The hypocrisy of the “Jinnah wanted a secular Pakistan� argument

The hypocrisy of the “Jinnah wanted a secular Pakistan� argument

There is a great irony in the debate over whether Jinnah believed in a secular Pakistan or a theocratic Pakistan. The irony lies in the contradictory premise of the secularist, which is the inviolability of Jinnah’s wishes for our country. The secularist argues that religion is to be kept separate from state on the basis that the public will should decide the limits of society and the laws that govern it rather than an unchanging set of beliefs whether they be religious or quasi-religious. The much touted Magna Carta was set aside way back in 1969 with the Revisions Act with the last remnant of that ancient document being Habeas Corpus…the most well known casualty of the War on Terror. There is no underlying principle in the secular school of thought that remains unchanging except the belief that everything should be subject to revision and change. Despite these facts, the educated secular class of Pakistan regularly attempts to argue that Jinnah desired a secular state……lets hold the debate on whether that is entirely true or not aside for the time being and simply analyze the hypocrisy that argument. The school of thought that believes that nothing is sacred is arguing that their interpretation of Jinnah’s wishes for Pakistan should be inviolable and should act as the iron wall that separates Islam from the state and its institutions. They argue that this iron wall is inviolable and all moves away from their interpretation of this sacred wall were done to appease some group or another, and are null and void. They argue that any and all legislation that differs from their interpretation of secularism should be rolled back and any references to Islam, the Quran or Sunnah in the constitution should be abolished. In their view it makes no difference that successive governments have in fact recognized the conservative values of this country and the sentiments of the religious community since this was “appeasement� and contrary to “Jinnah’s Pakistan�…a euphemism for their interpretation of Jinnah’s desires for a secular state. All governments that have existed since the creation of Pakistan stand on one side and the wishes of this one man, assuming we agree with the interpretation of the secularists, stand heavier than all Pakistanis during these 60+ years. If that is not religious dogma, then I don’t know what is…and coming from a secularist….it stinks of hypocrisy and demonstrates an inability to recognize the self-evident.