Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dillema of Theocratic Pakistan.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Dillema of Theocratic Pakistan.

    Since Pakistan is a theocratic or Muslim State. it follows:
    1. There can be only one Party.. "Muslim Party"

    2. Only muslims can be members of this party.

    3. What is the definition of muslim? Some one has to decide that. " Who better than the Government of Pakistan" but wait, the Government can change because one day we will have elections. New people will have new ideas and the official definition will change. ( too much Jhagra )

    4. Why not define a muslim and include that in the constitiution?

    5. But then who will ratify the constitution. We need elected representative to adopt a constitution.

    6. So lets have an fre and fair election.

    7. But then we need only a "True Muslim Party" to field candidates for the election.

    8. But now I need to know who is a true Muslim???

    AB KYA KARAI-N LETS US THINK???


    #2
    Your first assumption is wrong so I won't comment any further.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by khan_sahib:
      Your first assumption is wrong so I won't comment any further.
      Me too

      Comment


        #4
        agee with Khan_sahib (Pakistan, a country with well over 70 political parties)
        There are only two forces in the world, the sword and the spirit. In the end the sword will always be conquered by the spirit. --Napoleon Bonaparte

        Comment


          #5
          All his assumptions are wrong. Period.

          ------------------
          Our's not to reason why,
          Our's but to do and die:
          You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

          Comment


            #6
            Dosto , I hve made only one assumption. Pakistan is a Theocratic State.

            This means that all laws will be based on Islam.

            The rest of my post are logical deductions from that one assumption. Which is really a fact.

            For example:

            Since all laws are based on Islam, and there is only one Islam, and that is in the constitution.

            It is logical then that all we need is just one party. Parties that interpret Islam differently, will find their platform considered un-constitutional. So all the parties in Pakistan are really one party with different people.

            I was noticing the religious violence in Pakistan and so I was trying analyse and discuss the problems of theocratic states, of which there are only a handful in the world.

            For example Israel. Look at the difficulties the Palistinians, living inside Israel as citizens, face every day.

            Similary , but not to the same degree, the Quadianis and the Ahmedis etc. face in Pakistan.

            Similarly the problems in Afganistan are well known.

            Doesn't that say something about the mixture of religion and politics. People will be peole and will have their own views of Islam. But shouldnt the state as a representative of the whole country stay out of it and be fair to all its citizens.

            Yes, I was being a bit facetious (using the chicken or the egg as a parody) just to bring out the difficulties of theocratic states. The intent was to proke dialog. I apologise if it appeared anything else.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Tanhaa:
              Since all laws are based on Islam, and there is only one Islam, and that is in the constitution.

              It is logical then that all we need is just one party. Parties that interpret Islam differently, will find their platform considered un-constitutional. So all the parties in Pakistan are really one party with different people
              Not at all true. There has never been any effort to standardise on one interpretation of Islam to the exclusion of all others; in fact, leading Muslim scholars have spoken out for over 1000 years against codification of Islamic Law. Any interpretation of Islam which is derived from the Quran and the Hadith (the record of what the Prophet (pbuh) said and did) cannot be considered to be incorrect. This flexibility in interpretation is one of the ways in which Islam has been protected against corruption; should there be only one interpretation, that is not allowed to be altered, then should that be corrupted it would be impossible to rectify it.

              Historically, there have been 5 main schools (4 Sunni and 1 Shia) of thought in Islam. States that follow Islamic Law generally choose one of these 5 to draw their laws from. However, this does not mean that by default they consider the other 4 to be incorrect and unacceptable as Islam. Similarly, it is not obligatory for the State to only use rulings from one school of thought. Should the appropriate authorities feel that the State's official school of thought makes a ruling in one matter which is not as strongly supported by the Quran and Hadith as that of another school, then the ruling of the other school may be adopted instead.
              Muslims are so good at dividing that they can divide the atom. If you see two Muslims, probably they belong to 3 parties.
              Al-Ghazali

              Comment


                #8
                Ok Mad Scientist, Thanks for the information. I will certainly read more about Pakistani Laws. Can you suggest any links? Also please explain what is the real situation about Quaidianis and Ahmedis and Mojahirs in Pakistan. Is their official discrimination meaning and curtailed priveleges for people of these groups.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Tanhaa:
                  Ok Mad Scientist, Thanks for the information. I will certainly read more about Pakistani Laws. Can you suggest any links? Also please explain what is the real situation about Quaidianis and Ahmedis and Mojahirs in Pakistan. Is their official discrimination meaning and curtailed priveleges for people of these groups.
                  Tanha,

                  You are one Indian muslim,who is not only born in Hindu India ,but went through there education system.
                  What Pakistan means by Islamic Republic is not what India considers is THEOCRATIC.

                  There may be over 30 Islamic countries,DO YOU THINK THEY ARE ALL ALIKE IF YOUR INDIAN CLASSIFIES ALL OF THEM THEOCRATIC????????????????


                  Do you think ,Algerian constitution,is same as Malaysian is same as Indonesian, is same as Libyan????????????????????????NOT AT ALL


                  There is no more religous party in these Islamic republic than "SO CALLED SECULAR INDIA," In fact none of thses Islamic republics fromIndonesia to Morocco ,have majority seats occupied by Islamic party as it is occupied by Hindutva party in India!!!!!!!!!!!Being secular India ,Bharat ,have more federal holidays for religion(mostly Hindu RELIGION) than any other country
                  Secular = detached from religion,irrespective of,religion has no play....IS IT TRUE FOR INDIA WHERE MOSQUE IS DEMOLISHED TO MAKE MANDIR>What kind of secularism is that bhai.On onehand Religion is no factor constitutionally on the other hand all 100% of 1bn.Indian are engrossed,in the thick of one RELIGION or another.Get that defenition out first ,which they never taught you in the paatshaala,by the punditji under the banyan tree LOL
                  ------------------

                  Woh afsaana jise anjaam tak, laana na ho mumkin
                  Use ek KHoobsoorat moR dekar, chhoRna achha

                  [This message has been edited by FYI (edited July 20, 2001).]

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Tanhaa:
                    Ok Mad Scientist, Thanks for the information. I will certainly read more about Pakistani Laws. Can you suggest any links? Also please explain what is the real situation about Quaidianis and Ahmedis and Mojahirs in Pakistan. Is their official discrimination meaning and curtailed priveleges for people of these groups.
                    Hmmm I don't know any links that I could give you. Incidentally, Pakistan cannot be considered to be a theocracy - complete implementation of religious law has sadly not yet been implmented.

                    Here is an explanation of the Qadianis, from http://www.ourdialogue.com/q1.htm#1

                    Qadiyanism is a movement started in a town called Qadiyan in India by a man called Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. It later split into two factions, one of which called itself after the founder, hence the name Ahmadiya. Both, however, share the same deviant beliefs which ascribe the status of Prophethood to their man. It is well known that Qur'an makes it clear that Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, is the last in the line of prophets. This is stated clearly in Verse 40 of Surah 33, entitled Al-Ahzab or the Confederates [or the Clan]. In this verse God describes Muhammad as "God's messenger and the last of all prophets."

                    The Ahmadis and Qadiyanis claim to be Muslims, alleging that their movement is the second mission of the message of Islam and their man, Ghulam Ahmad, is God's messenger.

                    They try to reconcile this with the above quoted Qur'anic verse by saying that the Arabic word denoting 'last,' in the above verse means 'seal,' which means that Muhammad serves as the seal which endorses every new message. This is twisted logic, by a person who has tried to justify his false claims by giving a special meaning to the words of a language he did not speak. The Arabic word does have the connotations of a 'seal' but in the sense of 'putting an end to something, or bringing it to completeness that admits of no additions.' It is like a letter that has been signed and put in an envelope which is then sealed. You cannot add anything to that letter unless you break its seal.

                    The origins of the Ahmadiya go back to the day of the British rule in India, when the British colonial power sought to counter the notion of jihad among Muslims. This is the basic difference that the Ahmadiya brought.

                    The assigning of Prophethood to Mirza and the removal of the notion of jihad, which is a basic principle of the faith of Islam, takes them out of Islam altogether. They are not considered Muslims by any Muslim country or any Islamic authority. However, they are very active in preaching their falsehood and they have followers in different countries, particularly in Africa. They have gathered a momentum of their own and they are dedicated to their falsehood in a way which makes one sorry for them. Had they shown similar dedication in promoting the message of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, without trying to alter or distort it, they should have achieved much. In their misguided enthusiasm, they only turn people away from the truth and they earn God's displeasure.

                    ***************************

                    As for Mohajirs, they are Muslims from India who declined to live under Hindu dominated rule and moved to Pakistan. What you often hear of discrimination against Mohajirs in Pakistan is normally propaganda spread by the MQM. I come from a Mohajir family myself (my family originates from Hyderabad Deccan) and people in my family have never suffered the discrimination that Mr. Altaf Hussain makes up. We have had no problem in getting 2 generations into Pakistan's finest universities, no problems getting employment, many many people in my family have served as officers in the Armed Forces and achieved senior ranks......

                    In short, Altaf Hussain makes up figures and situations to try and use Pakistan's Mohajir population as a tool to achieve power.

                    And of course, the ridiculous notion that Mohajirs are discriminated against in Pakistan is completely disspelled by the fact that President General Pervez Musharraf, the Head of State and the leader of the nation's armed forces, is a Mohajir himself!!!!!
                    Muslims are so good at dividing that they can divide the atom. If you see two Muslims, probably they belong to 3 parties.
                    Al-Ghazali

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Medic FACTING well done!!
                      That was a beauty of a post!

                      ------------------
                      Our's not to reason why,
                      Our's but to do and die:
                      You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

                      Comment


                        #12
                        jinnah had a different vision for pakistan
                        which is hijacked . he wanted a homeland for muslim where they can live free without
                        fear of dicrimination. now in pakistan
                        if you dont belong to certain sect you are not part of the nation. where the shia's
                        ahamadiyas can go ?
                        question is is pakisatni is nationality or
                        some religious identity?cananybody be pakistani regardless of religious background?
                        can a head of state of pakistani be from
                        a non-muslim? india chose zakir hussain
                        as president of india ? technically a muslim can become primeminster of india.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Q. How would you compare the state of religious tolerance and equality of opportunity between India and Pakistan?


                          With deep regret I have to admit that there is no comparison. India is a proven secular country and the state of religious tolerance and equality is far better than that of Pakistan.
                          Group Captain Cecil Chaudhry, SJ

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by rvikz:
                            jinnah had a different vision for pakistan
                            which is hijacked . he wanted a homeland for muslim where they can live free without
                            fear of dicrimination. now in pakistan
                            if you dont belong to certain sect you are not part of the nation. where the shia's
                            ahamadiyas can go ?
                            question is is pakisatni is nationality or
                            some religious identity?cananybody be pakistani regardless of religious background?
                            can a head of state of pakistani be from
                            a non-muslim? india chose zakir hussain
                            as president of india ? technically a muslim can become primeminster of india.
                            Shia Muslims are very much Pakistani. They are not placed under any government discrimination and are legally entitled to all of the same rights as any of Pakistan's muslims. Legally, there is no job in Pakistan that is denied to Shia muslims. They are present in large numbers in all walks of Pakistani life. In culture, education, government and the Armed Forces.

                            Any discrimination they face is entirely the work of private individual who are part of the sectarian outfits that the government of Pakistan is dedicated to eradicating.

                            Jinnah wanted a homeland for Muslims. Qadianis are not muslims. You explain their views to any muslim scholar anywhere in the world and he/she will confirm that Qadianins are not muslims.

                            Pakistan is a nationality. Islam is the religion of Pakistan. The two are not one and the same.

                            Anyone can be Pakistani regardless of whether they are Muslim or not. Hence you have not only Muslim Pakistanis, but also Christian Pakistanis, Qadiani Pakistanis, Hindu Pakistanis and Sikh Pakistanis.

                            Pakistan's consitution prohibits non-muslims from being head of state as they would be a threat to Pakistan's identity as an Islam-orientated state.
                            Muslims are so good at dividing that they can divide the atom. If you see two Muslims, probably they belong to 3 parties.
                            Al-Ghazali

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X