Religion can enter politics, I see no problem with that, but anything that harms individual liberty should be criticized no matter where the policy originated from even if its from some holy book.
Name one religious state which allows liberty. Liberty and a religious state are incompatible. Religious states are horrible when it comes to liberty. See the examples of Iran, Afghanistan, the brief mini-Taliban state in Swat, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, etc. Look at the countries with the most liberty. All of them are very secular. Also, look at every successful country in the world. They are all secular. Religious states have not been successful in centuries. Time--and most of the world--have passed religious states by.
[QUOTE]
for examaple i want to listen music in loud but the few of my neigbour have issue wid it and rest is ok wid it.
someone wanna sex on some public places.
u dont want to pay taxes on ur income but are comfotable to pay indirect taxes and taxes associated wid the utility services u receive.
who will define the boundaries of indivdual liberty.
[/QUOTE]
Countries with liberty have no problem with those things. They are not real issues. The basic concept is "your rights end where mine begin." For example, loud music infringes upon neighbors hence is not allowed. Contrast that to states where music is banned, confiscated, or certain songs are censored. None of these things happen in lands of liberty. No one wants absolute liberty for that would lead to anarchy. When people speak of liberty they speak of a liberty which guarantees basic freedoms, i.e. freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion. None of these things are allowed in religious states.
[QUOTE]
I do agree that a lot of so called religious people may not be qualified to give a sane and balanced opinion, but to think religious people should not have an opinion how a state should be run is an absurd idea to say the least.
[/QUOTE]
Of course religious people can express opinions, vote, and run for office in democratic secular states. What secularism does is separate religion from the affairs of the state. A preacher can be elected president in US; he cannot impose religious law, create a religious police, a religious apartheid system, etc. This is what I believe the OP was talking about.
[QUOTE]
2ndly there are gud and ppl in every field ................ is not it
doctors, accountant lawyers etc. ............ but u make affort to find the best one is not it.
[/QUOTE]
Accountants have not created an ideological movement that has as tenets things such as suppression of women and minorities; many imams are involved in such a movement. Islamism is an ideology and most imams subscribe to some variant of it. For example, notice how rarely you hear imams talk about equal rights for religious minorities (unless they are in a country where they are in the minority!)...
[QUOTE]
It is my suspicion that many survey participants answer YES due to a fear of offending God if they said NO rather than really thinking things out.
[/QUOTE]
Religion is a slogan in a country like Pakistan. Of course if you ask people in Pakistan if they want more religion they will say yes. However, if you ask them if they want what more religion entails and provide them details you will get a different result. Are most Pakistanis Islamists? No, which is why Islamists--like they have done in numerous other places--are using violence to attempt to achieve their ends. I do think a significant minority of Pakistanis are Islamist (largely because few people in Pakistan understand what Islamism actually is), though, and when you combine them with non-Islamist social conservatives Pakistan is indeed a very socially conservative country.