Bakhtawar terms Ehteram-e-Ramazan Bill as ‘ridiculous law’

[Verve]

The word as such is not the focus of the action in this case, it is the history and connotation. In short, saying the word "Nigger" isn't the issue and neither is it illegal. It is racial abuse that solicits state response.

Many states (esp Liberal Secular ones) have criminalised offensive conduct that includes offensive language (that is not necessarily racial abuse). In Australia, offensive language in public has a fine of $660 and offensive conduct has $660 + 3 months in jail.

"The courts have adopted the reasonable person test in relation to these offences. This means that you will be found to have acted in a manner that is offensive or used words that are offensive if your conduct is against the standard of good taste or good manners, a breach of the rules of courtesy or runs contrary to commonly accepted social rules."

So there you have it ... morality and manners are being and should be legislated on!

This law in Pakistan is perfectly fine, even by the Liberal Secular standards.

 

[Icarus]

Many states (esp Liberal Secular ones) have criminalised offensive conduct that includes offensive language (that is not necessarily racial abuse). In Australia, offensive language in public has a fine of $660 and offensive conduct has $660 + 3 months in jail.

"The courts have adopted the reasonable person test in relation to these offences. This means that you will be found to have acted in a manner that is offensive or used words that are offensive if your conduct is against the standard of good taste or good manners, a breach of the rules of courtesy or runs contrary to commonly accepted social rules."

So there you have it ... morality and manners are being and should be legislated on!

This law in Pakistan is perfectly fine.

I feel that the law needs to be revised, when all mainstream interpretations of Islam provide leniency for those who are old, frail, sick, minors, pregnant or menstruating, and even those who are observing a fast but feel that they have become exhausted and continuing it may be detrimental to their health. Then how can we apply a blanket ban on it just like that? We had over a thousand people die in Karachi last year from heatstroke in Ramzan last year, the government should be addressing these issues rather than further complicating them. No one, I repeat, no one is going to take a paratha roll and dance with it in front of your face during Ramzan if this ban is lifted, everyone has the good sense and respect to avoid eating or drinking in front of people who are fasting, however that does not mean that they should be denied access.

 

[Verve]

I feel that the law needs to be revised, when all mainstream interpretations of Islam provide leniency for those who are old, frail, sick, minors, pregnant or menstruating, and even those who are observing a fast but feel that they have become exhausted and continuing it may be detrimental to their health. Then how can we apply a blanket ban on it just like that? We had over a thousand people die in Karachi last year from heatstroke in Ramzan last year, the government should be addressing these issues rather than further complicating them. No one, I repeat, no one is going to take a paratha roll and dance with it in front of your face during Ramzan if this ban is lifted, everyone has the good sense and respect to avoid eating or drinking in front of people who are fasting, however that does not mean that they should be denied access.

Agreed there should be no stoppage to trading and access to food & drink of course but eating openly in public view should not be allowed unless there is an emergency. Eateries should make appropriate arrangements so those eating there are not in public view.

No one dances but is not uncommon to find people eating in open and eateries serving in full view.

 

[Divergent]

I agree with @Icarus and @Oscar.

There are many flaws to this law and isn't necessary. The message itself 'please do Etharam' should be first kept at social awareness level (if things were ever that bad, I presume they weren't) to stamp a law straight on is ridiculous, harsh and unreasonable. A person with common sense within a Majority Muslim oriented population will feel embarrassed enough to chew their mouths off publicly during observation of the Holy Month.

Furthermore, being a Muslim also encourages you to make 70 odd excuses for your fellowmen before judging them. So even IF someone was eating, what if they're non-Muslims? Or have a health condition? It appears the dictating, hard-lining methods are used as first means of approach before taking other alternatives.

This law doesn't entail exceptional circumstances such as:

- Elderly People
- Very young children
- Non-Muslims
- The travellers (People travelling to other cities or making long distant journies)
- People with health issues
-Diabetics/Medication
- The sick
- Female issues
- The Pregnant and nursing woman

It is unethical.

 

[war&peace]

I find this law unnecessary.

Yes, I also found her unncessary.

The law is ridiculous, people already have the common sense and courtesy to not eat in front of those fasting. But that does nothing to let those that need to eat for whatever reason be stopped.

Pakistan is going to hell

Well Pakistan is not going to hell because of this law alone. However, I'm really not sure if this law is needed. We should ask the scholars.

 

[Divergent]

Ramadhan is a month of Mercy not dictatorship and God forbid let's say someone did happen to eat in public (for whatever reason), what if they get hurt by others? This is once again breeding intolerance and giving extremism and radicalism a boost.

One's Imaan level has to be really weak and insecure for it to reach this level.

 

[Verve]

I agree with @Icarus and @Oscar.

There are many flaws to this law and isn't necessary. The message itself 'please do Etharam' should be first kept at social awareness level (if things were ever that bad, I presume they weren't) to stamp a law straight on is ridiculous, harsh and unreasonable. A person with common sense within a Majority Muslim oriented population will feel embarrassed enough to chew their mouths off publicly during observation of the Holy Month.

Furthermore, being a Muslim also encourages you to make 70 odd excuses for your fellowmen before judging them. So even IF someone was eating, what if they're non-Muslims? Or have a health condition? It appears the dictating, hard-lining methods are used as first means of approach before taking other alternatives.

This law doesn't entail exceptional circumstances such as:

- Elderly People
- Very young children
- Non-Muslims
- The travellers (People travelling to other cities or making long distant journies)
- People with health issues
-Diabetics/Medication
- The sick
- Female issues
- The Pregnant and nursing woman

It is unethical.

This law has been in place before you were born, some not so major changes this time around .... please have a read: http://pakistancode.gov.pk/english/UY2FqaJw1-apaUY2Fqa-bZ2V-sg-jjjjjjjjjjjjj

As for your list, it is covered under section 4 - those are not obliged to fast according to the tenets of Islam. Food is allowed to be served in trains etc.

4. Prohibition of serving eatables in certain public places._(1) No proprietor, manager, servant, or other person in charge of a hotel, restaurant or canteen, or other public place, shall knowingly and wilfully offer or serve or cause to be offered or served any eatables during fasting hours in the month of Ramazan to any person who, according to the tenets of Islam, is under an obligation to fast.

Also

9. Power to make rules.___ (1) The Federal Government may make rules for carrying out the purposes of this Ordinance.
(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions, such rules may provide that, in a canteen, restaurant or dining-car referred to in clause (a), (b), (c) or (d) of section 5, eatables or articles of smoking shall only be served at a place protected from public view by means of a curtain or otherwise, and specify the classes of persons who may be admitted to any such canteen, restaurant or dining‑car during fasting hours in the month of Ramazan.

 

[Divergent]

This law has been in place before you were born, some not so major changes this time around .... please have a read: http://pakistancode.gov.pk/english/UY2FqaJw1-apaUY2Fqa-bZ2V-sg-jjjjjjjjjjjjj

As for your list, it is covered under section 4 - those are not obliged to fast according to the tenets of Islam. Food is allowed to be served in trains etc.

4. Prohibition of serving eatables in certain public places._(1) No proprietor, manager, servant, or other person in charge of a hotel, restaurant or canteen, or other public place, shall knowingly and wilfully offer or serve or cause to be offered or served any eatables during fasting hours in the month of Ramazan to any person who, according to the tenets of Islam, is under an obligation to fast.

Also

9. Power to make rules.___ (1) The Federal Government may make rules for carrying out the purposes of this Ordinance.
(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions, such rules may provide that, in a canteen, restaurant or dining-car referred to in clause (a), (b), (c) or (d) of section 5, eatables or articles of smoking shall only be served at a place protected from public view by means of a curtain or otherwise, and specify the classes of persons who may be admitted to any such canteen, restaurant or dining‑car during fasting hours in the month of Ramazan.

All of this is irrelevant because this bill has only just been enforced and still makes it unethical. Not everyone is in control of the urgency of their environmental/situational circumstances

 

[Verve]

All of this is irrelevant because this bill has only just been enforced and still makes it unethical. Not everyone is in control of the urgency of their environmental/situational circumstances

whaaa!!

Bill is 26yrs old and in news every other year ... so how can it be enforced now only - just because the fine went up?

There is no prohibitions on grocery shops etc. And restaurants can still serve behind a screen those not obliged to fast.

Where's the issue in the law?

 

[Riz]

just try to understand first what she said, there are many patients and there are many long route travelers , so how can you will justify the fine and punishment ? just capture them and put them into jail at spot ? o mery bhaio roza aik ibadat ha aor farz ha , jis na rakhna ha usky samny agar sari dunya bhi khana khati rahy tab bhe woh rakhy ga ..jis na nhi rakhna usky sar par danda bhe lay kar khary ho jao tab bhe woh kahen na kaheen sa khana peena kar he lay ga ...its personal matter you cant force any one for fasting or go to haaj, agar is aik farz ko ada karny k leay itni punishment ho sakti ha to phir Haj bhi farz ha uskko ada na karny waly par bhe fine karo aor jail bhaijo

 

[Divergent]

whaaa!!

Bill is 26yrs old and in news every other year ... so how can it be enforced now only - just because the fine went up?

There is no prohibitions on grocery shops etc. And restaurants can still serve behind a screen those not obliged to fast.

Where's the issue in the law?

Dr Khalid Zaheer, religious scholar and dean of the faculty of arts and social sciences of the University of Central Punjab, believes that the ordinance is a bit harsh and could have been avoided. "There are no clear instructions for such laws in the Qur'an. There are only a few instances where a state has the authority to question believers over a certain obligation; payment of zakaat (tax paid by Muslims) or jizya (tax paid by non-Muslims living in a Muslim country) being a primary example. I am certain that if we dealt with such matters more reasonably, people would respect the sanctity of Islam – in fact most do so and were doing it before the law was carried out. But forcing people to do it or, worse, punishing them if they fail to oblige, is only going to discourage people from taking Islamic teachings more seriously."

Even though the law states that it is only applicable to Muslims, in 2009 two Christians were arrested under it. The very existence of the law leads to a presumption that a person indulging their appetite during fasting hours is purposely disrespecting the holy month and therefore should be punished.

Vigilant moralism makes a society inherently oppressive, forced to believe in the notion of enforcing sanctimony rather than truly believing in it.

The very existence of the law leads to a presumption that a person indulging their appetite during fasting hours is purposely disrespecting the holy month and therefore should be punished.

There is no consideration to minorities or exceptional cases of urgency for those who are excluded from it.

May as well take the white out off the Flag and keep it all green.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

We should ask the scholars.

Which one do you want to ask?

The ones that says dead Pakistani Soldiers are not Shaheed neither do they deserve a Janaza?

Or the one that are ok with corruption?

The ones that keep their mouths shut are no better than the others.

You shouldn't need a scholar to tell you the stupidity of this law. How many people have you seen that openly eat during the rooza times in Pakistan?

 

[Divergent]

Which one do you want to ask?

The ones that says dead Pakistani Soldiers are not Shaheed neither do they deserve a Janaza?

Or the one that are ok with corruption?

The ones that keep their mouths shut are no better than the others.

You shouldn't need a scholar to tell you the stupidity of this law. How many people have you seen that openly eat during the rooza times in Pakistan?

Read the guy's post above your's - extremism level 100. Wow

Once again this obese ugly secularist woman is proving what a munafiq she is. These secularist people hate Islam to the core. Their hatred is so vile they cannot stand anything that is Islamic. They are beghairat people that follow Yazid Palid Lanatullah alaih. They will be raised up with Yazid

اللهم صلى على محمد وآل محمد

Labbaik Ya Rasul Allah

Once again this obese ugly secularist woman is proving what a munafiq she is. These secularist people hate Islam to the core. Their hatred is so vile they cannot stand anything that is Islamic. They are beghairat people that follow Yazid Palid Lanatullah alaih. They will be raised up with Yazid

اللهم صلى على محمد وآل محمد

Labbaik Ya Rasul Allah

If you aren't fasting in our sacred month of Ramadan for whatever reason, valid or invalid, then you must not eat in public as that is profaning our sacred month. I don't care if you are a non-Muslim minority. Pakistan is our Islamic country. If you don't like it feel free to leave. You are free to eat in the privacy of your home, but we cannot tolerate people eating and drinking in restaurants or hotels in an Islamic country. If you disagree then please give in writing that you are no longer Muslim and you disassociate yourself from the religion of our beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم and his minister, Maula Sher-e-Khuda عليه السلام

And name calling another female be she whoever is very Islamic isn't it.

 

[El Sidd]

Don't you guys tire out?

All laws are stupid. And its even more stupid if you break them so respect whatever the crap they have cooked up. Be law abiding citizens first to care about its misuse or false interpretation or even suggestions.

We are facing war, plague and famine and this seems to be our choice of changing ourselves.

Moderators should clean the thread up from the religious hotheads and one specific doomsday cult.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Once again this obese ugly secularist woman is proving what a munafiq she is. These secularist people hate Islam to the core. Their hatred is so vile they cannot stand anything that is Islamic.

If it's Islamic to have this law, perhaps you can reference it in the Qur'an, Hadaith, or Sunnah?

Read the guy's post above your's - extremism level 100. Wow

The only people supporting this "law" are those with weak iman. We were all children once who would eat or drink in front of our parents, I guess we should have been fined.