Atheistic Pukhtoon "nationalism", is it possible?

[BehavedMaseed]

But when you claim that those real things which you can't see don't exist, you are wrong.


Again you are wrong because before the last messenger Muhammad s.a.w., Allah sent messengers to every ancient nation.

The Quran confirms that some ancient Pashtuns/Afghans from ancient Sakastan/Baktria/Gandhara could have been Muslim actually. Although many Pashtuns/Afghans were polythiests and fire worshippers because of the corruption in their original religions.

Again your only evidence towards your claim that there were muslims before Islam and that Allah sent messengers during that time is the Quran which was a book written way way way after the discovery of the bible and torah.

Also there is no such records of Pashtuns/Afghans being Muslims before the invention of Islam.

What is so corrupted about other peoples faiths? Islam has to be one of the most contradictory and corrupted faith you can see.

It contradicts everything it says, one side it says Jews,christians and sabeans will go to paradise and then it says they will go to hell.

It insults people who do not accept Islam as being born out of Marriage.

Enemies of Pashtuns are working towards Islamizing Pashtuns to work for the agenda of Arabs and Punjabis.

Kind Regards

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

.

[Wrayun]

Levanaye Zalmaye,

You sure you're not an Iron Age holy book? Because you seem to be contradicting yourself like one, you naughty boy.

What was so contradicting?

This: I don't even know you, let alone think behalf of you.

Before you posted on this thread.

This: Therefore you disapprove of these things not out of your "good human" nature, but due to fear. You replaced your fear of hell, with fear of men and social rejection. Do you see the irony? Chew on it.

I concluded after reading your post. So, was the deduction accurate? You forgot to address it.

First things first, we don't just wipe our buttocks here, we use Muslim showers, too. Now with that out of the way, let's commence serious discussion.

Muslim showers...I hope you don't spend too much time washing certain parts. But glad you realized the seriousness of the discussion.

So are you suggesting through a series of semi-sarcastic comments that the only thing from devolving you back to the intermediary between a human and an advanced ape is the fear of being thrown in a fire where you'd get to play poker with Lady Gaga?

...didn't like the taste of your own medicine? I didnt start this thread for epic lulz...though after your witty antagonistic remarks (peace be up on you, maghrib, isha... falafel) I thought it might be fun to continue in such a trendy fashionable manner. But lets not moan about the discourse.

that the only thing from devolving you back to the intermediary between a human and an advanced ape is the fear of being thrown in a fire

Not really, though it helps to know that human morality, definition of good and bad, is an inherit quality which didn't just develop out of our "selfish" nature (which also includes laughing at others misery for good timez).

I thought humans were advanced apes.

Why do you want your life to be purposeless?

Did I say that?

Mine isn't. I love my family, my friends and my people. I take joy in that. My purpose is to be happy and be a source of help and happiness for those around me. I also love to acquire knowledge. These, among others, are fun purposes. You should try them some day. My purpose of life is not a large-scale reality TV show at the end of which I'll get either fired (pun intended) or hired. *Thank you, Mr. Trump, you won't regret it*

What if I don't love my family, my friends, my people? Is your concocted purpose somehow better than mines? Once you realize the absurdity behind your self created "purpose" you might as well join a reality show. It will be as meaningful as the above.

Humanitarianism and secular humanism are not purposeless. Getting high on opium is.... in the long-run anyway.

In an accidental universe, they are as purposeful as unicellular organisms budding heads.

I don't approve of such activity because for a woman to sell her body like that is against all sorts of moral values.

Says you Mullah saib. What about her moral values? She might find it enjoyable. And your morals, where do you get them from? Are you sure they are not socially relevant, influenced by your Islamic upbringing? You might as well pick up the prayer mat and make up for all those missed prayers my moral atheist friend.

And taking advantage of someone's poverty is something the Taliban do (that's where the suicide bombers come from).

Oh defiantly. At least the Taliban has a God that will punish them for taking advantage of the poor. As atheists, do as thou pleaseth. Don't suppress your 'selfish gene'. Oh wait. Mullah Zalmaye doesn't approve because of his personal set of "morals"?

epic.

To stone to death, or to not to stone to death. That's where I get my moral values from. To preserve the forest for our future generations or to cut it down for profit. I don't need someone to tell me right from wrong in these cases. Unlike fundamentalist Muslims and Christians who follow their sheikhs and pastors blindly, I follow whatever is more humanitarian, the lesser of two evils - stuff like that. I don't need someone to tell me right from wrong. Right is on the side of those who choose to fight for humankind (that's a song actually by Kreator).

True, you dont need anyone telling you from right and wrong. In this case you are free to invent your personal sets of morals (or morals that are circumstantiated by your upbringing). Though you can't say that your man made morals are somehow significant than those who wish to enjoy a weekly stoning. It makes good entertainment.

Humankind? - busy killing each other over pity things, like land, politics, religion too, resources - busy creating weapons that are getting more and more efficient in killing indiscriminately other life forms (including humans), especially the ones that get more advanced and technological. That you wish to fight for? human kindness...more like overgrown cancer.

I couldn't care less what my peers would think. I agree more with George Galloway (a Catholic) than Christopher Hitchens (a very vocal atheist) on most international issues. I know that Bob Spencer and Geert Wilders have gotten it completely wrong. I'm not here to please anyone and I couldn't be bothered about anyone's approval, except of course, that of these three particular girls. If something is right, it's right. If it's wrong, it's wrong. I'm a Pashtun nationalist but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to whatever India is doing in Kashmir. I don't have any puppeteers to please. Ni Dieu, ni Cesar, ni tribun.

You don't think that Bob Spencer, Geert Wilders might have it right? You don't think they have legitimate concerns? I hope you are not just saying that to get into some Muslim Pukhtoon girl pants (3 of them?). It's all nice and touchy, but negro please. Save me the sentimentality. You might as well be saying that for social acceptance (in this case Pukhtoon Muslim societal acceptance). If Spencer, Wilders at the end of the day had their way, are you sure you wont declare your apostasy to them and join their ranks, again for acceptance? And why shouldn't you...it will make perfect sense. The selfish gene will naturally kick in.

The only thing I'll be chewing on this month are dates. Made in Iran. Blessed by the Ayatollah. Thanks for your concern though.

Don't forget to spit.

All moral values are man made. There's no exception. Furthermore, the moral compass shifts from time to time. For example, co-education was haram haram haram (multiplied by a hundred) a few decades ago. It's the norm now.

Is your moral compass in alignment with majority of the Pukhtoons? You know, they might want shariah, which includes stoning, decapitations etc.

Life is not purposeless and meaningless. All I've said is exactly counter to this. What is your definition of a purposeful and meaningful life? Let's hear that out. No fairies please.

This thread is not about believers like me. It's about atheists like you. I think the Muslim purpose in life is pretty much clear. Enjoy good, reject bad. Note, it says ENJOY, not do, but enjoy. There is a difference.

Again, I have no fixed dogmas. If you believe I have dogmatic views regarding anything, please mention them. Just saying I'm dogmatic achieves no purpose.

I thought you have morals, to be exact, something like not approving of a woman selling her body? That is a dogmatic belief no, assuming if your sister or daughter came up to you and said they have this amazing way of earning extra bling to help them through college, yet you disprove.

Having non-consensual sex is wrong by any man-made (and allegedly god-made) standard.

Why? If I can't control what the chemicals are forcing on my brains, why should I suppress the very nature that promises the continued existence of my species by procreation, even if it is non-consensual? Mullah Zalmaye disproves? Professor Wrayun says do it, as long as you can get away with it. Enjoy the finer things in life.

So what you're saying in this particular paragraph is that you'd only help someone out if there's something in it for you (in your afterlife)? You should be ashamed of yourself.

Not entirely. I believe that my inherit moral nature is only possible after my predecessors who went through various trials and tests (speaking religiously). The punishment in afterlife solidifies my convictions in what I hold moral to be true. That I am not crazy and wasting my time for thinking and believing in the way I do. Like instead of screwing my fellow Pukhtoon neighbors beautiful wife while he is out of town, I'm wasting my time concerning myself with his honor and dignity.

Whats your excuse? The 'selfish gene'? Of course you'll pass on something like that because of your "morals", even when she consents and is inviting.

The futility seeps.

Do you believe that there were no Pashtuns before the 7th century AD? Who inhabited Bactria and Ghandara? Where did the Buddha statutes come from? Who were the Paktukes that Herodotus mentioned in the 5th century BC? Who were the tribes that descended upon the Indus Valley Civilization in 1500BC?

Pashtuns were never a literary or settled people until well after the arrival of the Delhi Sultanate. That's why even the Orientalists couldn't find any substantial information regarding our past, much less anything tangible. However, it doesn't take a genius like Zakir Naik to understand that we just didn't appear out of thin air or some dust or clay... and that civilizations from roughly the same areas we inhabit today were our own.

Take some hints from other civilizations. French didn't exist during the time of Vercingetorix but he's a French hero all the same. He was the son of the soil. Arminius spoke a language no modern German would understand. He is an integral part of German history nonetheless. The greatest English king of all time, Richard the Lionheart, didn't speak English. My point is that our ancestors, the same people Khan Abdul Wali Khan referred to as his 6,000 years old forefathers, who lived everywhere from Herat to Chitral, may have spoken a Pashto we might not easily recognize today or they may have not even spoken Pashto at all. But they were our forefathers by blood. Nothing changes that. I hope that answers your question. Now sister in the white scarf would like to ask a question, perhaps?

Did you not understand what I meant by empirical evidence? I need something tangible. Khan Abdul Wali Khan could be the descendant of some remote Turk who just might have happened to settled in the region with the first Islamic conquests. In fact many Pukhtoons probably are. There goes the credibility of your blood denomination. Don't tell me you honestly believe that Pukhtoons are a race, or share a common forefather.

6000 years ago and might not have spoken the language? Why stop there, why not go as far as the first man and claim every other heritage from there on? It's okay. These things are as ambiguous as your atheistic morals can be. Ever evolving, accommodating time and environment.

Delhi Sultanate eh...Will you agree with the notion that Islam contributed many things to Pukhtoons (including the very name Pukhtoon), social standards, moral values, a writing system, infrastructure so on so forth. That it is an integral, inseparable part of who Pukhtooons are? That those who wish to go back (before Islam, pre-Islamic utopian past), are nothing more than those people who when reaching a river wish to turn back home and instead of moving forward? Especially a home which no one actually knows much about (Jews, Greeks, Aryans, aliens from outer space).

Anyways, good luck with your unwarranted self-importance pretty princess. Don't forget to save the whales.

[ComradePashtun]

I see discussions like this as futile and un-worthy, sorry. I have not come across a single one athiest Pashtun in my entire life and nor have heard of one. So what has athiesm got anything to do with Pashtun nationlism. Co-constituting the two concept in the current state of affairs, and especially when it comes from a certain creed shouldn't be plausible. This I see as a conspiratory and orchestrated. Who the are the athiest in this forums, no really?!

[ComradePashtun]

Must admit that I have not read one post in this thread, sorry landing in the middle of it out of no where.

[Wrayun]

I see discussions like this as futile and un-worthy, sorry. I have not come across a single one athiest Pashtun in my entire life and nor have heard of one. So what has athiesm got anything to do with Pashtun nationlism. Co-constituting the two concept in the current state of affairs, and especially when it comes from a certain creed shouldn't be plausible. This I see as a conspiratory and orchestrated. Who the are the athiest in this forums, no really?!

If there are Pukhtoon atheists they have a very good reason of not coming out, their lives could be at risk. Though I believe it isn't as bad as it is made out to be, but the possibility of harm being done is serious. To say that its a conspiracy, is stretching it. It is natural to have doubts, to question, and scrutinize. People lose faith for many reasons. Most of the time its not really what the Quran says or teaches, but what Muslims do in the name of Islam.

[Admin Khan]

ComradePashtun,
We have 26 atheists members present in our community. All 26 have privately told me why they left Islam. Since I am the type of person who respects privacy, I will never tell you their user names. But yes, they exist.

[ComradePashtun]

To be honest, this is seriously shocking for me, I was ignorant of this, Admin.

Wrayun, thanks for explaining, and particularly I agree with the ending part of your post.

[Wrayun]

I am a Hindu and I consider myself a Pukhtoon/Pashtun Nationalist. Religion should not be a factor in this. I demand for secularism and I wish to see Pashtuns of Bar and Lar united. I want to see Pashto flourish in our households and Pashtunwali being practiced.

Yes Pashtuns are Muslims but what they practice home and what I believe in home should not affect our politics. I dont belong to any party specfically but I will vote for anyone who promises me that Pasho and Pashtunwali will be in effect.

We have suffered the most from Pakistan using Islam as a tool to exploit the Region to create proxies.

Nameste,

Do you speak Pukhto, and what is Pukhtoonwale to a Hindu? Does it include nang, namus, ghairat, satar? And where are you from in terms of Lar oh Bar?

ps, I could careless about peoples religious beliefs. I think I have stressed that enough. The subject of this topic is in the very first post.

[Wrayun]

Yes I speak Pashto of sheen dialect. I am from Kandahar city. In Kandahar city I am from an area called Hindu chowk.

What is Pashtunwali to a Hindu? The same what it is to a Muslim. I am from Kakar tribe.

Not really, for example a Muslim Pukhtoon believes in satar, believes in nang, namus and ghairat. These are Islamic concepts which didn't exist in the region, if they did I'd be interested to know. Do they exist in Hinduism? Hinduism also has no problem with women dancing midst strange men, in fact dance is part of their religious ceremonies. Hindus also dont have a strict concept of dressing, for example it is perfectly fine to show uncovered parts of a woman body when dressed in traditional sari. How do you as a Hindu accommodate for that?

These terms also would be funny sounding to an illuminated atheist. They should be because they are "irrational" and "illogical" (though logic and rational are conditioned by our environments - they differ from society to society). I mean concepts such as ghairat, nang, namus, pardah (satar) are ridiculous (dogmas) to an enlightened atheist. If they are not I'd be interested to know how they accommodate for that as well.

[Wrayun]

Wrora, culturally I am just as Muslim. our women wear scarfs and we follow nang and ghairat and namoos.

I cant answer for an atheist but an atheist would argue that culture and Religion are seperate. What he beliefs should not affect his culture and morality.

Grena, thats not true. The answer is in your own reply. Even though you are a Hindu, you are culturally a Muslim because to be a Pukhtoon the Muslim influence overrides the Hindu, the Buddhist, the Atheist, and the Shaman. This wasnt always true. But in 800 years much of Pukhtoon culture, and heritage is intertwined with Islamic concepts. Much of indigenous Pukhtoon culture was passed on to other communities due to Islam in the region as well. Right now to look for the original Pukhtoon culture, traditions, is absurd. Whoever they were, they weren't Pukhtoons (the people today known as Pukhtoon, following Pukhtoonwale of today).

An atheist concludes that morals (Pukhtoonwale) are man made, ever evolving. Atheists would like to see Pukhtoons compensate for their new found beliefs, which are conditioned by Greeko-Roman, Judo-Christian environments (much of modern day atheistic beliefs come from the West). Most atheists in the West reject religious dogmas, but willingly submit to societal dogmas i.e. incest is bidah and haram, even if consensual (deformities? use contraception), so is pedophilia (for some its genetic, also proven scientifically men are attracted to younger females naturally - procreation, fertility etc. okay I get it, 9 is too young, what about 14, 15 and 16 year olds? are they good to go?) They reason, but reason is subject again to environment. They use logic, but that to is conditioned through whatever knowledge you have acquired from within a society. The reasoning, rational, logic of one group of people, will be different than another. It is all circumstantial. Each group of people develop their own you unique perspective on life according to their needs. In an accidental world, all are equal, all are significant or none are. Even the cannibalistic ones.

I personally think Pukhtoon atheists, rather then conditioning the Pukhtoon nation to their enlightened beliefs (which might result in chaos - British era, Russian era, now the American invasion), should adopt to their newly found host societies and move on. Just like the Pathans of India and Karachi, and the Parsiban of Kabul. It is the most logical, rational, step to take. Let the Pukhtoon nation evolve on its own without imposition of yet another foreign ideology through war and politics. Do not support the forced conditioning of our people. I don't know how many atheists believe this, but so far from what I have read I can gather this much.

[Badlun]

The whole problem arises when we mix things, concepts and notions. Developed world(G8) is a model for every thing we must follow because they present a success story. Communism and political Islam , both are complete failures.

In the developed world every thing has its due place and this is perfect justince and striking balance. Religion has its church, politics has its presidency and parliamnet and economy has its stock exchange and factories. Those who dont follow religion are atheists. Nationalism is a political or cultural or linguistic phenomenon and has nothing to do with neither religion nor atheism. If we take it a model then the above discussion can be resolved in a very congenial and satisfactory mode.

Religion is only your faith in supernatural beings, modes of worship to these beings and then some morality. Atheism is the opposite of it. No faith in supernatural deity, no religious kind of worship and morality not inspired from religion or God. This is choice whether you follow religion or not. If you are convinced then do it if not then dont do it. This is why this is the duty of the religious people to propagate for religion otherwise the whole world will become atheist.

Now Pashtun nationalism has to do with politics, economics, culture, society as well as religion. These were the religious texts of Bayazid and Akhund Derweza which gave Pashto the beginning of literature. Khushal baba developed Pashto script. Both Khushal and rehman were sufis and thus influenced by religion. Pashtun Mullas used to write and read in Pashto before the influence of Persian and Urdu. I dont know any atheist who contributed to Pashto language the way Pashtun religious persons did.

Secularism must be differntiated from atheism. Secularism indeed helped in evolving Pashtun nationalism from political and cultural way. These were the secular Pashtun nationalist parties which gave a real boom to Pashtun nationalism. Lately religious parties got stuck too much in pure religious stuff that they did not play any role in promoting Pashtun nationalism. Even in Pakistan the religious parties and Mullas declared Urdu to be a sacred language and discouraged Pashto in opposition to Pashtun nationalists who promote Pashto and Pashtunwali.

The only thing I like of Taliban in Afghanistan was the use of Pashto language as their lingua franca(Pakistani taliban mostly use Urdu).The sense of being Pashtun and taliban at the same time is stronger in Afghanistan while in Pakistan a Pashtun nationalist will never be a Taliban. This may be because of the absence of strong Pashtun nationalist parties in Afghanistan.

The summary is that Atheism has nothing to do directly with Pashtun nationalism. There are many Pashtun atheists who are not Pashtun natioanlists and vice versa. The same way there are religious people who are Pashtun nationalsits and vice versa.This whole discussion of comparing atheism and Pashtun nationalism is baseless. Both are two differerent things with different spheres of influence. Atheism is no God while religion is God. This has nothing to do with Nationalism which is a political or cultural phenomenon. While simply speaking atheism and religion is God based notions.In the case of Pashtun nationalism yes we see the influence of religion but so far I dont see any influence of atheism.

[Badlun]

One thing we may also note that the traditional Pashtun society , before the invasion of the USSR, had a perfect separation of religion and politics, economy, culture and society. Hujra and Jumat had institutionalized this separation. Mulla for the religion while khan and common Pashtun for the politics, economy, culture and society. The menace of Mujaheedeen played havoc with this balance and Mulla was also involved in politics, culture, society and economy otherwise previously he used to conduct only pure religious duties. Mullas was part of Pashtun nationalism as he represented one institution but not beyond that.

We need a revival of this balance. Let religion be there but at its own place. Taliban should not become rulers, judges, economists and cultural idols and models. If atheism is there, it will only affect the religious part, the jumat but the Pashtun nationalism as a whole will flourish without any undue pressure from both Mulla and atheist.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

G

I personally think Pukhtoon atheists, rather then conditioning the Pukhtoon nation to their enlightened beliefs (which might result in chaos - British era, Russian era, now the American invasion), should adopt to their newly found host societies and move on. Just like the Pathans of India and Karachi, and the Parsiban of Kabul. It is the most logical, rational, step to take. Let the Pukhtoon nation evolve on its own without imposition of yet another foreign ideology through war and politics. Do not support the forced conditioning of our people. I don't know how many atheists believe this, but so far from what I have read I can gather this much.

i am a non believer and i co sign this statement. you cant force our beliefs upon our people

as i said before, if i was the ruler of Pakhtuns i would support an islamic system and pay lip service to the religion in order to establish stability. then use the religion to further my progressive agenda for pashtuns covertly

[Wrayun]

osho,

The whole problem arises when we mix things, concepts and notions. Developed world(G8) is a model for every thing we must follow because they present a success story. Communism and political Islam , both are complete failures.

Some of these G8 nations are suffering from staggering deficits. Communism failed? Tell that to the Chinese.

Nationalism is a political or cultural or linguistic phenomenon and has nothing to do with neither religion nor atheism.

Explain nations like Pakistan, Saudi and Israel, if religion doesn't play a huge role in nationalism.

Religion is only your faith in supernatural beings, modes of worship to these beings and then some morality.

Actually most of Pukhtoon morality comes from Islamic beliefs.

Atheism is the opposite of it.

Can atheism accommodate for Pukhto, Pukhtoonwale? In other words what are the substitutes for ghairat, nang, namus, satar, nanawate, melmestiya in atheism? For example, I just killed 10 people and require nanawate. To an atheist to give nanawate will be illogical because he/she will bring harm upon his/her family. A Muslim Pukhtoon will leave all matters in the hands of Allah, which requires faith (hint, atheists dont have any). Melmestiya, an atheist who is short on food will not cater to his guests. He knows he is short on food and his family requires it before others. It is logical, makes perfect sense. A Muslim Pukhtoon will leave the matters in the hands of Allah, because He is the provider, not Darwin.

No faith in supernatural deity, no religious kind of worship and morality not inspired from religion or God. This is choice whether you follow religion or not. If you are convinced then do it if not then dont do it.

I respect that. The question is how can those atheists who wish to reform Pukhtoon society, modeled after non-Pukhtoon societies, claim Pukhtoon "nationalism"? How does that work? What is the status of a Parsiban, Panjabi, Turki, Balochi in a secular Pukhtoon state? Will the state not accommodate to their languages, cultures, and heritages? Spanish is taking over secular America. Latino and Black population is growing (they have a secret Black Muslim (har har) president now days). Europe is already rubbing its nose in the sand due to demands of their Muslim minorities for Shariah laws. Burqa ban every where!

You are back to zero. It's starts all over again. Why the national anthem is in Pukhto in a secular state? Why is our Baba Ahmed Shah in a secular state? I want my rights!

It is futile to even struggle for a Pukhtoon state. It will make more sense to adopt your host nations, like Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, and Democratic Republic of Pakistan. Accept these nationalities, as they too can be the very secular states you wish to create under the slogans of "Pukhtoon nationalism". No reason to go through all that struggle (unless you have ulterior, fascist, separatist motives). Work within these nations, with every other ethnic group. Makes sense right?

Now Pashtun nationalism has to do with politics, economics, culture, society as well as religion. These were the religious texts of Bayazid and Akhund Derweza which gave Pashto the beginning of literature. Khushal baba developed Pashto script. Both Khushal and rehman were sufis and thus influenced by religion. Pashtun Mullas used to write and read in Pashto before the influence of Persian and Urdu. I dont know any atheist who contributed to Pashto language the way Pashtun religious persons did.

Exactly, the role of Islam in nurturing Pukhtoonyat as we know it today is tremendous. Mocking the bedouin religion doesn't fall short from mocking your own heritage. The problem is, that being Muslim is no longer convenient. Not just religiously but culturally as well. So it makes sense to drop the Muslim faith. But so does dropping Pukhto and Pukhtoonyat. That's the subject of this thread. Rationalizing Pukhtoon nationalism as secularist atheists, how does that work?

Secularism must be differntiated from atheism.

Secularism will give Pukhto, Pukhtoonwale, the very death blow it needs. Read above.

Secularism indeed helped in evolving Pashtun nationalism from political and cultural way.

Which Pukhtoon nationalism, the one controlled by tribalistic dynasties? They are all hierarchical where the leaderships belong to certain families and clans. They are for self interest, and very regional. That's why they are divided in the first place. They sleep with the very Pukhtoon "enemies" when in their interest while claiming to be Pukhtoon nationalists. This is why they never launched an arm struggle, that will require selfless sacrifices. They are already dying and being killed, look at Karachi. Yet, life is too precious, why not, you only live once. There is nothing after that. Fortunately the Muslim Pukhtoons dont think that way. If they die for their people, they go to heaven. It makes good motivation (go Mohammad!).

The summary is that Atheism has nothing to do directly with Pashtun nationalism.

True, but atheists claim Pukhtoon nationalism, and would like Pukhtoons to acclimatize to their sensitivities.

This whole discussion of comparing atheism and Pashtun nationalism is baseless.

Nope, I didn't compare atheism with Pukhtoon nationalism. I inquired how do atheists rationalize their Pukhtoon nationalism. They failed to provide an adequate answer. Other than that they just happen to be born to Pukhtoon parents, their morals (where ever they get them from), and values (secularism), are in contrast to main stream Pukhtoon aspirations and nationhood.

The only other option they have, is to start a new religion. Like the Punjabis (Sikhism), Urdu speakers (Qaidianism), or Persians (Shiaism). They can't claim atheism, and claim to preserve Pukhtoonyat at the same time.