1) And...? The fact that Jinnah chose to stop doing something on a PERSONAL basis means that we should have state implementation of religion intruding in our day to day lives? What are you getting at here? That was his personal decision. It should not determine whether the state has a right to say if you can drink or eat pork. In fact, alcohol was banned nearly three decades after Jinnah's death when Bhutto succumbed to mounting religious conservatism.
2) What kind of logic is that? Do they target orthodox muslims and kill them? Do they have laws implemented where orthodox muslims are given out unrealistically and inhumanely harsh penalties? Are you really trying to justify these inhumanely unrealistic barbaric laws? Ahmedis are one of the most peaceful communities in Pakistan. As long as they don't harm others, who cares what they believe? Why must the state take the responsibility of prosecuting perfectly peaceful men and women?
You obviously don't know how to read do you?
The first two points were about correcting history and nothing else and you can see that I wrote let's get the history right first. BTW, where exactly did I say the Ahmadis need to be persecuted? In fact if you see below my second point you'd see the following statement, which you either deliberately ignored to prove your point or in your seething rage you just missed it. Anyways that is what I wrote:
As for state denying their rights to vote and freedom of religion, you are right, the state had no business in enforcing such a cruel law!
Kinda pretty self explanatory don't you think, or should I elaborate more?
3) First of all I doubt you know what the word liberal means. Essentially it is anyone who advocates equality and freedom. We should all strive to be liberals. Secondly, switching to English is hardly a liberal ideal (lol?) and nor is it in anyway detrimental to society. English is by the way our national language, not arabic, sadly enough. You know you are confused when you think wearing jeans, speaking french and english is the country's biggest problem. Let's just ignore the Taliban, illiteracy, women oppression and lack of egalitarianism. Let's focus on people who speak English and wear jeans, oh and god forbid they do it at the same time. I can just see the havoc a jean wearing English speaking woman would create. /sarcasm
Condescending much? I am very well aware of what liberal means. Apparently you don't! because if it is just equality and freedom then even the conservatives make the same claims, however we know there is a difference between conservative and liberal ideologies. One claims to be progressive (which in fact depends on cultural context)and the other by it's very nature is very retrogressive. As for the rest, you again missed my point and completely tried to change the narrative to benefit your own argument!
I never said speaking a different language or wearing jeans is our country's biggest problem, My point was that the liberals in Pakistan believe using Arabic or anything perceived to be Arabic is an attack on our Culture and if that is the case then why isn't speaking english, wearing jeans and doing anything perceived western seen as detrimental to our culture? If you don't believe me, just see any number or articles on the tribune/dawn or on any Pakistani liberal news website/blog you will find the liberals making the same repetitive comments over and over again . Pakistan is turned "satirically" into Al Bakistan. In fact, they take an issue with Hijab and Abaya precisely because it is seen as a part of Arab culture and hence incompatible with ours!
Please read the following article.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/681106/al-bakistan/
The author follows the same narrative, starts with a convoluted history that can and has been manipulated over the years by whoever and then comes to the following moronic conclusion:
Are we yielding to the Arabised, extremist worldview, which will usher in more intolerance and increased possibility of cultural authoritarianism? If so, and I suspect this very much, we should cringe every time we see a vehicle with al-Bakistan on it. If al-Bakistan has arrived, how long will it be before we encounter ‘al-Bunjab’? In fact, I wonder why /p/ and /ch/ are not being abandoned altogether. We may lose our moon (chaand), but we will be better Arabs. Anyone for it?
If you are suggesting that the PPP, MQM and ANP are liberal, you have NO idea what liberalism entails, but it's really not surprising. All three of these parties violate the idea of liberalism at the most fundamental levels.
So that is your game plan? you disown all the evil the liberals do since it can't be liberalism yet you would not allow the same courtesy to people who disagree with you? Are you willing to absolve the Mullahs of every evil the taliban do? you will not in fact, the traditional line of thinking for a Pakistani liberal is If one Mullah makes an idiotic/misogynistic/xenophobic comment then entire clergy is to be blamed for it but that absolutely can't be case with liberals, right? oh how you forget that all the major liberal commentators from Afeem Zapata (NFP) to Marvi Hundred (kg) defend those three above mentioned parties and their despicable acts and how they whitewash their corruption, murder, gang warfare, kidnapping and million other things as long as they are Anti-Taliban because apparently that is all you need to do to be an upright citizen in their eyes! but I guess there is to be a different yard stick to measure the liberalism than it's counterparts. Case in point would be the recent Thar drought, you should've seen NFP's tweets on how he was trying to absolve PPP/Bhutto Zardari clan of any wrong doing!
My comments were in reference to Nostalgic, you've taken them wildly out of context.
My response was in reference to your following statement which in turn was a comment in reference to Nostalgic's statement. for reference this is what you said:
Nostalgic is right. Naming our kids as arabs would shows a confused national identity. We're not arabs.
If I am missing something then please do elaborate...
)
