What's new

‘Admitting you are a secularist can get you killed in Pakistan’

Allah would see that in Narak (or Jannat?)

On the Earth, You need to come up in front of the Foot Soldiers!

I may not be at the front (given I've got a job and family to take care of), but I'm not in hiding either. In the meantime I can safely say Taseer's last and final act was a glorious one and Qadri's an SOB. Taseer died doing a great service to Pakistan... Dying for Pakistan is a good way to go.
 
I may not be at the front (given I've got a job and family to take care of), but I'm not in hiding either. In the meantime I can safely say Taseer's last and final act was a glorious one and Qadri's an SOB. Taseer died doing a great service to Pakistan... Dying for Pakistan is a good way to go.

You are a Muslim, A Servant of Allah. You have to devote your life to Allah, not for 'Islamic Republic of Pakistan', An artificial Entity created on a Kuffar Ideology of Nationalism.

You as a Muslim should not be deceived on masqueraded identities of the Modern World scripted by the Kuffar.

Did Taseer speak/act which was against Islam?

Did Qadri Kill the Munafiq Taseer perfectly as Muslims have been killing Anti-Islamic/Kuffar throughout History?

What was wrong with that!
 
Enough of your bullsh!t - No need to go on personal attack and no need to become sole protector of Islam when you don't know abc of Islam. Be happy with your bloodthirsty mullahism and enjoy electric dance or bhangra on bollynaats

I agree that bollynaat are worst thing invented in Islam. But why did you give the reference of this. Why don't you want to give religious freedom to one.
 
@haviZsultan I would answer to your article point to point … You can see below:

First thing is this you have accepted that many Pakistani has failed to follow to tenets of Islam, no other argument is there. But kindly tell me who is the main responsible to this failure. Isn’t it the government who didn’t try to make the state an Islamic state?

What did we try in the 1980's when women were forced to wear burkas and tv sets broken? We were STILL unhappy!
It is never worthwhile to have just the name of “Islamic Republic” without making an “Islamic Republic”.
First question is that Is Islam compatible with secularism? This question is quite important in the present context, particularly in 21st century. Both non-Muslims and orthodox Muslims feel that Islam is not compatible with secularism. Fundamentalist Muslims totally reject secularism as anti-Islamic and haram. Maulana Maududi, founder of Jamat-e-Islami-e-Hind had said, while leaving for Pakistan in 1948, that those who participated in secular politics were raising flag of revolt against Allah and His Messenger. The Saudi Ulema, too, denounce secularism as strictly prohibited in Islamic tradition.

Just tell me how 50 million? Is it 50 million, I forgot? 50 million muslims living in Europe under secular regimes. Even Muslim majority nations like Uzbekistan (which have literacy of 99% by the way!) while we have one of the lowest in the Islamic world because we are bearded barbarians who think growing a beard is the only thing Islam teaches us.

The fundamentalist Hindus, on the other hand, say that Muslims support secularism while in minority in any country and oppose it while in majority. But this is not wholly true. Some Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia and others do reject secularism but all Muslim majority countries do not. For example, Indonesia does not reject secularism though its 85% population comprises of Muslims. However, by and large, it is true that many Muslim majority countries like for Islamic state or at least make Islam as state religion.

That is debatable. Central Asian republics, Azerbaijan, Nigeria, Indonesia rejected fundamentalist system for themselves. Only nation out of these with an issue is Nigeria with too many barbarians left there in the north.
It is important to note that there is some difference between an Islamic state and Islam being a state religion. In Islamic state all laws must strictly conform to Islamic Shari`ah but if a country declares 'Islam as its religion', it means that Islam is preferred to all other religions and it enjoys itself more privilege than other religions in the country. In 1948 Islam was declared as state religion in Pakistan, but Pakistan did not become an Islamic state until Zia-ul-Haq declared it to be an Islamic state in late seventies. He then began to enforce Shari`ah laws in Pakistan.

Do you accept Mutazili thought as a part of Islam? It is a school of thought of Muslims. Lets say you don't. Now how do we know we are to promote Hanafi Islam, Sufism or what the hell when each follows different lines of thought.

Completely disagree with your fact that Pakistanis have tried to impose Islam in letter and spirit for 60 years and failed. Actually it has not been tried except Zia era and that was his self – interest he didn’t do for Islamization. If people take bribes & do other sins as per Shari’ah then kindly tell me where is the fault of Islamic ruling system in it? Firstly Islamic ruling system could be imposed here with its full spirit for 60 years. Secondly this is rulers failure who shows to themselves as secular in front of west world except Zia-Ul-Haq because at that west world had need to Islamization against USSR.

So you accept breaking tv sets and forcing people was right. It means Wahabism has permeated your soul. You are part of the religious extremism issue!

Also hard to understand that after Mullah after Mullah has called for "Islamic government" we have failed to have one (if we go by what you say.) how we will be able to have one suddenly now. Do you need a list of Mullah's calling for Islamic law or Sharia? The most recent was in Quetta-Mr Agha.
If you say that all above mentioned corruptions can be remove from our society. So, check other secular states e.g. All these corruption you can find in India too, might be it would less over there but it can’t be said that has not.

India murdered fellow Ansaris and we will never forgive them for it. They are not secular. If secularism meant killing someone for his faith I wouldn't advocate it-that is what wahabism means. India has failed secularism.
Islam is declared to be incompatible with secularism because in a secular state there is no place for divine laws, and secular laws are unacceptable to Islam. Also it is believed that in Islam religion and politics cannot be separated. On these grounds secularism is totally rejected. Islam strongly emphasizes faith in Allah. Islam emphasizes life hereafter and secularism means only those matters which pertain to this world. There is no place for the world hereafter as far as secular philosophy is concerned.

Then explain to me how mu'tazali school of thought promotes it. Or are they kaffir. If so then I call Wahabis kaffir. Now what to do? Everyone calls each other Kaffir which school of thought should be imposed. Hanafi, Hambali? All are fighting themselves.
Is Islam really incompatible with secularism? Firstly, we should make a distinction between what is theological and what is historical. The concept that religion and politics cannot be separated is more historical than theological. In fact the Holy Qur'an, as we have pointed out elsewhere too, does not give any concept of the State; it only gives the concept of the society. The Qur'an is concerned with morality rather than polity. An upright conduct, justice, truth, benevolence, compassion and human dignity are very basic to the Holy Scripture. It repeatedly asserts these values. Thus it clearly means that these values are very fundamental to an Islamic society rather than to a State.

You mean ignore 1000's of years of scientific development and the works of Ghazali, Ibni sini, Kidni, burini (Ibni Sena was secular by the way) and go to caves. Amazing logic! These people allowed us to rule half the known word and smack anyone on the butt when they messed with us. We were like America is today because of their developments and advancements. You want to kill our history in the name of religion we will not let you because we understand true religion.
The view that religion cannot be separated from politics in Islam is due this primary concern with these Islamic values. It was thought by early Islamic Ulema and jurists that if religion was separated from politics, the rulers would totally neglect these fundamental Islamic values and would behave in a manner which would only satisfy their greed for power. In fact in those days there was no concept of secularism as a philosophy of humanism. The Ulema were afraid that if religion and politics were separated there would be absolutely no check on the conduct of the rulers. In fact, one does not find clear articulation to this effect (that religion cannot be separated from politics in Islam) in any early Islamic source. This formulation itself is of nineteenth century origin when colonial powers began to impose secular laws in Islamic countries i.e. the laws which were not basically derived from Shari`ah.

What the ulema are afraid of my dear child is them losing their authority or moral power if secularism is imposed. In that case they will no longer be needed and their role in the nation will diminish.
At the time of Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal unfortunately Moatazilah had forgot above mentioned Ayat. The Caliph Mamoon Ur Rasheed had accepted their beliefs & mostly fawning Ulemas had also accepted too, in his pressure but some righteous Ulema did not so, and Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal was one of them. They punished to him and he was imprisoned with chains. He had pressurized that accept their beliefs that Allah has created the Quran instead his it is word of Allah, but insisted against them. Afterwards he had been died in the prison. Their secularism was slept somewhere at that time.

Today time has proven them absolutely right. Muslims are blowing their own people up and this is their only specialization. Ibn Abdul Wahab was the dajjal of the century and supported by British. Until Wahabism remains it will be a threat and wahabism can only lead us into the arms of the imperials for cuddly-wuddly or it can make us suicide bombers and kill innocent locals while US claps at the side which is why we must reject it. @muse has raised this several times.

I would thank to you that you accepted that how the justice have been done at the time of 4th Caliph. This could be possible in an Islamic state. On the one side was the Jew (A non-Muslim) and other side was the ruler of the time. But court ruled the favor of Jew.

Do you know the muslim population at that time compared to that of others? 95% were others. We couldn't have suceeded without secularism and giving them equal rights.

This is the fault of people & rulers not the Islamic governing system.

No, it is time to call a spade a spade. It was the fault of a malignant ideology that thinks shooting a 15 year old girl in the head because she sought education was correct.

But don’t forget that Pakistan had been built on the name of Islam. You quoted to Quaid – e – Azam. That was he who had presented two nation theory. If Pakistan was not going to be theocratic state. Then why we had separated from India. If we were create a secular state then Why did we put the slogan for separate Muslim state? Why united secular India was bad for us? Why did we sacrifice millions of lives? It means at same time Maulan Abul Kalam Azad (according to you Wahabi) was right that Pakistan should not be built.

Islamic republic was never attached to the name of Pakistan during his time and he called the Ahmedis who you hate his sons by calling Mir Zafarullah Khan his son. That man was an Ahmedi. A lion of Pakistan. Furthermore there is the 11 August address.

Anyhow, it is pleasant thing that you consider to quoting example of 4th Caliph that all people can get same privileges in Islamic state.

Only secular brands of Islamic thought can do it though. Wahabism will never do this. It is a cowardly movement that established itself by ripping out wombs of pregnant woman for British empire.

Who would guarantee that sectarian separation could be remove to being a secular state? Give any example from present world.

Turkey!
Again same question will raise that why did we need for independence for Muslims? What was the bad in united India?

Saying we want a place for Muslims where they aren't oppressed and saying we want an Islamist system is far different. Remember that. We wanted a place where Muslims weren't oppressed for their beliefs.

Kindly explain. Is law faulted or implementation could not occur in righteous way?
How do we blame to law? Why do we not condemn to rulers that they failed to enforce in right way.

The law is. Because it does not apply to insult against Hindus and Christians. You would know how easy it is to frame you if you were one. People have been killed over it in jails by LEJ mobs like dogs. I condemn the rulers severely for promotin bigotism in our text books among other things so that no matter what I do you and Zarvan will not understand you are murdering Islamic history and how bigoted you 2 are.
Answer is “NO”

Wouldn’t it be the hypocrisy..??? If you agree that in Islamic system all people whether they are Muslim or non-Muslim can get all privileges then why do we need secular constitution? And for you information our constitution is secular at this time except some articles which were Zia Ul Haq included by amendment.

Rubbish. Nothing is secular. Zia's articles were enough for that including some legislation by ZAB. Islam and secularism are not distinct concepts. First we have to recognize this as a fact. This one point is hampering our debate.

Again same question raises in mind that where is the fault of Islamic system? This is the lack of implementation and this can be done by rulers & law enforcement agencies.

When I argue for secularism I do not argue against Islam. I am a son of Ibn Rushd. My people brought forth the Din e Ilahi, mine were responsible for the Roshaniya movement. Do not teach me my history. It is you who has forgotten our peaceful message.

Islam admits of freedom of conscience and democratic rights and there are no two opinions about it. Islam also officially accepts religious pluralism in as much as it is Quranic doctrine to hold other prophets in equal esteem. The Rasoolullah (Sallah O Alaihe Wa Alaihi Wa Sallam) provided equal social and religious space to all religions present in Madina, as pointed out above, through the Covenant of Madina.

I never said otherwise. I said Islam and secularism are inter-linked... but some schools of thought are just basically anti-Islamic. Like deobandi and wahabi.

There are different political systems in different Islamic countries from monarchy to military dictatorship to limited democracy to democracy. But it will be naïve to blame Islam for this. One has to look into the political history of the country rather than search for its causes in to Islamic doctrines. Islamic doctrines do not nurture any concept of absolutism as perhaps no other religion does. In fact the Quran's emphasis is on consultation (shura), and even the Rasoolullah (Sallah O Alaihe Wa Alaihi Wa Sallam) used to consult his companions in secular matters.

We brought secularism and we introduced the system of an elected council of elders which had immense power. You have to understand you are not the sole representative of Islam.
In Muslim majority countries there is problem of autonomy of state. Again, one should not look for causes into religious teachings but in the socio-political history of those countries. These countries have hardly emerged from their feudal past. There is no history in these countries of democratic struggles of the people. Also, most of these countries have very small religious minorities and these minorities too have historically accepted religious hegemony of Islam. It will take quite sometime for this position to change as feudal past has strong presence in these countries. But there is strong pressures building up and human rights movements are emerging in all these countries.

You keep arguing the same thing. First abandon Wahabism then talk about this. Secular thought is not the enemy. It is we and our weak understanding of our ancestors which is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What did we try in the 1980's when women were forced to wear burkas and tv sets broken? We were STILL unhappy!

We didn’t try for Islamization in 1980. You don’t say Islamization to Zia’s Islam. It was fraud for the name of Islam. Who forced to women I didn’t see anywhere & where did TV sets break. I don’t know where did see these things. But in Pakistan it did never happen. Second thing Quran has ordered to Mulim women for veil. Don’t you agree this?

Just tell me how 50 million? Is it 50 million, I forgot? 50 million muslims living in Europe under secular regimes. Even Muslim majority nations like Uzbekistan (which have literacy of 99% by the way!) while we have one of the lowest in the Islamic world because we are bearded barbarians who think growing a beard is the only thing Islam teaches us.
I don’t know why do you accuse to bearded barbarians for everything? Bhai Sb feudals destroyed this country. When did religious people gained power over here??? What are you talking about. And if Muslims live in Europe under secular regimes. So what ?
Every country has its constitution. So, Muslims have to respect their law.

That is debatable. Central Asian republics, Azerbaijan, Nigeria, Indonesia rejected fundamentalist system for themselves. Only nation out of these with an issue is Nigeria with too many barbarians left there in the north.

This is out of debate. One has right to reject something or not. No one can object if Iran is Shia state because they are in majority over there. So, if you can find any state Moatazillah then you can move there but Pakistan would never been converted as per your wish.

Do you accept Mutazili thought as a part of Islam? It is a school of thought of Muslims. Lets say you don't. Now how do we know we are to promote Hanafi Islam, Sufism or what the hell when each follows different lines of thought.

Might be. We consider it as misled sect of Islam. I am against all sects. Only one jamat is there which is Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamat. Rest of all sects are misled.

So you accept breaking tv sets and forcing people was right. It means Wahabism has permeated your soul. You are part of the religious extremism issue!

Also hard to understand that after Mullah after Mullah has called for "Islamic government" we have failed to have one (if we go by what you say.) how we will be able to have one suddenly now. Do you need a list of Mullah's calling for Islamic law or Sharia? The most recent was in Quetta-Mr Agha.

What the hell TV breaking. I have two TV sets in my home. And kindly explain about Wahabism. What do mean about it? I know most religious scholars ask for Islamic law & Shari’ah implementation. But rulers have failed to implement due to their hidden interests. Now, almost all scholars has accepted to democracy.

India murdered fellow Ansaris and we will never forgive them for it. They are not secular. If secularism meant killing someone for his faith I wouldn't advocate it-that is what wahabism means. India has failed secularism.

Ask to any Indian that is they secular or not? Anyhow their constitution is secular. So, I ask what India gains & we lost for the sake of secularism? If we would implement Shari’ah laws then what will become Kayamat?

Then explain to me how mu'tazali school of thought promotes it. Or are they kaffir. If so then I call Wahabis kaffir. Now what to do? Everyone calls each other Kaffir which school of thought should be imposed. Hanafi, Hambali? All are fighting themselves.

I just say impose the Shari’ah not other than of it. Law of Quran & Sunnah. But moatazillahs are in minority due to this reason they want to impose secularism. I wonder they are existed in Pakistan. I didn’t know about it. I think you are less of half percent of total population.

You mean ignore 1000's of years of scientific development and the works of Ghazali, Ibni sini, Kidni, burini (Ibni Sena was secular by the way) and go to caves. Amazing logic! These people allowed us to rule half the known word and smack anyone on the butt when they messed with us. We were like America is today because of their developments and advancements. You want to kill our history in the name of religion we will not let you because we understand true religion.

Your most of the things are non understandable. You didn’t understand my point of view. First understand it then argue. Shabash!

What the ulema are afraid of my dear child
Who the hell your child. Behave yourself & keep your discussion within manners.
is them losing their authority or moral power if secularism is imposed. In that case they will no longer be needed and their role in the nation will diminish.

Now, you expressed your heartily wish!

Today time has proven them absolutely right. Muslims are blowing their own people up and this is their only specialization. Ibn Abdul Wahab was the dajjal of the century and supported by British. Until Wahabism remains it will be a threat and wahabism can only lead us into the arms of the imperials for cuddly-wuddly or it can make us suicide bombers and kill innocent locals while US claps at the side which is why we must reject it. @muse has raised this several times.

What has been proved? Kuch tau batao. Sheik Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab had exposed to you that’s why you are saying him dajjal. Khair, Yeh batao do you believe on dajjal that he will appear?
Who created suicide bomber you didn’t know. But you didn’t answered me where your secularism was slept when had you committed atrocity on Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal?

Do you know the muslim population at that time compared to that of others? 95% were others.

Did you in your senses to writing this nonsense???

No, it is time to call a spade a spade. It was the fault of a malignant ideology that thinks shooting a 15 year old girl in the head because she sought education was correct.

Such shooters are born during last ten years. I ask for 60 years.

Islamic republic was never attached to the name of Pakistan during his time and he called the Ahmedis who you hate his sons by calling Mir Zafarullah Khan his son. That man was an Ahmedi. A lion of Pakistan. Furthermore there is the 11 August address.

So take ahmadis in your arms. We won’t.
But again you didn’t answer me perperly. Pakistan had been built on the name of Islam. You quoted to Quaid – e – Azam. That was he who had presented two nation theory. If we were creating a secular state then Why did we put the slogan for separate Muslim state? Why did we spoil millions of lives?

Only secular brands of Islamic thought can do it though. Wahabism will never do this. It is a cowardly movement that established itself by ripping out wombs of pregnant woman for British empire.

Islamic caliphate was not secularism!


Huh! Turkey. Which sectarian split were there? Kamal ata turk was the dog of brits & nothing else.

Saying we want a place for Muslims where they aren't oppressed and saying we want an Islamist system is far different. Remember that. We wanted a place where Muslims weren't oppressed for their beliefs.

Again question raises why would be oppressed? If India would have been united then Muslims were 40 percent of total Indian population. Then nobody could be oppressed to Muslims in secular & democratic India. Because this would have been a huge vote bank. Wouldn’t it?

The law is. Because it does not apply to insult against Hindus and Christians. You would know how easy it is to frame you if you were one. People have been killed over it in jails by LEJ mobs like dogs. I condemn the rulers severely for promotin bigotism in our text books among other things so that no matter what I do you and Zarvan will not understand you are murdering Islamic history and how bigoted you 2 are.

The thing was discussing over here about bribes & drinking but you turned it towards blasphemy. Anyhow, you quoted a victim named Muhammad Imran. Is he hindu or Christian? If he was Muslim then how could you say that only Hindu & Christians are being victimized by this law? There are many contradictions in your words.

Rubbish. Nothing is secular. Zia's articles were enough for that including some legislation by ZAB. Islam and secularism are not distinct concepts. First we have to recognize this as a fact. This one point is hampering our debate.

I told you “our constitution is secular at this time except some articles which were Zia Ul Haq included by amendment.” Perhaps you don’t read properly. I would never accept your so-called fact.

When I argue for secularism I do not argue against Islam. I am a son of Ibn Rushd. My people brought forth the Din e Ilahi, mine were responsible for the Roshaniya movement. Do not teach me my history. It is you who has forgotten our peaceful message.

Dear your total school of thought is against of Quran & Sunnah. What are you trying to understand to me?
What deen e Ilahi? This kind of religion had been introduced by emperor Akbar.

I never said otherwise. I said Islam and secularism are inter-linked... but some schools of thought are just basically anti-Islamic. Like deobandi and wahabi.

If Islam & secularism are inter-linked & we are anti-Islamic then kindly give any proof form Quran & Hadith. Otherwise your arguments would be considered baseless.

We brought secularism and we introduced the system of an elected council of elders which had immense power. You have to understand you are not the sole representative of Islam.

Ok we are not sole representative of Islam but you less than half percent is sole representative. Bas ab khush ho jao.

You keep arguing the same thing. First abandon Wahabism then talk about this. Secular thought is not the enemy. It is we and our weak understanding of our ancestors which is.

Why do you so hate to Ahle Sunnat?
 
One can spend their entire life studying Islam and accomplish nothing but also end up dumber.
For 1400 years we cannot agree which sect is right and still fighting about the rights of 7th century Khilafah.

3 Khalifa Rashidun were murdered on duty by disgruntled populace.

Commander of Believers and Mother of Believers went to war with each other - 10,000 innocent Muslims died.
Nothing has killed Muslims in scores as big as Islam itself.

The advent of Islam created a massive exodus of Semitic tribes, Persian traders and Assyrian Christians from Arabia who traditionally dominated the spheres of science, arts, engineering, metallurgy, warfare etc. This pushed Arabia into 1400 years of backwardness and a dependency on talent import which continues to this day. While the displaced people moved towards Europe and flourished well.



Violence is the easiest tool to silence critical minds. This is what all Mullahs follows. Everything which cannot be explained is raised to the status of holy cow!
Wrong completely wrong Islam gave the humanity best way of life it gave the system because of which despite these wars Muslims ruled the world for more than thousand for 600 years they were the leaders in knowledge of everything from science to Arts to poetry but as we separated from Islam we started losing ground and failed and what secularism have given let see two 2 world wars which have killed millions and millions of people in the world complete and wars still being continued by mostly those who call themselves secular because they and their system is curse for people and humanity
 
You are a Muslim, A Servant of Allah. You have to devote your life to Allah, not for 'Islamic Republic of Pakistan', An artificial Entity created on a Kuffar Ideology of Nationalism.
My nationalism is not in conflict with my religion.

You as a Muslim should not be deceived on masqueraded identities of the Modern World scripted by the Kuffar.
Yes, Sir, will not be deceived. Check.

Did Taseer speak/act which was against Islam?
No. Even if he did, uski marzi yaar.

Did Qadri Kill the Munafiq Taseer perfectly as Muslims have been killing Anti-Islamic/Kuffar throughout History?
Qadri, the SOB, killed a Pakistani who gave his life to bring a great reform to Pakistan. I haven't compared him to history, but whoever follows this SOB in the future are all SOBs themselves, mulk dushman and ghaddar.

What was wrong with that!
There is plenty wrong with killing people on the street, my friend.
 
This is the last time i am warning you - no need to go on personal, What do you know about me? If your mullah can't stand against simple question - does it mean you start calling other qadiani. Pity on your daily base study on Islam & your idiot teacher.
Mr I didn't call you qadyani the person I am talking about it another one who was the one who attacked Hadees and also his tafseer he wrote attacks all the concepts of Islam and gives completely wrong translation of the Quran you started being personal by the way
 
Everyone just try to be a good muslim, christian, hindu or whatever is your religion. But most importantly be a good human being. Leave it to God. Lets not judge each other as we all are sinners here. We can only try.

Thanx my friend. But remember Islam teaches us all these thing & once we could become a good Muslim we automatically would become a good human being. As we become good human being there is no guarantee that we can become a good Muslim.
 
We didn’t try for Islamization in 1980. You don’t say Islamization to Zia’s Islam. It was fraud for the name of Islam. Who forced to women I didn’t see anywhere & where did TV sets break. I don’t know where did see these things. But in Pakistan it did never happen. Second thing Quran has ordered to Mulim women for veil. Don’t you agree this?

When you don't accept we tried I don't know what can be done. But don't murder the Quran. you are defiling the Quran by making it seem like some religion that forces things.

Quran has clearly said:

"Let there be no compulsion in Religion: truth stands out clear from error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah (one God) has grasped the most trustworthy hand hold, that never breaks. and Allah hears, and knows all things."
(Qur'an, Al-Baqarah 2:256)

So it is a persons choice what he/she does. Your own women family don't wear abaya (all of them) so don't be a self-righteous champion. No one does now a days. Also it is debatable topic as again there are different views.

Again which view is going to be official. If you say it is must for women to cover hair I say there is interpretation by scholars that say it is not must. So what do we do here. Its an impasse?
I don’t know why do you accuse to bearded barbarians for everything? Bhai Sb feudals destroyed this country. When did religious people gained power over here??? What are you talking about. And if Muslims live in Europe under secular regimes. So what ?
Every country has its constitution. So, Muslims have to respect their law.

My point was secularism hasn't made them non-muslim. You accept them as Muslim then? What is the issue with secularism in our land?
This is out of debate. One has right to reject something or not. No one can object if Iran is Shia state because they are in majority over there. So, if you can find any state Moatazillah then you can move there but Pakistan would never been converted as per your wish.

I am not a shia but I support it and it has nothing to do with Shias-never have they specified its only for Shias but a thought process that can unite muslims. You are intolerant so you don't understand this. It is a secular ideology that allows scholars and philosophers to bloom. Not one real one has appeared in past many years except Iqbal.

Might be. We consider it as misled sect of Islam. I am against all sects. Only one jamat is there which is Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamat. Rest of all sects are misled.

ASWJ is a terrorist organization with the same name! You support them, they are Sipah e sahaba.

What the hell TV breaking. I have two TV sets in my home. And kindly explain about Wahabism. What do mean about it? I know most religious scholars ask for Islamic law & Shari’ah implementation. But rulers have failed to implement due to their hidden interests. Now, almost all scholars has accepted to democracy.

Here is a link:
The Critical Review: Or, Annals of Literature - Google Books

And another:
Salafi Wahabism is anti Islam

Must see:
The Biography of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab | The Wahhabi Threat

Didn't that thug defile the Prophet's grave because he was worried people would worship it? Didn't he rip women's wombs like babu bajrangi?

Ask to any Indian that is they secular or not? Anyhow their constitution is secular. So, I ask what India gains & we lost for the sake of secularism? If we would implement Shari’ah laws then what will become Kayamat?

You are acting like a fanatic. Shariah, this that. this that.

I just say impose the Shari’ah not other than of it. Law of Quran & Sunnah. But moatazillahs are in minority due to this reason they want to impose secularism. I wonder they are existed in Pakistan. I didn’t know about it. I think you are less of half percent of total population.

We know we are a minority. We won't impose anything on the rest like you want to impose breaking of tv's and women locked up in homes just for your satisfaction while you run off to Europe to flirt with their girls.
Now, you expressed your heartily wish!

Yes... It is the wish of every Pakistani patriot. Nationalism and religion are separate.

What has been proved? Kuch tau batao. Sheik Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab had exposed to you that’s why you are saying him dajjal. Khair, Yeh batao do you believe on dajjal that he will appear?

Forget dajjal he took us 1000 years backwards to please British.

Who created suicide bomber you didn’t know. But you didn’t answered me where your secularism was slept when had you committed atrocity on Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal?

How did secularism commit an atrocity on bin Hambal? There are still women killed for false charges of adultery and men framed on false charges of blasphemy. Hajjaj bin Yousuf murdered 8 adulterers one day by stoning on false charges. You kidding me. I can blame you guys for it.

So take ahmadis in your arms. We won’t.
But again you didn’t answer me perperly. Pakistan had been built on the name of Islam. You quoted to Quaid – e – Azam. That was he who had presented two nation theory. If we were creating a secular state then Why did we put the slogan for separate Muslim state? Why did we spoil millions of lives?

I explained this here:

View Post
Saying we want a place for Muslims where they aren't oppressed and saying we want an Islamist system is far different.
Remember that. We wanted a place where Muslims weren't oppressed for their beliefs.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/social...get-you-killed-pakistan-62.html#ixzz2JuoKh8fo

Quaid wanted a place for Muslims where they were safe which they are not because he forgot there were Wahabis like you around. You support ASWJ terrorists? You call yourself a patriot? You are a terrorist.

He never wanted an Islamic republic. There was a reason Islamic republic wasn't named when he was alive. I had a link too but site is down.
Islamic caliphate was not secularism!

It was. You have to disengage secularism and Islam as differing concepts. A son of Zia will never be able to do that.

Huh! Turkey. Which sectarian split were there? Kamal ata turk was the dog of brits & nothing else.

Rubbish. I told you they have no sectarianism.
Again question raises why would be oppressed? If India would have been united then Muslims were 40 percent of total Indian population. Then nobody could be oppressed to Muslims in secular & democratic India. Because this would have been a huge vote bank. Wouldn’t it?

We would (we would be around 33% of the population-not 40%)... eg the cow slaughter ban and refusal to allow us provinces. It was built to protect Muslims from their tyranny not for some supra islamic purpose. Jinnah said this:

"In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission.

And this:

... If you change your past and work together in a spirit that everyone of you, no matter to what community he belongs, ... 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. ...we must learn a lesson from this [our past experience]. 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 ... we are starting in the days when there is no discrimination between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste, or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State.... I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state.

The thing was discussing over here about bribes & drinking but you turned it towards blasphemy. Anyhow, you quoted a victim named Muhammad Imran. Is he hindu or Christian? If he was Muslim then how could you say that only Hindu & Christians are being victimized by this law? There are many contradictions in your words.

I say all have been victimized. I never said ONLY christians have been and its because people like you will never be happy until Taliban rule us.

I told you “our constitution is secular at this time except some articles which were Zia Ul Haq included by amendment.” Perhaps you don’t read properly. I would never accept your so-called fact.

Perhaps we should agree to disagree. But do not impose your twisted form of religion upon me. I am born to serve Pakistani sarzameen and am a son of this land.

Dear your total school of thought is against of Quran & Sunnah. What are you trying to understand to me?
What deen e Ilahi? This kind of religion had been introduced by emperor Akbar.

I was talking about the discussion part and tolerance part of deen e ilahi. Also I talk about Ijtehad. You will not understand such modern beautiful Islamic concepts being a Wahabi.

If Islam & secularism are inter-linked & we are anti-Islamic then kindly give any proof form Quran & Hadith. Otherwise your arguments would be considered baseless.

Read this:

Islamic Reformation III: Is Islam compatible with a secular state? | Pak Tea House

And this:

The concept of Secularism in Islam has been claimed to have religious sanction too. The Sahih of Imam Muslim, the second most authentic book on Hadith, dating from the 2nd century Hijrah, contains a chapter headed as follows: “Whatever the Prophet has said in matters of religion must be followed, but this does not apply to worldly affairs.”

The Hadith is as follows: Once Prophet Muhammad came across some people doing artificial pollination of palm trees. Due to some reason he disliked the idea and commented that it would be better not to do any pollination at all. However for the following year the harvest was poor. When he came to know about this Prophet Muhammad admitted his limitation of knowledge regarding secular affairs and said: “If a question relates to your worldly matters you would know better about it, but if it relates to your religion then to me it belongs.”

Ok we are not sole representative of Islam but you less than half percent is sole representative. Bas ab khush ho jao.

Why do you so hate to Ahle Sunnat?

If you really serve the ASWJ... then I believe you should be captured by the police actually.... you are a disgrace to true nationalists of this land and sons of Averoes.
@Armstrong, @LoveIcon, @muse... must read post!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm a secularist, ukhaar lo jo ukhaarna hai!

Why dont you goto Pakistan, start a party and say this in front of the media. Dont forget to say that Blasphemy law is a black law and should be removed.

I will miss you sorely.
 
When you don't accept we tried I don't know what can be done. But don't murder the Quran. you are defiling the Quran by making it seem like some religion that forces things.

Quran has clearly said:



So it is a persons choice what he/she does. Your own women family don't wear abaya (all of them) so don't be a self-righteous champion. No one does now a days. Also it is debatable topic as again there are different views.

Again which view is going to be official. If you say it is must for women to cover hair I say there is interpretation by scholars that say it is not must. So what do we do here. Its an impasse?


My point was secularism hasn't made them non-muslim. You accept them as Muslim then? What is the issue with secularism in our land?


I am not a shia but I support it and it has nothing to do with Shias-never have they specified its only for Shias but a thought process that can unite muslims. You are intolerant so you don't understand this. It is a secular ideology that allows scholars and philosophers to bloom. Not one real one has appeared in past many years except Iqbal.



ASWJ is a terrorist organization with the same name! You support them, they are Sipah e sahaba.



Here is a link:
The Critical Review: Or, Annals of Literature - Google Books

And another:
Salafi Wahabism is anti Islam

Must see:
The Biography of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab | The Wahhabi Threat

Didn't that thug defile the Prophet's grave because he was worried people would worship it? Didn't he rip women's wombs like babu bajrangi?



You are acting like a fanatic. Shariah, this that. this that.



We know we are a minority. We won't impose anything on the rest like you want to impose breaking of tv's and women locked up in homes just for your satisfaction while you run off to Europe to flirt with their girls.


Yes... It is the wish of every Pakistani patriot. Nationalism and religion are separate.



Forget dajjal he took us 1000 years backwards to please British.



How did secularism commit an atrocity on bin Hambal? There are still women killed for false charges of adultery and men framed on false charges of blasphemy. Hajjaj bin Yousuf murdered 8 adulterers one day by stoning on false charges. You kidding me. I can blame you guys for it.



I explained this here:



Quaid wanted a place for Muslims where they were safe which they are not because he forgot there were Wahabis like you around. You support ASWJ terrorists? You call yourself a patriot? You are a terrorist.

He never wanted an Islamic republic. There was a reason Islamic republic wasn't named when he was alive. I had a link too but site is down.


It was. You have to disengage secularism and Islam as differing concepts. A son of Zia will never be able to do that.



Rubbish. I told you they have no sectarianism.


We would (we would be around 33% of the population-not 40%)... eg the cow slaughter ban and refusal to allow us provinces. It was built to protect Muslims from their tyranny not for some supra islamic purpose. Jinnah said this:



And this:





I say all have been victimized. I never said ONLY christians have been and its because people like you will never be happy until Taliban rule us.



Perhaps we should agree to disagree. But do not impose your twisted form of religion upon me. I am born to serve Pakistani sarzameen and am a son of this land.



I was talking about the discussion part and tolerance part of deen e ilahi. Also I talk about Ijtehad. You will not understand such modern beautiful Islamic concepts being a Wahabi.



Read this:

Islamic Reformation III: Is Islam compatible with a secular state? | Pak Tea House

And this:





If you really serve the ASWJ... then I believe you should be captured by the police actually.... you are a disgrace to true nationalists of this land and sons of Averoes.
@Armstrong, @LoveIcon, @muse... must read post!

Sir the ayat you mentioned is for Non Muslims no Non Muslim can be forced to convert to Islam Sir but as Muslims we have to make sure our family members follow rules of Islam and Islam is implemented at government level and in society Sir and Ijtihad is not done on those matters which are clear in Quran and Sunnah and Islam and Secularism are pools apart Sir not even close Sir in Islam government have to enforce things Sir here @Patriot is complete right
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If someone is born Ahmediya family or converted in, why there is persecution of Ahmediyas ?

Even their graves are destroyed. If they are non-Muslims, then why do people call them inferior people and killing an Ahmedi will grant them Jannat.

All of this told in Express Tribune Documentary on Ahmedis.
 
Back
Top Bottom