Truckloads Of Stones In Ayodhya Put Focus Back On Ram Temple

[StandForInsaf]

Good luck make indian muslims your enemy and demolish you country.

 

[Sky lord]

Sacrificing of animals(including cows) is a religious sacrament in Islam.

Sacrificing of animals are allowed except for the cow.

It is NOT an injunction in Islam that a COW has to be sacrificed. It can be any animal. So cannot understand this insistence on a cow and only cow.

Personally am of the belief that public sacrifice of any animal should not be allowed. They should be killed humanely in an abattoir.

India claims to be a democracy and that's what the whole partition was about. The one nation vs two nation thing. Congress and its leaders were of the view that religion has no part in state matters and all the subjects will be free to practice their religion and their rights will be protected. The Muslims that stayed behind and sided with India were of that view that ur forefathers like Nehru held...so by destroying Babri Masjid and erecting a Mandir in its place...isn't that like saying "u were wrong Indian Muslims and so was Nehru and his folks...we r gonna do whatever we damn well please bcuz we r the majority"?

I have heard this argument often - forwarded by Muslims - i.e. You claim to be secular - So you have to do this or that, however, As We do not believe in secularism so it doesn't apply to us.

You may not believe in secularism- but you are ruled by divine law are you not? So you should be judged by those standards. Divine law requires mercy, humility, magnanimity.

Are these people who refuse to hand over land that was taken in what was obviously meant to be a humiliation of Hindus displaying any of the qualities of a good Muslim?

So you expect the secular to live up to man made standards but that doesn't apply to people who should be living up to god's standards?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Sacrificing of animals are allowed except for the cow.

It is NOT an injunction in Islam that a COW has to be sacrificed. It can be any animal. So cannot understand this insistence on a cow and only cow.

Where did I say it has to be ONLY cow? I just said that the practice wasn't created to offend Hindus.

I fully agree that if it's avoidable to hurt someone's religious sentiments then one should totally avoid it...but that should be more of a personal choice...not one enforced by the state bcuz the state claimed to be secular.

I have heard this argument often - forwarded by Muslims - i.e. You claim to be secular - So you have to do this or that, however, As We do not believe in secularism so it doesn't apply to us.

You may not believe in secularism- but you are ruled by divine law are you not? So you should be judged by those standards. Divine law requires mercy, humility, magnanimity.

Are these people who refuse to hand over land that was taken in what was obviously meant to be a humiliation of Hindus displaying any of the qualities of a good Muslim?

So you expect the secular to live up to man made standards but that doesn't apply to people who should be living up to god's standards?

Are u referring to the Babri Masjid/Ram Mandir in that paragraph that I've made bold? If so...then u should read my earlier posts. I advocated that bcuz the site is holy to Hindus...it should be returned. Hindus should be allowed to build a temple there and the mosque be relocated. The only issue I discussed there was the forceful destruction of the mosque by angry mobs...which is in a sense "might is right" kinda thing that's no different than what Babur did...and yes this understanding of the sentiments of other ppl(of other race/religion/etc) and not hurting their feelings is the "divine law"(as u called it). A muslim is not to harm others by his hand or tongue(words or actions).

Also I'm not expecting anyone to live up to the secular standards and what not. I'm just merely pointing out that this dream of peaceful coexistence was sold by ur forefathers to the Indian ppl including the Indian Muslims. If it's not working out then it's better to declare urself a not so secular state like KSA/Pak/Israel have done...it eliminates all sorts of grey areas.

 

[HariVamsha]

Sacrificing Halal Animals(including cow) is a religious sacrament to commemorate Prophet Abraham's resolve where he was even willing to sacrifice his son in the way of God.

LOGIC FAIL.

You admit that any animal is a SUBSTITUTE for the life of his child. So the sacrifice is only SYMBOLIC in nature.

This also means that the animal itself can be SUBSTITUTED by ANY other living organism like an Insect or a Vegetable or a Plant.

The Symbolism of "sacrifice" will still remain and the purpose is served. This is not the 7th century anymore and human sensitivities and civility and social and ecological and environmental consciousness is supposed to have EVOLVED and not remain stuck to the 7th century.

Halal animal sacrifice(including cows)
- A religious practice in Islam...not created to offend ppl of other religions

--> Interferes with Hinduism(Cow being considered holy)

WRONG.

Even Hinduism has sacrifice, only it has evolved to substitute vegetables for live animals. So far god seems to be OK with it.

Second. Cow is not "holy", it is CONSIDERED Holy in the same way one's Mother and Father is CONSIDERED Holy in Hinduism.

"Matra Devo Bhava, Pitr devo Bhava, Acharya Devo bhava, Athiti Devo Bhava "

Translate : "Mother is your god, Father is your god, Teacher is your god, Guest is your god".

Idolatory
- A Hindu practice that has existed for centuries...not created to offend Muslims.

--> Interferes with Islam(considered shirk...one of the worst sins)

Hinduism and its practices has existed for 15,000 year AT LEAST, before anything close to islam or Abraham ever existed.

So it practices cannot have been "created" to offend Muslims.

But since Islam came AFTER Hinduism, Logic dictates that its practices could have been DELIBERATE to offend Hinduism.

Do u see the equivalency?

See the LOGIC ?

If ur government bans cow slaughter...shutting out one religion's practice to please the other than does that mean in a Muslim majority country like Pakistan we should ban Hindus from worshipping their gods bcuz it doesn't sit right with Muslims?

Ban on Cow Slaughter is based on the Hindu VALUE SYSTEM, not religion.

Its a social contract which considers the cow a contributing member of Hindu / human society and hence has ethical and moral right of protection by the same society. The Law only covers what ethics and morality already dictates it do.

Now let's address the false equivalency I was talking about.

Drawing pictures of Prophet Muhammad(PBUH)
- Not part of Hinduism. If done then the sole purpose is to hurt/offend Muslims.

LOGIC FAIL.

This is freedom of speech and expression which has NOTHING to do with religion, but Fundamental Rights.

It would only apply correctly if for example animal sacrifice(including cows) wasn't an Islamic practice...and instead Indian Muslims just slaughtered cows to offend Hindus...then u can relate the two.

Slaughter of cows is specifically to offend Hindus. Like I said, since the "sacrifice" is only symbolic in nature, there are a million different living creatures which you can sacrifice if you really only wanted to make a symbolic gesture of submission to god.

The point I'm trying to make is that it was ur forefathers that rallied behind Congress(pre-Independence)...ur ancestors who were all for a united India and that we shouldn't part ways and divide the country based on religion. They promised that religion has no part to play in the government. They disagreed with Jinnah and claimed that the religious freedom of Muslims will not be undermined in a Hindu majority India.

So now why is ur government trying to stop them from having their religious freedom(we have already established in the above argument that it's a pre-existing religious sacrament)? Shouldn't the current India follow through on all those promises made?

Logic Fail Again.

That argument lost its value the moment partition was agreed upon.

If not then perhaps it should announce to its subjects(Indian Muslims) that "Jinnah was right, Nehru/Gandhi were wrong...u made the wrong choice of trusting/siding with Congress and u don't belong here"

That way Muslims of India will know what to expect...and learn to live in a non secular Hindu India. Currently all their demands r based on their view of India as a secular state. It would solve a whole bunch of India's problems along religious lines if Indian Muslims know how the state is going to operate.

P.S. please keep it objective and civil if u choose to reply.

Another LOGIC FAIL.

98% of muslims of India voted for Pakistan so the Hindus own an explanation to only 2% of the muslims who did not vote for the Muslim League.

The rest of the muslim own an explanation to Hindus as to why they refuced to vacate the land after having voted to make pakistan a reality.

Those 2% muslims are the one's that vote for BJP and Modi in today India, so for them no explanations are necessary. They already know what they want and what India stands for and who the Hindus truly are.

 

[Cookie Monster]

LOGIC FAIL.

You admit that any animal is a SUBSTITUTE for the life of his child. So the sacrifice is only SYMBOLIC in nature.

This also means that the animal itself can be SUBSTITUTED by ANY other living organism like an Insect or a Vegetable or a Plant.

The Symbolism of "sacrifice" will still remain and the purpose is served. This is not the 7th century anymore and human sensitivities and civility and social and ecological and environmental consciousness is supposed to have EVOLVED and not remain stuck to the 7th century.

Perhaps u should learn about Islam before preaching it to me.

WRONG.

Even Hinduism has sacrifice, only it has evolved to substitute vegetables for live animals. So far god seems to be OK with it.

Second. Cow is not "holy", it is CONSIDERED Holy in the same way one's Mother and Father is CONSIDERED Holy in Hinduism.

"Matra Devo Bhava, Pitr devo Bhava, Acharya Devo bhava, Athiti Devo Bhava "

Translate : "Mother is your god, Father is your god, Teacher is your god, Guest is your god".


Hinduism and its practices has existed for 15,000 year AT LEAST, before anything close to islam or Abraham ever existed.

So it practices cannot have been "created" to offend Muslims.

But since Islam came AFTER Hinduism, Logic dictates that its practices could have been DELIBERATE to offend Hinduism.

See the LOGIC ?

This is idiotic at best. Please show me one just one research paper or anything of that sort that shows that Muslims invented this religious practice to offend Hindus. That argument coming from u and ur ignorance of Islam displayed in the first paragraph(arguing to substitute insects for sacrifice...seriously?) just shows me that u r not fit to have this discussion.

Ban on Cow Slaughter is based on the Hindu VALUE SYSTEM, not religion.

Its a social contract which considers the cow a contributing member of Hindu / human society and hence has ethical and moral right of protection by the same society. The Law only covers what ethics and morality already dictates it do.

And Hindu values r separate from ur religion? Doesn't ur religion teach u these values...hence they r part of ur religion. Even if they r not why force it down the throats of others? It is the very meaning of secularism that the state doesn't dictate such things.

LOGIC FAIL.

This is freedom of speech and expression which has NOTHING to do with religion, but Fundamental Rights.

Slaughter of cows is specifically to offend Hindus. Like I said, since the "sacrifice" is only symbolic in nature, there are a million different living creatures which you can sacrifice if you really only wanted to make a symbolic gesture of submission to god.

Again this should be the people's choice in a secular state. A secular state by its own definition doesn't interfere in such matters. This was my point from the start if u had bothered to read it. Why keep up the garb of secularism when clearly the ppl and the state are moving away from it...just get rid of it altogether.

Logic Fail Again.

That argument lost its value the moment partition was agreed upon.

Another LOGIC FAIL.

98% of muslims of India voted for Pakistan so the Hindus own an explanation to only 2% of the muslims who did not vote for the Muslim League.

The rest of the muslim own an explanation to Hindus as to why they refuced to vacate the land after having voted to make pakistan a reality.

Those 2% muslims are the one's that vote for BJP and Modi in today India, so for them no explanations are necessary. They already know what they want and what India stands for and who the Hindus truly are.

It didn't lose any value at all. Jinnah and his followers kept their point of view and ur leaders kept their point of view. India is the successor to the views of Nehru/Gandhi/Congress and Pakistan is the successor to the views of Jinnah/Muslim League/etc. U cant erase history just by denying it. India tried to keep up its secular views for as long as it could but with passing time such idealistic views of Nehru seem to be failing.

Don't bother to quote me again. U r clearly getting too emotional and I'm not interested in having any further discussion with u.

 

[HariVamsha]

Perhaps u should learn about Islam before preaching it to me.

This is idiotic at best. Please show me one just one research paper or anything of that sort that shows that Muslims invented this religious practice to offend Hindus. That argument coming from u and ur ignorance of Islam displayed in the first paragraph(arguing to substitute insects for sacrifice...seriously?) just shows me that u r not fit to have this discussion.

LOL... are you kidding me ?

Your religion is build on destroying Idols and Deities of any other religion

Maybe you better learn about your religion before asking others to learn it.

And Hindu values r separate from ur religion? Doesn't ur religion teach u these values...hence they r part of ur religion. Even if they r not why force it down the throats of others? It is the very meaning of secularism that the state doesn't dictate such things.

The Values of Indian state are the values of our civilization and they are the values of our society and they all comes from Hinduism.

Who is to say what came first ? the values or the religion ? But either way, they are the foundation of our civilization and the constitution exist to serve that. The civilization do not exist to serve the constitution.

Those who disagree are free to leave, they already voted for pakistan.

Again this should be the people's choice in a secular state. A secular state by its own definition doesn't interfere in such matters. This was my point from the start if u had bothered to read it. Why keep up the garb of secularism when clearly the ppl and the state are moving away from it...just get rid of it altogether.

Peoples choice is expressed by our democracy and they have spoken multiple times and will continue to do so for a long long time.

Who are you to tell us what garb to keep and what not to ? No body asked for your advice and you guys certainly do not have ANY credibility in the global community to give unsolicited advice or opinions.

LOL at your audacity.

It didn't lose any value at all. Jinnah and his followers kept their point of view and ur leaders kept their point of view. India is the successor to the views of Nehru/Gandhi/Congress and Pakistan is the successor to the views of Jinnah/Muslim League/etc. U cant erase history just by denying it. India tried to keep up its secular views for as long as it could but with passing time such idealistic views of Nehru seem to be failing.

Don't bother to quote me again. U r clearly getting too emotional and I'm not interested in having any further discussion with u.

India is the successor to its ancient civilization, nehru/gandhi etc. are merely a couple of odd members in our ancient historical order. They do not mean anything beyond that.

LOL at your suggestion that the idea of India was the idea of Nehru .... the Idea of India is the will of the people of India.

I never respond to paksitanis because they can never handle the truth. I am only responding because there are far too many dumb hindus on pdf and they were unable to reply to you.

I assure you, I have NO INTENTION of responding to you or your kind ever again.

 

[Sky lord]

Where did I say it has to be ONLY cow?

In that case there is no problem. The problem is only when it is the cow. Sacrifice a goat or a chicken or a buffaloes or a rabbit . You can follow the requirements of your religion and no one will be offended.


Sacrificing a cow is NOT a requirement
Treating others with kindness and respect IS a requirement

So - problem solved!

Also I'm not expecting anyone to live up to the secular standards and what not. I'm just merely pointing out that this dream of peaceful coexistence was sold by ur forefathers to the Indian ppl including the Indian Muslims. If it's not working out then it's better to declare urself a not so secular state like KSA/Pak/Israel have done...it eliminates all sorts of grey areas.

So if secular people have to rename themselves as theocratic on the basis that one action was not secular (in your opinion) - then surely you will agree with me that these Muslims (involved in the land disputes) should long ago have acknowledged themselves not to be true Muslims? And given up claiming to be followers of Islam ?

Again you have very high standards for the secular but none at all it seems for god's own people .

 

[Cookie Monster]

In that case there is no problem. The problem is only when it is the cow. Sacrifice a goat or a chicken or a buffaloes or a rabbit . You can follow the requirements of your religion and no one will be offended.


Sacrificing a cow is NOT a requirement
Treating others with kindness and respect IS a requirement

So - problem solved!

Yes but choosing to sacrifice a goat instead of cow to respect/not harm another's feelings should come from the ppl...and not decided by the state. The moment a state starts deciding what to do or not to do in one's religion, it is no longer secular.

So if secular people have to rename themselves as theocratic on the basis that one action was not secular (in your opinion) - then surely you will agree with me that these Muslims (involved in the land disputes) should long ago have acknowledged themselves not to be true Muslims? And given up claiming to be followers of Islam ?

Again you have very high standards for the secular but none at all it seems for god's own people .

Secular ppl don't have to name themselves theocratic...it's the "secular" government taking theocratic actions.

And again u r putting words into my mouth. Where did I absolve the Muslims from such standards? Everyone should follow through on what they claim...or else why bother with just a label?

I don't know if u read it or not but I have said multiple times that Muslims should agree to relocate the Masjid and let u guys build a Ram Mandir there bcuz it's a holy place for u guys...and again I'll repeat...it shouldn't have been the angry mobs taking law into their own hands and destroy the Masjid.

If it's still not apparent then I'll just boil it down in a few lines.
- Muslims should(as per the religion) show kindness and understand it is a holy site and relocate the Masjid.
- They should also try to avoid sacrificing cow and instead sacrifice another animal whenever possible.
- Hindus mobs that destroyed the Masjid have no right to take the law into their own hands.
- the government shouldn't pass laws to dictate religious choices/freedom bcuz it claims to be secular.

No one is being absolved here. U r merely directing some of the things I'm saying towards urself.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

U r letting ur personal feelings into this. I didn't mean to offend u or ur religion. It was just purely a discussion. I m not advocating for ONLY the sacrifice of cows. I'm just saying that his example isn't equivalent in all respects. Let me break it down further more objectively. Sacrificing Halal Animals(including cow) is a religious sacrament to commemorate Prophet Abraham's resolve where he was even willing to sacrifice his son in the way of God.

Halal animal sacrifice(including cows)
- A religious practice in Islam...not created to offend ppl of other religions

--> Interferes with Hinduism(Cow being considered holy)

Idolatory
- A Hindu practice that has existed for centuries...not created to offend Muslims.

--> Interferes with Islam(considered shirk...one of the worst sins)

Do u see the equivalency?

If ur government bans cow slaughter...shutting out one religion's practice to please the other than does that mean in a Muslim majority country like Pakistan we should ban Hindus from worshipping their gods bcuz it doesn't sit right with Muslims?

Now let's address the false equivalency I was talking about.

Drawing pictures of Prophet Muhammad(PBUH)
- Not part of Hinduism. If done then the sole purpose is to hurt/offend Muslims.

It would only apply correctly if for example animal sacrifice(including cows) wasn't an Islamic practice...and instead Indian Muslims just slaughtered cows to offend Hindus...then u can relate the two.

The point I'm trying to make is that it was ur forefathers that rallied behind Congress(pre-Independence)...ur ancestors who were all for a united India and that we shouldn't part ways and divide the country based on religion. They promised that religion has no part to play in the government. They disagreed with Jinnah and claimed that the religious freedom of Muslims will not be undermined in a Hindu majority India.

So now why is ur government trying to stop them from having their religious freedom(we have already established in the above argument that it's a pre-existing religious sacrament)? Shouldn't the current India follow through on all those promises made?

If not then perhaps it should announce to its subjects(Indian Muslims) that "Jinnah was right, Nehru/Gandhi were wrong...u made the wrong choice of trusting/siding with Congress and u don't belong here"

That way Muslims of India will know what to expect...and learn to live in a non secular Hindu India. Currently all their demands r based on their view of India as a secular state. It would solve a whole bunch of India's problems along religious lines if Indian Muslims know how the state is going to operate.

P.S. please keep it objective and civil if u choose to reply.

Of course. It was my mistake if I thought if you take our ur religious glasses to have an unbiased debate. But alas. Just like other Pakistanis.

Show me from Quran where killing of a cow is compulsory.?? If it does not then its not a Islamic practise to begin with. Your full answer become Null, cos there is nothing in Islamic religion specifically to slaughter cows.

And so just cos some new religion called Islam came in, the followers of oldest religions should give up Idolotary to please Muslims? For your information Hinduism, Buddhism or Jainism, Sikhism never advocate killing of people if anyone changes religion. That freedom allowed people to voluntarily convert to Islam. Is it the same in Islam? Its death. Simple. Its not even worth comparing.

I am not against slaughter of cows, per se. Lets say if India was united (Thank God we are not), the 5 provinces would have separate laws that allows killing of cows, just like its legal in Kerala, Goa, Bengal and North Eastern states. India has a federal structure. Each state govt is free to frame its own laws that reflects its own culture.
Muslims alone dont consume beef. Some Hindus, even some of my friends consume it out of their own volition. But again, the law of the land is supreme. If a state has banned cow slaughter, then the people of the state are free to support a party which will allow cow slaughter in next elections.

Drawing pictures of all Gods are part of Hinduism/Indian culture. Its just Muslims are insecure lot where they create a lots of problems for trifles.

 

[Sky lord]

Yes but choosing to sacrifice a goat instead of cow to respect/not harm another's feelings should come from the ppl...and not decided by the state. The moment a state starts deciding what to do or not to do in one's religion, it is no longer secular.

It "SHOULD" come from the people but it NEVER will -and EVERYONE knows that.

No Muslim community anywhere in the world has ever voluntarily made ANY accommodation to another religion unless they are either in a really tiny minority and hence very insecure or they are forced into it. I'll be happy if you can come up with examples - broadly of the community as a whole not of individual persons or small groups of decent people acting on their own. Decent individuals behave decently whatever their religion or have no religion - I am talking group dynamics.

Sometimes people have to be forced to do the right thing until it becomes a habit for them!

If it's still not apparent then I'll just boil it down in a few lines.
- Muslims should(as per the religion) show kindness and understand it is a holy site and relocate the Masjid.
- They should also try to avoid sacrificing cow and instead sacrifice another animal whenever possible.
- Hindus mobs that destroyed the Masjid have no right to take the law into their own hands.
- the government shouldn't pass laws to dictate religious choices/freedom bcuz it claims to be secular.

No one is being absolved here. U r merely directing some of the things I'm saying towards urself.

I agree with everything you said above.

I thought your argument was that India cannot call itself a secular country because it allowed demolition of babri?

In which case, l will personally argue that India cease to call itself secular ONE DAY AFTER all these folks and the supportive community behind them, who out of sheer meanness of spirit refuse to hand over land upon which stood the holiest of shrines of another religion, stop calling themselves Muslim. You have to agree that their actions are against the tenets of Islam.

Far from being magnanimous they are mean spirited
Far from giving respect, they do everything to humiliate
....and most amazingly, far from working for a living , as a community they lobby for a larger share of the taxes from these idolaters to provide them with freebies.

Obviously these people are not Muslim and they should stop calling themselves so.

 

[ashok321]

Truckloads Of Stones In Ayodhya and Chinese stand-off at Sikkim border.

Lol India.

 

[Sky lord]

Truckloads Of Stones In Ayodhya and Chinese stand-off at Sikkim border.

Lol India.

AMAZING. - look mommy - India doing two things at the same time

 

[Cookie Monster]

Of course. It was my mistake if I thought if you take our ur religious glasses to have an unbiased debate. But alas. Just like other Pakistanis.

Show me from Quran where killing of a cow is compulsory.?? If it does not then its not a Islamic practise to begin with. Your full answer become Null, cos there is nothing in Islamic religion specifically to slaughter cows.

I'm unable to answer that bcuz I'm not a religious scholar. U should perhaps research the subject and consult religious scholars before making such bold claims. Have u ever read the Quran? Here u r talking as if u r the authority on Islam and its teachings.

And so just cos some new religion called Islam came in, the followers of oldest religions should give up Idolotary to please Muslims?

I didn't ask u to stop idolatory. Quit putting words in my mouth. The point was that just like the state hasn't passed a law to please Muslims putting a ban on idolatory and u r free to carry out ur religious duties just like that...The state shouldn't pass a law banning cow slaughter and give Muslims freedom to practice their own religion...the state is not to interfere with religious matters...
...That is for as long as India is trying to be secular. If it instead becomes a Hindu state then having pro Hinduism laws are understandable.

Anyways let's just end this here. I can see by ur posts that u r having trouble keeping it objective.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

I'm unable to answer that bcuz I'm not a religious scholar. U should perhaps research the subject and consult religious scholars before making such bold claims. Have u ever read the Quran? Here u r talking as if u r the authority on Islam and its teachings.



I didn't ask u to stop idolatory. Quit putting words in my mouth. The point was that just like the state hasn't passed a law to please Muslims putting a ban on idolatory and u r free to carry out ur religious duties just like that...The state shouldn't pass a law banning cow slaughter and give Muslims freedom to practice their own religion...the state is not to interfere with religious matters...
...That is for as long as India is trying to be secular. If it instead becomes a Hindu state then having pro Hinduism laws are understandable.

Anyways let's just end this here. I can see by ur posts that u r having trouble keeping it objective.

How can you even compare idolatory to killing of cows? Its other religion way of praying, which as a Muslim you have no right to interfere.

I am not a scholar either, but I know the basics due to various debates in Indian television and PDF religious debates. Its not compulsory to sacrifice cows in Islam. Any animals except pigs.

 

[Cookie Monster]

No Muslim community anywhere in the world has ever voluntarily made ANY accommodation to another religion unless they are either in a really tiny minority and hence very insecure or they are forced into it. I'll be happy if you can come up with examples - broadly of the community as a whole not of individual persons or small groups of decent people acting on their own. Decent individuals behave decently whatever their religion or have no religion - I am talking group dynamics.

Sometimes people have to be forced to do the right thing until it becomes a habit for them!

Such a bold statement to claim that no Muslim community has ever accommodated the followers of any other religion. It is very biased. Though I personally don't follow around these Muslim communities to see what they r doing, I can certainly give u an example. Shortly after Islam came about and an Islamic Caliphate had formed it guaranteed that the followers of all other religions r free to live there and practice their religion.

The very same pagans(idol worshippers who lived in Mecca and around the Arabian Peninsula) who had punished and oppressed the early Muslims, were pardoned. In this Muslim empire(that expanded later and survived under various dynasties) there lived Christians, Jews and various others(Fire worshippers, Sun/stars worshippers, idol worshippers) for centuries. None were persecuted. Islam itself allows for religious freedom for all human beings. In Islam a person's choices(in terms of right and wrong/his faith) are for God to judge. A Muslim at best can only preach his/her message and that too only after he/she practices what he/she preaches. There is no compulsion for ppl of other religions living in Muslim countries to convert to islam or feel threatened in any way.

The only exceptions u will find where non Muslims in Muslim societies were persecuted are bcuz of certain monarchs(Nawab, Shah, Nizam, etc). Some of these monarchs despite being Muslims let their power go to their head and did whatever they pleased. Their actions are their own and do not reflect Islam and its teachings.