When courts fail to serve justice, does it matter what laws do/do not exist? It's like putting the cart in front of the horse. When were laws ever respected and adhered to in Pakistan like they're meant to that it will make any behavioural difference in the country if you eradicate/revamp one of them.
Which begs the question: why are these laws interpreted in such an extreme manner in Pakistan, but not in countries like the UK (which I believe, technically, has a state religion and blasphemy law). As always, it's a combination of things, but it should be noted that extremism was promoted in Pakistan. It's not a popular, or well known fact but Pakistan was created with the consent of the British, i.e. Churchill. Now why would a racist imperialist want to help Muslims? He didn't. He realized that India could become a powerful country, which, if it had a large Muslim population, would have cultural ties to the Middle East and its resources. Pakistan was meant to act as a check to India, and even though Pakistan had better economic policies in the 60's (it could have been where South Korea and Canada are today), India and Pakistan's ridiculous feud has kept both countries in turmoil. Furthermore, Wahhabis and the US government, with the help of the Pakistani army, systematically eliminated religious leaders who preached tolerance and moderate interpretations of Islam.
My point is that other countries have meddled in Pakistan's affairs since its creation, and our people have foolishly sold the state out and allowed themselves to be manipulated.
^ You make a good point, we can't change people's mentality overnight. No law can do that. But like Martin Luther King Jr said, and I'm paraphrasing here: you may not be able to change a man's heart, but you can regulate his behaviour, i.e. you can't make racists love black people, but you can stop them from lynching African Americans.
Similarly, you can't moderate extremists overnight, but you can take away the cover of the blasphemy law. Like I said before, if someone is engaging in hate speech, by all means take them to court and let a judge decide their fate but don't turn it into a holy offense. It should be a judicial matter.
Right or wrong, both India and Pakistan along with many other countries where blasphemy is considered against the law..do not share freedom of expression and First amendment to constitution like in US.
I think the law in Pakistan has to be amended if it needs to stay and death penalty has to be removed from certain parts of it.
No one actually gets killed anyway through the law. And no one should ever be killed for ideological differences.
^ You make a good point, we can't change people's mentality overnight. No law can do that. But like Martin Luther King Jr said, and I'm paraphrasing here: you may not be able to change a man's heart, but you can regulate his behaviour, i.e. you can't make racists love black people, but you can stop them from lynching African Americans.
Similarly, you can't moderate extremists overnight, but you can take away the cover of the blasphemy law. Like I said before, if someone is engaging in hate speech, by all means take them to court and let a judge decide their fate but don't turn it into a holy offense. It should be a judicial matter.
Beautifully said. Love the way you break things down.
Right or wrong, both India and Pakistan along with many other countries where blasphemy is considered against the law..do not share freedom of expression and First amendment to constitution like in US.
Y
I think the law in Pakistan has to be amended if it needs to stay and death penalty has to be removed from certain parts of it.
No one actually gets killed anyway through the law. And no one should ever be killed for ideological differences.
While it is true blasphemy laws are in place in India, they are not implemented to the extent they are in Pakistan. Anyone who brings up India in the context of blasphemy laws is grasping for straws.
As to noone getting killed by thexlaw - it has been pointed out several times that it is not the end result. But the years of trial and uncertainty that the accused is subjected to.
While it is true blasphemy laws are in place in India, they are not implemented to the extent they are in Pakistan. Anyone who brings up India in the context of blasphemy laws is grasping for straws.
As to noone getting killed by thexlaw - it has been pointed out several times that it is not the end result. But the years of trial and uncertainty that the accused is subjected to.
The idea that the law, as stated, is somehow behind a rampaging mob is asinine.
People who oppose the law would do so even if someone actually did commit blasphemy. So please, let's put the pretense for concern over minorities aside...I'd suggest it's their latent desire to actually want to be free to blaspheme that really drives their interests.
The law must remain. But anti-incitement laws, and perhaps a double burden of proof should be called for. If one has the audacity to accuse another of blasphemy, they better have the evidence ready...otherwise they themselves are mocking the laws of God.
Similarly, you can't moderate extremists overnight, but you can take away the cover of the blasphemy law. Like I said before, if someone is engaging in hate speech, by all means take them to court and let a judge decide their fate but don't turn it into a holy offense. It should be a judicial matter.
The law provides no such cover. There is no "lynching" clause in the law.
blasphemy law is a joke, it has no place in society.. how do you justify killing minorities and not speaking up. whilst i agree that it's the mentality of people, the law provides a haven for jaahils to kill for the sake of religion and play God. i don't know what kind of superiority complex some pakistanis have that encourages them to go on a hating/killing rampage.