Front line 13th November 2010 - Orya Maqbool Jaan, Rubeena Sehgal, Sajjad Mir and Others (Good Progr

Tanker

New Member
lol, yes you live in US and we live in Pakistan ..... and we know shit..lol what a nice way to respond back..no logic just making other people get to know how privileged you are living in US...dude i have visited the states im talking about..Texas and all the other red neck states in the midwest...For your denial i have this link for you.get educated
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_law

and dont try to run off.. everyone cann what you wrote above.
lol...


AND REPLY COMPETLELY TO A POST TO ALL THE POINTS RAISED
WE ARE NOT DUMMIES JUST TYPING HERE WHILE YOU MAKE NO SENSE AT ALL

bro u definitely dont know ted sh** abt other countries! i live in US and i can say it with 200% surety that no county, city or state has any religious rule that prohibits u to drink on sunday (bcoz of church or whatever reason) so ur knowledge abt other countries atleast abt US seems to be O or maybe a negative value!
secondly i mentioned Iran islamic model in reply to a post by a guriji who said that secularism is good but wont work with paistan..then only i tried to bring up the example of an islamic country Iran which is strictly based on Islamic ideas (on the most part) to show that even such an Islamic model wont work in pakistan bcoz there is so much tension between each religious sector in our country!
get my point? now plz dont pass fatwas like hotdogs on foodball game and have the b**ls to take others opinions and arguments!
god bless!
 

mistehbab

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

oh bhai mere secular state has nothings against Islam or any other religion!i love islam and my Allah but i dont want a country to become a religious police or something! i am for secular state not secularism/atheism for religion for god's sake why do you people get on the edge so quickly??
all i am trying to say is that secular state , a state which is neutral to all religions and treats all citizens of its country equally regardless of their religions background and does not interfere with the religions beliefs of anyone, is the best model of state! examples are US, UK, France, Japan, Russia, Australia, Germany, China, Canada etc etc
god the more i get to know how less my people are ready to listen to others' views and how intolerant they are makes me really sad for paistan's future!
no wonder taliban whips girls and boys in public under the false umbrella of religion!
god bless pakistan but i am getting less and less optimistic about its future!
@tiger54: Your words don't make sense, at all. You say one thing. Then you say another thing. Then you say yet another thing. And then later on you say yet another thing. And you tend to do this endlessly. You'r the one not taking the time to understand what I'm saying.

How does a man become intolerant by replying to your comment ? Who's not listening to you ?

How do you substantiate ALL of the following claims in your comment quoted above ?

(1) secular state has nothings against Islam or any other religion
(a) How do you substantiate this claim ?

(b) When you 'tell' Muslims to accept one part of Islam and reject the other, your not 'telling' Muslims to stop adhering to Islam (its guidelines, ways, standards, principles, teachings, rules, laws) ?

Tell me how your not doing that ?

(c) A secular state wants to separate Islam from power. This is against guidelines, ways, standards, principles, teachings, rules, laws of Islam. There is no separation of Islam from power in Islam, inside a Muslim state.

If we Muslims do what you want us to do, that'd mean we Muslims no longer adhere to Islam. Yet, you want Muslims to do this. And then you claim you have nothing against Islam, against Muslims ? You are contradicting your own words.

(d) Do you think a 'Muslim' is that person, who adheres to Islam (its guidelines, ways, standards, principles, teachings, rules, laws), to that which ALLAH ALMIGHTY says (to guidelines, ways, standards, principles, teachings, rules, laws that ALLAH ALMIGHTY has put forward) or one who adheres to that which any other human says ?

(e) Who do you call a 'Muslim' ? What is the definition of a 'Muslim' ?

(f) Who do you call a 'non-Muslim' ? What is the definition of a 'non-Muslim' ?

(2) i dont want a country to become a religious police or something!
You seem to be confused. What do you mean by this ?

(3) i am for secular state not secularism/atheism for religion
Again, you seem to be confused. What do you mean by this ?

(4) a state which is neutral to all religions
Is this even possible ? There has been no state in ALL of history of mankind, as well as in the present world that is neutral to all religions or DEEN. This is an unsubstantiated myth at best.

How do you substantiate this claim ?

(5) treats all citizens of its country equally regardless of their religions background
Is this even possible ? There has been no state in ALL of history of mankind, as well as in the present world that is neutral to all citizens regardless of their religion or DEEN. This is an unsubstantiated myth at best.

How do you substantiate this claim ?

(6) does not interfere with the religions beliefs of anyone, is the best model of state! examples are US, UK, France, Japan, Russia, Australia, Germany, China, Canada etc etc
(a) Wrong!. Most if not all of these nation states do! interfere in religious beliefs of people. I can prove it to you

(b) How do you substantiate this claim ?

(c) You seem to be 'implying' the fact that these 'nation states' (US, UK, France, Japan, Russia, Australia, Germany, China, Canada etc etc) are 'plural' in nature. How do you substantiate this claim ?

(d) Do you understand the concept of a 'plural state' ? What is it ? What is the definition of a 'plural state' ?

(e) Prove to me that these 'nation states' (US, UK, France, Japan, Russia, Australia, Germany, China, Canada etc etc) are 'plural' ?


In light of history of mankind, as well as that which is going on in reality today, most of what you are saying is not true, is a myth at best. You need to substantiate your claims.
 
Last edited:

Urooj_lbw

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
they don't understand, what secularism is, audience in this show believe that cutting off with Islam is secularism, so i have no idea, what to discuss really with them
 

mistehbab

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

@Urooj_lbw: Perhaps you do know what secularism is. What is 'secularism' ?
 
Last edited:

GuruJi

Citizen
One of the very fundamental belief is the Day Of Judgment when every one will be called to account for their actions on an individual basis. Keeping this in mind on the Day of Judgment:

Will the individual be able to argue that he/she followed all the laws of an Islamic state therefore its not necessary to explain individual actions, how will you be able argue against your unlawful actions if the are sanctioned by the state.

Will an Individual be still called to account if he/she has lived all their life following the rules of an Islamic State? if yes than way?

Is it better if the state do not interfere with the Individual and allow him/her to follow the path, seek knowledge, consult and act on the basis therefore he/she is in a best position to answer on the Day of Judgment. Only under a secular adminstration this will be possible. Secularism does not prevent the a state to help provide its citizens with tools of knowledge and research.

Is it reasonable for an individual to discharge the responsibility of religion/deen upon the State and then be unconcerned of the Judgment day?

Is a State accountable on the Day of Judgment.
 

zubair.maalick

MPA (400+ posts)
Dear Tiger,
Just one question to clarify your idea of Secular state ....
Does your Secular state means ... On one side of road ther is Masjid and on the other side is Bar .. jis ko jahan jana hai jye koi rok took nahi state ki traf se???
that is what I understand from your posts (may b Im wrong)... please clarify ...

One thing I want to comment: when we said "freedom to all religions to practice their religion" .. During khilafat era Non Muslims had full rights to practice their religion freely, infect shariat defines how government should deal with non muslim minorities ... so why Secular state for this purpose when it is also addressed in shariat based government in detail ...???
 

tiger54

MPA (400+ posts)
oh i dont see why not? in most of the developed countries where i have been to or have lived including Canada, US , England and Germany i have seen many places where there is a church/mosque/mandir on the same street where there is a pub/night club/theater whatever
i wldnt want the govt to interfere in these matters!
and if secular state is giving u equal rights regardless of ur religion then whats ur problem with a secular state?
i have lived in a very strict islamic country Saudia Arabia and i found it extremely terrible that during salah times all shops and malls were closed and "mutawas" religions police patroled around the cities forcing people to go to salah even if they didnt want to!
now thats when a state pokes its nose unnecessary in religious matters and thats completely wrong!!
hope u get my point!

Dear Tiger,
Just one question to clarify your idea of Secular state ....
Does your Secular state means ... On one side of road ther is Masjid and on the other side is Bar .. jis ko jahan jana hai jye koi rok took nahi state ki traf se???
that is what I understand from your posts (may b Im wrong)... please clarify ...

One thing I want to comment: when we said "freedom to all religions to practice their religion" .. During khilafat era Non Muslims had full rights to practice their religion freely, infect shariat defines how government should deal with non muslim minorities ... so why Secular state for this purpose when it is also addressed in shariat based government in detail ...???
 

tiger54

MPA (400+ posts)
oh yeah im tired of trying to tell these nut brains what i mean. they think i am saying something anti-islamic!
typical taliban mentality lol
they don't understand, what secularism is, audience in this show believe that cutting off with Islam is secularism, so i have no idea, what to discuss really with them
 

tiger54

MPA (400+ posts)
great argument guruji!
i am proud to be a resident of a secular and free country where i can do what i want and the state doesnt interfere in business thats between me and my god!
havnt v seen the what this "shariah law" did to one of our our most beutiful state in pakistan called swat??
girls and boys were being publicly lashed and beaten in the name of Islam. now if thats what u want with an islamic state then sorry mates i have to say i am against shariah law lol

One of the very fundamental belief is the Day Of Judgment when every one will be called to account for their actions on an individual basis. Keeping this in mind on the Day of Judgment:

Will the individual be able to argue that he/she followed all the laws of an Islamic state therefore its not necessary to explain individual actions, how will you be able argue against your unlawful actions if the are sanctioned by the state.

Will an Individual be still called to account if he/she has lived all their life following the rules of an Islamic State? if yes than way?

Is it better if the state do not interfere with the Individual and allow him/her to follow the path, seek knowledge, consult and act on the basis therefore he/she is in a best position to answer on the Day of Judgment. Only under a secular adminstration this will be possible. Secularism does not prevent the a state to help provide its citizens with tools of knowledge and research.

Is it reasonable for an individual to discharge the responsibility of religion/deen upon the State and then be unconcerned of the Judgment day?

Is a State accountable on the Day of Judgment.
 

Abdul Allah

Minister (2k+ posts)
Tiger
[FONT=Helvetica, Arial]Quran 24:2[/FONT] [FONT=Helvetica, Arial]2. The woman and the man guilty of illegal sexual intercourse, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not pity withhold you in their case, in a punishment prescribed by Allh, if you believe in Allh and the Last Day. And let a party of the believers witness their punishment.[/FONT]

Now please tell us Allah ask this.
so please tell us who should have the right to do it you, me or the the state?


great argument guruji!
i am proud to be a resident of a secular and free country where i can do what i want and the state doesnt interfere in business thats between me and my god!
havnt v seen the what this "shariah law" did to one of our our most beutiful state in pakistan called swat??
girls and boys were being publicly lashed and beaten in the name of Islam. now if thats what u want with an islamic state then sorry mates i have to say i am against shariah law lol
 

GuruJi

Citizen
Tiger
[FONT=Helvetica, Arial]Quran 24:2[/FONT] [FONT=Helvetica, Arial]2. The woman and the man guilty of illegal sexual intercourse, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not pity withhold you in their case, in a punishment prescribed by Allh, if you believe in Allh and the Last Day. And let a party of the believers witness their punishment.[/FONT]

Now please tell us Allah ask this.
so please tell us who should have the right to do it you, me or the the state?

If this is the law then the state has the responsibility to carry out the punishment, my responsibility is not to engage in illegal sex nothing more weather I am in a Islamic country or secular country, for this i am accountable. All countries have laws and punishments are carried out by them under a due process. In US and several other countries death penalty is part of the punishment carried out.
 
Last edited:

zubair.maalick

MPA (400+ posts)
oh i dont see why not? in most of the developed countries where i have been to or have lived including Canada, US , England and Germany i have seen many places where there is a church/mosque/mandir on the same street where there is a pub/night club/theater whatever
i wldnt want the govt to interfere in these matters!
and if secular state is giving u equal rights regardless of ur religion then whats ur problem with a secular state?
i have lived in a very strict islamic country Saudia Arabia and i found it extremely terrible that during salah times all shops and malls were closed and "mutawas" religions police patroled around the cities forcing people to go to salah even if they didnt want to!
now thats when a state pokes its nose unnecessary in religious matters and thats completely wrong!!
hope u get my point!

hmmmm .. right .. got your point now ...
as u said that u are not saying anti Islamic .. with your idea of Secular state ... how would you Implement 'haduud' laws to Muslims ???
 

Abdul Allah

Minister (2k+ posts)
Gurru je there is not If
It is the Law of Allah.
Yes you are right that your/mine responsibility is not to engage in illegal activity
BUT.
What if some one do it? as per rule of Allah(religious law) this specific punishment must be carried out. isnt it?
can a secular state do it? and if a state who do this can be called secular?
I hope if you think on this with little care you got the answer of many things on it.


If this is the law then the state has the responsibility to carry out the punishment, my responsibility is not to engage in illegal sex nothing more weather I am in a Islamic country or secular country, for this i am accountable. All countries have laws and punishments are carried out by them under a due process. In US and several other countries death penalty is part of the punishment carried out.
 

GuruJi

Citizen
Gurru je there is not If
It is the Law of Allah.
Yes you are right that your/mine responsibility is not to engage in illegal activity
BUT.
What if some one do it? as per rule of Allah(religious law) this specific punishment must be carried out. isnt it?

Yes a secular state can have such punishments even for over speeding.

can a secular state do it? and if a state who do this can be called secular?
I hope if you think on this with little care you got the answer of many things on it.
Justice system of a secular system is enshrined in its constitution along with the rights and articles of freedom for each individual. A secular states does not look at religion for laws it looks for current issues and look for best ways to resolve issues and passes laws with mandate form its citizens.

You can not ignore the fact Pakistan consists of several sects and sub sects each willing to die or sometimes kill for religion. In any such society a Sec-U-lar administration is the only answer for many good reasons.

Mr Shami in this program is a staunch supporter of Islamic state. In another program called columkar he stated under questioning that " He/We are Gunnahgar Muslim", and gunnahgar did not meant unintentional he intentionally does not follow many of the minor tenants, Under an Islamic state there is no room for gunnahar Muslims. A Christian can easily claim that he is a Gunahgar Muslim.

Once the state becomes Islamic what ever it says becomes Koran and you can look at the examples of this today and you will have the same fate under Islamic State in my opinion.

Happy EID to everyone
 
Last edited:

mistehbab

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

@GuruJi: (1) You'r mixing things up when you claim the state is enforcing its laws on you. (2) Plus you'r engaging in hypocrisy.

How ?

(1) You 'accept' the west or non-Muslims to 'enforce' non-Muslim rules, laws, standards, ways of life, teachings, and all that etc etc on Muslims at the 'state level', yet at the same time, you want Muslims to not do that in Muslim state(s)

(2) You "don't accept" or "don't want" a 'plural state', yet at the same time, you love to shout out aloud that you do (which is hypocrisy)

(3) You 'forcefully' 'want' 'very much' for Muslims to 'adhere' to non-Muslim rules, laws, standards, ways of life, teachings, and all that etc etc, rather than give them the freedom to excersize Islam 'freely'

(4) You 'want' 'businessmen', 'corporation' 'owners', to get on, on all of our backs, rather than fighting it
 
Last edited:

mistehbab

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

@GuruJi: What your saying is not true.

(1) Look at the present. People from the west, non-Muslim people, people from USA and those who support them, who work for them inside our nation's borders have been trying to precipitate internal conflicts, sectarian conflicts in Pakistan between different sects for months on end

Harmony among Muslims of different sects in Pakistan, has kept all of their plans, their doings in vain.

Why is it that USA/Nato forces and those who support them were able to 'incite' 'sectarian in-fighting' in Iraq and continuously fail to get success in Pakistan for the same ?

Do you call that a product of 'sectarian in-fighting' in Pakistan ?



(2) ALL the in-fighting, murder, crime, treason, opportunism, loot/plunder especially of state wealth plus resources, injustice you see inside Pakistan is because of;

(a) the fact that Islam's rules, laws, standards are not being applied, not being practiced at the state level
(b) 'absence' of justice system in Pakistan or 'absence' of 'effectiveness' of justice system in Pakistan

(-) Laws that already exist are not applied, not practiced
(-) Laws that are harmful for people are not removed from constitution of Pakistan
(-) Laws that are beneficial for people are not being put in constitution of Pakistan

(-) There is no system in Pakistan, no code of conduct, no laws that everyone adheres to



(3) In 'western democracy', you 'willingly' 'accept';

(a) 'tyranny' of one human being, or one set of human beings (who run the state) over most others
(b) 'slavery' of the many at the hands of those who run the state
(c) human beings who run the state as having the status of 'sovereign'
(d) those who run the state are above and beyond all laws, all codes of conduct
(e) etc etc

Why ?

By doing that, your 'willingly' saying;

(a) there is no freedom
(b) slavery at the hands of another human being or group of human beings is 'willfully' 'acceptable'
(c) tyranny is 'willfully' 'acceptable'
(d) injustice is 'willfully' 'acceptable'
(e) etc etc

So, what is it that you'r complaining about, when you yourself support a system that 'forcefully' takes away 'freedom', that offers 'slavery to other human beings' as a system ?
 
Last edited:

Bret Hawk

Senator (1k+ posts)
There are some issues which have been raised here that has created more confusion rather than to create the sense of clarity and objectivity. I think the people who support for the ideology of secularism are completely or partially not aware of the objectives of Islam or the state which decide to base its constitutional and administrative laws according to the penal code of Shariah Law. The objectives of any Islamic state as advocated by the scholars are following;

To profess, accept and hold supreme as a state policy about the monotheistic Deity of Allah SWT and absolute finality of the prophethood of His last messenger Muhammd pbuh (May Allah SWT shower abundant peace and blessings upon his sanctified soul) along with their injunctions and laws as mentioned in the Quran & Sunnah.

To accept in its constitution and penal code that the state will carry out and enforce the religious institutions of Salah and Zakat along with the institutions of inheritance, criminal, civil and personal laws for Muslim masses.

That the law of the land would definitely and mandatorily draws its origins from the primary source of Shariah Laws with no tolerance and need at all for referring to any other sources.

The judicial system of an Islamic state which consists of Qazis and Muftis would have to be implemented as per the letter & spirit of Shariah Laws of Islam.

The consultative base of legislature is to be constituted where the criteria of their eligibility and selection / election has been clearly delineated in the corpus of Islamic jurisprudence.

The foreign relations, defence (Based on the spiritual ideology of Jihad), social setup based on the principles of Islamic morality & issues related to the economic policies will have to be made again according to the principles of Islamic Shariah.

The above mentioned points are not exhaustive but do contain some of the primary issues which have been addressed by the experts of Islamic jurisprudence based strictly on the principles and specifics of Quran & Sunnah. Deviating from even one clause of that norms and principles is not tolerated at all by the supreme law giver Himself as mentioned on numerous places in the Nass of Quran & the most authentic Hadith traditions of Prophet pbuh. Either its an Islamic way or no way, that is the prime dictum of Allah SWT’s last message to this mankind therefore the onus is on the influential stakeholders of a state whether to adopt that Islamic system in totality or to reject them out-rightly. There are no ifs and buts or partial acceptance of one rule of Islam and neglecting the other at both personal and cumulative level of a state. Therefore if in Pakistan the majority of the masses (Which is highly unlikely scenario) objects to adopt a state based on Islamic laws and principles then that sort of arrangement should be done, as per the norms of modern concept of suffrage in different formats of democracy, at the federal and provincial levels in order to resolve this decades old dilemma once for all.

P.S. The current order of constitution and administration in Pakistan is full of hypocrisy and confusion which has failed to give any direction to this state and the influential forces of this country now have to address this issue on priority basis whether to adopt the Islamic ideology of state in totality or to reject it out-rightly for the better future of its populace. I hope that the above mentioned brief description might have cleared some doubts of those sceptics who were engaging in this relatively simple issue, which has clear cut directions as far as the Islamic literary corpus is concerned.
 
Last edited:

Abdul Allah

Minister (2k+ posts)
Yes a secular state can have such punishments even for over speeding.

Justice system of a secular system is enshrined in its constitution along with the rights and articles of freedom for each individual. A secular states does not look at religion for laws it looks for current issues and look for best ways to resolve issues and passes laws with mandate form its citizens.

You can not ignore the fact Pakistan consists of several sects and sub sects each willing to die or sometimes kill for religion. In any such society a Sec-U-lar administration is the only answer for many good reasons.

Mr Shami in this program is a staunch supporter of Islamic state. In another program called columkar he stated under questioning that " He/We are Gunnahgar Muslim", and gunnahgar did not meant unintentional he intentionally does not follow many of the minor tenants, Under an Islamic state there is no room for gunnahar Muslims. A Christian can easily claim that he is a Gunahgar Muslim.

Once the state becomes Islamic what ever it says becomes Koran and you can look at the examples of this today and you will have the same fate under Islamic State in my opinion.

Happy EID to everyone

you are not looking at what i show you.

I show you a law from Quran(religion). A law that is must to be follow if one is a muslim. and if a state follow that law. will you call it secular state?
and Quran have many laws that must be followed. and it is a duty of state to carried it out. and if a state follow Laws of Quran how come you called it secular?

and one more question please.
Rasool Allah SW established state in Madina and then in Maka. was it a secular state? a state that you want to be implemented?
 

mistehbab

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

@tiger54: Why do you mark my comment/question to Urooj_lbw as 'disliked' by you, when I ask her for a discussion on what 'secularism' is ?

Why don't you want us to discuss this topic ?

Why do you resort to petty 'jibes' and 'insults' rather than discussing the topic at hand ?
 
Last edited:

Back
Top