Mukhtaran Mai vs. the Rest of Pakistan

kaalchakra: you are a fine poster yourself, my friend. Perhaps we should organize a ``Chowk Retreat`` to some serene hill resort or island resort where we can sort these matters out once and for all.
:-)

hamidm: no, he is not chopped liver. but he is not a dictator either. he is the messenger of God`s word. No more and no less. as the kalima makes clear when it says ``Muhammadur Rasoolullah.``

With this point being re-inforced throughout the Quran. And with this point being studiously ignored by those who seek to impose their will by claiming to be God`s muttawas (religious police) on earth - a status explicitly denied even to the prophet Muhammed himself in the Quran.


And no, you are not simple minded - merely stubborn as a mule in your determination to paint islam with the same brush that is applied to those who abuse islam for personal gain.

hamidm mian #68: ``.... thanks for supporting my drinking habit ! ...... that`s exactly what i have said all along, but nobody believed me .............. how do i sign up for your religion ?``

Technically speaking, there is actually nothing against drinking, in the Quran. They only thing that is banned is, ``nasha.`` Which could be nasha of power, nasha of arrogance, nasha or drugs, or nasha through drinking........

Generally, the maulvi brigade will agree with this also (see Dr. Israr Ahmad).......

So, as long as one doesn`t get drunk (nasha), I would have to suppose it is alright to drink. I am not sure why so many Muslim countries have banned it (though I am glad they have). Having said that, Pakistanis generally lack class, when it comes to drinking. Hence it should be banned for them, for that reason alone. Classy drinkers never brag or even mention their drinking. They neither kiss and tell, nor drink and tell.........

So I belong to the group of people who think alcohol should be banned. But not because there is anything in the Quran that bans it. But because it causes too many divorces and car accidents, and because it causes too many Pakistanis to brag about it all the time.

Then again, there are the few, like Churchill, who can say, ``I have taken more out of alcohol than it has taken out of me.`` But Churchill was not a Pakistani...........

tahemd,

``...But appreciate the faith - whether it is islam or hinduism or christianity or sikhism. Since in essence they are all delivering the same very positive, peaceful message.
....``

WHY? It is upto each individual to `appreciate` or not a faith or its prophets. God has given us free and independent mind.

The ideologies of these religions are different..........they are tools to make lives better. And I would shun and criticize anything that is negative and embrace whatever is good.

tahmed,

``You already signed up when you said the kalima (no mention of the sharia there). ``

....... are you sure? ....... i would agree with you if the kalima ended with ``la ilaaha illlallah`` ....... but what about the man mentioned in the second part - is he chopped liver ? ........ if al-lah did not want us to follow this man`s example why did he mention his name ?............it is all too confusing for simple minded folks like me ........

hamidm2, tahmed32, HP, dost-mittar

Is there any way you four gentlemen, among the clearest thinking Chowkies, find some common approach to discussing religion? Some way of deciding what should be included as part of religion and what should not be. What is our duty to criticize and what we are safe to ignore.

hp,

``I do know that the bible has lots of interesting stuff about women and treatment to them. If I am inclined, I may actually quote lots of stuff from all books``

............ nobody is denying that - it is all garbage built upon garbage.....


temporal,

.... did you say something ?

Dost-mittar #50: ``Criticising all religions is an accepted practice among Indians. The trouble is that when I condemn Hindu religion for heinous human rights abuses in their religion, such as sati, untouchability, plight of widows or even criticise Ram and Krishan, they don`t even try to defend it, except a measly ``yes, but we are doing something about it``

To criticise something, one has to first have knowledge of the subject. And one should have studied it. Thus, you will never see me, ``criticising`` Hinduism, or any other religion. For the simple reason, that my knowledge of Hinduism, much like your knowledge of Islam, is quite limited.

Everyone cannot simply declare themselves a critic, and then go ahead and start making statements. I have noticed this from you, on Islam, on a regular basis. You make some of the most outragoues and out of the world comments. And then when you are challenged on them, your reply is, ``I think everyone should be allowed to criticise every religion.``

This doesn`t cut it. Everyone should criticise every religion, provided they can back up their points. Otherwise, they should be considered bigots and troublemakers........They shouldn`t be physically harmed, but they should definitely be exposed and challenged. This goes for all religions, races, ethnicities etc. There is already enough bigotry in the world........One need not add to it.........

I am not sure what your motivation is, for such comments. None of which you have been able to defend, when I have attempted to debate them with you. Not a single one. Yet you continue to make such comments, without first attempting to learn about the subject...........

I don`t debate any religion, other than Islam. Since I have not studied them enough, and thus do not want to put my foot in my mouth, and appear like a troublemaker and a bigot. But I regularly debate Islam with some of the maulvi brigade on this site. And have been able to defend every argument (regardless of how controversial, it maybe), with facts and logic......As long as one can do that, one is fine. However, if one regularly finds ones` lack of knowledge being exposed, perhaps, it is a good idea to first become a student, before declaring one`s self a critic...........

You had earlier stated that it was the job of every Muslim to kill any non-beliver. At which point I had asked you if I was committing a sin, since I had not killed any of the Hindu colleagues that I have lunch with. Infact, I am on my lunch break right now, and am sitting next to a Hindu. Should I kill her? She paid for the food, today, so I am having second thoughts....

Now you have stated that Muslims can rape any non-Muslim women anytime. The Indian colleague actually happens to be a woman. Should I rape her, before I kill her? Would I be perfectly within my relgious rites, to ask her to come to Pakistan, and then rape her there, if I cannot do it in Canada? Would that make me a better Muslim?

Or are you just throwing around lack of information, and trying to disguise it as, ``criticism?`` At the very least, can you name a few Muslim countries, where raping non-Muslims is a regular practice and is legal? I truly hope you are amongst the minority of Indians who believe such nonsense................

kaurasach: agreed. no one said a sheikh is practicing islam when he is in fact merely practicing his lusts (like depraved men of any religion).

HP #70 Precisely!! Attack the mullahs and the sadhus and catholic priests all you like. But appreciate the faith - whether it is islam or hinduism or christianity or sikhism. Since in essence they are all delivering the same very positive, peaceful message.

hamidm: You already signed up when you said the kalima (no mention of the sharia there). Cant say that is a license for your drinking habit though. :-) Since the Quran also calls for using your God-given senses (including common sense) - and drinking isnt known to anything but dull those senses.

#65 by tahmed32
“Dost Mittar is not one of them.”

Well! Then you may not be reading his posts carefully. As soon as he is on defensive in any discussion, he would come back with something about Islam-related or unrelated to the discussion.

I don’t know about the difference in Sharia or the Quran as I have not read them both. But I do know that the bible has lots of interesting stuff about women and treatment to them. If I am inclined, I may actually quote lots of stuff from all books.

The question is why bother? There is a difference in attacking the Mullah or the fundamentalist as they have become a political entity and are a fair game.

I see on many sites/blogs where the rightwing is constantly attacked but nobody brings up the religion itself for discussion.
I am sure there must be many things that people would not approve of them now in the Hindu faith but differences with RSS/VHP don’t mean that people should attack the Hindu faith also.

dost, tahmed, hamidm, HP

(sigh)

i must be invisible

;)

tahmed,

.... thanks for supporting my drinking habit ! ...... that`s exactly what i have said all along, but nobody believed me .............. how do i sign up for your religion ?

there is a MORAL (universal) definition and then there is a LEGAL definition of most terms.

I always go for the MORAL. Legalities changes over space. Morality does not.



same is the case of rape.

What is the difference between a rape and a sheikh who `marries` for a day a new woman every week and then divorces her after the night is over? - which is legal in religious sense too.

hamidm: sharia may be part and parcel of the islam you practice. It is alien to the Islam that I practice - since common sense tells me that it is the message in the Quran that is important, not the decision of some long dead qazi who was paid by some long dead king to perpetuate hs rule of some long gone primitive kingdom.