Why should I become a Secular Pashtun Nationalist?

[ScimitarXEdge]

I actually wouldn't have a problem with secularism at all if it wasn't for the fact that Secularists believe their Law should dominante on everyone, including Muslims; if they allowed Muslims to rule themselves with their own laws and moral codes; I couldnt care less what non-Muslims do. But because Secularists wont accept that they have to be expunged, even amongst Non-Muslims.

[Alchemist]

Do you really think athiests or secular people get a long well with others? As we have extremists among Muslims and other religions, there are extreme extremists (fascists) among atheists and secular people as well.

The moment a secular or atheist takes over power, the first thing he/she would do is ban all religions. We witnessed that with the communist regimes across the world.

Secularism/Atheism does not get a long well with "tolerance".

Why does it have to be about atheism vs religion?

I live in Canada and it is a secular nation. Everyone can follow their own religion. The Government holds no pretense and does not, at least legally, advocate one religion over another. Rather the Government promotes multiculturalism.
When the Muslims migrated from Mecca to Medina, the social contract that was signed between the differing parties was by the broadest sense secular. In that the differences of the inhabitants would be put aside so that the community at large would act as one.
But let us keep our discussion to the contemporary sense of the definition of secularism. Still, you can't say that "atheism" and secularism are synonymous. China is not a secular state since it bans all other view points, and not necessarily religious views. However, its religious views itself are "Secular", e.g taoism. Polytheism itself is also a form of cultural secularism since there is no exclusivity of one deity or one view point. But here we are discussing "Secular Nationalism" and in it's strictest term, no nation on earth is practically secular. Similarly, we could argue that there are no real Islamic states in the world. However examples of true theistic domains exist, e.g the holy see and vatican city-state. Pragmatically almost all nation states are secular in nature. The policies and institutions of almost all the nations are, in one way or another, in congruence to an international standard, as set by the UN. Iran being the exception here since it is heavily theocratic in that even it's foreign policy is defiant to the larger secularist view espoused by all other "islamic" nation. For a short period of time, under the rule of Taliban, Afghanistan was also theocratic. But we have seen the short falls of both of these two countries so whatever criticism you have against secularism the same can be said about. And then even if you ask any communist, they will give the same excuses that advocates of theocracy will give - "it is good in theory but fails in action". So obviously the problem is not in the "conviction" but in the people themselves.
So if you give the example of france banning hijab, then the counter example is Iran and Saudi which enforcement hijab. Really there is no black or white about this. If it is wrong to fine someone for wearing a hijab, then how is it right to fine someone for not wearing it? It gives that impression that Islam was spread by the sword, as the orientalist say. Did hijab become enforced when Islam was first introduced?

I am not advocating for secularism. I just don't think your argument against it is strong.

[faye]

why doesn't iran have ummah?

[Catya Sher]

So - it sounds like Scimitar is saying that all 3 of them started out as
secular nationalists ?
If that's the right term, then what formed you guys in that line of thought.

And then what brought you, thankfully!, back to Islam ?

[fzpz]

There's nothing wrong with secularism, but everything wrong with what secularists (mostly communists and atheists) think secularism is or should be in their 'watan'. They have a very rudimentary and lazy understanding about the phenomenon of secularism and how it came about. It's a process that takes a long time for it to be acceptable to the people at large, and only in certain situations. It also ignores the fact that you simply cannot separate religion and state because religion is a lot more complex than just going to church and keeping a beard and we can all just leave it at that. It has cultural, spiritual, national, historical, linguistic, racial, and economic connotations that are too large to ignore. One can suppress it, but the religious aspect will pop up in different realms. How is one supposed to explain the support for much of the west for Israel? Most would reply because God promised the israelites their 'homeland'. In official circles they'll dress it up as something different. But the bare reality is that it's because of religion.

Sharia and secularism are just systems of governance laws. Both propounding the same eventual values for humans to aspire to. Tolerance and freedom of religion are universal values, you can reach the same conclusion for both whether it be sharia or common law. It's just about using vocab that makes sense to and is acceptable to people. Given what is going on in our world, one cannot be blamed for turning to communism, atheism, secularism, etc. They're all just responding to the woeful reality at large.

[fzpz]

There's a more interesting topic here, SX was a quran bashing atheist? Is that what you meant by "us"?

[Alchemist]

why doesn't iran have ummah?

do you even know what the word ummah means?

lol

[randolph85]

booze and boys.

[faye]

do you even know what the word ummah means?

lol

why don't you just manifest some pashtun honour and answer the question, alchemist?

[Alchemist]

why don't you just manifest some pashtun honour and answer the question, alchemist?

LOL

what was the question again?

Why does iran not have an ummah?

LOL

why does an egg not have a circle?

when you find the answer to that ...you will know why

[faye]

as you obviously don't know then leave it for someone who does.

[Alchemist]

as you obviously don't know then leave it for someone who does.

LOL

you are so silly


soo silly...


the word ummah drives from the word "um"...which means "mother" ...which is also used in english as "the mother of all__"..."ummul qurrah" "the mother of all villages" ...or even in physiological terminology as "membrane" ...that which encompasses all...so when we say Ummah, we mean All of the muslims, from east to west, north to south, past, present and future. so your question "why doesn't Iran have an ummah" LOL ...just means "Why doesn't iran have "all encompassing,togetherness"...which it could have depending on what you mean by the word...just as egg could have a circle depending on what angle you view it from...so when you say "iran", i don't think of muslims in particular, as iranians also have zorastrians, bhais, jews etc...iran is an ummah for iranians i guess.. but see...when you ask a silly question...u can only get silly answers :P

you should have just googled ummah before you used it.

[faye]

an ummah incorporates those other than muslims though. so i read.

[fzpz]

why doesn't iran have ummah?

I'll be nice. You tried to fit a broad concept (ummah) into a narrower concept (iran). It's like saying why doesn't a room have a house. Saying why doesn't ummah have (or include) iran would make sense.

[Alchemist]

umm...an ummah is not a "thing". It doesn't translate into "state" or "nation" per say or even institution...The full term that we mean is "Ummah Al Islamia"
but you could also use it as "Ummah Al Arabia"
or "Ummah Al Irania"

get what I mean?