Religious intolerance in Muslims

Hangout GupShup Cafe
21

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

[/QUOTE]

Thank you for that useful information. I guess there are many factors which might lead to intolerance like education and maybe law. I think before 1970s Pakistan was more tolerant like Ali says.
Also few people have had contact with minorities so i guess it is normal to not really know what they like. If you read biased textbooks and you never met a CHristian, Hindu or Sikh you’re just going to believe what you are taught. It’s like if in the West someone lives in a really white city/state with laws targeting them and they’ve never been exposed to Pakistanis or Asians and they’ve only heard negative things about them in school, how will they see them?

Do the school textbooks mention positive representations of minorities like Jaganath Azad, Christian and Hindu people in Pakistani military, Gyan Chand or Premchand, the social worker and member of Youth parliament of Pakistan, who died in a plane crash. What about Dr Abdul Salam, the first Muslims/Ahmaydia nobel laureate? Or that someone named Bhagat Singh was shaheed in Lahore? Or about Squadron leader Peter Christy, Group Captain Cecil Chaudry, Mervyn Leslie Middlecoat who all got a Sitara e Jurrat. Or of Rana Bhagwandas, Deepak Perwani, Satish Anand, film distributor and Danesh kaneria.

**“It is my great ambition to be a martyr while defending the mother-land.” Harcharan Singh, a Sikh officer in Pakistani army.

“It is my country and I will serve it to the best of my capabilities and energy to bring a good name to it. We live here as brothers.” Danesh first Hindu Cadet in Pakistani army.
**
What about the parsis of Pakistan who have the highest literacy rate and include writers like Bapsi Sidhwa.

How can someone have blind hate and intolerance for a group of people which include accomplished and patriotic people like above?

The population is about 7-8 million not that much but it is about which is not an insignifiant amount. The white in Pakistan’s flag stands for minorities.

22

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

Ali, there was an interesting show on Siyah Sufaid focusing on education.

There was a debate on whether the textbooks/education system cultivates intolerance and needs to be changed. Most people voted to say something needed to be done. This was set in Lahore.

There was also a debate on minorities set in Sindh a place where Muslims, Hindus and Christians were living peacefully for many centuries

It is well worth a watch. It shows that people agree with equality but are being let down by those in charge.

23

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

Jinnah’s speech in 1947 had the following.

Mr. Jinnah’s address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan

I cannot emphasize it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities, the Hindu community and the Muslim community, because even as regards Muslims you have Pathans, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on, and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on, will vanish. Indeed if you ask me, this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain the freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free people long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time, but for this. Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this. You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State. As you know, history shows that in England, conditions, some time ago, were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. **Thank God, we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days where there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State. **

24

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

The hatred that we started for non muslims, now haunts us in the shape of hatred towards other sects.

25

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

We are not!!!

and talking about pak, only thing we are kind of programmed to and have opinion about is ahmdis.

We did not know, it did not make sense when shia sarted dying all of a sudden 15+ years ago.
Nothing..And I a mean nothing in society changed!! Only some groups were allowed to run free and they endded up being so violent against shias.
I still say it does not have base in society. Its more like security issue.
Pakiastan was little too peaceful country. Other then army.. we hardly had any solid security forces.. or even our police/army instalments were bit too open. Because we never had need.
Then all of a sudden this whole thing was imposed on society, or it wasn’t stopped in the beginning.
Because we don’t take security seriously.

26

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

Extremism and ignorance are found ever where.

Esp in those who think they’re so enlightened and sympathetic and akalmand.

27

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

I think majority of Pakistani’s are tolerant and open minded. It is just that some laws are used to oppress the weak and vulnerable of whatever religion.
I think this song written on Pakistan by JaganNad Azad, who later had to flee Pakistan due to insecurity, is beautiful. He tried to return again but was advised against it be his friends due to the security situation. He received awards from Pakistan and India. Despite living away from home he always tried to build harmony between India and Pakistan. He became an eminent poet in India and wrote 70 books some on Allama Iqbal. His final wish was to write a song of peace between India and Pakistan.

It is alleged that this song played on 14th August on Radio Pakistan and he was commissioned by Jinnah to write it as an anthem because he was a knowledgeable Pakistani Hindu. Whatever the case might be it is an amazing song of patriotism and a sad story of how Azad could not live in the land he loved, how he could not enjoy the freedom he wrote about in his song in his own home land. Why can’t a minority like Azad be proud of being Pakistani? It would be great if children of Pakistan could know about this song just like many children in India learn and love Allama Iqbal’s Saare jahan se acha.

Another time, another anthem | Latest news, Breaking news, Pakistan News, World news, business, sport and multimedia | DAWN.COM

Translation of the lyrics:

[TABLE]

[TH]Lyrics[/TH]
[TH]Translation[/TH]

Aye sar zameen-i-Pak!
O, Land of the Pure!

Zare tere hain aaj sitaron se tabnakRoshan hai kehkashan se kahin aaj teri khakTundi-e-hasdan pe ghalib hai tera swaakDaman wo sil gaya hai jo tha mudaton se chaakAye sar zameen-i-Pak!
The grains of your soil are glowing todayBrighter than the stars and the galaxyAwe-struck is the enemy by your will-powerOpen wounds are sewn, we’ve found a cureO, Land of the Pure!

Ab apne azm ko hai naya rasta pasandApna watan hai aaj zamane main sar bulandPohncha sake ga is ko na koi bhi ab gazandApna alm a hai chand sitaron se bhi bulandAb ham ko dekhtey hain atarad hon ya samaakAye sar zameen-i-Pak!
New paths of progress, we resolve to treadProudly, our nation stands with a high headOur flag is aflutter above the moon and the starsAs planets look up to us be it Mercury or MarsNo harm will now come from anywhere, for sureO, Land of the Pure!

Utra hai imtehan main watan aaj kamyabAb huriat ki zulf nahin mahiv-e-paich-o-taabDaulat hai apne mulk ki be had-o-be hisaabHon ge ham aap mulk ki daulat se faiz yabMaghrib se hum ko khauf na mashriq se hum ko baakAye sar zameen-i-Pak!
The nation has tasted success at lastNow freedom struggle is a thing of the pastThe wealth of our country knows no boundsFor us are its benefits and bounty all aroundOf East and West, we have no fearO, Land of the Pure!

Apne watan ka aaj badalne laga nizamapne watan main aaj nahin hai koi ghulamapna watan hai rah-e-taraqi pe tez gamazad, bamurad jawan bakht shad kaamab itr bez hain jo hawain thin zehr naakAye sar zameen-i-Pak!
Change has become the order of the dayNo-one is a slave in the nation todayOn the road to progress, we’re swiftly going alongIndependent and fortunate, happy as a songGloomy winds are gone, sweet freedom’s in the airO, Land of the Pure!

Zare tere hain aaj sitaron se tabnakRoshan hai kehkashan se kahin aaj teri khakAye sar zameen-i-Pak!
The grains of your soil are glowing todayBrighter than the stars and the Milky WayO, Land of the Pure!

28

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

I don’t think a majority discriminate against minority but a few do so based on laws. I don’t know how much is because of influence of religion or because these laws are an easy way to keep minority silent and to keep everyone conforming. With 3-5% minority i think there is hardly any reason to be insecure. So why not just give them equal rights to all other Pakistanis.

according to wiki the original constitution did not discriminate between muslims and non-muslims but changes during Zia ul-Haq’s time, HUdood ordinance and shariat court had impact. A referendum held in 1984 showed 98.5% agreed with the changes.

  • there are the blasphemy laws (which were there from before partition and present in other subcontinental countries but only recently had extra sections added to them)
  • **the laws on Ahmadis (**like in 1974- they were declared non muslims which stops them from posing as Muslims, referring to their faith as Islam, posing even preaching and propagating it or sharing it with others or holding gatherings. They cannot directly or indirectly pose as Muslims, neither can they use standard Muslim greeting or call their children Muslim names. Gov and anti-Ahmadi groups use this to harass them. It can even be used by general public to harass them. Shouldn’t it be Allah(swt)'s judgement of who is Muslim or not not the governments. Granted they dont have same beliefs as mainstream Muslims but if they want to see themselves as Muslims, why is that wrong? Why should government police what someone’s religion is. The punishment for violating the above is 3 years and a fine.
  • Electoral process for non muslims-in 1980s Zia made it so that non muslims/minorities could only vote for minority politicians ( so they had votes saved for them in parliament). Some people said it was a form of affirmative action but many criticised it saying the main Muslim candidates had no reason to listen to minorities and no incentive to listen to their concerns. Community leader Sudham Chand who protested against this was murdered. In 1999 it was abolished and in 2001 it was ruled that they can vote for mayor, deputy mayor type positions but not for candidates running for general seats. In 2000 Christian minority sent a petition to Musharraf but it was ignored.

Is there any justification for this for non-Muslims having no say in gov? If your voice does not even count in deciding how a government is run should you still pay taxes? What if in the West minorities could only vote for minority candidates based on religion. Would you feel detached from the system*?* Why can’t Pakistani christians, hindus and ahmadis vote for candidates in general seats, even today? If they can give their life for their country in military why can’t they vote for the leader? (if this is incorrect as it is from online let me know) Although i have heard there are restrictions on what positions they occupy in military. Why is a Pakistani minority banned from even trying to become PM (apart from the fact few would vote for them)? If they are a good leader, care about their country and welfare for all citizens and are willing to enforce Islamic laws of the government, then why not? If there can be Bhagwan das as a supreme court judge then why not PM? OK he was a judge for a civil court maybe not sharia but why limit them from even trying If politicians in the west can be super religious and support a secular constitution and try for elections, why not minorities?. Chances are they won’t win anyway. feel free to correct me if things have improved since when this info has been updated. Sharia courts can only have Muslim judges, who have right to overturn any laws believed to be non-Islamic. What if a non-Muslim has studied Islamic law can they have a chance at these positions since some of the law applies to them as well? What if Muslims or minorities had to follow certain Christian laws in the West and yet had no say or could not even attempt to change how the laws came up? Sure there aren’t as many Muslim judges in the West but they definitely exist and despite some being very religious are comfortable with applying secular law.

  • The hudood ordinances apply to both muslims and non muslims. They apply to things such as rape (which is good), extra marital sex, gambling, alcohol and property offences. It is understandable to apply this to Muslims but why non-Muslims when they have different rules? As 3% of the population I don’t think they will influence anyone. Some are subjected to Koranic punishment other to secular punishment. What about the Hadd cases which discriminate against non-Muslims. A non Muslim can only testify if the victim is non-Muslim. So this can harm Muslim victims if the only witnesses they have are non-Muslim. Also testimony of women, under Hadd, means non muslim men/women and other women, cannot give testimony. So if a guy rapes a woman and this is observed by a non Muslim male or female their account will not be admissible. How would we like it if a crime happened to us in the West and our family were the witnesses but because they are not white or not christian their account is worth less than if they were? In countries in the subcontinent like Pakistan and India marital rape is still legal.
  • **Misuse of Hudood ordinances-**Lot of the extramarital cases are actually cases of rape where lack of consent was not proven. Some say even 95% of these cases are for rape for which not enough evidence is not found. If someone is accidentally found for fornication/adultery the punishment is flogging/stoning but that has never occurred yet. Often poor women are targeted and 1/3 of cases for adultery of women were actually found through Hudood. I think for Muslims the rules do not have to change if population is happy but why charge non-Muslims with these rules. That is secularism- it doesn’t have to mean no religion but just that not everyone has to follow the one set of rules if they are not part of that religion.
    -Ministry of religious affairs-is said to spend 30% on repairing minority worship places but many go without basic civil amenitis.

-Registration of marriage: Just last yr Pakistani Hindus were able to register for marriage allowing women to file for separation in case of domestic violence and other issues. Before that they could not.

All these laws affect how society and how people in education see these minorities. If law discriminates, people, who are bound to discriminate, will get more justification to discriminate. Changing laws can humanise people and make them feel less like second class citizens. While changing laws above or modifying them is important unbiased education is also important as is providing common people with basic necessities of life (food, shelter, clothing, jobs) and security in life. If they have this they won’t feel frustrated and feel like taking it out on the outsiders or pariahs of society.

I think if a majority of Pakistanis agree with the way this is implemented then that is fine but shouldn’t minorities, who thought according to Jinnah’s speech, they would be treated equally be given an opportunity to leave? There is no protest or chance it will change. Of course no one can stop anyone from leaving but getting asylum is hard. Perhaps the Pakistani government can assist the ones who want to leave to go to the West if they feel that they do not have basic freedom they desire. If they cannot fully engage in electoral process, have say in laws that govern them while paying taxes, and they feel they need to leave the government should help them. Especially as these laws came in 70s-80s, how would they have known laws would change so much and it would be harder for them to leave with few countries accepting asylum. That would be the humane thing to do. This will also help in reducing minorities of Pakistan and making it a more uniform Muslim society where it is easier for these laws to be followed. So it could be a win-win situation.
While i know majority of population is tolerant, especially on gs, these laws can really affect the lives of minorities. It is sad to see news items here in West which unfairly show whole Pakistani population as intolerant when it is just the misuse of laws causing it. I have no doubt most Pakistanis are warm and hospitable and would be against treatment of minorities as much as anyone else. I wouldnt know about this had the Pakistani friends i met online not told me. This isn’t the most important issue in Pakistan but its something worth fixing not just for justice but to improve image abroad.

29

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

Comments only on first video.

it shows some people in audience and Ayaz Amir have it all wrong.

No one says MB Qasim made Pakistan. Punjab textbook only said the beginning of Pakistan was from MB Qasim. It is a metaphoric statement.

The host read Lahore Qarardaad correctly but was wrong when she tried to connect it to decision to make Pakistan as it exists today.

Prof. Mehdi Hasan gave incorrect answer. When he said Pakistan was not supposed to be an Islamic country.

30

Re: Religious intolerance in Muslims

Anyhow,

There is no more intolerance in Muslims in general than intolerance among non Muslims for any other religions across the world.

Like Monk said: it is all about the law and order and security. I concur.

Please note:

If we take away law and order from so called tolerant societies, they may act exactly the same way as ‘some’ intolerant Muslims, if not worse!