Can Pakistan Be Secular?

[RobbieS]

This is a reality and true teachings of Islam.

Various system of governing and running a Country are based on Islamic Teachings and beliefs.

In Islamic country we have Islamic Laws for Muslims & Criminal Cases for all.

Non- Muslims can have their own civil law as per their belief.

No-Muslim have to abide by Laws of Land, Rules and Regulations and are to pay Taxes as well.

Ok. So it seems that the country is run on Islamic principles but with separate law for non-Muslims. Although this is off-topic but another question - Islam prohibits interests and hence Islamic banking is taking off big way. So how does a capitalist economy like Pakistan reconcile itself with Islamic/Sharia laws related to interests?

 

[s90]

It's been six decades and still we aren't sure what form of govt. we should have.

 

[Peregrine]

HI
Why would Pakistan want to be like this please watch the video its very relevant as the writer wants Pakistan to be like this

 

[hillman32]

Ok. So it seems that the country is run on Islamic principles but with separate law for non-Muslims. Although this is off-topic but another question - Islam prohibits interests and hence Islamic banking is taking off big way. So how does a capitalist economy like Pakistan reconcile itself with Islamic/Sharia laws related to interests?

I am sorry - I am not expert and I cannot answer this question.

Plz ask some specialist like Zakir Naik or others.

 

[Stumper]

Hi
actually these are desperate attempts, Writer has only focused on negative aspects we don't have utopian society in existence anywhere, she has focused on Bhutto & Zia who didn't even live post 1989, What about Musharaff & his enlightened moderation concept? Pakistan isn't the only country with Religious parties in the world & the funny thing is these so called religious parties have only control over one province n they haven't been in power for 4 decades.Pakistan should be secular like India only speaks of writers arbitrary views
YouTube - Muslims in India - A Honest Look

Peregrine: The article was attempt to point out if Pakistan can be secular (yes, i disagree that Pakistan is non secular .. depending on who and how it is defined). The reason it is not attempt to question creation of Pakistan is because the author have bought in the context of Mr.Zia and Mr.Bhutto, who inducted the Islamic angle to your policies.

As for Mr.Jinnah's view on this topic, let me paste his 1947 speech (courtesy Wikipedia) :

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 especially 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 everyone 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 emphasize it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities, the Hindu community and the Muslim community, because even as regards Muslims you have Pathans, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on, and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on, will vanish. Indeed if you ask me, this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain the freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free people long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time, but for this. 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 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. As you know, history shows that in England, conditions, some time ago, were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God, we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days where there is no discrimination, no distinction 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. The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today, you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen of Great Britain and they are all members of the Nation. Now 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. Jinnah, August 11, 1947 – presiding over the constituent assembly.

 

[Peregrine]

Peregrine: The article was attempt to point out if Pakistan can be secular (yes, i disagree that Pakistan is non secular .. depending on who and how it is defined). The reason it is not attempt to question creation of Pakistan is because the author have bought in the context of Mr.Zia and Mr.Bhutto, who inducted the Islamic angle to your policies.

Hi
If the writer wanted to over come this taboo of religious extremism in Pakistan she could have talked about Musrraff & Benazir as well but she didn't. Policies in Pakistan are subject to change with every successive government that comes to power, besides having Islamic injunctions in our policies is not a bad thing as this is what we are all about. Islam never forbade followers of other religions to observe their religious practices unlike French. The authors choice of examples as an analogy to secularism are nothing but pathetic endeavors to mask the reality with author playing the role of a sinister pseudo intellectual

 

[Stumper]

Hi
If the writer wanted to over come this taboo of religious extremism in Pakistan she could have talked about Musrraff & Benazir as well but she didn't. Policies in Pakistan are subject to change with every successive government that comes to power, besides having Islamic injunctions in our policies is not a bad thing as this is what we are all about. Islam never forbade followers of other religions to observe their religious practices unlike French. The authors choice of examples as an analogy to secularism are nothing but pathetic endeavors to mask the reality with author playing the role of a sinister pseudo intellectual

Maybe we are going in circle ...My point was that that neither of the author's are questioning "Creation of Pakistan" (Your post also does not refute that!). I'm in no way defending the reason's cited by the authors for religious extremism in Pakistan (I personally disagree that Pakistan lacked any stated identity at its inception or that Pakistan lacks any secularism).

You correctly stated example of French, that secularism will have it's own definition/perception varying across state's. That was my whole idea of posting Mr.Jinnah 's speech were he clearly says his views on Pakistan as being a equal state for all people , despite being a country founded for Muslim's.

But we can debate on the authors singling out Pakistan's past jihadi policy as being a example of non confirming to secular agenda.

 

[freak]

I feel the article is more about radicalisation of Islam in Pakistan rather than about secular credentials of Pakistan.

Pakistan is getting notoriety with a number of terrorists arrested around the world have some link with Pakistan. Last week it was NY Bomber and today another Pakistani has been arrested for terror links in Chile.

BBC News - Chile holds Pakistani after US embassy explosives trace

These incidents are pointing at Pakistan as the hotbed for radicalized Islamic ideology.

 

[TopCat]

Pakistan at least should allow a non muslim to assume the helm of the country. The very first step towards equality among all its citizen.

 

[khanz]

patronizing article none of indians business what pakistan does or doesn't want to be I dunno if pakistan really wants to be secular but regardless of that yes some improvements needs to happen esp things which happened in zia's time education system needs to be completely changed, minorities needs more rights and some discriminatory laws need to be scrapped.

 

[Solomon2]

patronizing article none of indians business what pakistan does or doesn't want to be

1) It is a patronizing article. So?

2) Of course it's India's business (more accurately, perhaps, concern) what Pakistan does or doesn't want - India and Pakistan have been at war since their separation.

some improvements needs to happen esp things which happened in zia's time education system needs to be completely changed, minorities needs more rights and some discriminatory laws need to be scrapped.

And who is going to see to that? In your opinion, do any of Pakistan's current or prospective leaders have these goals at the front of their agenda, or are they primarily busy with power-seeking and feathering their own nests?

 

[Martian]

What does anybody mean by secularism in a country where 97% population is muslim?

Religion is one of the defining factors of a society. Is UK a secular country where queen is also head of Church of England? Can India enact a law against core values of Hinduism? Is Russia a secular country with overwhelming influence of orthodox christianity? Are christian nuns' habits are equal to muslim headscrafs? How can minarets of mosques be a danger to Switzerlands' secularism/culture but cathederals cannot be?

It is moderation of views, actions, policies that count not scularism. See Turkey.

 

[TechLahore]

Anyone that has seen my participation here on any religious thread knows that I am generally extremely anti mullahs etc.

However, I think this article misses out on one very important point. For all *practical* purposes, Pakistan is a muslim majority country with secular laws/practices *today*. Barring the FATA area, which has not thus-far been in the mainstream of Pakistan society, there is really no imposition on muslims in the matter of their faith. Some examples:

1) There is no "religious police" in Pakistan unlike other countries that implement Islamic laws; if you want to go to the mosque, fine. If you don't, you can stand right outside during prayer times and choose to eat ice cream if you like, and no one - *no one* - says anything to you. The same goes for clothing; the only issues people have with clothing in Pakistan have to do with what is socially unacceptable (i.e. girls wearing shorts, for instance). But it is very common to find girls in western attire, it is actually the norm to see women without hijab/burqa etc. and no one says anything to them. There is no "muttawa" equivalent.

2) Pakistan recognizes that there are differences in faith at an official level. Both within Islam, e.g. the different laws for shia and sunni zakat contributions, and without, e.g. non-muslims being allowed to purchase and consume alcohol from any hotel or other institution licensed to serve it.

3) Pakistan, in the post Zia years, has liberalized even further. For example, personal conduct is not hampered - I use that word carefully, because it was not restricted even earlier. Again, alcohol consumption is an easy and high profile example. You can walk into a place that is allowed to serve, for example, the Royal Palm in Lahore, and simply order alcohol. No one asks to see your ID or "evidence" of you complying with muslim/non muslim laws.

4) The GoP through a specific ministry, actually funds and assists people of other religions with their temples/places of worship and several other programs. Yes, Pakistan is not a fil.thy rich country, so budgets are limited, but you only have to read one of numerous post-pilgrimage interviews with Sikhs who come to visit their holy places in Pakistan. There is *never* any interference, hampering or anything else. Contrast this with say, Saudi Arabia, where they would *never* allow public worship that is contrary to their own narrow set of beliefs. The GOP actually spends money on temples where, technically, "idolatory" is practiced.

5) Up until very recently when trouble started brewing in the Frontier, one of the largest concentrations of Sikhs were happily settled in the tribal and other areas of NWFP/KhPka. Hindus, in large numbers, are settled in Sindh. Christians in Lahore and Karachi are numerous. While there are specific unfortunate incidents involving minority communities - as there are, even at a far greater scale, in officially secular countries - for the most part, in the past 63 years minorities have not been "messed" with. One small piece of evidence I will cite for you is Forman Christian College in Lahore, which is one of the premier colleges in the city and is run to this day, by Christian missionaries. The Government funds this college, in addition to their own sources of income from the considerable land they own and other donations they receive. The Convent of Jesus and Mary, where my mother went to school, the Convent in Murree, Jesuit schools in Karachi where people of all faiths flock to, achingly gorgeous churches in Lahore and Karachi that are maintained partly at Government expense and exist, amongst other places, right smack dab in the middle of "Establishment" areas such as Lahore Cantonment... these are all examples which have been valid for 63 years and are valid today.

5) Other than the "only a muslim can be President" rule, there is nothing to prevent people of any faith from serving in the military - in fact Cecil Chaudary, a Pakistani christian, is a celebrated war hero - or in government/bureaucracy. There are absolutely no restrictions on employment of minorities in any kind of private institution. They are every where, and having been involved with private industry in the country, I can tell you that people are not discredited or discriminated against based on their faith in private job placement situations.

People that think of Pakistan in terms of the post-Soviet Afghanistan are HUGELY and I mean HUGELY-MASSIVELY, at a GARGANTUAN level, COMPLETELY mistaken about reality. Once you live in Pakistan you develop a sense for what a complete crock of intolerable horse manure propagates in the popular press 24x7, attempting to pass off as "news". It's very unfortunate, but trust me, it is completely so.

 

[TechLahore]

Please don't make this an India vs. Pakistan thread. Let's, for once, have a civilized debate about perceptions re Pakistan... PLEASE!! Don't attack each other...

 

[Realist]

I dont care much for labels, Islamic country, secular country, whatever...

Pakistan should be a free country, minorities should be allowed to feel safe in Pakistan, they should be offered opportunities as equals, only then we can progress, case in point, immigration to the USA pre and post WWII.

After all, what does the white in the Pakistan flag symbolise? By denying these minorities the rights they should have, you deny the very essence of Pakistan, which was a country built for a minority itself.