Nightmare of Blasphemy in Pakistan - The story of Younus Shaikh

[Halaku Khan]

Defiling the prophet's name is not the same as criticising Islam.

Hmm ... if you are not allowed to express critical opinions about the Prophet, how can you say criticism of Islam is allowed?

You seem very passionate about the blasphemy laws of pakistan, however a similar attitude towards using a dictionary would stand you in better stead.

Well, it is an important topic. I will grant that Pakistan is relatively liberal in some ways. Cowasjee would not have been allowed to write that article in Saudi Arabia, IMHO.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the preamble of which states: "the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief ... has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people".

If you will be killed for expressing opinions critical of Islam or its prophet, then you don't have freedom of speech.

If you will be killed for changing your religion from Islam to any other religion, then you don't have freedom of belief.

And how many nations in the EU have laws punishing denial of the holocaust? Are there not restrictions on 'freedom of speech' in some nations where the expression of faith in the public sphere is legally restricted?

Whatever the idealism behind 'freedom of speech', the reality is that it is rarely enforced as an absolute right. The old US SC opinion of 'freedom of speech does not protect ones right to falsely cry fire in a crowded theater' comes to mind, and the examples I mentioned above illustrate how Pakistan is not alone in this.

Societies will always temper freedom of speech within the perceived constraints of their particular environments.

 

[DarkStar]

do you know what the word defile means? you didn't get my hinting at you using a dictionary.

I suggest you learn the english language first, and then cut and paste things which actually support the point you're trying to make.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Defiling: The prophet Muhammed was a pedophile.

Criticism: I disagree with his decision to marry Hazrat Aisha given the difference in their ages.

Thats how I see the issue at least. The latter is completely acceptable, and can give rise to an interesting debate on cultural relativism vs universality of certain basic principles, the authenticity of the claims etc.

The former is nothing but a slur meant to incite and insult.

 

[Halaku Khan]

And how many nations in the EU have laws punishing denial of the holocaust? Are there not restrictions on 'freedom of speech' in some nations where the expression of faith in the public sphere is legally restricted?

Whatever the idealism behind 'freedom of speech', the reality is that it is rarely enforced as an absolute right. The old US SC opinion of 'freedom of speech does not protect ones right to falsely cry fire in a crowded theater' comes to mind, and the examples I mentioned above illustrate how Pakistan is not alone in this.



Societies will always temper freedom of speech within the perceived constraints of their particular environments.

I don't support the EU laws criminalizing questioning the Holocaust.

But questioning the Holocaust or criticizing a religion is not the same as crying fire in a theatre.

Fortunately, in the good old US of A, Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, you can still question the Holocaust as well as criticize religions.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I don't support the EU laws criminalizing questioning the Holocaust.

But questioning the Holocaust or criticizing a religion is not the same as crying fire in a theatre.

Fortunately, in the good old US of A, Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, you can still question the Holocaust as well as criticize religions.

I agree with you on not supporting the anti-holocaust denial laws, but I was merely pointing out that isolating Pakistan for violating the UDHR is not quite fair, when even European nations have restricted freedom of speech becasue of their peculiar histories and environment.

Criticizing a religion may not be the same as 'crying fire', but insulting a religion, in an environment where certain socio-economic factors and weak government institutions lend themselves to violence, is just as bad IMO.

 

[Halaku Khan]

Defiling: The prophet Muhammed was a pedophile.

Criticism: I disagree with his decision to marry Hazrat Aisha given the difference in their ages.

Thats how I see the issue at least. The latter is completely acceptable, and can give rise to an interesting debate on cultural relativism vs universality of certain basic principles, the authenticity of the claims etc.

The former is nothing but a slur meant to incite and insult.

I think one can work within that. But the law is far too broad.

Somebody could express a critical opinion and could easily be accused of an "imputation, innuendo, or insinuation" that "directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name".

 

[DarkStar]

like i said before, many muslims (also religious scholars) have been prosecuted under these laws, and I agree there is a sense of ambiguity as to what that defilint exactly entails.

But all in all, this law preserves communal harmony, and ensures the safety of minorities too.

 

[Vinod2070]

Well, it does seem that Muslims are more protective of the perceived insults to their religion and prophet than most others. While respecting this fact, there is just no doubt that the blasphemy laws are being misused to settle personal scores in Pakistan. This would be the case in any other country too!

I don't agree that the law is fine and just being misused. The law in the form it stands and given the state of the justice system is bound to be misused.

 

[lowe1941]

One has to wonder what is not said because of the fear of such laws....

 

[Zovc]

Judging by how vaguely the guidelines of convicting people under blasphemy have been defined, it definitely needs revision. Politicians like Nawaz Sharif - read: beardless mullah - pass such laws bluntly for gaining personal popularity.

In my honest opinion, death penalty for blasphemy is absurd. The sentence itself should also be revised. Some years of jail time and rehabilitation would do just fine, in the most severe cases.