Additional Jum'ah Journal

 Did not know how to approach but since I wrote something about "respecting symbols" it seems to me that some do not quite understand that.
Some comment was made on the 4 day old rioting in Afghanistan triggered by "Qur'an burning".
: Why go as far as killing just for protection of a book?
But you do not realize this is NOT Just a BOOK this is Qur'an which has more respect among Muslims than Christians have for Bible. However I agree that killing is wrong no matter how loss of life is brought about in these riots  Killing is NOT justifiable at all.
OK so if the Christians or Non-Muslims of these forces burn Qur'an, why not retaliate and burn Bible?--- there is the catch. Muslims hold Bible just as special and respected as a Sacred book--well may be not as much as Qur'an. (After all Bible is just an English translation) But the point that is missed here is the SYMBOL.  Qur'an is a symbol of Islam. For example: people burn the flag of a country-well it is just a piece of cloth why get excited about it?
There is the whole point
 There was also a comment that Terrorists shoot and kill attacking a mosque so what about the Qur'an copies that get burned by Muslims also?
Again the point is they are not burning Qur'an copies  they are killing people and of course they desecrate the mosque. They lost the faith and therefore they attack the mosque. I do not consider them Muslims.

Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/

Jumah Journal--Queen Sheba's wisdom

  The story in Qur'an-el-Kareem  indicates that when this wise queen received the letter from King Soloman she called her advisory council/ shura/ her cabinet or whatever you may call and addresses them how to respond to this invitation (change in religious thinking just like these days people want democracy and threaten the king/president like in Syria).
"She said, Ye chiefs!advise me in my affair; no affair have I decided except in your presence. They said: We are endued with strength and given to vehement war, but the command is with thee, so consider what thou wilt demand." (Sura 27th verses 32, 33.) Very simple and very instructive. They are telling her we have all the weapons and strength and would be willing to jump into armed conflict if you decide. But here is her wisdom in the next verse 34th:
 "She said, Kings when they enter a country despoil it and make the noblest of its people meanest, Thus do they behave."  Next, "But I am going to send him a present .........." (35th verse)
 She is clearly worried that war is likely to bring misery to the people and so many of my people will be killed or maimed or driven into low life, or something like that. It is unnecessary to do so therefore let us take an alternative approach---OK come back to modern times: in the case of Syria would translate to the following scenario
 The president should have considered that and called the "rebels " to a table to talk. That would have avoided loss of 10K lives. As it is now the West and more importantly America has challenged Bashar to step down. Even if he does not do so soon there will be consequences he will  have to face and eventually either leave in miserable state or even lose his own life and "chair" which he thinks is his right because of 'inheritance''. Then there are other examples of  Muammer Qadafi and Husni Mubarak before him
 Queen Sheba's wisdom is sorely needed in the present day politics and is applicable to all the heads of state today where even fake excuses are manufactured to hurry to war.

Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/

Starvation in Pakistan vs. Arms race

 Please read this
http://www.dawn.com/2012/02/22/feeding-the-bomb-starving-the-nation.html

  Now. My own thoughts.
 Is it wrong to have Nuclear and other arms in Pakistan?
 If not, then where do we draw the line how much to spend on which arms?
  If Pakistan had NOT gotten into Nuclear equality with India, what would have happened?
 Would starvation in Pakistan and all the  other ills of the nation such as electricity/gas load-shedding, grains deficit, low growth, low supplies etc. etc. would NOT have been experienced if Pakistan does not spend on arms?
 If the answer is NO then should we not look for the culprit some other place than the expence of defence?
 May I venture on what would have been the position of Pakistan if such expense was not undertaken?
 I shall let you think about how India would have behaved with Pakistan
 No waters for Pakistan and Pakistan could not negotiate.
 Kashmir question would have been solved overnight just like Haidrabad was solved by India at the time of Partition. Yes, Bengalis would NOT have had a Bangladesh because it would have been all India
 and who knows here would have been no existence of Pakistan itself . NOBODY would have blamed India. The West all would have supported India and blamed the Muslims
 Why did they want a separate country of their own in the first place?
   Well folks I think the problem is  leadership as has always been from the beginning. There are statistics available to show:
 There is enough food, enough electricity, enough gas enough everything for Pakistanis to resolve these deficiencies. Those are created politically to feed the hungry leaders and their families which will remain hungry no matter how much is provided for them.
Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/

Sunday Surkhi- Is 'marriage' just a piece of paper?

Once we are born, the only dead certain thing for each of us, is death.
 It used to be that everybody would think of getting married and having children as a great wish, part of life. But then some may remain unmarried or even if married may remain without children. I remember the old joke of a simple man who was instructed about how to be 'social' in a gathering, like asking somebody are you married or how many children you have, etc. So he asks a lady are you married and she says no and then he asks how many children you have?
   She was furious but nowadays that may not necessarily be considered rude or impertinent. Recent statistics from NY show that over half the children are born out of wedlock. They subdivide it  saying 73% of African American,  53% of Latinos and 29% of white women have children out of wedlock and so on and so forth. Then the Pundits say there is a change in tradition during the last couple of decades and all is becoming accepted. They bring into the etiological factors things such as college education and also that women seem to be earning more than men at this time. (So, they are not attractive any more for the women?) Men are making less money and are more likely to be out of job but the factor of socioeconomic background is not as important any more.
 What will happen to such children born out of wedlock? Considering that two third of unmarried couples having a living together arrangement split by the time their child is ten years old, they will be the ones to suffer and such is definitely the case as the statistics pile up how these children are functioning,socially and academically. there is so much talk about children born with handicap which is physical but the social and psychological handicap is totally ignored. Are these children accepted in the society in the same way as the others or for that matter the 'single parent' family situations? And of course, you are familiar how the media talk about gay parents having a child of their own or adopting or getting a child by donated ovum or rented uterus or donated sperm of choice. I am still waiting for the media to talk about what happens to such children conceived.
 So the unmarried couples, statistics show, have a higher rate of separating than those who do have 'a piece of paper', and yet some continue to hold such ideas that marriage is just a piece of paper.
What is the responsibility of Journalists or media? Just reporting anything aimlessly?

Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/

Jum'ah Journal--respecting symbols

 In connection with the history of Whitney Houston (Funeral today- or tomorrow) One of the the best performances of the National Anthem at some game (1991) was done by her with full fervour and zeal, putting her heart and soul in that performance along with her art. Exactly opposite to it was  that reminded me of the one that Roseanne had done in some other game probably earlier 1989 or 90 which sounded like she was making fun of the National anthem and I was really very angry. I have since that time positively disliked her, not that I was any fond of her show before that.
 Respecting such symbols is important and without quoting the verse of Qur'an I may add here that Muslims are supposed to respect such "symbols" of other religions even if they are idols as we know that we not supposed to show deference but at the same time we are not to degrade them in front of those for whom they mean equivalent to some god.
   May be Roseanne does not know how to sing, but then she should not have taken that assignment. I think it is preposterous to make fun of a national anthem.

Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/

Sunday Surkhi--Whitney Houston

 America mourns today another young death of a music legend Whitney Houston, with a remarkable and distinct voice and a talent beyond description.
 Other veteran music legends like Tony Bennett, Aretha Franklin, etc. pay tributes and they are older and still alive. When I first heard of this death, I suspected drugs- terrible on my part as I did not know her except as the singer- but so far we do not know the cause of death, may be it would require autopsy. Somewhere her friends and relatives 'failed' her just like they did for Michael Jackson, or those of  Elvis Presley. Sorry I blame such 'friends' because I believe these are "preventable" deaths Like the doctor of Michael who knew better and should have taken precautions both as a friend and as the physician. May be such extraordinary talented people are more self centered and 'alone', do not allow anybody else including friends to come too close to supervise.
 It is sad, very sad.

Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/

Jum'ah Journal-- Contraception and Obamacare

  That the Catholic teaching is in direct opposition to the Government mandated free supply of contraceptives of all types to all employees is not new and regulation has been imposed with full knowledge which is surprising. It provides excellent opportunity for the GOP "wannabe" candidates for forceful rhetoric as the other questions have limited the number of 'bullets' or arrows to throw on Obama.
 However, this seems rather illogical approach because even though contraceptives are used by Catholic men and women either in open defiance to the Church Rule or in modification and gradual relaxation of the strictness of the rule, Government cannot enforce such "preventive care" as many other "preventive care" methods are NOT regulated or "forced to be free". Dental care, eye-glasses prescription filling, hearing aids are some of the things that come to my mind.
 You may say that these things are options BUT
 Low hearing may put some people out of job, out of social gathering, out of listening to good things including music etc. causing psychological distubances or mental torture.
Poor vision may result in bad accidents, a definite deadly risk- not driving means loss of job or other consequences.
Dental problems. Many diseases originate, get worse etc. due to poor dentition
  I understand the real reason is not contraception as much as it is prevention of AIDS but the same argument can be against contraceptive use (there is no doubt that free availability of contraceptives has increased promiscuity in the society).
 No matter how you see it the objection for the Governmental rule remains more appropriate.
 IMANA (Islamic Medical Association of North America) has its position paper on the subject of abortion and use of contraception. (the Ethics Committee of IMANA)

Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/