Defending secularism forces feminists to prove they are still true believers

Evidence

To argue, as Pakistani feminists did, for the separation of religion and state was to engage in a battle over the meaning of secularism. As in the Canadian context, where Mumtaz Ali and the Islamic Council insisted that the only true Muslim was one who opted for Sharia law, Pakistani feminists found themselves having to defend themselves as still pro-Islam, and insisting that there were other ways of being Muslim. The call for secularism can mean many things, Jamal insists, including a separation of religion and state or a regulation of religious options within the state. In choosing the options they did, Pakistani feminists simply calculated the odds, understanding what they were up against as the eviction of women from citizenship. — Sherene Razack, Casting Out, 365

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the parallel Canadian sharia debate—the exact mirror the author draws—and to the earlier framing of secularism meaning many things.