I believe it was not the difference in religions per se but rather the lack of respect for laws and the lack of political accomodation that made it impossible for Muslims of India to think of a future in the post-colonial India in the early twentieth century but doesn’t necessarily do so in other parts of the world today.

For example, in what democracy of the world, would the government look the other way–and even actively promote–when violence erupts between two religious communities? It did not happen in America when Muslim religious fundamentalists reportedly struck on 9/11, it did not happen in United Kingdom when they reportedly struck on 7/7, but it did happen in India when Muslims were merely reported to have burnt down the train carrying Hindu pilgrims. Later inquiries have since proved that the train wasn’t even burnt by a fire source originating from outside (as was believed to have been done by Muslims) but rather from inside thus pointing at the possibility of sabotaging the train to blame it on Muslims to, in turn, create the pretext for the carnage that ultimately happened in Gujrat several years ago.

The two nation theory might be out of sync in its logic today but perhaps not in its implications. Can anyone imagine the sense of alarm that Muslim leaders of that time must have felt when they thought they were being forced to live in a country like that? The point that Faisal raises is valid, however, I seriously doubt if 33% Muslims would have made much difference. Democracy which is ideally a government supposed to protect the rights of a minority isn’t that forgiving when manipulated by an uncaring majority, as was as the case at the end of British rule in India.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Nation_Theory

Pakistan’s Muslim population today: 140,278,140 ie, 97.0% of total population
India’s Muslim population today: 144,198,760 ie, 14.0% of total population

Source: http://www.factbook.net/muslim_pop.php

Considering the facts above, we have more muslims in post-parition-India than Pakistan. Does that sound like objective and ideology of Pakistan was a woolly? What gives Pakistan the right to let the larger Muslim population of the reigon to suffer under Hindus? OR rightfully why do we still continue to exist as Pakistan? Isn’t the basis now all folly?

Interestingly, IF there was no Pakistan then today Muslims would be approx 28% population of India. A major minority in secular India whose Prime Minister is Sikh and President is Muslim.

My two cents.