definitions given by the ulama, need we make any comment except that no two learned divines ( Mullah's ) are agreed on this fundamental. If we attempt our own definition as each learned divine has done and that definition differs from that given by all others, we unanimously go out of the fold of Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulama, we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim but kafirs according to the definition of every one else."
Page 227 http://www.thepersecution.org/dl/report_1953.pdf
8. I hope people understand the above. What that means no two Mullah's could even agree on a definition of a Muslim and the prescription they all gave were varied. If you followed any one all rest would have to be declared kaffir and if we combine the precription of all Mullah's everybody would be declared kaffir. Is this not madness? Well 62 years later have a look at Pakistan do we not have madness where they are all killing each other?
Even Dr. Muhammad Iqbal, who must be considered to be the first thinker who conceived of the possibility of a consolidated North Western Indian Muslim State, in the course of his presidential address to the Muslim League in1930 said
“Nor should the Hindus fear that the creation of autonomous Muslim States will mean the introduction of a kind of religious rule in such States. The principle that each group is entitled to free development on its own lines is not inspired by any feeling of narrow communalism”.
When we come to deal with the question of responsibility we shall have the occasion to point out that the most important of the parties who are now clamouring for the enforcement of the three demands on religious grounds were all against the idea of an Islamic State. Even Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi
of Jama’at-i-Islami was of the view that the form of Government in the new Muslim State, if it ever came into existence, couldonly be secular.
Before the Partition, the first public picture of Pakistan that the Quaid-i-Azam gave to the world was in the course of an interview in New Delhi with Mr. Doon Campbell, Reuter’s Correspondent. The Quaid-i-Azam said that the new State would be a modern democratic State, with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of thenew nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of their religion, caste or creed.When Pakistan formally appeared on themap, the Quaid-i-Azam in his memorable speech of 11th August 1947 to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, while stating the principle on which the new State was to be founded, said:—“All the same, in this division it was impossible to avoid the question of minorities being in one Dominion or the other. Now that was unavoidable.
There is no other solution. Now what shall we do? Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and specially of the masses and the poor. If you will work in co-operation, forgetting the past,burying the hatchet, you are bound to succeed. If you change your past and work together in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a
citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges and obligations., there will be no end to the progress you will make.
“I cannot emphasise it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minoritycommunities—the Hindu community and the Muslim community—because even as regards Muslims you have Pathana, Punjabis, Shias,Sunnis and so on and among the Hindusyou have Brahmins, Vashnavas,
Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on—will vanish. Indeed if you askme this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain itsfreedom and independence and but for this we would have been free peoples long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conqueredyou, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time but for this(Applause).
Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this. You are free, you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed — that has nothing to do with the business of the State
These are the words of the founder of Pakistan - Mohammed Ali Jinnah. Today the
mullah's and their half literate mobs who opposed Pakistan's creation tell us what Pakistan should be.
I would strongly recommend people slowly read the Munir Commision Report 1953 as it is invaluable any study of Pakistan and in understanding how we got to the mess of today.
In the following story you can exchange the camel for the Mullah.
One cold night, an Arab sat in his tent, a camel gently thrust his nose under the flap and looked in. "Master," he said, "let me put my nose in your tent. It's cold and stormy out here." "By all means," said the Arab, "and welcome" as he turned over and went to sleep.
A little later the Arab awoke to find that the camel had not only put his nose in the tent but his head and neck also. The camel, who had been turning his head from side to side, said, "I will take but little more room if I place my forelegs within the tent. It is difficult standing out here." "Yes, you may put your forelegs within," said the Arab, moving a little to make room, for the tent was small.
Finally, the camel said, "May I not stand wholly inside? I keep the tent open by standing as I do." "Yes, yes," said the Arab. "Come wholly inside. Perhaps it will be better for both of us." So the camel crowded in. The Arab with difficulty in the crowded quarters again went to sleep.
When he woke up the next time, he was outside in the cold and the camel had the tent to himself.
Last edited:
PakPrinciples
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 6, 2013
- Messages
- 633
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Those stating that Pakistan was ever meant to be anything other than an Islamic Republic are either outright lying to you or are simply not fully knowledgeable on how important Islam was not only in reuniting the Pakistani civilization but also for helping us achieve our independence from the British Raj.
Read the Objective resolution which Liaquat Ali Khan authored. Here is an excerpt:
“Whereas sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to Allah Almighty alone and the authority which He has delegated to the State of Pakistan, through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust;”
The portion stating “exercised within the limits prescribed by Him [Allah swt]” specifically relates to Sharia which is why Jinnah stated during his address to the Karachi Bar Association on January 25, 1948 as referenced in “Jinnah: Speeches and Statements 1947-1948” pg. 98
"Why this feeling of nervousness that the future constitution of Pakistan is going to be in conflict with Shariat Laws? . . . Islamic principles today are as applicable to life as they were 1,300 years ago. "
Jinnah himself states that there is no differentiation between religion and politics during his address to the Karachi Bar association on January 25, 1948, as referenced in “Jinnah: Speeches and Statements 1947-1948” pg. 98
"The Prophet (PBUH) was a great teacher. He was a great law-giver. He was a great statesman and he was a great Sovereign who ruled. No doubt, there are people who do not quite appreciate when we talk of Islam... Islam is not only a set of rituals, traditions and spiritual doctrines. Islam is a code for every Muslim which regulates his life and his conduct in even politics and economics and the like."
Liaqat Ali Khan, Allama Iqbal, Chaudhary Rehmat Ali, etc... all of Pakistan's founders and the Pakistani's that worked, fought and died for our independence and freedom of our ancestral lands sought an Islamic State.
All of Jinnah's final speeches have him declaring Pakistan as an "Islamic State", under "Muslim rule", whose constitution and laws would be "shariah compliant" he never once referred to Pakistan as "secular" or one which would be a "secular state".
With that said I can understand why because Islam is the greatest ideology on the face of this planet. I've spent over 10 years literally reading book after book, taken a variety of courses in University (from one of the top 10 internationally ranked Universities in the world), reading many published peer reviewed studies and everything comes back to proving how amazing Islam is. Once people actually bother to read instead of listening to music or watching cartoons and movies all day or wasting their time on here they'll come to understand what I have.
No it shouldn't.
What needs to happen are those not loyal to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan should be told to leave for India or whatever "secular" nation is willing to accept them (ex. secular France or Tajikistan that restricts religious freedoms).
Secularism is a disease that brings nothing but war and oppression (ex. slavery and exploitation) and we don't need it nor want it.
Pakistan was not created for everyone it was created by the Pakistani civilization that embodies our Islamic culture and those Muslims that share our ideals and aspirations. However, non-Muslims can live here as long as they can abide by our laws and culture. We simply do not need anyone else particularly considering we're already a nation of 190+ million people.
How did the 2 nation theory fail?
Firstly, Bangladesh never joined India meaning that the concept of a united India failed and could never succeed.
Secondly, have you read Choudhary Rehmat Ali's "Now or Never" from 1930? Bangladesh wasn't even included in Pakistan it was only much later that they allowed them in to simply ensure that we each got our independence but even then it was imagined to be a federation where Bangladesh would have governed itself while Pakistan governed its own lands and we would instead cooperate on matters of defence and the economy. This obviously didn't happen hence why India and its secular murderous leadership was able to exploit divisions through propaganda.
The election of the parties like the BJP, that has slaughtered Muslim civilians in India, is just more proof that we were right.
If anyone is unhappy and is not loyal to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan they are free to give up their citizenship and leave.
As Jinnah himself during his April 18, 1948 address to the students of Edwards College in Peshawar as referenced in “Jinnah: Speeches and Statements 1947-1948” pg. 201:
“I am happy to see better things here. What more can one really expect than to see that this mighty land has now been brought under a rule, which is Islamic, Muslim rule, as a sovereign independent State.”
I am a proud citizen of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and a proud Muslim.
Most of the people here don't even know the basics of Pakistani history and they can read, write and have computer access yet I would never consider a host of individuals as “educated”.
Many of those who insult “Mullahs” and Madrassah's are themselves uneducated and completely disingenuous since I have yet to see any of them even bother to help (ex. I don't see any of them building schools and feeding over a million children let alone the wider Pakistani population) and have no understanding of how influential the Mosques and Madrassah's were in creating Pakistan and how Pakistan, let alone India, would not even exist today without Islam (we'd just be brainwashed lemmings who swallowed the nonsense British colonialists and Indian “Hindus” have been spewing since at least 1850). While Indians don't want to admit their nation only exists thanks to Muslims we are thankful to Islam and the Muslims that reunited the Pakistani civilization.
Granted there are issues but these are patriots and I have the absolute respect for them.
It's obvious you don't know what Quaid said.
I've already covered this before
For starters there no copies of the speech in question:
No copy of Jinnah's 'secular state' speech: India - The Express Tribune
However, regardless of that fact Islam and the Islamic Republic allows for freedom of religion as referenced by the following passage:
“Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever rejects false worship and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And God hears and knows all things.” (Quran 2:256)
“If it had been your Lord’s will, all of the people on Earth would have believed. Would you then compel the people so to have them believe?” (Quran 10:99)
“If it had been your Lord’s will, all of the people on Earth would have believed. Would you then compel the people so to have them believe?” (Quran 10:99)
Assuming this speech took place Jinnah was in no way advocating secularism he simply conveyed the message of Islam.
However, non-Muslims and all others must be mindful of our laws and Islamic culture and if they do not like it they are free to leave.
Jinnah himself states that there is no differentiation between religion and politics during his address to the Karachi Bar association on January 25, 1948, as referenced in “Jinnah: Speeches and Statements 1947-1948” pg. 98
"The Prophet (PBUH) was a great teacher. He was a great law-giver. He was a great statesman and he was a great Sovereign who ruled. No doubt, there are people who do not quite appreciate when we talk of Islam... Islam is not only a set of rituals, traditions and spiritual doctrines. Islam is a code for every Muslim which regulates his life and his conduct in even politics and economics and the like."
When Jinnah referred to concepts like equal rights for non-Muslims you need to take it into context of all the other speeches he's made and writings of Pakistan's other founding fathers like Chaudhary Rehmat Ali, Allama Iqbal, etc...
Jinnah was simply referring to the right of all citizens to practice their faith, own property and start a business just like any other Muslim but their rights and limitations are dictated by Islam just like they are for any other Muslim.
What some individuals are doing is confusing rights with privileges and in the case of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan these are dictated by the Quran and Sunnah while in non-Muslim nations they are dictated by other factors and beliefs. Freedom of religion never meant that people would be free to violate Islamic law such as having the right to drink alcohol, do drugs, be prostitutes, dress like Western whores, be thieves, take bribes, etc...
To give you an example only natural born US citizens can be President or VP (naturalized citizens born abroad do not have this right) which was intended to prevent the influence of foreigners on the US government. This itself, as of 2010, excluded about 40 million US citizens from ever holding the highest office in the land and I completely agree with their decision. This is similar to Pakistan's laws that prevent a non-Muslim from holding that post to prevent the influence of non-Muslims on our nation considering we are an Islamic Republic.
The only reason the vast majority of Muslims let alone most immigrants even live in Western secular nations, all of whom profited from colonialism of Muslim countries and other nations pilfering their wealth and hampering development for about 300 years and are guilty for a host of crimes including forced conversions (ex. Canada and its infamous Indian residential school system which operated until about 1996), is for economic reasons nothing else. My own family never intended to live in Canada my father always wanted to return to Pakistan despite the country never being able to pay him what he could earn abroad but corruption, which is anti-Islam, kept him out it wasn't anything else. With that said my parents are still going to retire to Pakistan and I myself have been looking to start a manufacturing business in the country but without a resolution to the energy crisis that makes it difficult.
The moment Pakistan starts to seriously enforce its own Islamic constitution and laws instead of allowing drunkards and corrupt or immoral politicians and even some from within the Army officer ranks from breaking the laws and selling it along with its people and culture out you'll see millions of Pakistanis start streaming back and with them tens of billions in foreign exchange. By 2050 the US Census already believes that there will be no net migration out of Pakistan (this is not true of India which will continue to see as many of its people leave year on year through 2050) because Pakistani's have no wish to live in secular nations. The economy has been destroyed by liberals who keep promoting failed neo-liberal economic policies because they don't know any better or are intentionally trying to sabotage the country.
Last edited:
salarsikander
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2013
- Messages
- 8,860
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Hi,
If I could I would haven given you positive rating forthat.
What in see in front of me is proud Pakistani whomknows what new talking about.
Can someone take my posyive rating and give it to him, he deserves it more
Bhot khoob bhot shandar
Hell hound
STAFF
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2014
- Messages
- 4,168
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
means if Pakistan is declared secular state.there will be open bars vodka, black label and wine bhi where can i vote for this secular Pakistan.
Icewolf
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2012
- Messages
- 10,503
- Reaction score
- -11
- Country
- Location
It can be secular but the Stone Age mentality in the country prevents it from, and some Mullah lovers will be against secularism as they do not want to be "European" even though secularism has nothing to do with European, but has to do with seperation of Mosque and State which I fully support.
Thorough Pro
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2008
- Messages
- 13,232
- Reaction score
- -21
- Country
- Location
stop worrying about Pakistan. Pakistan was created in the name of Islam and will remain an Islamic Republic. the concern is false secular claims about bharat, which is turning out to be more and more of a extremist hindu country with no sensitivity or respect towards other religions.
SC ponders over whether Pakistan can be declared a secular state - The Express Tribune
ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court judges on Monday debated the mechanism that would be needed to declare Pakistan a secular state.
Hearing constitutional petitions against the 18th and 21st Constitutional Amendments, a 17-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk questioned how the country would go about declaring itself a secular state if there is a popular demand for change.
The chief justice questioned whether such a process could be carried out through a constituent assembly. “How can the constituent assembly be formed at present stage?”
“If a political party whose manifesto supported such a declaration comes to power, how does that party plan on making the country secular?” Justice Mian Saqib Nisar questioned.
Proposing a solution, Hamid Khan, counsel for different bar associations suggested that it could be carried out through a referendum.
Justice Asif Saeed Khosa also questioned whether parliament had the power to pass an amendment to the Constitution which would declare the country secular.
Taking a page out of history, Justice Khosa said the country was created in the name of Islam in 1947 and later reaffirmed its commitment to being an Islamic state in 1949 with the Objectives Resolution, which was also supported by East Pakistan. However, Khosa pointed out how East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) went on to declare their country a secular state after partition. Later, Bangladesh attempted to declare the country an Islamic state through a constitutional amendments, but the Bangladesh Supreme Court annulled the amendment.
Citing the example of Turkey, Justice Khosa added people and their ideologies change with the passage of time. However, Jutsice Khawaja believed changes in Bangladesh and Turkey were rooted in revolution.
ArsalanKhan21
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2015
- Messages
- 4,006
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
There would be neither a secular state nor a theocratic state and Pakistan would remain a Islamic republic. Both Islamic parties and these secular are just wasting their breath on this issue since we have evolved a balance. This democratic and peaceful discussion is better than wasting fighting on other issues.
Hell hound
STAFF
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2014
- Messages
- 4,168
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
bro i think two nation theory and Islamic nations concept died in 1971. at least by being secular we can constitutionally reduce religious intolerance such as blasphemy laws and we will be giving more freedom of choice to our population do what ever they want.
Indus Pakistan
BANNED
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 20,487
- Reaction score
- 182
- Country
- Location
I am going to pull out of this discussion now but before I go I will say the following:-
1. We lived under the rule of Sikhs, we lived under the rule of British so we had kaffirs ruling us for hundred of years yet our Islamic vigour never weakened. If after all that Islam did not die in our hearts you think it is now going to die when we are 97% Muslim majority and have our own independant country?
2. Millions of muslims live in the west and millions more will probably emigrate over the next decade from the Muslim world to the West. Pakprinciples appears on the face to be living in secular haven called Canada. So what is the principle being set here? A muslim is fine and dandy to live in the West but if he comes to his own country secularism is going to ravish him?
3. If secularism is condratictory to Muslim in Pakistan then it is contradictory to a Muslim in the West. Therefore a fatwa should be given to the effect that no Muslim should choose to emigrate to any country other than an another Muslim country. Secular and worldly concerns like income, education should take secondary place to Islam. All muslims abroad should make every effort to move back to the ummah.
Will this happen? NO. Hypocracy will prevail. Secularism good in West but Secularism harmfull in Pakistan. Will live in secular countries in West but will not live in secular Pakistan.
Let us wait another 100 years like previous poster said.
1. We lived under the rule of Sikhs, we lived under the rule of British so we had kaffirs ruling us for hundred of years yet our Islamic vigour never weakened. If after all that Islam did not die in our hearts you think it is now going to die when we are 97% Muslim majority and have our own independant country?
2. Millions of muslims live in the west and millions more will probably emigrate over the next decade from the Muslim world to the West. Pakprinciples appears on the face to be living in secular haven called Canada. So what is the principle being set here? A muslim is fine and dandy to live in the West but if he comes to his own country secularism is going to ravish him?
3. If secularism is condratictory to Muslim in Pakistan then it is contradictory to a Muslim in the West. Therefore a fatwa should be given to the effect that no Muslim should choose to emigrate to any country other than an another Muslim country. Secular and worldly concerns like income, education should take secondary place to Islam. All muslims abroad should make every effort to move back to the ummah.
Will this happen? NO. Hypocracy will prevail. Secularism good in West but Secularism harmfull in Pakistan. Will live in secular countries in West but will not live in secular Pakistan.
Let us wait another 100 years like previous poster said.
Last edited:
ArsalanKhan21
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2015
- Messages
- 4,006
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
The democratic institutions and courts will protect the rights of the people. The Second Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan on the issue of Qadianism was supported by all the political parties passed in the Parliament. Pakistan has good balance of Muslim law and we can neither became secular nor theocratic. This seems to be another threat to start new political and religious strife in Pakistan by Qadianis and their supporters.
zeeshan23
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2014
- Messages
- 7
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Already this country is bearing bloodshed owing to inter sectarian beliefs of championing their version of Islam. Dont u think that scrambling a religious-sensitive nation will embroil it in yet another unending sectarian conflicts....
I dont see a "Secular Pakistan" in the near future, although how noble the aim be!!
I dont see a "Secular Pakistan" in the near future, although how noble the aim be!!
Hell hound
STAFF
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2014
- Messages
- 4,168
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
bro just show me where it is written in Islam that non Muslim cant lead Muslim. we denied qadianis there rights based on the concept that only muslims are first class citizen rest can go to hell. they are as much pakistani as we are.if its every pakistanis right that he can vote then why cant he lead this country does this mean that they don't belong here. you and me both know what happened when that law was passed.
Indus Pakistan
BANNED
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 20,487
- Reaction score
- 182
- Country
- Location
@PakPrinciples You gave a long diatribe to justify why it is acceptable to live in the West by giving economic reasons. This is rather convenient. Preach one thing and live another.This means as a principle you are prepared to compromise your religious faith and your belief in a Islamic state for a few dollars more. That what you call faith? Dollars before principles? Is that not the height of hypocracy?
So if I could argue that Pakistan would earn more dollars and prove that would you support secularism - because that is eactly what your saying?
I must disengage from this thread. I gave my two cents on Webbie's request. I don't like getting embroiled in internal Pak politics as I have my hands filled with Indian's.
Salaam.
So if I could argue that Pakistan would earn more dollars and prove that would you support secularism - because that is eactly what your saying?
I must disengage from this thread. I gave my two cents on Webbie's request. I don't like getting embroiled in internal Pak politics as I have my hands filled with Indian's.
Salaam.
Last edited:
Ghareeb_Da_Baal
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2008
- Messages
- 6,654
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
LOL no actually. India still has some decency left. I ve met prominent& very involved in running gurdawaras & such Sikh families here in the US and they dont even like their women leaving their hair open.
Do look up proper/form definition of secularism esp. the 2nd part. If you have shred of Islam "you"( meaning a ordinary muslim) you will understand.
Similar threads
