UN backs gay rights for first time ever

[reduzijuice]

Re: UN backs gay rights for first time ever

@javedmiandad

If a state has laws i.e islamic state in future inshallah they implemented just because you don’t like it because homosexuality is punishable is neither here or there. In parts of Europe some people also want to have fornication with their daughters and sons i.e incest and others want to have relationship with animals should we give them pass to carry on? in some european secular countries they allow this disgrace its legal! what is your view on this since you representing secularism?

Of course if the Islamic State comes as a result of the democratic will of the people - whatever law parliament legislates would be enforced, I might not like some of those laws - so I’ll vote for someone who can change them.

Incest - Parent/offspring - in my opinion would theoretically be fine - as long as a judge can determine for certain that the childs upbringing was not in such a way that predisposes them to say yes to such a union. So I guess the only case where I would actually ever be okay with this happening would be if a parent lost their child - met them after the child was 18 and then the two of them consented to their relationship - because only in such a case would you be able to ensure that the power that the parent commands over the child until they turn 18 is not abused, because otherwise that would be pedophilia and I don’t think any sane person would support that - even in Europe - would love to see some links about the Europe story though.

As for bestiality. If there was a way in which the consent of the animal could be determined - and the animal was a free animal - then yes I wouldn’t have a problem with bestiality either. Until that happens though - condoning bestiality because the guy/girl thinks they save love/lust in the animals eyes is not sufficient.

@javedmiandad

The pakistan political system was created by the british raj and the system has not changed much since its inception unless you telling me the british raj based their aqeedah and laws on islam? Proof of how secular the constitution Article 31(1) the state acts only as a facilitator for its citizens “to order their lives in accordance with the fundamental principles and basic concepts of Islam” i.e it does not enforce islamic laws. article 227 allows the legislation decided upon by an assembly and whatever they decide could be anything they choose even if they toss a coin they can do it.

i can go on a dissection course of the constitution instead i will point to few sample realities of the state. Lets look at the economy along with it’s complete usuary(riba) which part of shariah made riba allowed, funny didn’t recall seeing that permitted from any islamic texts i read, maybe you can point it out to me? since you claim pakistan is non secular and islamic right?

The highlighted part is incorrect - I said -

@reduzijuice

We might not be a complete Islamic State), but we’re definitely not secular.

hence the rest of your post - which is quite an informative one - is misdirected - because you misread what I said. Currently Pakistan is in limbo - not secular because we have some laws based on Shariah, and not and Islamic State because all laws that can be based on Shariah are not.

@javedmiandad

what about GST and income tax under what islamic texts with evidence is this permitted?

i can point to foreign forces in the country completely going against the one of the main conditions of an islamic state which is “the security of an islamic state must be in the hands of the muslims” can you say that about pakistan again which part of the islamic laws allowed an enemy state like the americans access to every part of the state infrastructure?

Judicial system article 248 any minister, government and president is immune from prosecution from what shariah principle or law is this based? none it completely secular based and shows how corrupt the secular system is in pakistan.

See above.

@javedmiandad

I gave you evidence of justice to minorities under the islamic state your response did not even refute it, instead you insulted the current secular muslim countries of today who cannot even give rights to muslims so on this point you slapped your own secular ideology so yes i agree with you on this point about current regimes in muslim lands

India with 800 million people in severe poverty and minorities looking over their shoulders every minute is direct result under secular rule how can you even deny these facts if you do go ahead do it i would like to see the refutation of it.

finally hinduism is not an ideology it is just a religion with no say on life’s affairs at all, so the rss or bjp or abc whoever they are if in power will simply implement a rehash of what already there i.e democratic capitalism.

I’m not sure what evidence of justice of minorities you gave - I also don’t know what state today or in the past you consider an Islamic State because in the other thread you seem to imply that Mughal India was an Islamic State.

Are minorities in India safe? In the eyes of the state they’re equal citizens, practically in the eyes of society? no.

I’d love to discuss more in the Secular Pakistan thread in Pakistan Affairs, this thread has already been derailed - once because of the morality/legality of homosexuality - and now this.