The two faces of ‘Muslim’ Modernists

[Psychic]

They are trapped in Pakistan. Don't confuse trapped with choice. First chance they get to get to move to West they would run faster than Jerry.

First of all, you had claimed otherwise.
Secondly, they migrated because of the wars and civil war. (who's the culprit).
Thirdly, most of the people of Astan are by your standards, still cavemen as they practice both tribal customs and Islamic laws.
Fourthly , people want to migrate towards the West because of economic reasons and do tell me when did Pakistan adopt an Islamic economic model?

Internal divisions of Afghanistan do not matter with regards to subject in hand. The issue was Afghanistan had Islamists in power in the form of Amir ul Momin Mullah Omar. He like typical Islamists frigged bad style and look the at the hell that his people faced.

Yeah and those who fought mullah Omer were saints. Please do enlighten me as to when Ahmad Shah Massud became a secular torch bearer of humanity.

You mean your interpretation of Islam. Millions of Muslims living in Europe would disagree with that. If Islam truely did not allow secularism why has there been no fatwa issued preventing Muslims from moving to Secular West and imploring those already there to move back?

And I believe the translation of secularism as I understand it means "no religion" which is cheating the truth. Why not visit the secular West and see what how many Muslim's live in land of "No religion".

Secularism is not "no religion". Just that the state stays neutral to religion.

Here mosque in "land of no religion" United Kingdom.

This argument is flawed since Islam wants the subjects to be ruled according to the Islamic principles in a Muslim majority society. This is a fundamental of Islamic governance system. If you call it my interpretation then I think that it is useless to argue on it. If you want secularism then go and live in the West. Don't shove it down our throats.

was war. Who told you it was "genocide"? Western revisionist historians? Now your using the narrative of the West to screw a Muslim country. Bravo

Armenian minority wasn't prosecuted by the Sultan but by your secular Atta Turk.

Internal divisions of Afghanistan do not matter with regards to subject in hand

THEY DO MATTER.

 

[Devil's Advokat]

We can go around and around with this. But how about distlling the issue.

(i) If Islam is incompatible with secularism does it mean Muslim's living in the West are compromising their faith?

(ii) If above (i) is true than should there be a Fatwa issued to make that clear. That is it is wrong to move to secular countries for anything longer than minimum time period even than on very strong compelling reasons - economic gain should not be one of them.

@Psychic

 

[Zibago]

You blame everything on Islam, want Islamic principles to be brushed aside, mock the practicing Muslims, call Islamic laws as draconian laws and still say that you are not an athiest ....You are confused.

Check the posts and tweets of known secularists of Pakistan and you will come to know who most of them are.

So it will be fixed if secularism is imposed? BTW, it's not the law which has loop holes, it's our weak judicial system which has loop holes as according to the law, the killer can't pressurize the relatives of the victims into accepting the blood-money,,, but still you won't blame the prosecution system but blame the Islamic law....But settling a dispute is not the thing which you want.
And as for establishing the writ of the state, you really think that revenge attacks could be stopped by that way if the attacker is determined? Or the people under the threat of revenge attacks will stop fearing for their lives? And FYI, majority of those who benifit from Qisas laws do so by settling the dispute in a proper manner. A rich guy taking advantage of the situation indicates a loop hole in the police and judiciary, not the basic law.


And that is what Islam doesn't allow. End of the story.

The majority of so called Pakistani secularists are nothing but pro mqm fucktards

When is see killers using a law to get away woth murder i will call that law draconian and every sane person should

The law has a million loopholes its best to have a law in which there is no way out for a murderer like in rest of world or dont cry when next jatoi or davis kills Pakistanis


Settle the dispute by pardoning the culprit ye kahan ka insaaf hay?


Only the criminals and oppurtunist relatives benifit from it

 

[Psychic]

When is see killers using a law to get away woth murder i will call that law draconian and every sane person should

The law has a million loopholes its best to have a law in which there is no way out for a murderer like in rest of world or dont cry when next jatoi or davis kills Pakistanis


Settle the dispute by pardoning the culprit ye kahan ka insaaf hay?


Only the criminals and oppurtunist relatives benifit from it

Just a repetition of what you posted and what I replied to earlier.

The majority of so called Pakistani secularists are nothing but pro mqm fucktards

You are not one of them and there are many like you.

 

[Devil's Advokat]

@Luffy 500
The way I see it is simple. It is the Islamists that are two faced. How so? Well they will denigrate seculatism as evil in Pakistan but have no problems with Pakistani's moving to secular West.

That's like saying alchohol is bad for me in Pakistan but fine if I move to UK. Contradictory and two faced.

Here. This Imam in UK has no problem with his flock in living with secularism or land of "no religion".

Moulana Fazlur Rehman arrived in Manchester. They don't see conflict between Islam and secularism in West. Neither are they preaching their Muslim flock to avoid secularism or saying do not move to West lest your faith be compromised.

Of course back in Pakistan they are screaming against secularism. That's what I call "two faced".

 

[haviZsultan]

The argument that Pakistan is not an Islamic state is either a canard, a direct lie or a convenient excuse told to ensure a system in favor of the average arrogant mullah-where they have power over the masses. Even going by the Islamists theories if they say Pakistan is not Islamic with its blundering forward with blasphemy law and hudood ordinance and a field of religious affairs then the question arises that after 60 years with Islamists like Ayub Khan who adopted an Islamic resolution turning Pakistan into an Islamic republic and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and Zia made it a hell for minorities other than dictating who should drink alocohol and destroyed the cinema/tv industry of Pakistan with mullahistic movies and breaking tvs then the question is if none of these could Islamicize Pakistan to the point where these mullahs want then how can we expect after 60 years they will be able to adopt Islam. They have failed according to mullahs on this forum for 60 years, how they plan to make Pakistan Islamic now?

When nations pay attention instead of state building on how long the paichan of my shalwar is or how long your beard is it is bound to be disaster. Let me qoute there is nothing wrong in the search of a secular system or a system that governs our country better or decides its leaders on merit rather than theological prowess. The prophet was asked whether crops were to be planted in a certain way he forbade it. Then when he heard the crops planted in the Prophets way had led to poor harvest. The prophet admitted his advice did not benefit the farmers. The point is think for yourself too. I think a bigger threat to us is that Islamic countries produce less than their population of total gdp in the world while jews produce twice or thrice as much.

Allah created us so that we could use our brain, our own logic to decide the system of our governance or in the Prophets case, their own way of pollinating crops. Everything is not about pulling in religion. We have to keep thinking of a strategy to pull us out of the rampant corruption (moral and actual), poor management of the state, and internal divisions.

The truth is there is no real consensus on things like whether beards are compulsory for men or hijab compulsory for women and they want to implement Islamic law. I am telling you in 60 years the mullahs weren't happy, in the next 60 years they won't be either with the current system, no matter how sugar coated it is to appear Islamic there is no pleasing the mullah until humanity goes back to living in caves

@Zibago @Psychic @hinduguy @jamahir @SecularNationalist @User @Luffy 500

 

[Luffy 500]

How about a live and let policy is it too hard to understand or do you still prefer daesh like laws in the 21st century?
Well these things are totally comparable i mean they had witch hunts in the past and we have blasphemer hunts

How would you feel if you got killed by your family just for being raped it halpens in our society does it make us slaves of west if we want better laws?
Our society is full of flaws and we need to look at solutions that work

Who is NOT letting you live? Live and let live doesn't mean you get to corrupt the society since human beings are social beings and get influenced. One of the foremost commands of islam is to promote good and forbid evil. Meaning u don't get to flaunt your corrupt ideas and immoral behavior in public for the greater good of the society and stability. While Islam allows non-muslims to live their lives as per their beliefs , customs and values, the tyrannical philosophy of liberalism doesn't even allows its minorities that basic right , if the minorities doesn't conform to certain liberal beliefs and customs. John loke the founder of liberalism actually justified certain restrictions on private lives of christians to ensure stability of his liberal utopian society. He had similar views regarding muslims. Now a days u can see how the modern liberal western countries are treating their muslim minorities. Enacting all sorts of draconian laws against practicing muslims.

No its not comparable. If being in denial helps you sooth your inferiority complex, then so be it. The church had complete and utter control of the state in medieval europe and it was not simply science VS church since church also promoted scientific development and universities. It was more of a power struggle between the old guard (church) , pro-monarchist and a rising affluent mercantile elite. None of the conditions are present in the muslim world. For the last 100 years ulema don't have any power (even in KSA their power is blown out of proportion). Ulemas btw are some of the brightest minds of the muslim world unlike catholic christianity . Vast majority of the muslim world is essentially a secular shithole ruled by corrupt secular liberal dacoits. Your country and my country are perfect example. WHat you r seeing now is the reaction to 100 years of secular colonial imperialism and islamic intellectual resurgence with some wayward sporadic violence by certain fringe groups. Now its understandable that folks like u who r the most beneficiary of the post-colonial status quo are frightened and worried abt losing your privileged status.

Blashphemy law is necessary since the divinely revealed islamic principles and the honor of the Prophets and sahabas can not be allowed to be ridiculed by intellectually bankrupt bigots who only promote hatred and chaos. Islam doesn't sanction absolute freedom of speech just like the west. There r red lines you can not cross.

As for your 2nd para. Well PAK is governed by secular british common laws and honor killings has nothing to do with islam but a remnant of the pre-islamic pagan culture that u seculars are so proud off. Are u so intellectually disingenuous to actually blame islam for your corrupt cultural practice. In my country , there r similar cultural hindu practices like for eg. dowry called joutuk (i.e the brides family have to give the grooms family a large sum of money as demanded by the groom) . Inability to give joutuk can result in the bride getting tortured, oppressed and killed. While its well known that Islam completely forbids it and actually commands that the groom to give the bride mahr. Without marh the marriage is invalid. Clearly your secular laws and are not working. Your should blame your secular courts and corrupt police for unislamic cultural practices instead of being intellectually so disingenuous and shameless.

Y

I was tolerating his rhetoric but i seriously stopped reading him after this .That,s why i said when you make religion your benchmark to judge right and wrong you will simply see other,s as inferior or infidels.Now imagine doing this on much bigger scale and it,s consquences i.e making a country islamic. Is there any sense in arguing with such people? @havisultan @Zibago

All the things you mentioned are directly related with secularism because they originated in secular societies.None of those things were invented in your ideal Islamic nations where people don,t like to study science and are too busy blowing each other up and issuing fatwas.

I am the one who has to tolerate and give long replies to your intellectually disingenuous crap. Consider yourself privileged to have my some of my time. Your don't even care what islam says so why bother when someone points out your deceitful behavior and ignorance. Allah commands you to do X but u decide to do Y . Now what's worse is that u don't stop there but intend to promote Y instead of X and even attempt to justify Y while claiming that doing X is wrong. What are you actually doing apart from questioning Allah (swt) and saying that Allah is wrong (nauzubillah). Now if u are so inept and ignorant (which i think many liberals actually are) to not have realized the severe repercussions of your actions, that's another matter. But don't fret just bcs someone points out your 2 faced deceitful beliefs and actions.

And don't cut and cherry pick lines from my post. Quote it full. If u have stopped reading , don't waste your time repeating your intellectually disingenuous crap.

If religion and only religion was enough to glue muslims together Bengal would not have seperated. Whereever religious rules are imposed there is immense tension in society. Secularism is not an anti Islamic concept. It is simply what has been taught to us and unlearning this will take decades, decades of unrest in muslim countries. I don't want to impose secularism without the will of the people but I want people to think of it positively.

You are repeating the same old non-sense that i replied to couple of months back. I think you already know that secularism is antithetical to Islam and vise-versa . Now u can have your beliefs but don't try to do hermeneutical gymnastics with the text of Quran and Sunnah to justify your preconceived notions and beliefs shaped by liberalism . What you r trying to do is futile, hypocritical , morally wrong , intellectually disingenuous and your are only deceiving your self. 1.5 bn people don't share your views and often get deeply hurt by you mocking their religion and way of life.

And its good to know that u don't to impost secularism. Hope you have no problem if a bearded guy gives sermons explaining the kufr of secularism to the masses with you not screaming and labeling him a illiterate extremist/terrorists/mullah/fanatic etc etc .

Yeh. You mean this guy below - Ataturk. He defeated the European invaders's and saved his land and people from colonialism. The republic (Turkey) he set up has gone from strength to strength. Today it is amongst the most advanced and powerful Muslim countries in the world.

Then you have so called Islamists. A synonym for medievalism like this guy below (Mullah Omar) who presided over destruction of his country and rape of his people by Western invaders. This is what the genius of Islamists gets you. A Neo colonial land with Western soldiers trampling over you. With millions of Afghan's living under Western secularism as migrants in refugee camps in Europe.

Ataturk was a tyrant bigot of the highest order. Far right in Europe is yet to produce a ataturk. That guy hated islam with a passion and i doubt he even wanted to have a muslim label. He banned the fez, changed arabic script to latin , ordered azan to be given in turkish , closed mosque and madrassas. In short he did everything to make sure muslims in turkey can't behave and act as muslims. That's what a totalitarian satanic ideology like secularism did to turkey. How was it separation of church and state ? What happened to turkey after WWI is sad and tragic.

A person can not be judged good based on military victories and political achievements. Stalin industrialized russia in 20 years but slaughtered tens of millions. Same goes for the likes of hitler , churchill , mao etc. Materialistic achievement in and of itself has nothing to do with justice and fairness. The bigot won against europeans not for the sake of muslim turks but for his own political agenda. It doesn't in any way justify what he did to turkish muslims.

The republic of turkey was the sick man of europe and looked down upon up until the beginning of 21st century. Its not a good example for muslim countris to follow. It didn't even have much material achievement and even if it had it still wouldn't have been a good example to follow. Material achievement is NO bench mark of success at least to muslims. West is materially vary advance with a sick and morally degraded society on a down ward spiral to chaos.

Mollah omar had nothing o do with t he destruction of AF. Only pro-neocon intellectually dishonest people will say that he had anything to do with neo-con invasion of AF. Neo-con secular liberal US invaded and pilaged AF to promote secularism and democracy while AF taliban fought them and is still fighting them. US is now negotiating with AF taliban knowing that taliban are there to stay in AF as a major force. Millions of AF living under western secularism is bcs some secular bush , dick and cheny decided to carpet bomb the country and show their egalitarian way of life to muslims world wide.

 

[Desert Fox]

Wel obviously if we demand secularism in west its halal demand in Pakistan it becomes haram روغلے پن کی انتہا

Because Pakistan isn't the West. They have a completely different political culture and now they too are experiencing the multiple ramifications of completely removing religion from every facet of public life all together.

In former Communist countries religion is making a big comeback.

 

[Luffy 500]

We can go around and around with this. But how about distlling the issue.

(i) If Islam is incompatible with secularism does it mean Muslim's living in the West are compromising their faith?

(ii) If above (i) is true than should there be a Fatwa issued to make that clear. That is it is wrong to move to secular countries for anything longer than minimum time period even than on very strong compelling reasons - economic gain should not be one of them.

@Psychic

i) NO muslims are not compromising their faith by living in the west in and of itself. It depends on whether they can practice their religion freely without any compromise what so ever. . If they face threat to their lives and have to compromise with their religion then its commanded that they migrate elsewhere if they are able and they have to strive their hardest to migrate. Now a days muslims are increasingly asked to compromise with their religion under the deceitful argument of integration. They are being asked to completely assimilate and draconian laws are being passed in europe in an attempt to force them into assimilation . Muslims in places like China's Xinjiang province and france are also forced to compromise. In places like china and now france muslims r being forced to compromise , so migration from these places most likely are a must. If u contact a islamic scholar he can give u a better answer. There r many in china who r migrating though.

II) Islamic law is not balck & white but takes variety of things into consideration. It varies case by case taking the social-political context into consideration. For eg. if someone is weak in faith , he/she is asked not to travel to secular/non-muslim lands since there's a danger of him falling astray. Traveling for business , education and health care also varies case by case. Also u have to realize , many if NOT most muslims in the west are born and raised there and many are native converts. Also the post-colonial muslim world is subjected to nation-state and visa system by secular liberal political world order and there is NO islamic caliphate now and many muslim countries are militantly secular and thus oppress muslims. SO the fatwa is NOT so simple as you think.

If u are really interested and not trolling u can read some scholarly asnwers since none of us here are islamic scholars:

Very conservative site run by a renowned saudi scholar:

https://islamqa.info/en/13363
https://islamqa.info/en/27211
https://islamqa.info/en/111564

Another good site:

http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=fatwa&tab=1&vPart=379

Two renowned scholars with almost similar views:

This is also an amazing scholar of orthodoxy but mind u he says that his fatwas are only meant for western muslims and not muslims living in the muslim world already. He calls himself a western scholar and deals with issues of muslims in the west:

This is a UK based scholar also deals with muslim issues in the west. In this video he is answering whether muslims living in non-muslim lands should migrate or not:

@Luffy 500
The way I see it is simple. It is the Islamists that are two faced. How so? Well they will denigrate seculatism as evil in Pakistan but have no problems with Pakistani's moving to secular West.

That's like saying alchohol is bad for me in Pakistan but fine if I move to UK. Contradictory and two faced.

Here. This Imam in UK has no problem with his flock in living with secularism or land of "no religion".

Moulana Fazlur Rehman arrived in Manchester. They don't see conflict between Islam and secularism in West. Neither are they preaching their Muslim flock to avoid secularism or saying do not move to West lest your faith be compromised.

Of course back in Pakistan they are screaming against secularism. That's what I call "two faced".

You r conflating two completely irrelevant issues and making a serious mistake. Muslims living in non-muslim lands doesn't justify establishing secularism in muslim lands. Though mind you most muslims lands are secular and NOT islamic. PAK is also run by secular laws and is NOT an islamic country.

Does your intellectual gymnastics justify americans and europeans adopting saudi laws bcs many americans and europeans live in KSA and other GCC countries like UAE?

And muslims are NOT 2 faced. Its liberals in muslim lands who r hypocrites and 2 faced. Muslims are NOT demanding that west replace their civil penal code with sharia law. While liberals both inside and outside the muslim world are demanding that muslims adopt secularism and do away with islamic laws. Even when secular liberal europeans & americans don't live in muslim lands , they want to mold the muslim world to their liking and does carpet bombing for purpose. What do u call that? Its liberals who r the totalitarian 2 faced bigots and NOT muslims.


As for muslims living in the west:

Scholars say that there is a defacto undeclared agreement of co-existence between the native non-muslims and muslim living in non-muslim lands:
http://sunnahonline.com/library/con...muslims-should-behave-in-non-muslim-societies



Even the companions of the prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) migrated to christian abyssinia to escape the persecution of meccan pagans. Also companions of the prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) and subsequent generations of muslims also travelled the globe in order to preach the message of islam and thus u have muslim in places like BD , indoneshia and malaysia.

You are the one who in a desperate attempt to justify kufr of secularism in muslim lands is coming up with this absurd and ludicrous argument.

 

[Desert Fox]

You also need to mention the successful societies in this modern world and try to learn and understand their modern perspective of life,not just the quran and some hadiths.By giving too much importance to quran and hadith stuff you can,t think outside the box.And the same can be said about any religious hindu or a christian.
Yes there are and were secular dictator style countries where religion was suppressed for example the soviet union and communist china.Currently india is the best example where secularism only exists in constitution. I was definitely not talking about such countries.The countries i mentioned are not perfectly secular but a way better than any country where religion is imposed.

Well, if we are to judge secular ideologies and compare them with Islam using your criteria then your secular ideologies come on top in terms of oppression and brutality, even the ones that aren't communist.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the best example of a Muslim and he never oppressed minorities, he never prevented non-Muslims from going to their places of worship.

Meanwhile your beloved Liberalism has bombed and starved (economic sanctions) nations in the name of "democracy".

Well you can keep living in the 6th century if you think that makes you a perfect muslim

Yes, i will because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is more dear to me than White men who intellectually colonized people like you.

You can continue to expose your hatred for Islam. At least you can stop pretending to be a Muslim.

 

[Desert Fox]

When you have rich using this law to escape justice incase of Ramon Davis,Sharukh Jatoi ,families killing their daughters in name of honour without and repercussions you onow you havr a loop hole in your system this law is get out of jail free card for the wealthy if you want to prevent future incidents like Jatoi you have to end this loop hole and to stop the feuds you need to establish wrot of state not allow killers to go scott free after paying fine that is injustice to the deceased



MAny mullahs and mullah minded folks reject dna as evidence and resist sensible ammendments in our outdated rape laws

And being secular means being athiest?
Ap ki soch ko 21 topoan ki salami

Your issue is with corrupt people and corrupt tribal cultural practices and you are somehow pinning the blame on Islam.

Shall i point to secular countries where similar practices take place?

Then you have so called Islamists. A synonym for medievalism like this guy below (Mullah Omar) who presided over destruction of his country and rape of his people by Western invaders. This is what the genius of Islamists gets you. A Neo colonial land with Western soldiers trampling over you. With millions of Afghan's living under Western secularism as migrants in refugee camps in Europe.

Talk about cherry picking.

You completely (intentionally i assume) ignored the Soviet Communist/Atheist/Secularists invasion of Afghanistan which destroyed the country and left 2 million Afghans dead, not to mention the Communist warlords who then raped and oppressed the Afghans in the 1990's BEFORE the Taliban came into power. Mullah Omar was just a product of these events that preceded him, yet you are using that to blame Islam? Only someone with dementia can somehow make pin all of this on Islam.

 

[haviZsultan]

Who is NOT letting you live? Live and let live doesn't mean you get to corrupt the society since human beings are social beings and get influenced. One of the foremost commands of islam is to promote good and forbid evil. Meaning u don't get to flaunt your corrupt ideas and immoral behavior in public for the greater good of the society and stability. While Islam allows non-muslims to live their lives as per their beliefs , customs and values, the tyrannical philosophy of liberalism doesn't even allows its minorities that basic right , if the minorities doesn't conform to certain liberal beliefs and customs. John loke the founder of liberalism actually justified certain restrictions on private lives of christians to ensure stability of his liberal utopian society. He had similar views regarding muslims. Now a days u can see how the modern liberal western countries are treating their muslim minorities. Enacting all sorts of draconian laws against practicing muslims.

No its not comparable. If being in denial helps you sooth your inferiority complex, then so be it. The church had complete and utter control of the state in medieval europe and it was not simply science VS church since church also promoted scientific development and universities. It was more of a power struggle between the old guard (church) , pro-monarchist and a rising affluent mercantile elite. None of the conditions are present in the muslim world. For the last 100 years ulema don't have any power (even in KSA their power is blown out of proportion). Ulemas btw are some of the brightest minds of the muslim world unlike catholic christianity . Vast majority of the muslim world is essentially a secular shithole ruled by corrupt secular liberal dacoits. Your country and my country are perfect example. WHat you r seeing now is the reaction to 100 years of secular colonial imperialism and islamic intellectual resurgence with some wayward sporadic violence by certain fringe groups. Now its understandable that folks like u who r the most beneficiary of the post-colonial status quo are frightened and worried abt losing your privileged status.

Blashphemy law is necessary since the divinely revealed islamic principles and the honor of the Prophets and sahabas can not be allowed to be ridiculed by intellectually bankrupt bigots who only promote hatred and chaos. Islam doesn't sanction absolute freedom of speech just like the west. There r red lines you can not cross.

As for your 2nd para. Well PAK is governed by secular british common laws and honor killings has nothing to do with islam but a remnant of the pre-islamic pagan culture that u seculars are so proud off. Are u so intellectually disingenuous to actually blame islam for your corrupt cultural practice. In my country , there r similar cultural hindu practices like for eg. dowry called joutuk (i.e the brides family have to give the grooms family a large sum of money as demanded by the groom) . Inability to give joutuk can result in the bride getting tortured, oppressed and killed. While its well known that Islam completely forbids it and actually commands that the groom to give the bride mahr. Without marh the marriage is invalid. Clearly your secular laws and are not working. Your should blame your secular courts and corrupt police for unislamic cultural practices instead of being intellectually so disingenuous and shameless.



I am the one who has to tolerate and give long replies to your intellectually disingenuous crap. Consider yourself privileged to have my some of my time. Your don't even care what islam says so why bother when someone points out your deceitful behavior and ignorance. Allah commands you to do X but u decide to do Y . Now what's worse is that u don't stop there but intend to promote Y instead of X and even attempt to justify Y while claiming that doing X is wrong. What are you actually doing apart from questioning Allah (swt) and saying that Allah is wrong (nauzubillah). Now if u are so inept and ignorant (which i think many liberals actually are) to not have realized the severe repercussions of your actions, that's another matter. But don't fret just bcs someone points out your 2 faced deceitful beliefs and actions.

And don't cut and cherry pick lines from my post. Quote it full. If u have stopped reading , don't waste your time repeating your intellectually disingenuous crap.



You are repeating the same old non-sense that i replied to couple of months back. I think you already know that secularism is antithetical to Islam and vise-versa . Now u can have your beliefs but don't try to do hermeneutical gymnastics with the text of Quran and Sunnah to justify your preconceived notions and beliefs shaped by liberalism . What you r trying to do is futile, hypocritical , morally wrong , intellectually disingenuous and your are only deceiving your self. 1.5 bn people don't share your views and often get deeply hurt by you mocking their religion and way of life.

And its good to know that u don't to impost secularism. Hope you have no problem if a bearded guy gives sermons explaining the kufr of secularism to the masses with you not screaming and labeling him a illiterate extremist/terrorists/mullah/fanatic etc etc .



Ataturk was a tyrant bigot of the highest order. Far right in Europe is yet to produce a ataturk. That guy hated islam with a passion and i doubt he even wanted to have a muslim label. He banned the fez, changed arabic script to latin , ordered azan to be given in turkish , closed mosque and madrassas. In short he did everything to make sure muslims in turkey can't behave and act as muslims. That's what a totalitarian satanic ideology like secularism did to turkey. How was it separation of church and state ? What happened to turkey after WWI is sad and tragic.

A person can not be judged good based on military victories and political achievements. Stalin industrialized russia in 20 years but slaughtered tens of millions. Same goes for the likes of hitler , churchill , mao etc. Materialistic achievement in and of itself has nothing to do with justice and fairness. The bigot won against europeans not for the sake of muslim turks but for his own political agenda. It doesn't in any way justify what he did to turkish muslims.

The republic of turkey was the sick man of europe and looked down upon up until the beginning of 21st century. Its not a good example for muslim countris to follow. It didn't even have much material achievement and even if it had it still wouldn't have been a good example to follow. Material achievement is NO bench mark of success at least to muslims. West is materially vary advance with a sick and morally degraded society on a down ward spiral to chaos.

Mollah omar had nothing o do with t he destruction of AF. Only pro-neocon intellectually dishonest people will say that he had anything to do with neo-con invasion of AF. Neo-con secular liberal US invaded and pilaged AF to promote secularism and democracy while AF taliban fought them and is still fighting them. US is now negotiating with AF taliban knowing that taliban are there to stay in AF as a major force. Millions of AF living under western secularism is bcs some secular bush , dick and cheny decided to carpet bomb the country and show their egalitarian way of life to muslims world wide.

There is no reason secularism is antithetical to Islam. What about 40 million plus muslims living in europe, enjoying the fruits of the secular system. Are you going to label them all anti islamic for living in a secular system? They have produced some brilliant muslim minds.

The question deserves answering is whos Islam are you going to have. The sunnis, shias, ismailis, hanfis, muta zilite or the Taliban? Whos? When you can't sit together and agree to the concept of beard being compulsory or not how are you ever going to reach agreement on more important matters with so many muslim sects. You fail to understand that all muslims implement Islam and religion in their own separate ways and there is no universal version of Islam. All muslims do not abide by exactly the same tenets.

What you are doing is paroting the same things that have been taught to us by our Islamist mullah controlled systems and looking down condescendingly on all secularists thinking of them as unislamic or against Islam. These thoughts are ingrained in you because of the very education you received. It will take time to unlearn and I acknowledge that the majority of Muslims not in Turkey and in non-central American states advocate views similar to your own.

However I would like us to agree that both of us want what is best for the muslim ummah and that secularism is not Anti Islamic. This will be a useful first step for the conservatives to bring them to the point of ijtehad or Islamic debate at least. Do note that Allama Iqbal associated the fall of Ijtehad with the fall of the entire muslim ummah. Ijtehad is a debate where people discuss all sorts of topics without assuming their views are superior. If we can bring the golden age of Islam and the secularism of the Rashidun caliphate back all can benefit.

I would like the conservatives to do something other than just hating secularists and demonizing us but sit with us and debate. Secularism has been a solid concept promoted by a Muslim named Ibn Rushd. I am not telling you to adopt a foreign concept since muslims invented secularism. I am simply asking that we adopt a system we created that has since then been adopted by the west. Muslim spain would never be muslim spain without secularism. When Hajib Al Mansur punished the Christians for treachery he sat at a church and allowed a Christian priest to pray on, even while he ravaged the rest of the Christian north. We must learn something from our secular roots or we are bound to be destroyed. This is my humble opinion. Stop turning Islam into a religion made by the sword but accept its liberal leanings.

 

[Falcon29]

This is a difficult discussion, but it indeed was productive, at least people went through and didn't flame the thread. What we see today is identity crisis experienced by many people, not just Muslims. The world has moved away from religion under the surface long ago. There are some state sponsored scholars, and the societal agenda is preached by them. We are now in a phase where liberal/secular lifestyle norms and standards are being forced on everyone. The latest of which, is allowing men into female bathrooms if their 'feelings' push them into identify as females. If you question where this culture is heading, you will be labeled extremist, backwards, or have some sort of controversy or public shaming against you. This is another form enforcing your views. Most people who object to such norms don't speak out of fear of being shunned by friends, family and local community. This is all happening while the idea of God is being attacked, it is being pushed in all public universities, media and entertainment institutions that religion is man made.

As a result, people are having identity crisis, looking for feasible concept that meets modern demands and retains cultural/moral norms. Which is not an easy thing to come up with. On one hand, secularism brought up some technological and scientific advancements. On other hand, it has brought up total moral decay, and basically eliminated any cultural identity. Nobody in the West can identify with a culture, they just identify with the 'modern lifestyle'. So they need to keep living the way the society tells them to live if they want to be mentally sound, otherwise they began having feelings of being lost and lack of cultural identity. So this forces to them accept every change in the society without questioning it.

How this relates to Muslims and Islam? Well, Muslims are concerned about political and social implications. Starting with political, look at the ME, it hasn't been stable for near a century, they are treated very unfairly because of their resources. Secularism is used as weapon of war by the West, to get benefit out of resources in the region, while having total political leverage over these societies. Hence it is not appealing at all. A Muslim who has any political vision for the Muslim world, will not find appeal in this because it designed so it only brings benefit to the West and Israel. Socially, you are going to be ready for serious moral decay, look at the moral decay in the West. You have transgenders, gays all over the place, you can't find any sustaining relationship, there are now entertainment shows where a husband and wife sit across each other, talk about how they cheated on each other and enjoyed it, while the wife was sharing partners with other females. This moral decay makes one cringe. It should make anyone who is inspired by biblical Prophets cringe.

As far as Islam goes, Muslims may change, but Islam won't. Islam can't change, otherwise you render it a man made religion and admit your disbelief in it. So if people suggest Islam needs change, then they suggest God make a mistake when he said it will remain unchanged. Islam's Prophet, unlike other religions, gave lots of input on societal approach and the future, which is why Muslims are still influenced by him to a degree. One example, is that he said alcohol is forbidden period, but Muslims in the future will make it 'halal'. He gave many other examples, and it abundantly clear that what's forbidden and permitted is exactly as he outlined and nothing else.

The struggle is now to what follow, some people are becoming extreme, some are becoming liberal, some are in between and not sure what to do. Better to focus on their selves for now, on important things, and let things play itself out, give it some time. Biblical religions gave input on the end times era and the norms during them. So my personal judgement is that we are in it, and the next 10-20 years should help us recognize if there is indeed a God influencing events of the world. I have studied this subject dearly, and as per my analysis, there should be events and signs that are divine, that are long overdue, and be expected in the coming decade up to two decades. If not, then we can conclude that religion is man made.

 

[M.AsfandYar]

The majority of so called Pakistani secularists are nothing but pro mqm fucktards

When is see killers using a law to get away woth murder i will call that law draconian and every sane person should

The law has a million loopholes its best to have a law in which there is no way out for a murderer like in rest of world or dont cry when next jatoi or davis kills Pakistanis


Settle the dispute by pardoning the culprit ye kahan ka insaaf hay?


Only the criminals and oppurtunist relatives benifit from it

See some sense Dude You are going directly against some clear commands in Quran. This Debate Only becomes Legit with The Existance Of Islamic system In Pakistan. WHICH BY NO DEFINITION EXISTS IN PAKISTAN. THE ONE YOU THINK ARE ISLAMIC LAWS ARE DEFORMED AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AS SUCH.

 

[Devil's Advokat]

@Luffy 500 This is serious question I am bringing up. It is very simple.

If secularism is bad for Muslim's in Pakistan then it is bad for Muslims in UK. If secularism is acceptable to Muslim's in UK then it is acceptable to Muslims in Pakistan.

Your thoughts on this? And here can we exclude those on medical, educational, business or those on Da'wah trips. All these categories are transient by their nature. This excludes the 99% of the over 2.6 million Muslims in UK. Also the native Anglo-Saxon converts are tiny number. This question is applicable to the other 98% of 2.6 million.

The bulk of the 2.6 million Muslims are migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia etc or are second or third generation children of those migrants vast majority of who maintain contact with ancestor country through regular visits or arranged marriages.

So let's not kid ourselves here that we are talking about group of Muslim's who are entirely estranged from their origin countries.

Ps. With regards to the videos you posted I will get back to you after I go through them all.