Re: Blasphemy law
Blasphemy law is silly, an affront to civilized legal process and a knock on free speech. I dont deny that the reason may be a noble one (to protect the status of faith in a religious nation), but it has only ever been misused and abused.
Also it sould be uniform, its against the law to insult all faiths, be it Islam, Hinduism, Xtianity or anyother. With the provisio that open academic debate between scholars of each be allowed in public forums.
It depends on what you regard as insult, different nations or people have different tolerance levels and interpretations of a joke versus insult. I can also see equal laws of tolerance and respect towards all faiths in a society following secular laws but not in a theocratic state. In an Islamic state non-muslims are supposed to be dealt justly, which means we do not insult them for their beliefs because that is a form of injustice however they cannot preach against the state religion because that would be regarded as treason whereas in secular states it should not be regarded as treason.
Blasphemy law is not silly but needs to be understood in the correct context. I might agree that the way it is implemented and executed in Pakistan is wrong but it has a place in a theocratic state. Blasphemy law is similar to treason in any other secular state, the difference is what actions are subject to treason. If people from a secular state are involved in actions which are deemed dangerous to the national security and its existence and ideology then it is treason, similarly actions which are deemed dangerous to the ideology and existence of an Islamic state should be prosecuted under laws of treason. The foundations or creed of an Islamic or any theocratic state are based on faith and belief and its citizenship is based on whether you have a common belief with it or not. If you do not agree with it then leave the state and go to one which coincides with your beliefs or live under the privileges that the theocratic state provides.
To me blasphemy should not be dealt with capital punishment by their rights or privileges that are based on their faith should be revoked. It is their choice whether they want to continue to live in the same country or not. Capital punishment is only justified if they are committing activites that threaten the national security of the state. For Pakistan 10 people changing their religion out of a population of 160 million does not threaten its national security. If they change their religion and launch attacks on muslims as part of their newly found ideology or religion then its a problem and deserves punishment.