The Quaid in his speech broadcast on 13, November 1939 said, “Man has indeed been called God’s Caliph in the Quran and if that description of man is to be of any significance it imposes upon us a duty to follow the Quran, to behave towards others as God behaves towards his mankind.” In the same speech he further said, “All social regeneration and political freedom must finally depend on something that has deeper meaning in life. And that, if you allow me to say so, is Islam and Islamic spirit.” The Quaid when asked by the students to give a message said, “You have asked me to give you a message. What message can I give you? We have got the greatest message in the Quran for our guidance and enlightenment.”
Sectarian? Nope man, I can’t do that even if I wanted to because I’ve not studied Islamic history per se, I study history strictly from a secular point of view (secular here meaning “not related to religion” for all hypocrites here who might try to twist my words)
Secularism has a proven track, even if anecdotal. Usually, countries that are secular tend to boast of doing better in a general sense, and are more harmonious…
Can any Islamic state make a similar boast?
He was speaking of Islam in terms of a personal religion. How it guides people on a personal level.
He even eluded to this in his 1947 speech, by saying, "Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State. "
He does not in any way imply that this personal faith be used to govern a nation!
This entire passage is vague, in that its open to interpretation. However, there is no confusion in the DIRECT statement proclaiming that RELIGION IS NOT THE BUSINESS OF THE STATE. That is in itself a clear endorsement of secularism.
Even in that speech he didn’t used the world secular and but their are many speeches after that speech in which he has many times said Pakistan Law will be based on Quran and Sunnah second term which he used most of the time was Islamic Law and Principals
The two “true” Islamic (true as per your thinking, in fact they are far away from Islam) are Saudi Arabia and Iran and by God, they are among the most perverted nations in existence.
Then there is Turkey, the jewel among the Muslim nations.
So Quaid-e-Azam went ahead founded a country for MUSLIMS but want the same country to be Secular, then why the hell He actually bothered, India was there, constitutionally it is Secular state, so why need a separate state any way…
Mr when ever you visit Karachi go to Karachi Bar and ask their for the speech of Jinnah which he made their you will know it and the statement which I said includes English I think if you can write english you can also read it
*"Arguing about the country ( Pakistan) and can’t really read Urdu… says alot "
*Do people have to speak URDU to prove they are pakistanis??. do you also doubt the Punjabi speaking population of Pakistan. Or sindis, baloch etc.
In India there are over 2 dozen official languages
The whole of south India does not speak in Hindi, does that make them less Indian. No way!!
India’s progress is mainly due to south India.
