It is fashionable in some quarters of Lahore to be “Secular Humanists” these days. This reminds me of our trip to Sarajevo, the capital of Yugoslavia a few decades ago when Marshal Tito was alive and Yugoslavia was sternly ruled by the Socialist state. It was the end of Ramadhan so my father asked us to investigate, seek out and find a mosque for saying Eid Prayers.
We searched far and wide, and asked several people with Muslim sounding names for the nearest mosque. The usual response was “we are Europeans”, saying that being a Socialist in a post-religious world meant that these modern Yugoslavs had transcended religion and it was not important.
In the 80s when Yugoslavia was coming apart and Bosnia wanted to be independent, the Serbians came down hunted down the Bosnian Muslims. They Serbs were more successful in finding the Muslims then we were. The Serbs hunted them down, put them in concentration camps and rape centers. Their fault their ancestors were Muslims.
That was then and this is now. Today a visitor to Sarajevo would have no difficulty finding Muslims or a mosque to pray in. The mosques are full and the Bosnians don’t make the wine that they were so proud of.
Pakistan's new provinces. Ending majoritarianism. Balancing the federation. Empowering minorities. Resolving greviences
An important question is being asked which is the result of vast conspiracy to destabilize Pakistan and blame Islam. Unfortunately the conclusion some draw from the recent events in Swat is based on Anti-Pakistan propaganda perpetuated by the Pro-Indians, and the Unpatriotic Left in Pakistan.
Let us assume that for minute, that the 1973 constitution created by consensus of all parties is changed and Pakistan is declared a “secular state”. How will that change anything? Will the war in Afghanistan go away? Will poverty be eliminated? Will corruption be history? Nothing will change!
Will “declaring” Pakistan secular secure the rights of the minorities? or will it create fundamental issues for the Pakistani state?
Some say that declaring Pakistan a “Secular State will secure minority rights.
First of all there are many ways of securing minority rights. “Secularism” is not the answer. “Secular” Germany killed 6 million Jews. “Secular” Bharat killed 2000 in Gujarat and 2000 after the destruction of the Ayodhya mosque. Per Justice Sachaar report of Bharat, Indian Muslims live a pathetic life worse off than the Dalit Untouchables. The massacre of the Sikhs an another spot on Bharat. 450 million Dalits, Untouchables, Scheduled classes and Tribals eek out a miserable life in “Secular” Bharat.
Minorities must be respected and cherished as trophies and treated with more than respect.
Respect for minorities has nothing to do with “Secularism”–it has to do with real implementation of Islam. In Muslim Spain from 700 AD to 1492 Muslims ruled Spain with justice and peace–also known as the Golden period of the Jews. It is called the Jewish-Christian-Muslim symbiosis. Hasdai Shaprut was the Prime Minister and Chief of the Armed forces for thirty years–UNDER Shariah Laws. In fact during the Inquisition the Jews begged the new rulers to allow them the same privileges as during Muslim rule
Details about Why Jinnah was not Secuar–are presented here.
http://rupeenews.com/2009/05/24/mohammad-ali-jinnah-was-not-secular/
With all due respect you are misinformed by Hoodbhoy and gang. “Secularism” in Bharat does not give Muslims “First class citizenship”. Not in Germany nor in any European country. This weeks verdict in Ayodhya confirmed that breaking a mosque is legal and the court validates the myth that Ram was born there “per Hindu beliefs”.
We cannot assume for a minute what is not in the “Qarardad e Maqasid” (http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/preamble.html) passed on 12 March 1949. Jinnah did not espouse “secularism”. He famously said that “The Quran is the constitution of Pakistan”.
The Objectives resolution was included as a Preamble to the constitution, not as part of it. Similarly, an article (227) of our constitution says that no law can be made against Quran and Sunnah, and “all existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah”
It has been described as the “Magna Carta” of Pakistan’s constitutional history. Liaqat Ali Khan called it “the most important occasion in the life of this country, next in importance, only to the achievement of independence”. Under his leadership a team also drafted the first report of the Basic Principle Committee and work began on the second report.
Making Pakistan secular is an insidious conspiracy–to eliminate the reason for Pakistan. That would open a Pandora’s box questioning the “raison d etre” of Pakistan.
The issues is not secularism or Islam. The issue is geopolitical and a result of the US occupation and continued bombing of Pakistanis by US drones.
This is hard concept to comprehend by some in our youth who see “nirvana” promised by the Non-religious Left who are pre-disposed in blaming Islam as the root cause of the problem.
Pakistan will never be a secular state. This is the talk of the enemy from across the border.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgolHzefmvo&feature=player_embedded
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgolHzefmvo&feature=player_embedded]
There are 23 sessions that discuss Battle of Plassey to the present day.
It is not Islam that is the problem, it is the murderous gang of terrorists from across the border that want to demoralize Pakistanis into thinking that somehow the religion is the issue.
Secular Christians murdered 55 million of their own During WW2 and 15 million in WW1. Millions died during the American Civil war–a secular country.
3 million were killed by Buddhist Cambodia in the killing fields.
Bharat has enslaved 450 million Untouchables, marginalized 150 million Muslims and does not control 40% of its territory (which is controlled by the Naxalites).
TTP is part of the 3000 strong “CIA Army” as revealed in his latest book called “Obama’s wars”–the TTP leadership are part and parcel RAW–Mehsud was an Indian agent sending terror to Islamabad. The US is planning an exit strategy and will leave by 2011. Then this terror will stop.
Of course we are deeply disappointed that some in the Pakistani media is presenting this point of view which runs contrary to our glorious constitution and for which millions have died. Some naive Pakistani portals want to publish all points of view. Of course we can get the other point of a view form hundreds of Bharati sites. Many seek a Pakistani oasis.
It is amazing that the same people who raise the issue of secularism also praise Iran where millions were killed and where the Vice Police even today enforce segregation and Imam Sastani enforce a strict enforcement of religion in Iraq, Lebanon, and Iraq. So should Palestine, Sudan, Libya, Sudan, Iran and a host of other countries also have to be also be secular. Why only Pakistan?
Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | ??????? ????? | ???? | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ??????? | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | ???????? ????? | RUPEE NEWS | January 4th, 2009 | Moin Ansari | ????? ????? | ???? ??????? | Dr Muzaffar Iqbal |
Pakistanis have to refocus our priorities on the real issues–illiteracy, unemployment, and build Pakistan as a prosperous state.
“Quantum Note” has seldom been written in response to anything that appears on the op-ed pages of The News. But two recent columns have raised fundamental issues regarding state and religion, andthey demandresponse because they deal with issues of enduring importance for Pakistan. “In defence of a secular state” (Dec 18) and”Winter less of discontent than of gloom” (Dec 19) are bothconcerned with Islam and Pakistan, which, let us recall, is a country where 96 percent of the population proclaims that “There is no deity except Allah, andMuhammad is Allah’s Messenger.” This testimony of faithmakes them Muslim, that is, those who believe in the five pillars of Islam (the testimony of faith, obligatory prayers, fasting, zakah, andHaj), as well as the set of tenets associated with belief (Iman): the Unicity of the Creator, Allah, belief in angels, in Allah’s prophets, on the Day of Reckoning, and on qadr. These are non-negotiable and irreducible beliefs of every Muslim.
It is not my intention to probe the beliefs of the writers of the above mentioned columns. One of them has ridiculed the “self-proclaimed defenders of Pakistan’s ideology,” lamented the impossibility of “a creative dialogue on the meanings of secularism,” and listed five points in “defence of revisiting our dominant ideologies and establishing a secular state within Pakistan as one of several possible resolutions to its myriad problems. “The other is essentially asking for legalisation of drinking and prostitution, for “doctors of divinity should know enough about the human condition to realise that banning anything makes it more attractive.”
Marhattas in green India 1760 19051
While both are welcome to hold whatever views they hold, when they write for public consumption, they incur a responsibility–a moral and intellectual responsibility. While the prevalent intellectual anarchy allows publication of all kinds of views, we wish we could think that these ideas are unsound on historical grounds. It is hard to see how the writers of these two articles can publish such views, which ignore fundamental historical realities. The writer is a freelance columnist.quantumnotes@gmail.com. Islamic or secular Pakistan? Quantum note, Friday, January 02, 2009 by Dr Muzaffar Iqbal
Today many of the Lahorites brainwashed by the propaganda of the Neocons and the Akhand Bhartis are acting like the Bosnians of yesteryear. They have bought the Neocon Plan for a New American Century (PNAC) masquerading as the Global War on Terror (GWOT) claptrap. These Neo-Liberals are stuck in a time warp of the 60s, the new Pakistani Flower Children who think that if they sing “kambaya” in Lahore, the nasty Modi’s and the abominable Thackery’s will just go away.
Legal India Pakistan map. Map of India. Map of Pakistan. Map of Bangladesh
To begin with, let us note that the state of Pakistan came into existence through the partition of the Indian subcontinent on the basis of Islam. This can be attested to by visiting the primary sources available to all. There is not a single argument advanced by the representatives of Muslims of the Indian subcontinent during the period of struggle for gaining independence from the overbearing English colonisers that does not rest on the principle that Muslims and non-Muslims are two nations which cannot live within the same state.
The two-nation theory is simply a statement of this historical reality: even after hundreds of years of shared existence within a specific geographical region, Muslims and non-Muslims of the Indian subcontinent remained two distinct nations. This is why Islam was, is, and will remain, the only raison d’etre of Pakistan. This is why every document of the Independence movement–from the pamphlets of Chaudhry Rahmat Ali, to the 1930 presidential address of Allama Iqbal, to the legalistic arguments of Muhammad Ali Jinnah–rests on this fundamental argument that the Muslims of India constitute a separate nation from the non-Muslims anddeserve to have a separate homeland.
All lower caste areas are in open revolt. Map of India showing the highest concentration of Brahmins and Hindu extremists known as Hinduvta
To be sure, the case for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan does not rest on the statements of a Jinnah or an Iqbal, for these individuals were but human and their reasoning cannot be taken to have enduring and lasting value; it rsests on the fact that the vast majority of this land is Muslim. It is this silent majority for whom the rallying cry during the years of popular uprising against the British was Pakistan ka Matlab kaya? La’ila ilLah (What is the meaning of Pakistan? There is no deity except Allah), that remains the bedrock of an unchanging reality. Hence, the argument advanced by Dr Saigol, that “ideologies do not remain static and over time they do transform,” is invalid, for the fundamental building block of Pakistan is not merely an ideology, but a commitment of our people to Islam. It is this fundamental reality that Dr Saigol wishes to ignore by calling it a “foundational mythology,” and “a denial of history.” Denial of history is certainly present in this argument. The writer is a freelance columnist.quantumnotes@gmail.com. Islamic or secular Pakistan? Quantum note, Friday, January 02, 2009 by Dr Muzaffar Iqbal
Raised on “Social Studies” they are totally unaware of the History of Pakistan or the Two Nation Theory. Alarmed by the Indian sponsored “TTP” they are scared of giving up their lifestyle.
Like the decadent Andalusians they are scared of the impending doom of the Re-Conquista but also scared of the Almohadis (Taliban) Moorish Berbers who swarmed upon the Cordovan’s. These Secular Humanists are unaware of what would happen once Isabella and Ferdinand take over Cordoba.
They are unaware of the Spanish Inquisition and the terrible Torquemada who eliminated all Muslims from Spain.
Lord Clives 1760 British Empire map of India
Apart from these considerations, there are other enduring reasons which dictate that a truly Islamic, and not a secular, state is the real answer to Pakistan’s myriad problems. But those considerations require a separate column, although it must be mentioned here that an Islamic state is, by definition, a state based on the Qur’an and the Sunnahof the Prophet of Islam, peace be upon him. A secular state of whatever kind, on the other hand, is a state based on the wisdom of human beings who deny that Revelation can be the basis of a state. Dr Saigol’s version of secular state may be a legitimate model for an imaginary “multi-religious state,” as she claims. But her reasoning falls apart when applied to Pakistan, simply because it is based on a fundamental failure to acknowledge the fact that 96 percent of people living within the geographical entity called Pakistan are Muslim according to
the most recent census. (See demographic data according to religious beliefs at the official website http:// www.statpak.gov.pk/depts /pco/statistics/other_tables/ pop_by_religion.pdf).
Map of the 570 states of the Subcontinent in pre-indpendence "india"
With regard to the second column, with its seeming advocacy of legalisation of drinking and prostitution, it is sufficient to say that if basic argument of that advocacy (“prevalence of drinking and of the oldest profession”) is accepted, then one should simultaneously advocate for legalisation of theft, murder, robbery, and all other crimes, for they are–and have always been–present in human society.
Even though these views may advance the ideological and moral commitments of a few Pakistanis, their articulation in public domain at a moment when every basic principle of authority seems undermined, accelerates the process of intellectual anarchy which cannot be delinked from the political and social anarchy of our times. There is much reason to fear that loose philosophy, stimulated by a faulty understanding of religion has done not a little to weaken the principles on which the state of Pakistan was established and which continue to remain valid because the populace has not changed its religious beliefs.The writer is a freelance columnist.quantumnotes@gmail.com. Islamic or secular Pakistan? Quantum note, Friday, January 02, 2009 by Dr Muzaffar Iqbal
Continent of Dinia and dependencies Large Ch. Rehmat Ali Big map
India has identified 5000 targets in Pakistan: Air Marshal Barbora
Nuclear armageddon in South Asia: Analysis
Gandhi’s racism: Crititicsm of Mohandas Gandhi by his grandsons and other Indians 
Why is Urine drinking popular in India? From Mohandas Gandhi to PM Desai to common man. 
How Buddhism was exterminated from South Asia? 600BC-400AD 
Reviving Hindusism in Budhdist lands: The Hindu extremists use the Safron Swastika flag instead of the tri-colored flag of India. (see Hindu unity dot org)
Indian penury: The reality vs. the Bollywood marketing gloss:
India as World Power 1 
Extremist Hindus show power using the Swastika in triple entendre–as an ancient Hindu symbol, reverence for Hitler and sign of Anti-Western Indian power
Extremist Hindus revere Hitler and use the Swastika as the Indian flag
How long to extripate penury from india? 300 years! 
India’s budget– fit for a superpower 
Murder of 10 million Indian girl babies:Before or right after birth. The media is silent.
————————————–
Sino-Indian relationship 
India Balkanizing? Naxalite insurrection widening cracks in deep cavaties 
The 2nd world revolution (after Buddhism) from Nepal: Another threat to India
Red Nepal: Clear and present danger to India
LEDGER | ???????? ????? | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | 
Defensebriefs
Intellibriefs
Translate to: 
RSS feed: 
| RUPEE NEWS | January 4th, 2009 | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | ????? ????? | Save/Share
Why would Pakistan like to be secular when the prime examples of secularism in the the past century have been the worst examples of barbarity that humanity has known. It wasn’t just Hitler and Moussilini, it was Lenin and Stalin too. Stalin killed 10 million Muslims. Bharat has engaged in systematic murder since 1947. Bharat’s secular constitution did not prevent the massacre of 2000 Muslim in Gujarat and the culling of 5000 Sikhs in the aftermath of Operation Bluestar. The US and Europe killed 173 million in the recent past. Saddam Husein’s secular government was removed and 1-22 million Iraqis killed and 2-3 million were thrown out of Iraq. The Secular Mukti Bahni killed hundreds of thousands and keeps million in camps. The Awami League does not give the Chakma Tribes its rights in the Chittagong Hill Tracks and they claim to be the victims of Bengali chauvinism (the same that the Bengalis claimed against the Punjabis).
Jinnah said a lot of things about Pakistan being a true Islamic welfare state. One cannot ignore the other statements of Jinnah which are published on this–and those of Iqbal and Liaqat Ali Khan. Pakistan was not created for Zorastrianism–it was created for Muslims…so that they could practice their religion in the manner in which they saw fit. They want a leader which represents them–not a Non-Muslim.
Pakistan ka matlab kiya–La Ilaha Il Lal Lah.
Pakistan will never be secular. We are not sure why the Humanists don’t get it–the people don’t want it. Why are they trying to shove this down the throat of Pakistanis. The sooner they realize it the better for their own personal sanity.
We have listed several examples of how a secular state did not protect the minorities. Nazisim and Fascism were acts of the state. The decimation of the natives of America and Australia didn’t just happen–the secular state did conducted the genocide. Secular Colonialism killed millions and it was the secular state which enslaved millions.
There are multiple ways of securing minority rights–and they should be secure–but becoming secular is not any solution. Immigrants to US cannot become president. There are millions of them–more than the percentage of minorities in Pakistan.
The Pakistanis have rejected the “Secular Humanists”–and their Agnostic and Atheist Political parties. The Secularists are frustrated because they have no political base. Secularism has been rejected by Turkey too. It has no backing in Pakistan.
If the Secularists think that they have the right message—-Form a party called “Secular Party of Pakistan”, run for elections, get a two thirds majority and change the constitution.
Hint: It ain’t going to happen!
New Pakistan map
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/1314/pakistannewfuture.jpg
http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/4252/karachi2010.jpg
http://www.paklinks.com/gsmedia/files/50382/Pakistan_new_Map2012.jpg
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/6733/pakistanafghanistan.jpg
My Blog
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/blogs/ngenius/68499-pakistans-balkanization.html
http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/4471/pakistan2012.jpg
“Let us assume that for minute, that the 1973 constitution created by consensus of all parties is changed and Pakistan is declared a “secular state”. How will that change anything? ”
It’ll keep the religious minorities of Pakistan from being the second-class citizens of this state. A majority does not have the right to impose its own religion and a personal brand of morals upon the minorities.
That’s why Jinnah, in his famous address to the Constituent Assembly, insisted upon the need to keep Pakistan a secular state.
Faraz:
Thank you for bringing up a good subject. Obviously our purpose is not to convince you–that is impossible–but we will present an explanation which you can summarily reject.
This is a complex issue and not as simple as changing the nomenclature. This has to be looked at from many aspects. Will “declaring” Pakistan secular secure the rights of the minorities? or will it create fundamental issues for the Pakistani state?
First of all there are many ways of securing minority rights. “Secularism” is not the answer. “Secular” Germany killed 6 million Jews. “Secular” Bharat killed 2000 in Gujarat and 2000 after the destruction of the Ayodhya mosque. Per Justice Sachaar report of Bharat, Indian Muslims live a pathetic life worse off than the Dalit Untouchables. The massacre of the Sikhs an another spot on Bharat. 450 million Dalits, Untouchables, Scheduled classes and Tribals eek out a miserable life in “Secular” Bharat.
Minorities must be respected and cherished as trophies and treated with more than respect.
Respect for minorities has nothing to do with “Secularism”–it has to do with real implementation of Islam. In Muslim Spain from 700 AD to 1492 Muslims ruled Spain with justice and peace–also known as the Golden period of the Jews. It is called the Jewish-Christian-Muslim symbiosis. Hasdai Shaprut was the Prime Minister and Chief of the Armed forces for thirty years–UNDER Shariah Laws. In fact during the Inquisition the Jews begged the new rulers to allow them the same privileges as during Muslim rule
Details about Jinnah are presented here.
http://rupeenews.com/2009/05/24/mohammad-ali-jinnah-was-not-secular/
Shabbir Ahmed Usmani reminded the Assembly of Jinnah’s letter of March 10, 1945, to the Pir of Manki Sharif, where he promised that the Constituent Assembly would enact laws for Muslims “not inconsistent with the Shariat laws and Muslims will no longer be obliged to abide by the un-Islamic laws.”
There were other instances.
On January 25, 1948, Jinnah spoke to the Bar Association of Karachi, and said:
“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.”
“Islam is not only a set of rituals, traditions and spiritual doctrines. Islam is also a code for every Muslim, which regulates his life and conduct in even politics and economics and the like.”
With all due respect you are misinformed by Hoodbhoy and gang. “Secularism” in Bharat does not give Muslims “First class citizenship”. Not in Germany nor in any European country. This weeks verdict in Ayodhya confimed that breaking a mosque is legal and the court validates the myth that Ram was born there “per Hindu beliefs”.
We cannot assume for a minute what is not in the “Qarardad e Maqasid” (http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/preamble.html) passed on 12 March 1949. Jinnah did not espouse “secularism”. He famously said that “The Quran is the constitution of Pakistan”.
The Objectives resolution was included as a Preamble to the constitution, not as part of it. Similarly, an article (227) of our constitution says that no law can be made against Quran and Sunnah, and “all existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah”
It has been described as the “Magna Carta” of Pakistan’s constitutional history. Liaqat Ali Khan called it “the most important occasion in the life of this country, next in importance, only to the achievement of independence”. Under his leadership a team also drafted the first report of the Basic Principle Committee and work began on the second report.
Making Pakistan secular is an insidious conspiracy–to eliminate the reason for Pakistan. That would open a Pandora’s box questioning the “raison d etre” of Pakistan.
“Extremist Hindus revere Hitler and use the Swastika as the Indian flag”
How utterly pathetic and ignorant. The swastika has been in use as a sacred emblem by Hindus since the bronze age, way before Hitler’s time.
Faraz:
Hitler also used an old Aryan symbol–surely you don’t think he invented it.
Hindus, Gandhi, Modi, and Bharati textbooks do revere Hitler. There is documented proof of this published on this site and thousands of other sites.
The Editors,
Hitler hijacked the swastika from its true Hindu origins, but that doesn’t equate Hitlerism with Hinduism. The white supremacists believed themselves to be descendants of the Aryans, so they assumed the well-known symbol of good luck called swastika.
When Hindus draw swastikas on their flags, they’re not revering Hitler, they’re simply carrying out their old religious rituals just like they’ve had for thousands of years. They don’t do it for Nazism, they do it out of respect for their own religious roots.
“Faraz”:
You just proved our point–Fascists in Bharat and Europe use the Swastika to push forward their racist agenda.
Tell your Disneyland tales about the racist symbols to the birds. Hinduunity.org clearly defines the motives for using the Swasatika on the new Bharati flag.
Try flying the Swastika in Harlem and Bronx or in Tel Aviv–you won’t be able to walk straight and then write about it. The “Swastika” is today a symbol of the worst racist regime on the planet. It has been discarded by the world. Just like the Dixie flag in the US in a symbol of slavery the Swastika is a symbol of White Supremacy. Anyone who uses the Swastika today adheres to that philosophy.
The Cross used to be Phoenician, Greek and Roman symbol. However today it is a symbol of Christianity–and the Lebanese and the Greeks and Romans use it to represent Christianity..
If you used your real name we would appreciate it
“Secular” Germany killed 6 million Jews”
Equating Nazism with Secularism is as hollow an argument as saying that mustaches are wicked because Hitler had one. There’s a difference between a country doing something unspeakably evil while it happens to be secular, and doing something IN THE NAME of secularism.
Hitler didn’t kill 6 million Jews because he was secular. In fact, his personal disgust for Jews can be traced back to his Catholic roots, which he made perfectly clear in Mein Kampff. He often referred to Jews as “Christ-killers” in his speeches, which is not a secular statement at all. Same goes for the other black examples from history that you’re trying to ignominiously compare with secularism.
“Respect for minorities has nothing to do with “Secularism”–it has to do with real implementation of Islam”
It most certainly is. When you declare the religion of the majority as the “state religion”, you immediately turn all the minorities into the non-Islamic elements of an Islamic Republic, which alone is discriminatory. Don’t you think a Christian would like Pakistan to become a Christian Republic of Pakistan? Is he any less of a Pakistani for us to ignore his aspirations and exploit our position as a majority to integrate our personal religious code into the constitution?
Article 41 of Pakistan claims that a non-Muslim cannot become the President of Pakistan (there’s a similar law for PM as well). According to Qanun-e-Shahadat, a Muslim’s testimony is equal to that of two non-Muslims. If that isn’t discrimination, I don’t know what else is. And then there’s the mother of all oppressive laws, Section 295, the blasphemy charges, which have been frequently abused by Muslims to settle their personal scores with non-Muslims. It’s interesting to note that there are no corresponding laws for the protection of non-Muslims from blasphemous remarks. Only Muslims enjoy that immunity.
And that’s why we need secularism. So no one religion can enjoy supremacy over the other, but that doesn’t seem to go well with the general egoistic attitude of most Pakistani Muslims.
“With all due respect you are misinformed by Hoodbhoy and gang.”
It’s you has been misled my mullacracy into believing that Jinnah was a Muslim supremacist. Following is a link to Jinnah’s speech that he delivered to the Constituent Assembly:
http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/legislation/constituent_address_11aug1947.html
Jinnah: “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or 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”
First let me set the record straight on Jinnah. Obviously you did not read the article on Jinnah which has a lot of quotes. The speed of your response tells us that you didn’t have the time to read it. You mention the “Constituent Assembly Speech” but forget his last speech in front of the State Bank of Pakistan.
When Jinnah was saying ” “You are free; you are free to go to your temples,” Jinnah was not creating new history–he was simply quoting what the the Prohphet Muhammad said 1400 years ago.
Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) sent a message to the monks of Saint Catherine in Mount Sinai:
“This is a message written by Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, far and near, we are behind them. Verily, I defend them by myself, the servants, the helpers, and my followers, 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 changed 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 (Christians) 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, this is not to take place without her own wish. She is not to be prevented from going to 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 is to disobey this covenant till the Day of Judgment and the end of the world.” http://www.emuslim.com/IslamAgainstVoilence.asp, http://www.emuslim.com/Jesus.asp
Shabbir Ahmed Usmani reminded the Assembly of Jinnah’s letter of March 10, 1945, to the Pir of Manki Sharif, where he promised that the Constituent Assembly would enact laws for Muslims “not inconsistent with the Shariat laws and Muslims will no longer be obliged to abide by the un-Islamic laws.”
There were other instances.
On January 25, 1948, Jinnah spoke to the Bar Association of Karachi, and said:
“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.”
“Islam is not only a set of rituals, traditions and spiritual doctrines. Islam is also a code for every Muslim, which regulates his life and conduct in even politics and economics and the like.”
We agree with “Hitler didn’t kill 6 million Jews because he was secular.”
However the point we are making is that “Secularism” could not prevent the Holocaust, or Colonialism, or the Spanish Inquisition or the decimation of the Natives of South and North America. Neither did it prevent the death of 130 million African through slavery.
MINORITIES:
Respect of minorities have to be done under Sahriah Law which is the progenitor of of “British Common Law” and the Magna Carta (see research of John Maksudi).
As listed below–and we repeat we want to cherish minorities as in Andulusia Spain where Hasdai Shaprut could become the Sipah e Salar of the Armed forces. In 2010 the Pakistani people once again passed the 18th amendment and told the world that the consensus on the PM being Muslim is part of the Pakistan landscape. Just like all US citizens cannot become president, all Pakistanis cannot become PM or President. This has nothing to do with the condition of the minorities–its a political reality and all the Hoodbhoy bouncing cannot change that.
Pakistani laws and Pakistani constitution does not accept your version of “Qanun-e-Shahada”> Ghamdi and the Pakistan Council of Islamic Ideology repudiated this. It is not part of the Pakistani constitution.
Anis bhai–Every religion claims superiority–the Jews claim that, the catholics claim that, the Brahmins claim that too. Christians say they are saved too. Secular Humanists like you claim to know it all and propound moral superiority too. If Pakistani Muslims do that–so what?
Three times the Pakistanis have spoken–three times they have passed constitutions in ’56, 62 and ’73. Even secular leaders like Bhutto subscribed instituted Shariah Laws and made the Pakistan an Islamic State.
Why is it important for the Humanists to impose their “Secularist Fascism”. Don’t you get it–the people don’t want it.
There is a way to make Pakistan secular—form the “Secular Party of Pakistan” win a plurality of the votes, get a three fourths majority and change the constitution. See how many votes you get!!!!
“til lthat day put up or **** **
When Jinnah said ” “You are free; you are free to go to your temples ” he was not saying anything new he was simply repeating what Prophet Muhammad had said in his “Covenant with the Christians” and what was written in the “Meeshaq e Mdina” with the Jews.
Shabbir Ahmed Usmani reminded the Assembly of Jinnah’s letter of March 10, 1945, to the Pir of Manki Sharif, where he promised that the Constituent Assembly would enact laws for Muslims “not inconsistent with the Shariat laws and Muslims will no longer be obliged to abide by the un-Islamic laws.”
There were other instances.
On January 25, 1948, Jinnah spoke to the Bar Association of Karachi, and said:
“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.”
“Islam is not only a set of rituals, traditions and spiritual doctrines. Islam is also a code for every Muslim, which regulates his life and conduct in even politics and economics and the like.”
And about the Swastika, yes, Gandhi and Modhi were Hitler-friendly. But you can’t generalize their personal admiration for Hitler as a particularly “Hindu” phenomenon.
Otherwise, I can use photographs of hijab-clad women carrying signs like “God bless Hitler” to to draw stereotypes that “Muslims” revere Hitler too.
Just like these protestors are not representative of Islam’s tolerance for Nazism, Hindus using swastikas as part of their cultural practices isn’t representative of their admiration for Hitler.
“Faraz”
If the father of the Bharati nation called Hitler his friend (and wrote letters to him), if there are schools books in Gujarat which eulogize Hitler, if Mein Kemph is a best seller in Bharat then it shows an ongoing trend. Modi, Advani and are the latest incarnation of Lala Lajpat Rai, Haldiram, Golwakar, Swarkar who thought of Hitler as a great man.
That and more makes a bit more than one playcard carried by a no-name.
The Nazis, the Neo-Nazis, and the Saffron Brigade believe in their racial superiority and all worship the Swastika.
“When Jinnah was saying ” “You are free; you are free to go to your temples,” Jinnah was not creating new history–he was simply quoting what the the Prohphet Muhammad said 1400 years ago.”
When did Muhammad (SAW) say anything about religion not being the business of the state? Or did you conveniently ignore the second part of the quote that I had posted in caps?
“However the point we are making is that “Secularism” could not prevent the Holocaust, or Colonialism…”
Again, that’s just like saying that Islamization of Pakistan couldn’t save the two brothers in Sialkot from being clubbed to death, therefore Sharia is a failure. It’s a non-sequitur argument. You can’t link secularism with failure to prevent genocides.
“Just like all US citizens cannot become president, all Pakistanis cannot become PM or President. ”
..but all US citizens are allowed to try for Presidency regardless of their race, gender, creed and RELIGION (as long as they meet they meet the general requirements of age, state of education etc). USA has been ruled by Christian presidents as well as non-religious presidents. You can’t deprive the minorities of the opportunity to reach the top government posts of their own country and call yourself fair at the same time.
Developed are those nations which select their leaders on the basis of their merit. India, which you are so fond of criticizing, is a Hindu-majority state with a Muslim President and a Sikh Prime Minister. It’s because the Hindu majority is more interested in choosing the most capable leaders for themselves, than ensuring Hindu superiority by planting Hindu leaders.
“Making Pakistan secular is an insidious conspiracy–to eliminate the reason for Pakistan”
The “reason” for Pakistan was to allow Muslims a land where they could practice their faith in peace without fear of persecution…not where they could impose themselves upon the non-Muslims. A secular state grants full religious freedom to all religious groups, and it serves the “reason” of Pakistan perfectly well.
Thank you for your feedback.
Why would Pakistan like to be secular when the prime examples of secularism in the the past century have been the worst examples of barbarity that humanity has known. It wasn’t just Hitler and Moussilini, it was Lenin and Stalin too. Stalin killed 10 million Muslims. Bharat has engaged in systematic murder since 1947. Bharat’s secular constitution did not prevent the massacre of 2000 Muslim in Gujarat and the culling of 5000 Sikhs in the aftermath of Operation Bluestar. The US and Europe killed 173 million in the recent past. Saddam Husein’s secular government was removed and 1-22 million Iraqis killed and 2-3 million were thrown out of Iraq. The Secular Mukti Bahni killed hundreds of thousands and keeps million in camps. The Awami League does not give the Chakma Tribes its rights in the Chittagong Hill Tracks and they claim to be the victims of Bengali chauvinism (the same that the Bengalis claimed against the Punjabis).
Jinnah said a lot of things about Pakistan being a true Islamic welfare state. You ignored the other statements of Jinnah which I pasted for you–and Iqbal and Liaqat Ali Khan. Pakistan was not created for Zorastrianism–it was created for Muslims…so that they could practice their religion in the manner in which they saw fit. They want a leader which represents them–not a Non-Muslim.
Pakistan ka matlab kiya–La Ilaha Il Lal Lah.
Pakistan will never be secular. Don’t you get it–the people don’t want it. Why are you trying to shove this down the throat of Pakistanis. The sooner you realize that the better for your own personal sanity.
We have given you several examples of how a secular state did not protect the minorities. Sialkot was a individual act, and those responsible have all been arrested by the state, and will be hanging from the end of a rope. Nazisim and Fascism were acts of the state. The decimation of the natives of America and Australia didn’t just happen–the secular state did conducted the genocide. Secular Colonialism killed millions and it was the secular state which enslaved millions.
There are multiple ways of securing minority rights–and they should be secure–but becoming secular is not any solution. Immigrants to US cannot become president. There are millions of them–more than the percentage of minorities in Pakistan.
The Pakistanis have rejected the “Secular Humanists”–and their Agnostic and Atheist Political parties. Folks like you are frustrated because you have no political base. Secularism has been rejected by Turkey too. It has no backing in Pakistan.
If you think you have the right message—-Form a party called “Secular Party of Pakistan”, run for elections, get a two thirds majority and change the constitution. I can’t think of a single politicians who would support your cause. As they say in American Put up or ***t up.
All we could say, we have said. Let us agree to disagree or disagree to agree.
Take Care and Best of Luck to you.
All the current laws that are enforced in any of the countries in the world are derived from Islamic Shariah. They have given them different names, but one way or the other resembles Shariah.
During Islamic golden period, all the uncivilized countries had a Muslim Counselor to teach the king how to govern the masses.
When that free mason president of U S A wrote the constitution, he had Qur’an in front of him.
But they do not want to give credit to Islam out of sheer jealousy, that, why ALLAH gave the Last Messenger ship to progeny of Ishmael? This is same as Satan was asked to bow before Adam, which he refused out of sheer jealousy, since Satan thought himself to be superior to Adam who was made of altered state of Clay while he was made of essential element of fire or by other narrative by smokeless fire.
So the fools still argue against Shariah………Wait then, when you meet with ALLAH (SWT) on the day of judgment.
Assalamu-Elekum