Was Jinnah secular or not?

[padamchen]

It's because I refuse to engage in your paradigm.

The trail of taught that you want to lead me through only ends up one place and that is your wish to treat Muslims as lesser then.

I will state my position again so there is no confusion.
All humans are equal and the government should treat them equally regardless of religion, race, etc etc.

That is your personal opinion. And it is admirable.

But

All non Muslim minorities in Pakistan also probably share your sentiments. But still the laws of an Islamic Republic mean that they do not enjoy the equal rights you enjoy as a minority in a secular western country.

Such secular western countries could take you and millions of emigrants like you on your word, as as outliers who are against the policies of their parent nations.

But

How then do they force change in countries like yours?

Those of you living inside those countries should be the agents of change.

If you give up and move to other countries, you are doing a disservice to minorities such as yourself in your own country back home.

It is much easier and less expensive and violent than regime change and revolution and bringing democracy to Islamic countries from the seas and the skies.

Be the agent of the change you wish.

Do to others what you've grown accustomed to others doing to and for you.

 

[VCheng]

Any Sharia as far as Ahle-Sunnat is concerned can be Derived from Holy Quran, Bukharia Sharif and Muslim Sharief Hadeeth books as these are Principle books agreed upon by all those sects (Brelvis, Deobandis, Ahle-Hadeeths) who Identify with Ahle-Sunnat. A Commission can Easily Derive an Islamic Basic Law from these Books and no one in their right mind will Question it. On matters which are not mentioned there use common law followed by Rest of the world. Most of Shia and Sunni basic law will be same as Fundamentals of Islam are same on matters where there will be Difference's of Opinion Eg. Zakat a Dual Mechanism could be made.

This may not be as easy as it sounds above. The real question to be answered is whether any government can balance equal rights for all its citizens and enforcing a religion by force of law.

 

[Jackdaws]

He was an astute politician. He was also largely secular. Like Ambedkar wanted to secure rights for Dalits, Jinnah too wanted to do the same for Muslims. His demand for a separate state was negotiable as seen from the acceptance of the Cabinet Mission Plan. But his demands were not reasonable. He also expected all of Punjab, all of Bengal, Hyderabad. The size of the Pakistan he expected was almost as big as India. That didn't work out for him.

 

[Rusty]

That is your personal opinion. And it is admirable.

But

All non Muslim minorities in Pakistan also probably share your sentiments. But still the laws of an Islamic Republic mean that they do not enjoy the equal rights you enjoy as a minority in a secular western country.

Such secular western countries could take you and millions of emigrants like you on your word, as as outliers who are against the policies of their parent nations.

But

How then do they force change in countries like yours?

Those of you living inside those countries should be the agents of change.

If you give up and move to other countries, you are doing a disservice to minorities such as yourself in your own country back home.

It is much easier and less expensive and violent than regime change and revolution and bringing democracy to Islamic countries from the seas and the skies.

Be the agent of the change you wish.

Do to others what you've grown accustomed to others doing to and for you.

That is such a twisted way at looking at things especially since India is actually making anti Muslim laws and enforcing it.

The core of your argument is that common people (like me) who have no power (as a single person) to change the laws or enforcement, should be punished by other countries for the wrong ideas of the state.

And again, the only reason you believe this is because you want it to be uniquely applied to Muslims only.
You don't want western secular countries to lynch Hindus over beef or force Chinese immigrants to be communist.


As for forcing change, need I remind you that while this is happening in Pakistan

This is happening in India

The only country needs to be forced right now is India.

I am fully willing to have a discussion about Pakistani laws and minorities, but talking to an Indian is like talking to a nazi about minority rights.
You people don't really have a leg to stand on.

 

[padamchen]

That is such a twisted way at looking at things especially since India is actually making anti Muslim laws and enforcing it.

The core of your argument is that common people (like me) who have no power (as a single person) to change the laws or enforcement, should be punished by other countries for the wrong ideas of the state.

And again, the only reason you believe this is because you want it to be uniquely applied to Muslims only.
You don't want western secular countries to lynch Hindus over beef or force Chinese immigrants to be communist.


As for forcing change, need I remind you that while this is happening in Pakistan

This is happening in India

The only country needs to be forced right now is India.

I am fully willing to have a discussion about Pakistani laws and minorities, but talking to an Indian is like talking to a nazi about minority rights.
You people don't really have a leg to stand on.

Thank you for your reply.

Firstly, no, I am not talking about Muslims only. That is probably an innate guilt complex chiming in.

My paradigm has always been that in the days to follow, with nations tightening their borders, and different nations having very different moral axes to minorities, immigrants from parent countries should expect the same treatment abroad in countries they attempt to move to as what is meted out to minorities of the SAME faith as the foreign country they are moving to.

Quid pro quo.

I used Islamic countries as a blanket example and then narrowed it down to the specifics of Pakistan because these are consistently not secular.

Countries dominated by all other major faiths are not so. But for outliers, like say China, Russia, Israel, India, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, where say you feel Muslims are feeling the brunt, then sure immigrants of those countries should be treated similar in any Islamic country.

Coming back to Pakistan. The Christians are usually reserved for menial labour, like sanitation workers (jamadars). A Christian country like Canada should therefore exclusively offer such job prospects to Pakistani immigrants.

 

[Rusty]

Thank you for your reply.

Firstly, no, I am not talking about Muslims only. That is probably an innate guilt complex chiming in.

My paradigm has always been that in the days to follow, with nations tightening their borders, and different nations having very different moral axes to minorities, immigrants from parent countries should expect the same treatment abroad in countries they attempt to move to as what is meted out to minorities of the SAME faith as the foreign country they are moving to.

Quid pro quo.

No, just no.
I am not going to give up my morality humanity in an unwinnable and frankly, childish, notion of Quid pro Quo

And logistically, lets say it happens, you would then have to have an entire government department tracking nearly 200 countries and then applying those same conditions on their own minorities.
You could just save that money and spend it on the betterment of your people... which Canada does and look how much better minorities are here compared to the rest of the world.

Again, I urge you to rethink this silliness. It will lead you nowhere good.

I used Islamic countries as a blanket example and then narrowed it down to the specifics of Pakistan because these are consistently not secular.

Countries dominated by all other major faiths are not so. But for outliers, like say China, Russia, Israel, India, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, where say you feel Muslims are feeling the brunt, then sure immigrants of those countries should be treated similar in any Islamic country.

Coming back to Pakistan. The Christians are usually reserved for menial labour, like sanitation workers (jamadars). A Christian country like Canada should therefore exclusively offer such job prospects to Pakistani immigrants.

What does consistently non secular mean?
Could you tell us?
There only two laws in Pakistan that I see are not secular.
1. Blasphemy law - but majority of that is applied to Muslims (I still think it's wrong)
2. Ahmady laws - but that only identifies them, does not stop them from living their lives (again, I still oppose it)
Outside of this Pakistani laws protect minorities just as much as secular nations.

The natural comparison is to India, which literally has made laws against Muslims (no matter how you sell it, it is an Anti Muslim law)
So I hope you understand how it's hard for me to take secular talk seriously from Indians.

As for the jamadar, that is proof that you really have no Idea about Pakistan or its society.

There is no christian reservation for those jobs.
It's just that they happen to be filled by Christians.
It's like saying a farmer's son is a farmer.
Sure, he might be, but there is no law that says he has to be.

Heck, local governments are even forcing diversity in hiring more non Christians and one time there was add to hire a Christian jamidar which was stopped after a massive outrage by Muslims in Muslim majority Pakistan.

I want to emphasis again that India and Pakistan are so incomparable that the worst you really have said about it is that more Christians work as jamadars, while I have shown you pictures of riots and anti Muslim mobs in India.

I will take it on good faith that you don't hate Muslim, but your arguments are pretty weak against Pakistan when compared to India.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

No, just no.
I am not going to give up my morality humanity in an unwinnable and frankly, childish, notion of Quid pro Quo

And logistically, lets say it happens, you would then have to have an entire government department tracking nearly 200 countries and then applying those same conditions on their own minorities.
You could just save that money and spend it on the betterment of your people... which Canada does and look how much better minorities are here compared to the rest of the world.

Again, I urge you to rethink this silliness. It will lead you nowhere good.






What does consistently non secular mean?
Could you tell us?
There only two laws in Pakistan that I see are not secular.
1. Blasphemy law - but majority of that is applied to Muslims (I still think it's wrong)
2. Ahmady laws - but that only identifies them, does not stop them from living their lives (again, I still oppose it)
Outside of this Pakistani laws protect minorities just as much as secular nations.

The natural comparison is to India, which literally has made laws against Muslims (no matter how you sell it, it is an Anti Muslim law)
So I hope you understand how it's hard for me to take secular talk seriously from Indians.

As for the jamadar, that is proof that you really have no Idea about Pakistan or its society.

There is no christian reservation for those jobs.
It's just that they happen to be filled by Christians.
It's like saying a farmer's son is a farmer.
Sure, he might be, but there is no law that says he has to be.

Heck, local governments are even forcing diversity in hiring more non Christians and one time there was add to hire a Christian jamidar which was stopped after a massive outrage by Muslims in Muslim majority Pakistan.

I want to emphasis again that India and Pakistan are so incomparable that the worst you really have said about it is that more Christians work as jamadars, while I have shown you pictures of riots and anti Muslim mobs in India.

I will take it on good faith that you don't hate Muslim, but your arguments are pretty weak against Pakistan when compared to India.

@Shantanu_Left Check this excellent post by our friend Rusty.

 

[Shantanu_Left]

@Shantanu_Left Check this excellent post by our friend Rusty.

Oh I love reading Rusty's posts. He's 100 times better than you. He's the kind of Pakistani I prefer dealing with.

I never said you following Islam is something I would oppose. It's you that is putting words in my mouth.

Again watch that scene from Sarfarosh: "Pakistan say zayad Musalman yahan Hindustan mein hai" so that argument you guys use is specious. And it's Aamir Khan saying that dialogue, I don't think he's a lesser Muslim than anyone. Wouldn't you agree that much?

 

[Vapnope]

This question and a quest for Jinnah's identity would continue to bug people who love to read history. There is nothing wrong to spend time to find out an answer the only problem i see here is that people take extreme positions when trying to find out the answer to this question.

I personally believe Jinnah was a modern muslim who was a rationalist. His opposition to blasphemy law is well documented in 1921 however his statement regarding Pakistan an islamic laboratory is well documented as well. I personally believe that he envisioned a modern muslim state but never an islamist governmental style.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Oh I love reading Rusty's posts. He's 100 times better than you. He's the kind of Pakistani I prefer dealing with.

I never said you following Islam is something I would oppose. It's you that is putting words in my mouth.

Again watch that scene from Sarfarosh: "Pakistan say zayad Musalman yahan Hindustan mein hai" so that argument you guys use is specious. And it's Aamir Khan saying that dialogue, I don't think he's a lesser Muslim than anyone. Wouldn't you agree that much?

Seriously man, are you some kind of child?

Pakistanis come in various types, you cannot pick and choose your own. It is not like buffet style, make your own Pakistani. Lol.

@Rusty Is my dear brother, we are all same here in Pakistan. We have loyalty for this country and for our people.

Read the exchange here, because you seem to have missed why I tagged you here.

Don't follow the missteps of your compatriots like Doc.

 

[padamchen]

Seriously man, are you some kind of child?

Pakistanis come in various types, you cannot pick and choose your own. It is not like buffet style, make your own Pakistani. Lol.

@Rusty Is my dear brother, we are all same here in Pakistan. We have loyalty for this country and for our people.

Read the exchange here, because you seem to have missed why I tagged you here.

Don't follow the missteps of your compatriots like Doc.

You seem miffed since I reported you.

Im sorry. It was a stupid schoolboy thing to do.

 

[Shantanu_Left]

Seriously man, are you some kind of child?

Pakistanis come in various types, you cannot pick and choose your own. It is not like buffet style, make your own Pakistani. Lol.

I pick and choose people ALL THE TIME. Everyone else should do it as well. Believe me it saves you a lot of time.

I had once thought you would make a great friend but you have greatly disappointed me. You have such rigid, religious fundamentalist views that it's impossible to deal with you.

As I said a lot of Pakistanis I know don't even use the word "Inshallah". Of course they're Muslims, that's not what I have a problem with, Only you would think that way because you're a religious fanatic.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

I pick and choose people ALL THE TIME. Everyone else should do it as well.

I had once thought you would make a great friend but you have greatly disappointed me.

No worries. My loyalty is to my faith and my country.

If you don't like my positive views on Afghans and Pukhtoons or Islam, I am not going to change for you. That would be an unreasonable expectation.

If you cannot engage with members who are a different political, religious, ethnic spectrum than you, then who here is the illiberal and close-minded bigot?

You are on a Pakistani forum, yet here you are telling Pakistanis how to think, how to view our founding father, how to not befriend our neighboring countries, how to change our government, and how to distance ourselves from our religion.

Unreasonable may be an understatement.

You seem miffed since I reported you.

Im sorry. It was a stupid schoolboy thing to do.

No, I am not. That was expected from you.

I just oppose your views on this thread. Think nothing more of it and carry on.

 

[padamchen]

No worries. My loyalty is to my faith and my country.

If you don't like my positive views on Afghans and Pukhtoons or Islam, I am not going to change for you. That would be an unreasonable expectation.

If you cannot engage with members who are a different political, religious, ethnic spectrum than you, then who here is the illiberal and close-minded bigot?

You are on a Pakistani forum, yet here you are telling Pakistanis how to think, how to view our founding father, how to not befriend our neighboring countries, how to change our government, and how to distance ourselves from our religion.

Unreasonable may be an understatement.



No, I am not. That was expected from you.

I just oppose your views on this thread. Think nothing more of it and carry on.

No you are miffed.

Our active exchanges stopped post that.

The funny bit is that it was I who got a 2 week ban. Lol

This is PDF after all. No worries.

We are our country's soldiers, engaging on enemy territory.

Casualties are expected.

 

[Shantanu_Left]

No worries. My loyalty is to my faith and my country.

You should. I won't respect any man who doesn't.

If you don't like my positive views on Afghans and Pukhtoons or Islam, I am not going to change for you. That would be an unreasonable expectation.

Again you're accusing me of Islamophobia just because it suits your narrative. For the last time, I'm not anti-Muslim.

I may be prejudiced against the Afghans due to personal reasons (more of bitter experiences) but I won't stop anyone from loving them. As we have seen in a previous thread, not all Pakistanis love Afghans like you do.

I said "I had thought" you would make a great friend. Between Afghans and Indians, you can choose only one as far as I am concerned. That's not an unreasonable expectation. I don't care if you are friends with Iranians, Arabs, Turks, Malaysians whatever.

Now these are just my personal views. Don't try to pass them for my general views about Pakistan.

If you cannot engage with members who are a different political, religious, ethnic spectrum than you, then who here is the illiberal and close-minded bigot?

I am engaging with you, am not I?

You are on a Pakistani forum, yet here you are telling Pakistanis how to think, how to view our founding father, how to not befriend our neighboring countries, how to change our government, and how to distance ourselves from our religion.

I never said how Pakistanis should view their founding father. I only narrated what Indian Congress thinks of Jinnah's two nation theory. That's a huge difference.

I also never said that Pakistanis should distance from their religion.

You are a champion of misquoting others.