Is blasphemy a pardonable offense?

[TankMan]

Not twisting words. I don't know what "unbiased approach while opposing evil" is.

Of course, you wouldn't know.
The first step is being careful who you label evil. Most of the times, they're just misinformed stubborn people, like our resident maulvi here.
Secondly, you need to make sure you don't stoop lower than the people you're opposing - what's the point in fighting extremism if you're going to be just as extremist yourself?
Thirdly, no generalizations - generalizations are what lead to discrimination, racism and so on. (The Holocaust is a prime example of the dangers of generalizations, especially when coupled with a psychopath and weapons)

But, when it comes to clear injustice, Islam promotes a strong, resolute approach - that's the concept of Jihad and Qital. But again, this needs to be used moderately and in an intelligent manner - otherwise, sh!t (like ISIS) happens.

I not disobeying him and for ayats you first go and read there context than come and talk you are quoting ayats wrongly and talking against this law are mostly those who are always looking to please west but punishment for Blasphemy is clear if state will not do that people will

I have already read and even posted the context over hear. How about you actually quote some context instead of telling me I'm looking to please West - I'm looking to please Allah, and unless you consider the Quran to be a product of the west, this allegation doesn't apply to me.
So for God's sake, stop behaving like a mullah and engage in an intellectual debate.

 

[Solomon2]

...talking against this law are mostly those who are always looking to please west -

Why can't Pakistanis both please themselves and the West? Is it forbidden or something?

 

[TankMan]

Why can't Pakistanis both please themselves and the West? Is it forbidden or something?

Come on, don't act as though the west is full of angels. Politically, the West's interests oppose Pakistan's interests, which is why you can't please both.

 

[Zarvan]

Of course, you wouldn't know.
The first step is being careful who you label evil. Most of the times, they're just misinformed stubborn people, like our resident maulvi here.
Secondly, you need to make sure you don't stoop lower than the people you're opposing - what's the point in fighting extremism if you're going to be just as extremist yourself?
Thirdly, no generalizations - generalizations are what lead to discrimination, racism and so on. (The Holocaust is a prime example of the dangers of generalizations, especially when coupled with a psychopath and weapons)

But, when it comes to clear injustice, Islam promotes a strong, resolute approach - that's the concept of Jihad and Qital. But again, this needs to be used moderately and in an intelligent manner - otherwise, sh!t (like ISIS) happens.


I have already read and even posted the context over hear. How about you actually quote some context instead of telling me I'm looking to please West - I'm looking to please Allah, and unless you consider the Quran to be a product of the west, this allegation doesn't apply to me.
So for God's sake, stop behaving like a mullah and engage in an intellectual debate.

I have given proof and I would give more but you still will remain in denial and sorry you didn't posted context of ayat

 

[TankMan]

I have given proof and I would give more but you still will remain in denial and sorry you didn't posted context of ayat

I have refuted all of your alleged proof. All of it. The only one in denial here is you brother.
I did post context of the Ayats:

''Show forgiveness, enjoin what is good, and turn away from the foolish'' (i.e. don't punish them) [Al A'raf 7:199]
(Context: Allah is commanding the Prophet to convey this message to his people: ''Say, [O Muhammad] .... [7:195]'')

''And when they hear ill speech, they turn away from it and say, "For us are our deeds, and for you are your deeds. Peace will be upon you; we seek not the ignorant." [Al-Qasas 28:55]
(Context: Allah is describing the actions of the messengers, : ''Those to whom We gave the Scripture before it..... [28:52]'')

They swear by Allah that they said nothing (bad), but really they said the word of disbelief, and they disbelieved after accepting Islam, and they resolved that (plot to murder Prophet Muhammad SAW) which they were unable to carry out, and they could not find any cause to do so except that Allah and His Messenger had enriched them of His Bounty. If then they repent, it will be better for them, but if they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful torment in this worldly life and in the Hereafter. And there is none for them on earth as a Wali (supporter, protector) or a helper.
(Context: Allah is addressing Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) directly: ''O Prophet....'')

The context within the Quran itself is enough to prove that it does apply to us. But If you still refuse to believe in the Quran, what about the Hadiths where it is said that the Prophet (s.a.w) forgave blasphemers such as the man who urinated in a mosque infront of him, the people of Taif, the people of Makkah and the two groups of Jews who insulted him to his face?

It's a shame that I have to convince a supposed Muslim that Islam is peaceful.

 

[Oldman1]

No Pardons!

 

[Solomon2]

Come on, don't act as though the west is full of angels. Politically, the West's interests oppose Pakistan's interests, which is why you can't please both.

So because Westerners are against blasphemy laws (or at least enforcing them) Pakistanis should automatically endorse blasphemy laws?

 

[TankMan]

So because Westerners are against blasphemy laws (or at least enforcing them) Pakistanis should automatically endorse blasphemy laws?

More of that word twisting I was talking about.

The west doesn't oppose things like blasphemy laws out of goodwill - it opposes them because of the political leverage it gives them, along with the popular support. So, actually, in this case opposing blasphemy laws = removing some of the west's leverage against us.

My post was in reference to ''making the west happy'', i.e: in general, when you asked why we can't keep the West happy (again, I took this as a general question, not specifically targeting the issue of blasphemy laws).

And no, I do not oppose the west entirely. I would be glad if they didn't play political games and we all could just get along. But sadly, the reality is different.

I know I'm doing something right when both a Western Ultra-Liberal and a Pakistani Ultra-Mullah are debating me - upsetting both the extremes means I am being moderate.

 

[Zarvan]

I have refuted all of your alleged proof. All of it. The only one in denial here is you brother.
I did post context of the Ayats:


The context within the Quran itself is enough to prove that it does apply to us. But If you still refuse to believe in the Quran, what about the Hadiths where it is said that the Prophet (s.a.w) forgave blasphemers such as the man who urinated in a mosque infront of him, the people of Taif, the people of Makkah and the two groups of Jews who insulted him to his face?

It's a shame that I have to convince a supposed Muslim that Islam is peaceful.

No Mr its not enough that shows your major mistakes without know on which event and why that ayat was revealed you can't understand it

 

[TankMan]

No Mr its not enough that shows your major mistakes without know on which event and why that ayat was revealed you can't understand it

Bhai sahab, If you think I am making mistakes then POINT THEM OUT! Don't just say mistakes, prove it.

 

[Patriots]

This is indeed pardonable if committed person apologizes publicly ... Whether he had begged pardon sincerely or not ... If he doesn't beg pardon than surely be punished ............

 

[Solomon2]

No Mr its not enough that shows your major mistakes without know on which event and why that ayat was revealed you can't understand it

Bhai sahab, If you think I am making mistakes then POINT THEM OUT! Don't just say mistakes, prove it.

What will it take for one of you to yield to the other?

 

[PurpleButcher]

Now you have a clue of how Jews feel when they answer the false charges of hatemongers. Zarvan's "logic" is that what he claims as evidence is evidence and what you say, if it doesn't support his claims, is irrelevant.

His pointing out that when Muslims were weak jihad wasn't mandatory and that only the ruler is to protect minorities could be part a larger theme: that the stronger Muslims become the more they are expected to exercise repression upon weaker others. His poor syntax suggests that he is aware of the weakness of his arguments and is working to confuse you. If this was a face-to-face confrontation I suspect he might have lost patience already and struck you down while you were distracted trying to make sense of what he said and composing your response.

Or maybe by this time he would have gone to the local police station, lodged an FIR against us using Blasphemy Law and we would have been jail for a decade or so till our eventual murder in the jail/court

but punishment for Blasphemy is clear if state will not do that people will

or before the FIR we would have been murdered and our murderer would have been showered with rose petals by MULLAHS

It's a shame that I have to convince a supposed Muslim that Islam is peaceful.

Yes It is

@Zarvan kindly answer my questions brother

 

[TankMan]

This is indeed pardonable if committed person apologizes publicly ... Whether he had begged pardon sincerely or not ... If he doesn't beg pardon than surely be punished ............

Even if he doesn't beg pardon, any punishment greater than a fine or small term in prison would be disproportionate, and thus against the Quran's orders.
"And if you punished, let your punishment be proportionate to the wrong that has been done to you; but if you show patience, that is indeed the best course''. [Qur'an 16:126]

What will it take for one of you to yield to the other?

Nothing will make me yield to his current stance. Nothing. As for him, he claims to be Muslim. So clear commands from the Quran, the highest authority for Muslims, should have been enough. But they weren't, so I don't know anymore.

 

[Dubious]

If a Hindu or another guy doesn't believe in PROPHET SAW that is not my problem but if that person abuses my PROPHET SAW than I will just ............ them up

Why? Under whose orders?

How will his barking hurt our prophet?

LOL... ok... you continue burying your head deep inside the sand than an ostrich... But here is my 2 cents - Till you have to refer to a book before you decide (as an individual) on how to deal with another human being rather than using your commonsense, knowledge and emotions this situation will continue. You argue that the book says not to kill (even though history is replete with such instances) just because you don't want to kill. You will justify that interpretation saying all who are against it are ignorant of the "real" thing. Another says book supports killing because he wants to kill (even though history is again replete with opposite). He term all opposing him "ignorant". This is not new to any one religion and even secular books. Drop the book, think for yourself. We are humans, not robots that we need to be "programmed" for every action.

Ok genius!

Well, if the book is giving good examples and good references and good conduct I am not an arrogant fool to ignore it! As for common sense (depends on upbringing, society and OWN thoughts- differ people to people as well as differs from place to place), knowledge (unless it falls from heaven my 2 cents is it comes from BOOKS - and a religious book can fit in that category too) and emotions (depends on upbringing, society and OWN thoughts- differ people to people as well as differs from place to place) - Basically this is flawed coz if a rapist is made in charge of giving such "knowledge education and information" do you think his followers will be thinking like you? What about a serial killer...ever seen his followers how they dont take logic...maybe you havent hence your naive interpretation of life!

When Hindus claim Hinduism is a peaceful religion why did Ashoka go around conducting mass murder and what not? Isnt peace in your books...then why did Ashoka do that? Same can be said about a billion other things but of course common sense is not very common!

If you want to single out "people´s action" over commands of a religious book be my guest lock yourself in ignorance!

When "other" cant be reasoned is when you should doubt yourself coz no book says kill! When you cant reason that is when you order to drop the book coz your inability to reason...there goes common sense, logic and "programmed" theory

As for programmed, how do you know fire will burn, have you not been warned as a child? Not until you reach a certain level do you understand the warning...OR you burn yourself as a child....

Blasphemy law doesn't go against Quran these liberal puppet touts of west are for sure going against Islam from prisoners of badr till Fatah Makkhah many were killed for this crime and in time of 4 caliphs to

If blasphemy law was valid.....WHY wasnt the Jewish lady killed? what was soo special about her? SHE ONLY did blasphemy!

Why wasnt the guy who peed in the Masjid IN FRONT OF THE PROPHET killed? He ONLY did blasphemy!

Why can't Pakistanis both please themselves and the West? Is it forbidden or something?

"please themselves and the West?"

Why the bloody hell would anyone want that?