kubrickian Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 By Ali Ismail 20 December 2012 Pakistan’s largest city is being ravaged by increasingly bloody ethnic and sectarian violence. While Karachi has been the scene of such violence for decades, the past year has been one of the deadliest in the city’s history. Not a day goes by without reports of target killings or bullet-riddled bodies being discovered in one of the city’s numerous slums. The violence is expected to worsen in the coming months as next year’s national election draws closer. According to the Citizens’ Police Liaison Committee, a civic organization that works in partnership with the Karachi police force, violence in the city had claimed 1,938 lives as of late November, the deadliest year since 1994, when the organization first began collecting figures. Police tallies put the number of dead at 1,897 through mid-October. Many more people have been killed since the release of these figures. Those who dont like the "law" in India can move to Afghanistan and Pakistan whenever they like. http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/12/20/kara-d20.html
The Outsider Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 What a peaceful country. Those who dont like the "law" in India can move to Afghanistan and Pakistan whenever they like. :hysterical: http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/12/20/kara-d20.html Why Afghanistan and Pakistan? Why not United States or Canada?
kubrickian Posted April 6, 2013 Author Posted April 6, 2013 Why Afghanistan and Pakistan? Why not United States or Canada? Because someone here seemed to like the Shariah Law. :dontknow:
Junyfan Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 Because 1 or 2 people here seem to think Shariah Law is not so bad. :dontknow: what shariah law has to do with violence?uneducated?ignorant? anyway Islam is the most peaceful religion & we love it and its laws,we are happy in pakistan & love each others,but there are conspiracies against pak and Islam all over the world,we will win the challenge inshallah,
The Outsider Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 Because someone here seemed to like the Shariah Law. :dontknow: If you are referring to mhr, he said nothing like that. From what I could make out his point was that we should look to clean up our crap in India before bothering about who likes or dislikes Shariah in Pakistan.
Rohit S. Ambani Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 kubrickian - Death figures are not something to laugh. I hate Pakistan Nation to the core, but what fault these 3rd gen. Pakiis have that they deserve your hatred? Learn to ignore, death of any living being should be treated with respect even OBL's because we all are creation of Supreme GOD.
kubrickian Posted April 6, 2013 Author Posted April 6, 2013 kubrickian - Death figures are not something to laugh. I hate Pakistan Nation to the core' date=' but what fault these 3rd gen. Pakiis have that they deserve your hatred? Learn to ignore, death of any living being should be treated with respect even OBL's because we all are creation of Supreme GOD.[/quote'] I never laughed at the people who were dead. You have no clue what you are talking about.
Muloghonto Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 what shariah law has to do with violence? It is a discriminatory law that promotes subjugation of non-muslims, which can technically be a path down to violence. It has nothing to do with the current situation in this thread. anyway Islam is the most peaceful religion Thats the biggest BS being peddled by the muslims who do not know their own history. Islam is the most violent religion in human history. & we love it and its laws,we are happy in pakistan & love each others,but there are conspiracies against pak and Islam all over the world,we will win the challenge inshallah, You can love it all you want, it is still a beleif with zero evidence for it. And therefore, you have no right to thrust this unproven, hypothetical religion's laws and moralities on others who do not wish to follow it. This is the part that muslims do not get because they cannot differentiate (largely) between fact and faith.
panther Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 It is a discriminatory law that promotes subjugation of non-muslims, which can technically be a path down to violence. It has nothing to do with the current situation in this thread. Thats the biggest BS being peddled by the muslims who do not know their own history. Islam is the most violent religion in human history. You can love it all you want, it is still a beleif with zero evidence for it. And therefore, you have no right to thrust this unproven, hypothetical religion's laws and moralities on others who do not wish to follow it. This is the part that muslims do not get because they cannot differentiate (largely) between fact and faith. 98% of pak identify themselves as muslims, so if they want sharia law what's wrong with that?
Muloghonto Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 98% of pak identify themselves as muslims' date=' so if they want sharia law what's wrong with that?[/quote'] Because 99% of them do not want sharia. And even if they did, as i said, it is inherently unfair to make up completely hypothetical laws on the basis of completely unproven and hypothetical holy books and subject people to them. On an ethical level, it is technically fraud: you are peddling something as a binding law on the basis of absolute hear-say. For eg, if my country involved 10 people, 9 of which share my beleif that four legged chairs are the sign fo the devil, it doesnt give us the right to subject the one and only non-believer to this completely hypothetical legal construct. it is fundamentally wrong to say 'this is illegal. why ? because the holy book says so. Even though i cannot prove that: a) the holy book is indeed holy (proof that it came from God, not from aliens, mohammed's dreams, etc) b) the book is factual and most importantly, c) the book is authentic ( how do you know the entire content of the book isnt dictated by Satan masquerading as an angel?), i will still make you alter your life to meet the conditions of this completely unproven book and the laws emminating from it'. That is fundamentally saying 'because i said so'. Not a good enough reason to base society and its laws on.
panther Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 Because 99% of them do not want sharia. And even if they did, as i said, it is inherently unfair to make up completely hypothetical laws on the basis of completely unproven and hypothetical holy books and subject people to them. On an ethical level, it is technically fraud: you are peddling something as a binding law on the basis of absolute hear-say. For eg, if my country involved 10 people, 9 of which share my beleif that four legged chairs are the sign fo the devil, it doesnt give us the right to subject the one and only non-believer to this completely hypothetical legal construct. it is fundamentally wrong to say 'this is illegal. why ? because the holy book says so. Even though i cannot prove that: a) the holy book is indeed holy (proof that it came from God, not from aliens, mohammed's dreams, etc) b) the book is factual and most importantly, c) the book is authentic ( how do you know the entire content of the book isnt dictated by Satan masquerading as an angel?), i will still make you alter your life to meet the conditions of this completely unproven book and the laws emminating from it'. That is fundamentally saying 'because i said so'. Not a good enough reason to base society and its laws on. But those 98% accept the Quran as the truth, you may not but they do so let them live by it even if you hate it.
Muloghonto Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 But those 98% accept the Quran as the truth' date=' you may not but they do so let them live by it even if you hate it.[/quote'] Accepting something as truth and proving something as truth are two different things and if a society cannot distinguish between the two, it leads to dire consequences, one of the many is the absolute intolerance of even the most minor variation of the 'accepted truth'. As i said, check out Islam's history and the history of the middle east from 700AD to present times, there is significant amount of religious conflict spawned by this very problem of accepting any random thing as the truth simply out of majority consensus. And as i said, because 98% believe in something that is unsubstantiated, it does not give them the right to enforce it on the other 2%. Tyranny of the majority is not a valid defence for enforcing any random laws.
kubrickian Posted April 6, 2013 Author Posted April 6, 2013 Isnt the Shariah Law what Taliban wants to impose on Muslims ? How can that be a good thing ? We know what kind of ideals they stand for. Its just control and dominance they are after in the name of religion.
panther Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 Isnt the Shariah Law what Taliban wants to impose on Muslims ? How can that be a good thing ? We know what kind of ideals they stand for. Its just control and dominance they are after in the name of religion. Why not go and educate yourself on it?
Muloghonto Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 What were these conflicts over? First the Ridda wars- the very first arabs to convert who cast off Islam were brutally murdered. Second, the ever present Shia vs Sunni conflict, which is the reason why your Caliphate collapsed. Not to mention, the various sectarian conflicts between the Shia, Sunni, Hashishin & Sufi orders. All stemming from ultimately trying to impose completely arbitary laws based on a completely unproven book.
Muloghonto Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 Why not go and educate yourself on it? We have, he is correct. Sharia = mass subjugation of society, especially women and non believers, to a completely arbitary set of laws that fundamentally makes one side more priviledged over the other. All based on a completely unfounded claims of divinity of a supposed book.
Vilander Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 98% of pak identify themselves as muslims' date=' so if they want sharia law what's wrong with that?[/quote'] panther do you want to explain how 9% + hindus in 1952 the time of partition became 1% now in pakistan ?
panther Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 First the Ridda wars- the very first arabs to convert who cast off Islam were brutally murdered. Second, the ever present Shia vs Sunni conflict, which is the reason why your Caliphate collapsed. Not to mention, the various sectarian conflicts between the Shia, Sunni, Hashishin & Sufi orders. All stemming from ultimately trying to impose completely arbitary laws based on a completely unproven book. These people did not wan't to give the zakat which is equal to prayer in islam yet called themselves muslims. not only that some were trying to destroy the unity within the muslims at the time which is an act of treason. Shia, sunni conflict political conflict not religious. Most of these conflicts are political reasons not religous anyway the quran is veryy clear on no division whoever started these other sects and divisions are obviously not following the Quran.
Recommended Posts