What's new

Khatam e nabowat bill passed

Yeah you finally won, Super Asia washing machine Aap ki hui.

Sarkar, I believe in the domination of Political, Social, Economic system of Islam -- If you didn't get my viewpoint ( mera kya kasur). Why would I or who am I to object when Islam gives right to minorities --- I simply said that minorities can't hold head of the state, army etc., positions.

Anyways, it was a good discussion.

Look buddy, either there was a misunderstanding from about 3 pages ago that you didn't immediately clear up, despite me mentioning participation about 10 times or so. Or, in the end you decided that you meant only top level leadership and limitations on how much that power could be used to change the system. I was arguing the whole time with the assumption that you meant that they have limited participation and that you were claiming that this is what Jinnah wanted. If that's not the case anymore, fine, we don't need to discuss anything now, we could have saved a few pages worth of replies.
 
On the last part, I'd add, political power =/= meddling. Political power is participation. Think about it, they say the whole point of democracy is that the demos (ordinary people) get the final say on how society is structured and organised and how they govern themselves, they do this by participating, in today's world that means voting. In ancient Greece, Athenian democracy meant literally participating, voting did not happen at all, instead any citizen could be randomly selected to serve a maximum term wielding political power, that's called sortition.

I think what you mean is that they ought not to be given complete authority, top level positions, and any power that would substantially undermine the Islamic Republic. Giving minorities political power is just a right extended to them as citizens.

I was clear on the type of political power and undermining the Islamic Republic falls under that too. Political power to voice your say and convince yes, but not political power to blackmail and force any changes that oppose Islamic laws.

There seems to be a difference in the definitions used, but it's not difficult.
 
Zahid Hamid proves to be a two term Waterloo; first for Musharraf, then for Nawaz and now for entire PMLN......am loving it like anything!
 
Look buddy, either there was a misunderstanding from about 3 pages ago that you didn't immediately clear up, despite me mentioning participation about 10 times or so. Or, in the end you decided that you meant only top level leadership and limitations on how much that power could be used to change the system. I was arguing the whole time with the assumption that you meant that they have limited participation and that you were claiming that this is what Jinnah wanted. If that's not the case anymore, fine, we don't need to discuss anything now, we could have saved a few pages worth of replies.

Dear Jungibaaz, I'm interested in knowing your personal opinion on the following: "Would you be happy with a Malaysia like setup." Quoted below for your reference.

A simple Yes, or No, would suffice.

Best Regards

Look at Malaysia. Shariah is imposed on Muslims only - minorities can drink (their right protected) but muslims are punished if caught. Also the state religion is Islam in Malaysia (despite a narrow majority) and no one is allowed to challenge that, same in Pak. But we have been here a few times already so no need to repeat.
 
Dear Jungibaaz, I'm interested in knowing your personal opinion on the following: "Would you be happy with a Malaysia like setup." Quoted below for your reference.

A simple Yes, or No, would suffice.

Best Regards

I'd like to be able to answer this, but the truth is, I don't know the first thing about Malaysia. From what I do know, I like their rule of law and how much more robust their constitution and institutions are. However, even Sharia applied to Muslims probably includes apostasy laws, they apparently have a morality police who can enforce morality as if it what they oppose is a criminal civil offence. The only plus side is that it apparently isn't implemented federally, but up to individual states. Even so, I prefer no compulsion in religion, and enforcement of religious laws at a federal or state level. One can have religion inform the identity of a country and to an extent it can influence a set of laws. I look more favourably upon Malaysia for its economic development, political stability, having and established system, as opposed to state level implementation of Islamic law.
 
He
You think i am Ahmadi don't you? :lol:
he is another munafiq living in secular society earning there paying taxes to them and ahmdi word still haunting him like nightmare, he mentioned qadaiyani couple of time even topic not related just showing fearness how Islam is in danger lol.
Teen char chitar bu..d pe mar ke banda inhe Saudi bheje where they joy the Sharia.
Great munafiqat ki azeeem misaal.
Stop wasting your time bro.
 
Anther bill passed a box " to ask believe in Khatam e nabowat" will be removed. Or do you believe in khatam e nabowat or not question will be removed.
Shiekh Rasheed has challenge the removal of this clause in the parliament yesterday.
Every single Pakistanis against the bill this is why I'm against this type of democracy which is based on lies we choose our parlimentarin from respective districts but after that the people of the district are useless to question the parlimentarian

This is why we need new Constitution where few things like khatam e nabwat bills should never be allowed to change or even touched

This nawaz Sharif is clearly a enemy of Islam nation
 
Shiekh Rasheed has openly challenging PMLn in the parliament speech yesterday and has already been posted in this thread. These tweets has no value. PMLn govt need to answer Shiekh Rasheed through official platform or use the parliament platform. Until then there is not justification of closing this thread.
Do you want me to past PMLn tweets in this forum..... how much lies they have posted already. Or you want me to post QATARI KA KHAT wala tweet too....

**** PML(n) bro...and **** these secularist wanna be’s that’d be happy on such news.

I hope this is not true and if it is, I hope PML(N) pays a heavy price for it!!
 
The picture is clear that these corrupt & treacherous bastards Peoples Muslim Movement along with JUI-F & ANP are working for foreign powers agenda.

Where is JUI-F bastard fake mullah who barked so loudly against the installation of educated molvis in religious places? & who barks everyday barking YAHOODI agenda? Of course the fake bastard mullah too is part of foreign agenda & too is enemy of the state along with the above mentioned, bastard jabronis.
 
He
he is another munafiq living in secular society earning there paying taxes to them and ahmdi word still haunting him like nightmare, he mentioned qadaiyani couple of time even topic not related just showing fearness how Islam is in danger lol.
Teen char chitar bu..d pe mar ke banda inhe Saudi bheje where they joy the Sharia.
Great munafiqat ki azeeem misaal.
Stop wasting your time bro.

Hey buster. Watch your filthy mouth with carbolic soap.
 
mere appeasement for nawazo's western husbands, that's all.

Don't worry folks, it'll get thrown out by the court. relax. :coffee:
 
NA passes bill to restore Khatm-i-Naboowat declaration to original form in Elections Act 2017
Inamullah Khattak | Nadir GuramaniUpdated October 05, 2017



27

The National Assembly on Thursday passed the Elections Reforms Amendment Bill 2017, tabled by Law Minister Zahid Hamid, that amends the recently-passed Elections Act 2017 to restore a Khatm-i-Naboowat oath lawmakers are required, to take back to its original state.

Parliamentarians on Tuesday had pointed out that the wordings of Form-A, which is submitted at the time of election by candidates, had been changed so that it had been turned into a declaration form instead of an affidavit, which puts a candidate under oath.

Through the Elections Act 2017, the words in Form-A “I solemnly swear” had been replaced with “I believe” in a clause relating to a candidate's belief in the finality of the prophethood of Prophet Muhammad and it had been made not applicable to non-Muslim candidates.

Sections 7B and 7C of The Conduct of General Elections Order, 2002, which relate to the status of Ahmedis, had also been omitted from Elections Act 2017.

Section 7B says that the status of Ahmedis remains as stated in the Constitution of Pakistan, while section 7C states that if an enrolled voter's belief in the finality of Prophet Muhammad's prophethood is contended, they shall have to sign a declaration stating so, failing which their "name shall be deleted from the joint electoral rolls and added to a supplementary list of voters in the same electoral area as non-Muslim."

Speaker National Assembly Ayaz Sadiq had accepted the changes on Wednesday as "a clerical error" after parliamentary leaders decided to restore the declaration and the sections to their original form.

Hamid appreciated the efforts of parliamentary leaders in ensuring that the amendment was passed and said that it was decided to rectify the mistake as soon as it was noticed.

Former prime minister Mir Zafrullah Jamali blamed Hamid for the change in the Khatm-i-Naboowat laws while Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf's Shah Mehmood Qureshi also asked the government to determine who was responsible for it.

Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif on Wednesday had also asked Nawaz Sharif to sack those responsible for controversial changes in the law.

Minister walks out over 'fabricated IB list'
During the NA session, Minister for Inter-provincial Coordination Riaz Hussain Pirzada walked out in protest against a list of lawmakers suspected of links to banned groups allegedly compiled by the IB on former premier Nawaz Sharif's orders.

The IB has denied issuing any such list, and has filed a notice with the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority against the TV channel that first ran the news report.

Pirzada, whose name was on the list, today demanded Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi shed some clarity on the situation and answer whether he is regarded as a terrorist or not.

Other lawmakers named in the "fabricated" list also walked out with him.

Following the incident, Speaker Ayaz Sadiq asked Pirzada to meet him in his chamber, along with the IB director general, to discuss the issue, reminding the lawmaker that the IB had already rejected the list.

However, Pirzada turned down the offer, calling for a senior minister to inform the House that no such list had been requested by the intelligence body, adding that he did not trust the IB.

"If I am a terrorist, why am I a minister? I propose that a senior minister tells the House that the list was not initiated," he said.

Later, Sadiq met with the DG IB who briefed him on the issue in his chambers at Parliament House.

Sadiq informed him that a number of MNAs have been receiving threats owing to their names being on the list. According to sources, the DG IB assured him that no such list had been issued by it.
 

Back
Top Bottom