The future of Islam is not in the middle east, it's in Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey, Senegal, by Reza

[Mahmoud_EGY]

Egypt had no constitution, afaik he was trying to implement a new one that many did not agree with but quite frankly his rule was only a stop gap. The reason the MB won was because their opponents were members of Mubaraks old regime, by the time the next elections rolled around there would have been more options in terms of parties for Egyptians. Anyway most Egyptians I have come across here had those R4bia stickers on their doors and windows and were obviously anti coup and the ones I spoken to were also anti coup. My Coptic friends were more on the fence as I figured they would be.

you have no idea first it was the MB who were talking with the mubark regime when the rest of us were protesting in tahrir square second we had a constitutions back to the days of the king majority of Egyptians support el sisi
here is what the Egyptians think about morsi after 1 year of his rule

 

[KingMamba]

I am not slandering you but stating facts which might be painful for you.

The Taliban are animals. They would fight us regardless of the fact we declare ourselves a secular state or declare ourselves mullah republic of Pakistan because our version of Islam will never be compatible with them. They simply do not believe in modern theries like guys and girls hanging around together, jinai women going out of their houses or being married when they are older. Pakistan has already tried Zia Ul Haq. This is my article on secularism and explains my take on the matter perfectly.



It explains my view on the matter perfectly. You did not respond to my question. Why live in the US when you don't believe in secular society. I am very anti american but I know many people loyal to it and their reasons are the same. Question them why and they will tell you whatever they do across the world within their country they have a system which treats each of them as equal-as a secular society they have given you respect and you respect them in return. In our country we are focused on imposing not religion but our version of Islam.

In an Islamic republic who can say who's Islam is right? Mine or yours or the Talibans. It is impossible. Then there is the Shia and Sunni view. If we impose one view on the other it will be unfair. If in the time taken to impose religion we separated church and state we wouldn't have this problem. Also if we have a fund for Haj why do we not have a fund for Pakistani Hindus yatra? The system is glaringly unfair Mambi, try to understand this.

The amount of tolerance shown to you in a secular society is incomparable elsewhere. That is why you are in America to reap its benefits.

I believe secularism works in the US because of the history behind it, Pakistan's history and its current circumstances occurring in the country does not allow for even a discussion on the subject. Any talk of secularism will only strengthen the position of the TTP as their whole propaganda revolves around the term and their goal of trying to implement a Islamic state.

Why should I hate the US in fact you shouldn't hate the US either, the US only does what any responsible state should do which is look out for their interests. Do they make a bunch of foreign policy mistakes sure but at least they try to look out for American interest when doing so. Compare it to Pakistan where Pakistan has a non existent foreign policy which only consists of bowing to greater powers and sucking up to Arabs. Pakistan couldn't even use its position of power in Afghan supply lines issue to get concessions towards Iranian electricity in terms of sanction exemptions.

As I said Pakistan's history does not allow for yatra funds for Hindus, Pakistan should if anything develop a UK like system where the head of state is the head of church (queen if the defender of the faith and head of the church of england) and leave the rest of religions alone. If UK can have a state religion and still be fair to all then Pakistan can find a similar system to work for them but you cannot just pick a system from one country and assume it is a one size fits all type of deal.

 

[haviZsultan]

I believe secularism works in the US because of the history behind it, Pakistan's history and its current circumstances occurring in the country does not allow for even a discussion on the subject. Any talk of secularism will only strengthen the position of the TTP as their whole propaganda revolves around the term and their goal of trying to implement a islamic state.

Their propaganda and strength will remain regardless of us being an Islamic republic under the suzerainty of Zia Ul Haq until their evil mentality remains, until the education system stops feeding us rubbish like Hindu baniya. That is a sick mentality that the Taliban have and once they declare all Ahmedis, Christians, Shias apostates they will declare the sunnis (90%) who do not follow their version of Wahabistic rubbish too. You can only appease them by having shariah law, women not getting out of houses and public beatings and beheadings in the name of Islam. If you want that then go ahead and start with America. I know you love that country very much but you need to ask yourself is it the system their that garners your respect. Anyway Taliban are unhappy even now and there were attacks on Shias even during Zia's time. In fact LEJ was born during his tenure. Is that the type of rule you want? You are enjoying secularisms fruits and yet you are opposed to it.

First of all change your thinking. Secularism is perfectly viable in an Islamic system. Both can work side by side. Islam doesn't have to be destroyed for the foundations of modern secularism. We suggested it first anyway and now the west has adopted it. Do you know anything about Ibn Rushd or Averoes?

Pakistan's entire history is the basis of secularism. I gave you that article that is more than 5 speeches by Jinnah favouring secularism. Iqbal was the same story. He said in favor of Turkish secularism:

“The religious doctors of Islam in Egypt and India, as far as I know, have not yet expressed themselves on this point. Personally, I find the Turkish view is perfectly sound.”

 

[KingMamba]

Their propaganda and strength will remain regardless of us being an Islamic republic under the suzerainty of Zia Ul Haq until their evil mentality remains, until the education system stops feeding us rubbish like Hindu baniya. That is a sick mentality that the Taliban have and once they declare all Ahmedis, Christians, Shias apostates they will declare the sunnis (90%) who do not follow their version of Wahabistic rubbish too. You can only appease them by having shariah law, women not getting out of houses and public beatings and beheadings in the name of Islam. If you want that then go ahead and start with America. I know you love that country very much but you need to ask yourself is it the system their that garners your respect. Anyway Taliban are unhappy even now and there were attacks on Shias even during Zia's time. In fact LEJ was born during his tenure. Is that the type of rule you want? You are enjoying secularisms fruits and yet you are opposed to it.

First of all change your thinking. Secularism is perfectly viable in an Islamic system. Both can work side by side. Islam doesn't have to be destroyed for the foundations of modern secularism. We suggested it first anyway and now the west has adopted it. Do you know anything about Ibn Rushd or Averoes?

Pakistan's entire history is the basis of secularism. I gave you that article that is more than 5 speeches by Jinnah favouring secularism. Iqbal was the same story. He said in favor of Turkish secularism:

There can be no appeasing them, they must be slaughtered but trying to make Pakistan will make a whole lot of Pakistanis in Pakistan sitting on the fence join their side, you know most Pakistanis are religious who believe in the Islamic Republic and secularism has a bad connotation behind it in South Asia in general. There are aspects of the system here that work and there are things that need to be worked on.

Pakistan's history is not based on secularism that is your wishful thinking, Pakistan itself was made on the two nation theory, the two nation theory itself thrives on separating communities (Hindus and Muslims) based on religious and ultimately cultural differences. Jinnah made a lot of comments that can be used for the other side as well and if zarvan was here he would quote all the times Jinnah talked about Islams role to play in Pakistan, I personally do not know what Jinnah wanted I believe he wanted to do his own experimentation but unfortunately passed before he could implement whatever was going through his head. As for Iqbal he had his own view of what an Islamic state should entail and what role Islam should play in a country which can be found in work, reconstruction of religious thought in Islam which you can say has elements of both.

 

[haviZsultan]

There can be no appeasing them, they must be slaughtered but trying to make Pakistan will make a whole lot of Pakistanis in Pakistan sitting on the fence join their side, you know most Pakistanis are religious who believe in the Islamic Republic and secularism has a bad connotation behind it in South Asia in general. There are aspects of the system here that work and there are things that need to be worked on.

Pakistan's history is not based on secularism that is your wishful thinking, Pakistan itself was made on the two nation theory, the two nation theory itself thrives on separating communities (Hindus and Muslims) based on religious and ultimately cultural differences. Jinnah made a lot of comments that can be used for the other side as well and if zarvan was here he would quote all the times Jinnah talked about Islams role to play in Pakistan, I personally do not know what Jinnah wanted I believe he wanted to do his own experimentation but unfortunately passed before he could implement whatever was going through his head. As for Iqbal he had his own view of what an Islamic state should entail and what role Islam should play in a country which can be found in work, reconstruction of religious thought in Islam which you can say has elements of both.

There is no beef between Hindus and Muslims. The problem was simply that the Indians refused to give us equal rights. Till 1935 Jinnah too wanted a united India according to Jaswant Singhs book. Nehru's severe persecution, refusal to let muslim majority provinces have their own rule and imposition of laws like the banning of cow slaughter made Jinnah want an independent Pakistan.

The independent Pakistan was not only for muslims but all those oppressed under Indian rule. Do note he even invited the Sikhs to join Pakistan. Also only when all options were exhausted and Hindutva india refused to give us equal rights we were forced to seek them ourselves in an independent state. Jinnah never wanted an Islamic republic. Throughout his life Pakistan did not adopt the title of Islamic republic. People like Zafarullah Khan, Cornelius and Joginder Nath Mandal all fought alongside him for an independent Pakistan. They were all non muslims.

I believe we will fail to agree on this topic.

 

[Established_1965]

His views are quite interesting. Just watch this though lol

OMG!! He's a #Kickass

 

[KingMamba]

There is no beef between Hindus and Muslims. The problem was simply that the Indians refused to give us equal rights. Till 1935 Jinnah too wanted a united India according to Jaswant Singhs book. Nehru's severe persecution, refusal to let muslim majority provinces have their own rule and imposition of laws like the banning of cow slaughter made Jinnah want an independent Pakistan.

The independent Pakistan was not only for muslims but all those oppressed under Indian rule. Do note he even invited the Sikhs to join Pakistan. Also only when all options were exhausted and Hindutva india refused to give us equal rights we were forced to seek them ourselves in an independent state. Jinnah never wanted an Islamic republic. Throughout his life Pakistan did not adopt the title of Islamic republic. People like Zafarullah Khan, Cornelius and Joginder Nath Mandal all fought alongside him for an independent Pakistan. They were all non muslims.

I believe we will fail to agree on this topic.

I agree that Jinnah did not want an Islamic Republic but back then there was no such thing as Islamic republic anyway, Pakistan was the first to adopt such a phrase and that after he had already passed. You are right to say some non-Muslims fought for Pakistan as well namely Qadianis/ Christians but the majority of non-Muslims chose to remain in India and take their chances, which made the Muslim majority a foregone conclusion.

 

[genmirajborgza786]

The centre of gravity of Islam shifted from Arabia long time ago. It then moved to Turkey and Central Asia. Now it will move to Asia.

I say this because there is a theory among Islamic scholars and I will try to share it here.

Noah had three sons - Shem. Ham and Japheth. Noah was messenger of Allah and he preached for 950 years but was not very successful. As he persevered in the path of Almighty, the Almighty will reward him through his sons and their descendants.

All humanity is descendant of the three sons of Noah.

This is how this theory works. The descendants of his son Shem are in Arabia and Middle East. The Almighty descended most of the prophets in the Semite races of Middle East. The most illustrious of His descendants was Mohammed PBUH. This is how Shem was rewarded.

Japheth's descendants settled in Europe and around Mount Ararat. Its these peoples from whom descended Turkic nations and tribes as well as Ashkenaz. The way to reward Japheth, or Noah indirectly is that, the greatest Empires were built by the descendants of Japheth. In fact, the Europeans still rule the world in terms of commerce, culture and economy. The greatest Empire of Islam - the Ottoman Empire was also created by descendants of Japheth. Its also important to note that Sultan Mohammed Fatih, the one who conquered Constantinople, had been prophesied by Prophet Mohammed himself to be a person who will share his name will one day conquer the greatest city of then prosperous part of Europe.

Now its the turn of Ham. Muslim scholars agree that its this son whose descendants havent been rewarded as yet. These are the peoples of Asia. In the view of Muslim scholars, its the Muslims of South Asia, who will emerge as a big power. As Islam centre of gravity shifts eastwards.

Now this is just a theory. I would like people to respect it rather ridicule it.

interesting read, but,, I do not find it convincing as it has got to do more with progenity , then with merit & it is my understanding , that Islam being a fair religion, would give merit more weight over progenity &
therefore I respectfully disagree with this theory

 

[airmarshal]

interesting read, but,, I do not find it convincing as it has got to do more with progenity , then with merit & it is my understanding , that Islam being a fair religion, would give merit more weight over progenity &
therefore I respectfully disagree with this theory

Dont be ridiculous. Islam is a religion of merit and what the theory suggest is rewarding a great prophet of Allah. Dont compare Islam with prevalent system of non merit in Islamic world.

Serving Allah for 950 years and being persecuted all the way has no merit? Then by your theory there should no merit in ritual of hajj and ummrah as well as all rituals of hajj and ummrah are in following the practices of Hazrat Ibrahim and Hazrat Ismail, the father and son prophets.

 

[genmirajborgza786]

Dont be ridiculous. Islam is a religion of merit and what the theory suggest is rewarding a great prophet of Allah. Dont compare Islam with prevalent system of non merit in Islamic world.

Serving Allah for 950 years and being persecuted all the way has no merit? Then by your theory there should no merit in ritual of hajj and ummrah as well as all rituals of hajj and ummrah are in following the practices of Hazrat Ibrahim and Hazrat Ismail, the father and son prophets.

See, Noah (P.B.U.H) was a great Prophet of Allah ,& Allah will reward him, but here its Not Noah (P.B.U.H), whom we are talking about, but his children, particularly evolving into forming nations (a particular people & not a single entity but, people, a 'lot of people forming communities in this case Europe, Mid-East & South Asia) so, here clearly we are talking about communities, race, culture, language ,region then in that case, what has South East Asia done to be excluded & what's so special about South Asia ? why is Europe included & not North America ? why Mid-East & Why not Australia ? so clearly, this theory has a bias , it makes a particular community feel special then the other, where is the equality in this ? don't you think this is discriminatory ? nobody is disputing Allah Rewarding his Prophet Noah (P.B.U.H) , but what we are questioning is, the choosing of one Region (peoples) over the other