Christian death toll spiking in India. Arson, massacre, state involvement,2002 again?

[Vinod2070]

Liable to be murderd???? According to whome?????

You need to open your mind and have some unbias study on this my dear vindo.

Islam has not at all passed any judgment of murdering anyone who wants to leave its fold.
There is not even a single verse or even not a single Hadith which calls for murdering those who leave fold of Islam.

In Islam anyone can leave there is no bar on that nor there is any order of punishing them physicaly.

Now come back to the killing of NON-Hinuds by Hindu terrorists who are against conversion.

Just search for Islam and apostasy. You will find "according to whome".

And don't try to dictate what I need to discuss here. Why not discuss Muslim terrorists?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

And don't try to dictate what I need to discuss here. Why not discuss Muslim terrorists?

Discussed plenty elsewhere - lets stick with the thread subject please.

 

[Vinod2070]

An equivalent number of Muslims migrated out of India into Pakistan (or West Pakistan) as well.

This canard of 'minorities wiped out' is repeated ad-nauseam by some, but I still haven't seen how the percentages drastically changed in West Pakistan when you take into account the percentage of minorities in West Pakistan in 1947, and the migration into and out of those areas.

AM jee. That is my point. We have gone over it earlier too.

India saw emigration from only border states which experienced first hand the horrors of partition. There was no large scale emigration from the interiors. Why? What does it mean?

Many Muslims from South India actually came back to India after emigrating to Pakistan for a while.

Non-Muslims were in significant numbers in all states of Western Pakistan before 1947. They dominated the bigger cities economically.

If they are now less than 1% or so, how else do you want to describe it except ethnic cleansing.

 

[Vinod2070]

Discussed plenty elsewhere - lets stick with the thread subject please.

I had no intention to discuss that subject anyway. It was just that I find it amusing for some people with a single minded agenda to try to dictate to others.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AM jee. That is my point. We have gone over it earlier too.

India saw emigration from only border states which experienced first hand the horrors of partition. There was no large scale emigration from the interiors. Why? What does it mean?

Many Muslims from South India actually came back to India after emigrating to Pakistan for a while.

Non-Muslims were in significant numbers in all states of Western Pakistan before 1947. They dominated the bigger cities economically.

If they are now less than 1% or so, how else do you want to describe it except ethnic cleansing.

Muslims from South India may have returned because of the stark cultural difference, however as far as I understand, Lahore is on the border, and saw large scale immigration in and out. Pakistan is also a lot narrower geographically than India, so what constitutes an 'interior' is relative.

Minorities are about 3 percent I believe, not 1 percent, and again, what was the percentage of minorities in Pakistan in 1947? What numbers moved out of Pakistan and what numbers moved into Pakistan? If an equivalent number of minorities moved out of Pakistan as Muslims moved in, Pakistan did not commit ethnic cleansing, unless India did the same, given the similar numbers who moved back and forth.

 

[Vinod2070]

I don't believe Islam commands that, some extreme interpretations (such as in Afghanistan) may impose that interpretation.

They do it as per their interpretaion of Islam. And they believe in the more pristine form of Islam.

See, I have no intention of going too deep into that here. It would be a separate topic.

If you are talking of theory, Indian constitution also allows the freedom of choice of religion.

If you are talking of practice, it is leading to social problems in India and murders in some islamic countries.

I don't see any grounds for moral preaching by Pakistanis here.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

They do it as per their interpretaion of Islam. And they believe in the more pristine form of Islam.

See, I have no intention of going too deep into that here. It would be a separate topic.

If you are talking of theory, Indian constitution also allows the freedom of choice of religion.

If you are talking of practice, it is leading to social problems in India and murders in some islamic countries.

I don't see any grounds for moral preaching by Pakistanis here.

I think some on this forum have answered your question that they do not believe Islam commands death for apostasy, I therefore do see grounds, in their case.

 

[Vinod2070]

Muslims from South India may have returned because of the stark cultural difference, however as far as I understand, Lahore is on the border, and saw large scale immigration in and out. Pakistan is also a lot narrower geographically than India, so what constitutes an 'interior' is relative.

Minorities are about 3 percent I believe, not 1 percent, and again, what was the percentage of minorities in Pakistan in 1947? What numbers moved out of Pakistan and what numbers moved into Pakistan? If an equivalent number of minorities moved out of Pakistan as moved in, Pakistan did not commit ethnic cleansing, unless India did the same, given the similar numbers who moved back and forth.

No. It does not mean that.

If you are comparing the exodus, it should have been proportionate to the respective populations in the two countries and not equivalent.

Given a ratio of 7:1 in populations, an equal migration (leaving practically no Hindu/Sikhs) means that the ethnic cleansing did take place in Pakistan.

I meant Hindu/Sikhs when I mentioned 1 %. Christians were not targeted during the partition.

 

[Vinod2070]

I think some on this forum have answered your question that they do not believe Islam commands death for apostasy, I therefore do see grounds, in their case.

That doesn't matter. No one has answered why apostates are murdered in many Islamic countries. Just mentioning Hadhiths and Quran (when the people who murder apostates also quote the same for their actions) doesn't mean anything.

I see it as nothing more than whitewash, especially coming from people I don't find credible given their history of posts.

 

[Spring Onion]

Just search for Islam and apostasy. You will find "according to whome".

I do not need to seach propaganda articles written by non-Muslims against Islam.

Being a Muslim i know read and understand what is there in Quran and according to Quran there is no punishment like death penality for those who leave folds of Islam.

And don't try to dictate what I need to discuss here. Why not discuss Muslim terrorists?

Aha well do discuss that but not here as it dosnt belong to this thread.

This thread is about Terrorism by Hindu fanatics against Christians

 

[Spring Onion]

That doesn't matter. No one has answered why apostates are murdered in many Islamic countries. Just mentioning Hadhiths and Quran (when the people who murder apostates also quote the same for their actions) doesn't mean anything.

I see it as nothing more than whitewash, especially coming from people I don't find credible given their history of posts.

They were killed due to the same mentality of people who are killing Christians in India.


Your claim of murdering as punishment by Islam for converts is false and 200% lie.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No. It does not mean that.

If you are comparing the exodus, it should have been proportionate to the respective populations in the two countries and not equivalent.

Given a ratio of 7:1 in populations, an equal migration (leaving practically no Hindu/Sikhs) means that the ethnic cleansing did take place in Pakistan.

I meant Hindu/Sikhs when I mentioned 1 %. Christians were not targeted during the partition.

No, it means that violence took place in areas where you had the different communities interacting with each other that were affected by the violence of partition. Given Pakistan was geographically smaller, that would have meant that a larger percentage of the population, compared to India (especially South India) would have been affected due to its proximity with the border. Keep in mind that more than half of Pakistan's population is in the border province of Punjab, and when you add in the province of Sindh (also on the border) the percentage of the population of Pakistan close to the border goes up significantly.

Christians are also a minority, as are the Parsis etc.

Again, I am looking for hard numbers to show what the percentage of minorities was in 1947 in West Pakistan, and how those percentages were affected by the migration in and out, not speculative arguments.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That doesn't matter. No one has answered why apostates are murdered in many Islamic countries. Just mentioning Hadhiths and Quran (when the people who murder apostates also quote the same for their actions) doesn't mean anything.

I see it as nothing more than whitewash, especially coming from people I don't find credible given their history of posts.

It does matter, because it indicates a fundamental disagreement with that interpretation, and therefore a disagreement with the instances where apostates are killed. In this case this should be limited to Pakistan, we can't be responsible for the rest of the Muslim world.

Anyway, back to the thread.

 

[Vinod2070]

No, it means that violence took place in areas where you had the different communities interacting with each other that were affected by the violence of partition. Given Pakistan was geographically smaller, that would have meant that a larger percentage of the population, compared to India (especially South India) would have been affected due to its proximity with the border. Keep in mind that more than half of Pakistan's population is in the border province of Punjab, and when you add in the province of Sindh (also on the border) the percentage of the population of Pakistan close to the border goes up significantly.

Christians are also a minority, as are the Parsis etc.

Again, I am looking for hard numbers to show what the percentage of minorities was in 1947 in West Pakistan, and how those percentages were affected by the migration in and out, not speculative arguments.

No, it doesn't mean that. Wherever there is a significant population of the two communities, there would be this interaction.

If the exodus was throughout Western Pakistan and limited in extent in India, I think it clearly proves where the whole thing was well orchestrated (I shared a document with you on that earlier) and where it was a limited reaction. Limited in extent and limited in scope, compared to the near total cleansing in the other country.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No, it doesn't mean that. Wherever there is a significant population of the two communities, there would be this interaction.

If the exodus was throughout Western Pakistan and limited in extent in India, I think it clearly proves where the whole thing was well orchestrated (I shared a document with you on that earlier) and where it was a limited reaction. Limited in extent and limited in scope, compared to the near total cleansing in the other country.

Disagree - you yourself argued that it primarily happened in the border areas of India. Given that Pakistan is narrower, and how large a percentage of its population inhabits the border areas, similar numbers of refugees would have left, given the proximity of a larger percentage of its population to the sights and tales of horror that came pouring out of trains and migrants from India.

And I still need to see numbers, since the drop in the percentage of the minorities is easily explained by the exodus of minorities similar to India's, and the influx of Muslims.

That many of these atrocities were orchestrated, in both India and Pakistan, by violent mobs is not being questioned. But your attempt to exonerate India from this by referencing percentages is ludicrous.