Another ‘blasphemy’ case

[PAFAce]

The problem is not the law itself, but the application of the law. In most cases justice cannot be guaranteed as it can never be proven beyond reasonable doubt that the blasphemous actions took place. This means that this law has become a tool for people to use to oppress minorities within their communities. Unfortunately, opportunistic religious community leaders flame the fire.

As long as justice cannot be guaranteed, the punishments must not be doled out. However, if it can be proven sufficiently, then the law is the law is the law. It is completely reasonable, and in my opinion necessary, to implement Shariah rulings in a country with 95% Muslims, particularly the controversial ones (i.e., regarding adultery, lewd behavior, blasphemy, murder etc). According to Pew Research, 81% of Pakistanis agree with me.

Pakistan is a confused state, it was not meant to be an Islamic state and even if it become one, we do not have the leaders to implement Sharia.

That is a key point. Even though Shariah is a 1400 year old code, it doesn't have to be implemented in that way. Shariah has a place in the modern world. We don't need people with the moral character of the Original Four Caliphs to implement Shariah properly, we need a people that desire it, and I believe we aree a people who desire it. All we really need to do is modify our Legislative and Judicial system slightly to ensure the implementation of Shariah in which consensus is mandatory.

See, neither the British Justice system nor the Western-style democracy has worked for us so far. Maybe Islamic democracy is an option worth giving a shot.

 

[niaz]

IMO this is an illustration of imbeciles giving went to their prejudices. If throwing of a business card in the dust bin with a name Mohammed printed on it is ‘Blasphemy’. What do you think of swearing? When you swear at me I can’t swear back at you if your name is Mohammed as I would be committing blasphemy?

How many pieces of newspaper you see lying in the gutter? Mohammed is a common name in the Muslim world; there would surely some lines with Mohammed printed. Does it mean that any time someone throws a piece of paper on the road, if it happens to have Mohammed printed any where on it; the person should be tried for blasphemy? What about old books with pages falling off? Where do we stop?

Isn’t it clear that the mere name Mohammed does not mean our holy Prophet unless it clear refers to him with PBUH written after the word Mohammed? An individual named Mohammed by his parents
could be a thief or a murder or even a fornicator or anything else; but he is certainly not the Prophet. This is just common sense. Why was the case registered in the first place?

Let us face it; we are becoming a nation of ignorant bigots without even common sense. Both the complainant and the SHO who registered the case should be penalized for wasting time of the Courts. An age of madness currently prevails in Pakistan.

 

[Valiant_Soul]

See, neither the British Justice system nor the Western-style democracy has worked for us so far. Maybe Islamic democracy is an option worth giving a shot.

So why has democracy worked for them? If "taking shots" is your way of dealing with the functioning of a nation, God help you.

Democracy itself cannot be at flaw, it is the implementation of it that is flawed, and hence the blame squarely lies upon the implementers, if it has not worked for you.

 

[T-Faz]

We made this country with the slogan "Pakistan ka mutlub kya LA ILLAHA ILALLAH", so now we are forgetting it, Quaid e Azam was NOT a SECULAR leader, why don't people understand it..

This ‘Pakistan Ka Mutlab Kya’ slogan only become famous during Zia’s rule because he used religion as a political tool.

It wasn’t a popular slogan during the creation of Pakistan and Jinnah was infuriated when he first heard it.

It is said that Pakistan was created with the use of the slogans “Islam in danger” and “Pakistan ka matlab kya, La illaha ilallah”, both slogans which — ironically — were never used by Quaid-e-Azam himself. Indeed Jinnah ruled out “Pakistan ka matlab kiya, La illaha illallah” when he censured a Leaguer at the last session of the All India Muslim League after partition in these words: “Neither I nor the Muslim League Working Committee ever passed a resolution — Pakistan ka matlab kiya — you may have used it to catch a few votes.”

Today, the most funniest thing secularists come up with is Quaid's 11th August speech where his words are misunderstood, Quaid never used the word "Secular" in his any speech, his every speech contained "Islamic Ideology", "Muslims" and other words like these..

Well he said that religion will have no role in state affairs, he said that Pakistan was not going to be a theocracy, he said it was not the business of state on what religion someone is.

He said we should all be Pakistani’s and that is it. Sounds secular enough or not.

How about this.

Iskander Mirza once asked the Quaid, “Sir, we all agreed to go to Pakistan, but what kind of polity are you going to have? Are you going to have an Islamic state?” The Quaid replied, “Non-sense! I’m going to have a modern state.”

Or this

In 1943 Dr. A H Kazi of Bombay presented a resolution saying that the future constitution of Pakistan should be based on Islam. Jinnah vetoed it and declared it as nothing less than censure.

When will people understand, ALLAH is the only sovereign, Muslims are bound to follow ALLAH's rules which are sharia'ah otherwise they should wait for azaab, today's generation needs to understand it...

Allah is to whom we will all return and be judged for our actions. Perhaps you should understand this quote from Hadhrat Ali (RA) to truly understand religion.

The foremost act in religion is the acknowledgment of Him. The perfection of acknowledging Him is believing in Him; the perfection of believing in Him is acknowledging His oneness; the perfection of acknowledging His oneness is pledging loyalty to Him and the perfection of pledging loyalty to Him is denying attributes pertaining to Him, because of the qualities of His creation that could be attributed to humans. Everyone of them is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed and everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute. Thus whoever assigns attributes to Allah recognizes His like, and who recognizes His like regards Him as dual, and who regards Him as dual recognizes parts of Him, and who recognizes parts of Him has mistaken Him.

 

[GentlemanObserver]

So why has democracy worked for them? If "taking shots" is your way of dealing with the functioning of a nation, God help you.

Democracy itself cannot be at flaw, it is the implementation of it that is flawed, and hence the blame squarely lies upon the implementers, if it has not worked for you.

I like how people like Democracy as some western value... I say nay it is a global social system... Instead of despotism, or monarchy or theocracy you have a democracy..

Democracy.. As Shakespeare put it.. "What is in a name", a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet. As long as it is the people who wield the power and not some warlord, despot or autocratic landlord... then it is in essence "Democracy"...

We still have a long way to go before we can secure rights for all in Pakistan, there is no dispersible tablet to cure such an ill.

 

[pak-marine]

I can see your representing your nation well.. Bravo... Please carry on the good work.

please delete this post as well .. one can read his offensive remarks

 

[Developereo]

It is completely reasonable, and in my opinion necessary, to implement Shariah rulings in a country with 95% Muslims, particularly the controversial ones (i.e., regarding adultery, lewd behavior, blasphemy, murder etc). According to Pew Research, 81% of Pakistanis agree with me.

I don't understand how this would work. Would non-Muslims be subject to shariah law? How about a dispute involving two people where one is Muslim and the other not? How about non-practising Muslims or those who are not heavily religious?


In my opinion, there should be one law of the land. No exceptions. In a multi-religious society with a full spectrum of relgiosity, the only choice is a secular legal system.

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

that is not correct. Had that been the case East Pakistan wouldn't have turned into Bangladesh. Real progress and unity have nothing to do with religion. Its just the opposite. You mix religion with nationality and what you end up getting is anybody whom you don't consider to be following your sect is not only a kafir but also ghaddar, which makes the whole concept heretic in itself.

Welcome to the discussion Mr Architect Cobb...

You seem confused about the issue... East Pakistan turned into Bangladesh EXACTLY because we did not look at Islam for our solution... not the other way around... If you take a second to think about it, you are basically supporting my point of view in reality, because the root of the problem in East Pakistan was Nationalism, not Islam!!! duh

As for your point about mixing religion with nationality... I dont know what religion you are talking about... Islam has no place for sects... What we do allow is difference of opinion based on valid Shariah text... That results in schools of Jurisprudence i.e Fiqh... Sects are something like Qadianis etc... They are clearly out of the fold of Islam...

not correct again. There is nothing wrong with being Blaoch, Punjabis, Sindhis , Pukhtoons, Mahajir etc as long as you're a Pakistani as well. Just as being English, Scottish, Welsh or Irish doesn't stop you from being British or a citizen of UK.

Again what you overlook here is that being a Pakistani you have to have your roots in Islam... Pakistan was built for this very reason... I mean Afghans can remain Afghans, Turks can be turks, Arabs shall be Arabs, but us Pakistanis, we simply do not have any other identity... because a few decades ago we were all basically INDIANS!!!

It is absolutely wrong to confine Islam into a nationalist frame work... Islam is a system of universal brotherhood... There is no such thing as nationalism in Islam... You choose your sides very carefully here...

and what you quoted from me illustrates this clearly... Had it not been for Islam, I have absolutely no use for my Pakistani identity... but my pride in Pakistan is because we got that land in the name of God and His Messenger...

Now where does religion come in there? If Islam is the key to being Pakistani then a muslim in Ethiopia or Bosnia would be more of a Pakistani than a christian or hindu in Pakistan. Thats not the case. Please avoid confusing the two issues. Geographical loyalities cannot be mixed/confused with ideological allegiances. Thats a recipe for disaster the kind we face everyday in the streets of Pakistan.

I think my above post will explain what you have written above very clearly... There is absolutely no plan for the Caliphate to remain confined to the borders of Pakistan my friend

These borders were just divide and rule, at times drawn over tissue papers by the British colonialists... it has zero legitimacy in my world view... If I can pray together with a brother from Turkey or Iran, I see no reason why we need to stay BOXED in these imaginary walls...

You need to listen to this...

YouTube - Soldiers of Allah-Imaginary Walls

and always remember... that when a certain political idea can work in the past, it can certainly work again... democracy for example is an ANCIENT concept... not a new one!!!

 

[shuntmaster]

What is Islamic democracy? How is it different from secular democracy? How is a head of state elected in an Islamic democracy? is there any country today which follows Islamic democracy? (Turkey? Iran?Indonesia?)

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Doesn't every religion claim the same? First stop thinking that islam is superior to other religions. That's the root cause the problem is thinking others are inherently inferior to you.

I know you guy's will say Hinduism has caste system. We know Hinduism has some stupid rules written 2000 yrs ago. But no Hindu will argue caste system or sati is good.

We are not interested in CLAIMS... be my guest... Show me how Hinduism gives teachings to solve the economic problems of mankind...

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

What is Islamic democracy? How is it different from secular democracy? How is a head of state elected in an Islamic democracy? is there any country today which follows Islamic democracy? (Turkey? Iran?Indonesia?)

A very good question in my view... Islam and Democracy are opposites of each other... our good folks confuse it with election and representation which are also part of Islam... there can be no such thing as an Islamic democracy because democracy gives man the power to legislate on behalf of others, whereas Islam has halal and haram decided by Allah swt... When you bring in Halal and Haram, you do not have a democracy... Our people fail to see this...

Islam in its systems is complete (and has huge depth and details)... It does not need to be attached to communism, capitalism or democracy to function...

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

So why has democracy worked for them? If "taking shots" is your way of dealing with the functioning of a nation, God help you.

Democracy itself cannot be at flaw, it is the implementation of it that is flawed, and hence the blame squarely lies upon the implementers, if it has not worked for you.

Who says its working for them...

Dude... yOu have no idea the kind of corruption that the British MPs are engaged in... people got a glimpse of that a few months ago... Its all forgotten by now...

Democracy is the reason why we are having on going war and conflict in the world!!! Its a system of Cannibals...

Who do we eat today... Valiant Soul? Lets vote

---------- Post added at 10:56 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:55 AM ----------

Ok... i ll be writing in response to TFaz and Saf and Develop later on... having a busy day today!!!

 

[GentlemanObserver]

What is Islamic democracy? How is it different from secular democracy? How is a head of state elected in an Islamic democracy? is there any country today which follows Islamic democracy? (Turkey? Iran?Indonesia?)

Lets not play on semantics shall we, one man's penicillin is another man's anthrax... There is no miracle cure, REMEMBER THAT

 

[LeGenD]

And about the Blasphemy law, it is completely Islamic and it should remain intact, whatever people may say, this is not gonna change it Insh'ALLAH, whole Muslim ummah has consensus on it.. I actually don't mind whatever rubbish is spoken about these religious matters by ignorants because these discussions won't change ground realities, Majority of people are in favour of a Islamic system and if you can just go to a street and ask a common man what should we do to a Blasphemer, he will answer this question better than us.

So, Stop criticising it, move on and try to ACT like Muslims.

Brother, you know what our problem is? When we try to implement Islamic teachings in our system, we do so without looking at the whole picture of those teachings.

Islamic punishment laws are very different from what common people here understand:

1. If a person is found guilty of blasphemy or a heinous crime, a trial should be conducted against that person and only a very pious Qazi or Islamic leader has the 'authority' to carry out that trail.
2. Unless the person is proven guilty, he or she cannot be punished.
3. Mobs or groups of common citizens do not have the right to punish the accused on their own. They should hand the accused to the right authorities for trial.
4. If the person was wrongly accused, than those who accused him are to be punished severly in response.

This is the whole process of Islamic way of punishments.

If we are to implement Islamic teachings in our system, we need to do so in proper context.

Unfortunately, this does not seems to be the case in Pakistan. Our leaders are not implementing Islamic teachings in their full context and thus are doing more harm to Islamic image.

 

[Valiant_Soul]

We still have a long way to go before we can secure rights for all in Pakistan, there is no dispersible tablet to cure such an ill.

How about starting with building the consensus that secularism is the way forward and not Shariah?

P.S. Thank you for allowing me to speak.