I propose a name change from Islamic Republic of Pakistan(IRP) to Democratic Republic of Pakistan (DRP).
I dont remember where I read this but if I come across I will post the author (I think it was either some Farooq or Maududi guy).
So by changing the name, people of pakistan will still be able to “practice” their beliefs freely(whatever it may be, shiism, zorostarians, christians, islam, etc) but the preferential treatment given to the majority will be taken away in other words everyone will be on the same playing field. If a christian wants to be the next president and he is qualified so be it. None of this minority seats in parliament because of faith.
The moment “Islamic” is taken out of Pakistan it frees up the constitution to be ammended so it truly reperesents citizens of pakistan versus **muslims **in Pakistan. It will also allow ammendments without the constraints imposed by a religion.
One other note, the definition of republic is
In a republic “supreme power lies in a body of citizens” vs an Islamic state “political and socio-economic order is based upon the Koran and Sharia”.
So for Pakistan to call itself a republic and call itself an Islamic State (moderate or not) is sort of deceiving.
Actually, i had thought of the same thing before, but after reading an article on the Democratic Reuplic of the Congo, i changed my mind... But your proposal is very intresting and i agree sound well enough!
Bumblebee: What did you read about DRC that made you change your mind (ethnic cleansing??). PM me or open another thread I'd be interested to read.
Ranjhan: Globalization knows no geographical bounds. Soon Not only India and Pakistan but other countries will be joining soon and working in harmony. What I am proposing is for preparation of globalization.
What you are proposing (in honesty or sarcasm) is not gonna happen not in our lifetimes. The amount of blood that flowed while the partition took place is still pretty much alive.
Verizon, I will send some stuff to you asap about DRC, also i would be gald to make a threat about the ethnic cleaning issue… And as for Ranjhan’s comment…“Thanks, but no thanks… We are Far, far better off in Pakistan”.
Ohh and another thing, technically, we sought speration not from india, but from Britian… So technically we should be saying, seperation from british india… As it was then!
Based on the responses, I can safely come to the conclusion that Pakistanis are not ready for democracy yet. Having said that it should be OK for Mush to hold on to power as long as he lives, since the Pakistanis dont care who is in power.
If you know pakistani history properly, pakistan was created by the MUSLIM league, not the christian league or the hindu leage. It was created to safe guard the interest of Indian Muslims, and not the interest of Indian christians.
If you do not want to accept historical facts then nobody can help.
You are an extrem-ist leftist, whose views are not shared by 95% of the people in pakland.
So good luck and say hi to your folks in san francisco gay parade.
Pakistn was created on the tenets of Islam, by your insane proposal, we would not only jeopardize the basis but also make a mockery of ourselves. Here we are trying to create a separate identity, and you propose secularizing Pakistan (then WHY not join India, right?)
Minority rights and working against discrimination is one thing, but changing foundations is another.
I am curious, do you consider yourself Pakistani at all? If not, then may I suggest India being your best option.
but wasn’t it a secular republic that quaid thought of and even described on his inaugural speech?? didnt he say that the minorities would have the same rights as the majority in all spheres???
I do think a name change does little and so the proposal is simply a charade. But ....
what does 'trying to create a separate identity' mean? who is trying to do that? if you mean as a separate country, that's done. if you mean as a Muslim country, that's done. Names are not insignificant but calling names foundational is going too far.
IMO either we can change or change will be imposed on us by sheer events and progression in time and environment. Why not be in control of it?
Pak Brave Heart: Come again. BTW we are talking about democracy and pakistan not your sexual preferences; I know you love me but sorry kid I dont swing your way. On to relevant stuff. you know pakistani history properly
Ok do you know your history? Are you 100% certain that what they teach you in pak studies is 100% accurate? did you ever bother to cross reference it just to expand your noggin capabilities?
RF: Pakistan was created using Islam as a bargaining chip not tenets of Islam. Here we are trying to create a separate identity and you propose secularizing Pakistan (then WHY not join India, right?)
No one is changing the separate identity plus the identity is already created. And no thats what you are proposing, read my response to one of posts again.
Can we think out of the Islamic/ Muslim box or thats too much.
Can we think out of the Islamic/ Muslim box or thats too much.
Yes, it is… let me try to explain it terminology that you might understand, it is like asking Verizon to think outside of wireless box… and your suggestion to give up "Islamic" from Pakistan's formal name is equivalent to asking Verizon to give up its wireless claim.
Regardless of where you get your history doze from reality is that the state of Pakistan was created in the name of Islam and the creator of this state had no objection to using “Islamic” in the state’s name. The significance of “Islam” in Pakistan’s name is to emphasize the reason of its creation, to remove it will be a great injustice to all who sacrificed for this nation.
As far as desibanda’s confusion goes:
*didnt he say that the minorities would have the same rights as the majority in all spheres??? *
So where do you see the relevance of having Islamic in the name of Pakistan and the dealings with minorities. Just like any civilized society and just like Islam advocates all must be treated the same. Minorities should be given their rights and should be no less citizens of Pakistan than the majority.
So you wouldn’t have any issues NONE WHATSOEVER if you had a Non-Muslim President and a prime minister. Honest response not emotional. BTW Not only that I am wireless I am also connected with wires (I am the old NYNEX :D) so believe me I think out of the box and inside.
Not at all.. if the majority elects a non-Muslim to that post so be it.... I have a problem with it or not becomes irrelevant... as long as people are free to choose what they want not imposed on them...
there should be some things that should be set in stone and this being one of them
but through proper procedures all laws of a country can be modified (Mushy and his predecessors have already set the trend :)) .. and if there is a big enough cry for the change and the majority convinces the law makers to change the name then my problem will be irrelevant... I might be the one standing outside the SC with a banner opposing it but that is my right as a citizen of the country...
[quote]
Not at all.. if the majority elects a non-Muslim to that post so be it....
[/quote]
Pakis are confused. A mere name doesn't mean anything, how much longer are you going to use this empty 'show sha' ka Islam to make an ullu out of our people?
I'm sorry but if Pakistan was not meant to be a theocracy then I hope God gives Quaid-e-'Azam' (Mohd. Ali Jinnah) and his 'thugs' what they deserves, they ripped us off.
Indian Muslims were tricked into paying far too high a price for just a Pseudo Islamic or secular state, we would have been much better off in a secular India.
