It has been opined by the atheists that the religion is harmful for society at large in general, and for young children in particular, who are force fed harmful ideology. Then the natural question is-why atheists send their children to Religious Centers? Why this contradiction?

I do not know about other religious communities, but I am talking about Muslim community. I personally know three families in Muslim community, who (one or both parents) do not believe in God and attack religion ferociously, but all three of them send their children to Islamic Centers. I am sure some of the participants also know some such families in their communities.

Let me suggest possible reasons behind it, and participants can write their comments;

1- They think it is ok to have atheist believes themselves, but not good idea for children?

2- They are hedging their bets?

3- They are afraid that the children and they themselves might get isolated from the community?

4-    Under pressure from grandparents of children?

5-    One parent (usually mother) wants to take children to Islamic Center, but other (usually father) with atheism views faintly grumbles but does not stop it? ( He usually fights with teachers and management)

6-    When it comes to girls, no matter how strong atheism views of parents, mostly both parents’ wants to send them to Islamic Centers?

7-    No matter how viciously they attack religion, the parents still believe Islamic Center is still good place for children to learn some morals and values?

If some atheist feel so strongly against religion, as the comments on our website suggest, then why compromise on any of the above grounds? Of course it is not true for all atheists in all Muslim communities, but it is true about all three families I am familiar with.

Happy New Year!

Fayyaz

Mian Aslam sent following three questions and some comments on TFUSA.

If TF USA is to be an inter-active congress of thinkers, the members must participate and offer their opinion, instead of  being voyeuristic onlookers while just a few specific members keep writing as a display sport. There comes a time to be blunt and forth right instead of continuing to be hypocritically polite and quiet. Now is that time. Please invite the House to come forth and come clean. These are some controversies that do not entail deep intellectual ruminations, but require simple understanding of history and realization whether history has been distorted and/or retrofitted to suit the agenda of vested interests. Lets offer an exercise like this ?

In the opinion of TF members :

1. Who was more insightful and far-sighted between Jinnah and Azad ? Why ?

2. Who was more keen to break-away ; Bhutto or Mujib ? Why ?

3. Who was the usurper ? Jinnah for making a Secular Pakistan instead of a Islamic Republic against the alleged wishes of Muslims of Muslim majority areas, or, did the Islamists hi-jack Secular Pakistan and turn it into Islamic Republic through Objective Resolution of 1949 followed by ZAB’s symbolic islamisation measures of banning Bars, Night-Clubs, Race-courses, and finally, enforcing of Sharia laws, flogging, changing ACRs to predicate raises and promotions of government functionaries on their knowledge of and compliance with Sharia in daily life, by Zia ? 

If Members do not participate in this exercise, you know that whipping unwilling horses islike pulling your own hair.

Mian Aslam

Dear Editors,
I was watching some program that someone questioned “despite the fact Prophet Mohammad(pbuh) preached equal treatment with the slaves in his time but didn’t terminate/abolish the institution of slavery,WHY?
I would like to put the same question to my learned Forum to comment on.
Thanks.
Tahir Mahmood.