World Affairs Board - View Single Post

Agnostic Muslim · 03-30-2008, 00:37 AM

Your second argument was on the basis of the "legal codes" of most Muslim nations. Again, every nation is influenced by its own set of dynamics, so I will argue form the perspective of Pakistan, though I think some general observations can be taken and applied elsewhere.

First, I have never argued that Muslim nations do not posses discriminatory or oppressive laws. Nor have I argued that any of those laws are acceptable, bar the restrictions on the President and Prime Minister. I do not agree with those restrictions, but since I see little practical impact on the lives of minorities by those restrictions, I am willing to forgo opposition to them (for the time being) so that more important institutional and structural reforms are not side tracked by the extremist minority. Those reforms are more essential, because in their absence the extremists always have the argument that it is the lack of their form of religion and politics that has caused the mess.

I have also not advocated "Shariah Law" - I have argued in favor of "Islamic Governments" (and I reiterate, that I do so reluctantly, seeing the polarization between the West and the Muslim world - IMO a recipe for further violence within Muslim nations if "secular" government is seen as "selling out" or capitulating to the West). I do not believe the two to be the same, in the context of the interpretation of Shariah as it is applied in Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabi and elsewhere.

When I refer to an "Islamic Government" it is more along the lines of Pakistan. We are an "Islamic Republic", yet we have just held perhaps the fairest elections in our history, with an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis arguing in favor of democracy, and electing moderate, liberal parties to office.

We have had a free, liberal and vibrant media for several years now, and when Musharraf attempted to impose restrictions, Pakistanis overwhelmingly told him what they thought, at the polls. The new Prime Minister today repealed the media restrictions.

We have suffered form some draconian laws instituted by another autocrat, Pres. Zia-ul-Haq, but thankfully the Womens Protection Bill passed by Musharraf repealed some of the horrible conditions placed upon women.

The debate over the repeal of those laws was carried out in the print and electronic media, with overwhelming support from the general populace. The repeal was also validated, several times (as Musharraf ***** footed around the objections of the Mullah's) by Islamic Scholars in the Council of Islamic Ideology.

Do we have shortcomings? Absolutely. Attempts were made to remove the listing of ones faith on Passports and ID cards, but failed when Musharraf caved into Mullah pressure. However, as of 2001, Greece and Turkey also require religion on National ID cards (not sure if that has been removed now).

The point is that even in a quasi democracy/quasi dictatorship - political stability, economic growth and the presence of a vibrant media and civil society allowed Pakistan to engage in a national discourse over issues of significant import. This, when there was very little ownership and felt by Citizens in the Government.

In the twenty years (from Zia's death) we have seen a sea change across the social and economic spectrum, despite political upheavals, martial law, a mini war, sanctions, terrorism. We have seen a progressive change, a positive change, with freedom and rights that would have been unimaginable during Zia's reign. We have a lot more to do, and our democracy is but a nascent one, but with a little luck (political stability and continuity in democracy), the changes in Pakistan will only accelerate - and we will do so as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, as we have so far, and hopefully some day the Office of President and Prime Minister shall be open to anyone - regardless of religion, race or sexual orientation.

03-30-2008, 00:37 AM	#195 (permalink)
Agnostic Muslim Contributor Join Date: 12-12-07 Location: Auburn Hills Posts: 461 Country:	Adux Reply (2) Your second argument was on the basis of the "legal codes" of most Muslim nations. Again, every nation is influenced by its own set of dynamics, so I will argue form the perspective of Pakistan, though I think some general observations can be taken and applied elsewhere. First, I have never argued that Muslim nations do not posses discriminatory or oppressive laws. Nor have I argued that any of those laws are acceptable, bar the restrictions on the President and Prime Minister. I do not agree with those restrictions, but since I see little practical impact on the lives of minorities by those restrictions, I am willing to forgo opposition to them (for the time being) so that more important institutional and structural reforms are not side tracked by the extremist minority. Those reforms are more essential, because in their absence the extremists always have the argument that it is the lack of their form of religion and politics that has caused the mess. I have also not advocated "Shariah Law" - I have argued in favor of "Islamic Governments" (and I reiterate, that I do so reluctantly, seeing the polarization between the West and the Muslim world - IMO a recipe for further violence within Muslim nations if "secular" government is seen as "selling out" or capitulating to the West). I do not believe the two to be the same, in the context of the interpretation of Shariah as it is applied in Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabi and elsewhere. When I refer to an "Islamic Government" it is more along the lines of Pakistan. We are an "Islamic Republic", yet we have just held perhaps the fairest elections in our history, with an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis arguing in favor of democracy, and electing moderate, liberal parties to office. We have had a free, liberal and vibrant media for several years now, and when Musharraf attempted to impose restrictions, Pakistanis overwhelmingly told him what they thought, at the polls. The new Prime Minister today repealed the media restrictions. We have suffered form some draconian laws instituted by another autocrat, Pres. Zia-ul-Haq, but thankfully the Womens Protection Bill passed by Musharraf repealed some of the horrible conditions placed upon women. The debate over the repeal of those laws was carried out in the print and electronic media, with overwhelming support from the general populace. The repeal was also validated, several times (as Musharraf ***** footed around the objections of the Mullah's) by Islamic Scholars in the Council of Islamic Ideology. Do we have shortcomings? Absolutely. Attempts were made to remove the listing of ones faith on Passports and ID cards, but failed when Musharraf caved into Mullah pressure. However, as of 2001, Greece and Turkey also require religion on National ID cards (not sure if that has been removed now). The point is that even in a quasi democracy/quasi dictatorship - political stability, economic growth and the presence of a vibrant media and civil society allowed Pakistan to engage in a national discourse over issues of significant import. This, when there was very little ownership and felt by Citizens in the Government. In the twenty years (from Zia's death) we have seen a sea change across the social and economic spectrum, despite political upheavals, martial law, a mini war, sanctions, terrorism. We have seen a progressive change, a positive change, with freedom and rights that would have been unimaginable during Zia's reign. We have a lot more to do, and our democracy is but a nascent one, but with a little luck (political stability and continuity in democracy), the changes in Pakistan will only accelerate - and we will do so as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, as we have so far, and hopefully some day the Office of President and Prime Minister shall be open to anyone - regardless of religion, race or sexual orientation. __________________ Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah Last edited by Agnostic Muslim : 03-30-2008 at 00:43 AM.