Pak Tea House » Pakistan » Love and Sex at LUMS 1: The Secret Love Life of LUMS Students
Love and Sex at LUMS 1: The Secret Love Life of LUMS Students
From Dawn Blogs
The campus of the Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS) is famous for being a bubble environment where risqué fashion trends are explored and high-school soap operas come to life in the midst of hijab-clad women and the bearded folk from LUMS Religious Society. To an outsider visiting LUMS, or possibly visiting Pakistan for the first time, this campus might seem at first encounter like the ideal multicultural environment akin to an ancient city-state where all live in harmony with tolerance.
However, as anyone with a deeper relationship with the campus or its student body can tell you, things aren’t so rosy at LUMS. In fact, the campus often seems divided between conservative, retro-revisionists and ultra-modern, party-hopping, next-generation liberals. Recently, what was previously a silent divide, became verbose on the LUMS campus mail system following a mass message sent out by a conservative student fed up with all the on-campus indecency she’s had to deal with.
Sent on the notable date of September 11 to the ‘General Discussion Group,’ this mail with the subject line ‘To love or not to love’ was a real ’social suicide bomb.’ The mail hit the inboxes of LUMS students and exploded into a fiery debate on public displays of affection (PDA) and sleek clothing versus religious values and cultural traditions. Since its inception, the thread has branched out into several sub-discussions, and subsequent replies from charged respondents range from traditionalists and Islamic ideologists, to ‘Class A’ revisionist hippies and devout atheists – guys, girls, freshmen, seniors, class-clowns, serious academicians alike have freely expressed themselves. So much so that it has caused many LUMS students to complain about the clogged inbox resulting from the same thread.
So what exactly is in this mail that’s so inspiring and polarising? Well, the mail starts with a confessional disclaimer where the claimant says that the goings on of the last month (possibly Ramadan?) have left her no choice but to state her disgust in an open email. She denies any religious connotations of her views and claims to just be dishing out societal critique based on cultural norms. Then the mail leads into the explosive sub-heading: Public Display of Affection.
The complainant starts by pointing at freshmen and ‘some seniors’ who have to ‘seek physical consolation from the members of opposite sex many times in a day’ on campus premises and in public sight. Then she proceeds – like one would in any good paper assignment – to back her claims with examples as evidence:
Quoting few instances: (Readers’ Discretion is advised)
1) Standing at the main entrance, a girl stands on tip of her toes and kisses a boy good bye.
2) Lying in the lawn in front of the library, a boy rolls over the girl lying down beside him and remains in this posture.
3) Sitting in the academic block, a boy constantly rubs a girl’s leg, which are already half bare, with his hand inside her capris.
After doubly bolstering her claim with photographic evidence, she turns to the conflict this kind of social interaction has with her parent’s generation, and the awkwardness some LUMS students have to face when their parents witness this debacle. She also notes the ‘credibility’ of LUMS students and the institution has been put on the line by ‘aunties who spread rumors that doubt the chastity of girls studying in LUMS.’ Citing a personal example, she says even her parents were hesitant in sending her to a place with such a questionable environment.
She goes on to refute the ‘fake hypocritical’ tolerance and liberalism put forth by ‘irreligious and uncultured people’ and fiercely argues for the rights of ‘religious, cultured, and social people.’ Interestingly, she even takes the ‘us versus them’ stance at a point signifying the extent of this expansive cultural rift within this posh college campus.
Ending her diatribe against cultural degradation, she advises policy measures to be taken up by the LUMS administration and draws out rules that outline an inter-gender code of conduct on campus, outlawing on-campus PDA and idealising an innocent return to the ‘LUMS culture’ of the olden day when the lewd and the salacious used to be hidden behind closed doors and bushes.
This e-rant has generated quite the response, opening the floodgates to a debate across campus touching on topics such as freedom, liberation, censorship, social values, multiculturalism, and the clash of civilisations, all laced with witty remarks, outlandish statements, and hyper-polar opinions. Evidently, a lot of concerned LUMS students had opinions on the matter bottled up for as long as they’ve been witnessing this campus spectacle.
Like any hotly debated topic among a group of LUMS students, the debate also takes a very theoretical twist based on the current readings assigned to a given LUMS student trying to come up with an analytical response. While people have cited Plato, Max Weber, Karl Marx, Rumi, and Muhammad Iqbal, others have pointed to the flaws inherent in western schools of thought and how their adoption represents the deterioration of eastern societies.
In one of the many replies morphing content and subject, a student addresses the newly admitted, still innocent freshmen who might be unsuspecting prey to dangerous theories and philosophies:
At LUMS, you will be bombarded with all sorts of atheistic and secular philosophies and ‘isms’. If you do not have the proper knowledge and conviction about Islam, you may fall prey to the untiring efforts of certain faculty members as well as your fellow students to misguide you.
Then the respondent conveniently takes the opportunity to steer this debate into an evangelical venture by diverting traffic to his Islamic website claimed to be providing a wealth of knowledge on religion.
‘I have sinned’ says a student in reply to the guiding light of the mail illuminated above, following with an open declaration of his disbelief:
I shave twice a week and my ‘painchas’ hang obstinately below my heels. I have a penchant for ties that resemble the Christian cross and my satanic dress code is causing me to stray far far away from the straight path. During the holy month, instead of attending Koranic recitals in the mosque, I was listening to the demonic sounds of Pink Floyd.
He follows by saying that he wasn’t like this until he ‘studied under the mischievous and deviant professors’ whose deviant theories made his moral-compass go all awry.
In an interesting turn of events, the Program Coordinator also issued a reply to the thread saying that they had been waiting for the issue to arise in public discourse so that they could take note of this and forward recommendations to the administration, prompting a possible laying down of rules that would prohibit such practices which are apparently not representative of the ‘LUMS culture.’
According to LUMS students, the administration hardly ever replies to the general comments thread. Students have apparently been complaining about malfunctioning campus utilities and the lack of certain essential facilities. A student in reply to the administration email expresses shock at the fact that this is one of the top priorities on the agenda of the LUMS administration.
With the LUMS administration now apparently bent on enforcing moral values, one wonders if an air-tight shariah-imposed zone is going to be the next ‘in-thing’ in LUMS. Perhaps the government will have to step in if public lashings are suddenly going to be enforceable on LUMS girls found with non-mehrams. And with people getting so high-headed and passionate about ‘LUMS culture,’ one is left wondering what exactly this culture is, and how you define a culture. LUMS students on the social-morality mailing thread are not far from the game, however, one LUMS student professes:
As Max Weber said, all social policy- tolerance or intolerance… from more ‘tolerant’ strands of ‘multi-culturalism’ to banning of PDAs to the banning of the Hijab (France: Liberté, égalité, fraternité)- always involves a preference of some values and rejection or relegation of others- even if pretensions are held otherwise.
So what are the guidelines that are supposed to define the parameters of this inter-campus cultural construct? Isn’t LUMS somewhat of a sample population of the country’s educated upper- and middle-class youth subsections? What is the morality of these vast spanning cultural-geographic subgroups influenced by a myriad of mass-media content ranging from cultural franchise to strict traditionalism? And, more importantly, whose job is it to determine that such and such should be the social-cultural ideals that should be respected by everyone?
LUMS must decide whether it is in fact a ‘liberal’ institution. Here, liberal does not mean the promotion of some strange brand of Bollywoodised consumer-culture. Rather, LUMS should ask whether it abides to a stance of universal cultural relativism, where all cultural behavior represents a social expression, promoting a tolerance and an intermingling of discourses to promote understanding through interaction. Or is the university in fact a ‘conservative’ institution, conservative not in the sense that it promotes the fashion of beards, rubber sandals, and high-cuffed trousers, but conservative in the sense that it wants to ‘conserve’ a certain cultural aesthetic, where it wants to shelter it from outside extravagances?
If there is actually an ‘us versus them’ situation brewing in LUMS, then this is probably true for outside of LUMS also. Perhaps instead of enforcing some crudely designed dictum to the word, the administration should take this as an opportunity to encourage debate and discussion on the topic, gather opinions of those involved or affected, and let the strength of ideas stand on their own weight like any academically responsible institution should. Perhaps a democratic path to this issue could help shed some light on the broader national, cultural and political dilemma as well.
Lahore-based Asif Akhtar is interested in critical social discourse as well as the expressive facets of reactive art. He is one of the schizophrenic narrators of a graphic novel and blogs at e_scape from nowher_e.
More From PakTeaHouse
- Love and Sex at LUMS 2: 9/11 Destined For Misery
- Partition of Sudan: Learning from India and Pakistan
- The Verdict of Dr Afia and Our Reaction
PakTeaHouse Recommends
- The Collapse of Complex Economic Life Support Systems (LongCrisis)
- The Audacity of President Obama’s Hopeful Speech (LongCrisis)
Filed under: Pakistan · Tags: culture, Education, irreligious, liberal, Liberalism, Love, LUMS, Mullahism, Pakistan, religious, secular, sex, Women
147 Responses to "Love and Sex at LUMS 1: The Secret Love Life of LUMS Students"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- Fingolfin
said Tajender
you poor soul Amitabh is not a Brahmin... - tajender
said ahem,truth is this that,
Corruption dents India... - tajender said It is the mainstay of islam. Islam was, is and alw...
- ahem
said to raj
Quote:
"He was ok till some muslims c... - RajTOO
said I don't think posters here should make tajender in... - ahem said In the cauldron of Pakistan everything gets cooked...
- ahem said Muslims are unwilling to accept that their god (or...
- ahem said to saad
You wrote: "Hopefully, despite Pakistan...
- ahem said to kalachakra
you ask: "how come the mullah is...
- RajTOO said Fingolfin,
regarding deletion of comments, that i...
Bin ismail,
This reminded me of a book I have published by the Jamaat Ahmaddiya’s own publishing body … I would have to see the name but is generally against Rushdie … I can understand the attack on Rushdie after all the attack on Rushdie seems to be next to Kalima to prove one’s Muslimness… But what got my goat was the Ahmadi author’s flowing praise for General Zia’s Islamization.
Does the Ahmadiyya community like indulging in acts of collective self pain?
*** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***
@bin ismail
Take for instance the case of the Gravitational Force. The force itself is imperceivable to the five senses, but its effects can be appreciated.
try standing right in the path of a heavy enough free-falling object and then tell me if all of your five sense failed to appreciate the force.
as a general rule, examples are exempt from dissection. but not such poor ones, i am afraid.
@bciv
July 19, 2010 at 5:47 pm
“try standing right in the path of a heavy enough free-falling object and then tell me if all of your five sense failed to appreciate the force.”
I have another proposition for you bciv. Stand right in the path of a heavy enough free-falling object and then tell me if your were able to see the force pulling the ball and then tell me if your five senses failed to appreciate the “effect” of the force. Maybe the impact will fix the processor behind your five senses
>I have another proposition for you bciv
you have just reproduced the original proposition. calling it “another” does not make it different. both sight and touch are amongst the five senses. you cannot ‘see’ air either. but you can feel (ie ‘touch’) it. so what? calling it the “effect” of air does not change the fact that you use your sense of ‘touch’ to know it’s there.
@YLH (July 19, 2010 at 8:10 am)
The liberals are indeed the most promising and hope-inspiring segment of the Pakistani population. They give reason to believe that this nation is not dead. Hats off to the liberals – all the liberals of Pakistan.
Being liberal does not mean being anti-religion. It means not being judgmental. It means being tolerant and accommodative. It means celebrating diversity. It means respecting the viewpoint of the other even in the face of difference. It means denouncing and eschewing extremism and fanaticism. It means keeping religion out of politics and politics out of religion. My best wishes and sincerest prayers for the liberals of Pakistan.
Regarding the book you’ve mentioned, I wouldn’t be in a position to comment on it without precise knowledge of its contents. Frankly, I fail to understand how an Ahmadi would praise Zia’s obnoxious policies after being their victim himself.
By the way you’re right about the hadees “Trust in God but tie the knee of the camel”. I believe Ahmadis are doing both.
Best Regards.
@ bciv (July 19, 2010 at 5:47 pm)
“…..as a general rule, examples are exempt from dissection. but not such poor ones, i am afraid…..”
Would it be alright if I myself dissected the example I put forth?
The actual Force of Gravitation – the force itself – is entirely imperceivable to the five physical senses. Gravity can neither be seen, nor heard, nor tasted, nor smelled, nor touched – the force itself. The impact with an object moving under the “effect” of Gravity, can indeed be felt by the sense of touch, but please bear in mind that it would be the “effect of gravity”, not Gravity itself. Gravity itself would remain imperceivable to the five senses.
So, we accept the existence of Gravity inspite of the fact that we cannot perceive the actual force itself, and we consider it perfectly rational to accept its existence.
I’ll get you the name of the book, author, publisher, date by tonight.
thank you, bin ismail. only if these five senses, or any of them, could exist in a body with no mass… however, a body with mass (and a sense of ‘touch’) would find it difficult to escape the utter perceptibility of gravity. the other relevant problem with examples – even good ones – is that they are supposed to support an argument. they make little sense, if any, when the argument itself is absent.
@ bciv @bin ismail
The strict concept of the traditional 5 senses is getting a bit outdated.
The inner ear has gravity receptors.
Here is what the Encyclopedia B says:
Because of the constancy of its magnitude and direction, gravity is most suitable in providing animals with cues to their position in space. The sense organs involved (statoreceptors) usually have the structure of a statocyst, a fluid-filled vesicle containing one or more sandy or stonelike elements (statoliths). Sensory cells in the wall of the vesicle have hairs that are in contact with the statolith, which always weighs vertically down. Hence, depending on the animal’s position, different sense cells will be stimulated in statocysts with loose statoliths.
bciv & Tilsim:
Right. The loose statoliths make physical contact with the hairs inside the vesicle. This physical impact stimulates the statoreceptors and impulses are transmitted to the brain. The brain deciphers the impulses and an awareness of the “effect of gravity” is aroused. Thus what is perceived is the “effect of gravity” – not “gravity” itself. Yet, it is rational to infer that gravity exists.
Whether it’s gravity or magnetism, in both cases we are talking about forces – forces that themselves remain imperceptible but their effects can be perceived by human senses. In any case, accepting the existence of gravitational force or magnetic force, on the grounds of perceiving the effects of these forces, cannot be categorized as irrational.
@ Bin Ismail
“Thus what is perceived is the “effect of gravity” – not “gravity” itself.”
I think you will find that the other senses work the same way.
@bin ismail
if i may be permitted to put two simple questions to you:
1. would you consider it rational not to accept the existence of gravity?
2. would you consider it irrational not to accept the existence of god?
regards
@Tilsim
The point I’m trying to make is that there are several entities – not just God – whose existence we are prepared to rationally accept, despite the fact that they are directly imperceivable to human physical perception.
@ bciv
1. Yes. I consider it perfectly rational to accept the existence of gravity.
2. No. I do not consider it irrational to accept the existence of God.
Regards.
@ bin Ismail
“Whether it’s gravity or magnetism, in both cases we are talking about forces – forces that themselves remain imperceptible but their effects can be perceived by human senses.”
The nature of gravity is not fully understood. I believe that there is still arguments about how this ‘force at a distance’ works and the theory of relativity does not fully reconcile to Newtonian physics. Both theories exist and are rational in themselves. However rationally speaking both can’t be right at the same time, or can they and we just don’t know why as yet?
I understand what Bin Ismail is trying to say. Many people have a perception of divinity or the unseen. It’s very real to them – I have it myself. To paraphrase, perhaps this automatic perception of divinity that many people have is a sort of effect of a force at a distance. It may be that some of us have receptors that can sense it where is others can’t. We make sense of this experience through faith and religion.
However, in the absence of an observable construct and one that cannot be tested, I am still unclear how belief in the unseen fits with the definition of rational as it is understood by science at present. This may be a limitation of science but it does not make scientific method invalid.
“and the theory of relativity does not fully reconcile to Newtonian physics.”
Sorry about this. I meant to say does not fully as yet reconcile to quantum theory.
@bin ismail
i asked: “1. would you consider it rational not to accept the existence of gravity?”
you replied:” 1. Yes.”
but you added that you also “consider it perfectly rational to accept the existence of gravity.”
my second question was: “2. would you consider it irrational not to accept the existence of god?”
your response was: “2. No.”
and again you added that, at the same time, you “do not consider it irrational to accept the existence of God.”
so, you consider both accepting and denying the existence of gravity to be equally and perfectly rational. the same goes for believers and atheists, in your view.
The point I’m trying to make is that there are several entities – not just God – whose existence we are prepared to rationally accept, despite the fact that they are directly imperceivable to human physical perception.
tilsim has already responded to this.
in science, fact and theory are two different things. scientific proof goes beyond and is far more rigourous than the so-called five senses. to forward a theory is a perfectly valid and useful scientific exercise. but no proof = no fact.
@Tilsim
However, in the absence of an observable construct and one that cannot be tested, I am still unclear how belief in the unseen fits with the definition of rational as it is understood by science at present. This may be a limitation of science but it does not make scientific method invalid.
do we really have any other option? while it can’t be tested, it remains in the realm of theory and not fact.
@bciv
I agree.
@bciv (July 20, 2010 at 8:33 pm)
Thank you indeed for pointing out my oversight. I somehow, and I assure you, inadvertently missed the “not” in both your questions. My fault. Sorry. Let me redo that:
Q#1. would you consider it rational not to accept the existence of gravity?
Answer: I consider it perfectly rational to accept the existence of gravity.
Q#2. would you consider it irrational not to accept the existence of god?
Answer: I do not consider it irrational to accept the existence of God.
@bin ismail
thanks for redoing that. you have once again answered questions that i did not ask. it seems you wish to leave unanswered the questions i asked.
@ bciv
I hope this is acceptable:
Q#1: would you consider it rational not to accept the existence of gravity?
Answer: No. I would not consider it rational not to accept the existence of gravity.
Q#2: would you consider it irrational not to accept the existence of god?
Answer: Yes. I would consider it irrational not to accept the existence of God.
Regards.
@ bciv
Are you posing that these questions are related or infact not related and as such are you trying to find a logic error – I am trying to see what you are trying to deduce but finding it difficult? Look forward to seeing your analysis of the result.
Here is my take. The term rational means derived from reason. It can be a confusing term and different value judgements can be placed on it. It does not automatically follow that for a premise to be rational it needs scientific proof. There are different forms of reasoning. Two methods of note are deductive and inductive reasoning.
People use inductive reasoning to find what is a probable truth, which may not always be the actual truth. As I understand the term in a limited way is that inductive reasoning is based on deriving conclusions from observations alone. Of course we use this method of reasoning all the time. They are great for establishing premises.
Scientific methods are excellent tools for validating premises (as they involve rigorous testing). Once proven one can claim something to be absolutely true. However in reality there are limitations. For example, it’s difficult to eliminate inherent bias completely and that fact alone can mean that perhaps absolute truth is unknowable.
Deductive reasoning would have it as follows:
I would say that Bin Ismail is saying:
1) The effect of Gravity can be perceived; it is rational to believe in gravity
2) The effect of God can be perceived;
3) It is rational to believe in God.
Are you saying?
1) The existence of gravity can be proven scientifically; it is rational to believe this
2) The existence of God cannot be proven scientifically;
3) It is irrational to believe in God.
If so would it be fair to say that the first premise may be wrong because rational does not always imply the necessity for scientific proof. If so this would invalidate the argument.
@bin ismail
this is perfectly acceptable. many thanks.
@Tilsim
i was trying my best not to mix empirical with rational. i saw a lack of consistency and wished to investigate it a bit further. for me, the inconsistency is there, mainly, because (as i pointed out earlier) “they[ie examples in support of an argument] make little sense, if any, when the argument itself is absent.”
even a rational rather than empirical test must completely deal with both the nature of the cause and of the effect, as well as clearly and consistently establishing the link between the two. saying that one effect is similar to another effect (or even cause-and-effect) is a) incomplete, and b) only an example (strictly speaking, not an argument).
i am aware that this is not the forum – not least because it can offer neither the space nor time – for the main argument to be produced and debated. that, i presume, is the reason why no actual argument has been put forth here.
it’s difficult to eliminate inherent bias completely and that fact alone can mean that perhaps absolute truth is unknowable.
that is a possibility, may be even a probable danger, but it is only a fact if and when scientifically proven. the proposition that it can never be proven also requires proof.
there is a difference between ‘keeping an open mind’ and ‘doubting’ proven scientific facts. what does “absolute” mean? non-empirical reason and rhetoric is what cannot claim to be the absolute argument. (internal) consistency is not absolute logic.
scientific observations are objective till shown to be biased (in the method or in its definition of or effect on what is observed). scientific facts are absolute, till they are proven not to be.
Ok, I am not sure I totally understood the comment so please excuse me if I am just talking at a tangent. We are getting into the nature of scientific proof. According to Karl Popper, the only way science can support a hypothesis is to try to show that it is false through testing the scientific evidence using scientific method. No idea is proven correct, just that false ideas are discarded. However the more the idea stands up to tests of falsification, the more it is considered to be correct. Eventually, it’s called a theory.
In science there is no such thing as absolute proof (absolute certainty). Scientific ‘proof’ is probabilistic. If we remember from science at school: rejection of the null hypothesis at less than 5% probability, the somewhat arbitrary (but reasonable) nature of this cutoff.
If you have absolute to mean objective then I think you are correct. I accept the scientific evidence on that basis. I therefore also keep an open mind.
I was sloppy with the language in my previous comment. I should have said that “problem alone…” instead of that “fact alone…”. Thank you for picking that up. However I hope that you will agree that in everyday language, a fact is a statement known to be true through direct observation.
Bias is indeed a serious threat in scientific experimentation. That is why we repeat the experiments over and over again. However even with this we only arrive at a very high probability (not certainty) that we understand something. Given the high probability, fair enough if you say that it is unreasonable to doubt.
The best (only) approach in science is interpretation of the facts in a probabilistic way. Our frame of reference is science should not be ‘proofs’ or certainty of knowledge.
Maths and philosophy are interesting disciplines because with the rules and criteria of logic, only here does proof actually have an absolute meaning.
@ YLH
I along with bin Ismail and Musa would also thank you and laud you for the bold support you have shown for the Ahmadi Muslims whenever we have been under attack. We also stand for justice and equality for all citizens of Pakistan. We welcome the work you have done to keep pakteahouse a very enlightening and intellectual forum for discussion and dialogue. I would also like to quell some of the anger that Musa may have ignited within you. As debates sometimes get heating people may start becoming a little judgmental and testy. I apologize if that is what ignited you. I apologize if he was being judgmental and sermonizing. With all that said, I do think it is a little unjust to delete all of Musa’s posts on this thread as it goes against the principles of open discussion on pakteahouse.
@YLH
“What is rational about belief in the unknown?”
As bin Ismail has stated, our belief is in the “unseen”. We believe Allah created us and has revealed himself to humanity many times. What makes us Ahmadi’s in the first place is that we believe Allah revealed himself again to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, who named our community as Ahmadi. The traditions of the saints and enlightened scholars that have passed in the muslim umma and within our own Ahmadi traditions also strengthens our belief. An example of a saint was Data Ganj Baksh who’s final resting place was so barbarically attacked not too long ago.
@YLH July 19, 2010 at 8:03 am
“Isn’t the saying “trust in God but tie your camel”?”
As Ahmadi’s I think we are following both messages of this maxim. We have tied the camel with the strongest rope within our means. Please tell us what you are implying we do. We will not break the law however. I’m an Ahmadi of Pakistani origin living in the USA. Here our leadership is constantly urging us to write to our representatives regarding the situation in Pakistan and put pressure on the Pakistani government. We constantly appeal to humanitarian organizations to put pressure on the Pakistani government. We ourselves try to put pressure on the Pakistani government within all legal means. As far as our own security is concerned we have been making increasing accommodations for that as well within our mosques and homes. Let me put to your attention that the 2 terrorists caught in the Lahore attacks were by the worshippers themselves and not the police. We have links with the police that warn us of impending threats and we take the best measures according to our means.
@Tilsim
I agree with what you have said. all i meant to say was that science’s lack of claim of infallibility and it’s constant endeavour to keep an open mind is to be lauded as a quality that elevates its status, not used to trash it as being inferior, somehow.
because science does not claim a fact to be absolute is sometimes used to claim that the absolute fact is something else, unbeknownst to science. science is the best method we have of discovering and establishing facts. in that sense, it’s absolute enough for me.
(maths is of course a ‘man-made’ science. it is as good as it is consistent. the fewer unknown inconsistencies it has, the better it would work as a tool – ie applied science. it is a tool capable of simulating known and as yet unknown patterns whether or not occurring in the physical world.)
I think the debate has gotten overly complicated regarding scientific proof and its application to establishing God’s existence. I don’t think bin Ismail was trying to prove God’s existence scientifically. I’m not even sure God’s existence can be proved based on the proposed scientific methods. One of his points was just because we can’t see God’s physical countenance directly does not disqualify his existence. The other point was that in our community we have repeatedly felt the “hand of God” so for many people its rational (not scientific) to accept God. Here I use the world rational in the sense of reasonable judgment and not some scientific definition.
Let me propose another angle to this problem. If we truly get into a very low level debate regarding the use of the scientific method to prove or disprove the existence of God then I think the universe will probably come to an end before an acceptable theory is established. It will definitely not happen within our lifetime for sure. Since my own judgment, predilections, and reasoning coupled with these “experiences” or “effects” of God that bin ismail has mentioned has led me to accept God. I cannot spend my life waiting for an acceptable “proof” or repeatable scientific measurement on God to be established. On the other hand time well spent for me would be to assume God exists and search for God based on the so called “revelations” of God to humanity that so many noble personalities have claimed.
What all dee fuss bee about.
Few years back there was an accounts teacher who was busy molesting female students. This went on for a while until the po gals plucked up the courage to submit a formal complaint of harrassment. Then it took senior forever for senior management to relieve—–(name edited by the moderator) of his duties and kick him out.
By the way he runs a successful training company for preparation of the CFA qualification.
Note to the commentator: Do not use this forum for airing libellous statements against other individuals. (AZW, Moderator, PTH).
Clearly the university doesn’t have enough to worry about!! Clearly a stupid university in a similar country
moderator – try saying please – don’t they teach you any manners in your country?
This is just sad! I was aware of the youth being led astray and have often seen on TV how ‘westernized’ the youth of Pakistan is, maybe too ‘westernized’. Born in the UK, I may not have the right to say this as I live in the society that most Pakistanis imitate. But at the end of the day you’re not in England or America. More than half of your people can’t speak English, funny how they remain oblivious to this fact and walk around like they’re the next big thing. Sad. Pakistani’s born and living abroad know the true value of ‘Identity’ find it before you lose it!
hello to the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx girlz of lahore
I AM ALONE PERSON…03477291509
All types of girls are available.school,college and university students
They make you comfortable and relax..
Pick and drop facility is also available
For jst Nearest Locations
plz contect
For Lahore:
Miss Maham 0321-8888567
Miss Samina 0332-4529914
For Multan:
Miss Fari 0307-7821693
Miss Ayesha 0303-7973963
plz contact on my mob number 03025180616
hello piz on my mob nu 03004226557 i love you top girl
For Lahore
For Lahore
I think this was meant to be a discussion about pros and the cons about the Ahmedi/Qadiana school of thinking. How and why some quaint hearts (and peabrains) have started bleeding about their Made-in-LawLawMusa loneliness is slightly diversionary and, well err, some tiny bit mistaken. Sex of one is half dozen-dozen of The Odder.
I had nicknamed injustice in Lahore as ‘LawWhore’.
Now with all these beseechings for prepaid companionship-onthetake, perhaps that namecalling be appropriately up’dating-ed to ‘La!Whore.’ As cash ‘N carry love juices flutter into the guttering mainstream. My mfhusain!
The PakTeaHouse, I recall reluctantly, was never, and is not a Dating Servis.
======================================================================
Glossary:
My mfhusain = My foot
La = Bring/fetch or procure
it does not depend on the person that how he thinks.
every person think according to his knowledge and status,
i am the student of lums.i find lums very comfortable about
study not for girls….
islam is our leader…we must know about it…
I was also doing this at LUMS, it’s enjoyment.
Oh sorry, i wanted to write it’s enjoyment.
just look at some people here,, i just feel like giving them a tight slap on there big dirty faces, here a one is discussing on a topic which is being emerging here in universities of pakistan like LUMS, i dont know know whether this issue is right to discuss or not, if i talk about islam that what is prohibited and what not many idiot faces will bark upon my sentences, like if rolling over eachother on the ground of lawn infront of campus library,putting hand in girls capri is prohibited in islam many would bark that opposite sex getting education under one roof is also prohibited, But let me tell u here what does a women means,,(A Cover) esi cheese jo dhaki ho,, these are the institutions where people go to gain something,to get education not to have fun and sex in campus, there are some illetrate and uneducated people like elite class and from middle class who ruin the meaning of education and give name of institution the name of red light area, EIK GANDI MACHLI SARAY TALAAB KO GANDA KARTI H
tHE administration should take a step and at least should put some restrictions, a campus is not a place to have fun, if you talk about western schools, that there are also those who are having same environment, then all of babies here listen to me carefully if in this case you are following them then u might also follow them in their achievements, See where western countries are standing now and where pakistan is standing now, those are developed countries and from years and years pakistan is least developed country and here our young generation is following them not in case how they are progressing but say how they are modernized,liberal,partying, enjoying,, shame on all of you