Would you guys support a law in Pakistan which penalizes blasphemy (disrespecting religious holy figures, orally or through any action) with a guarantee that (improbable but for sake of argument):
safeguards will be designed and implemented to prevent misuse
cases will go through proper scrutiny before punishment is handed out
blatantly false allegation of blasphemy will be prosecuted and punished.
Laws are made to meet some need of society. There is absolutely no need for such a law in Pakistan. Muslims are in such a majority that no one will dare disrespect their holy figures. As far as the minorities are concerned, their feelings don't count for jack anyway. Even with the present laws, their holy figures are routinely disrespected and ridiculed.
You were being charitable when you said it was improbable to have such guarantees. I would say it is impossible. The religious fervor is such that as soon as a person is accused of blasphemy, s/he is considered guilty by the majority and anyone who acts to punish such a person becomes a hero (e.g. Qadri).
All this being said, I don't support people who disrespect religious personalities. A law such as the one that was on the books before mullahs tempered with it is tolerable. I would absolutely not support a law, no matter what the justification, that kills someone for spoken words and hurt feelings.
I would fully support such a law, furthermore in this day and age the protection should not just be to Muslims but other faiths too… no more mudslinging literall or physical at the Church walls or at the Temples, Synagoges or any other place of worship.
One rule for all anyone who steps over the line should be duly punished, reserve harshest punishments for repeat offenders or those who make big fitna.
Those who lie should also suffer harsh punishment.
I am not in favour of executing every blasphemer a mere fine will suffice for most individuals and a hefty fine for publishers etc.
For those who go too far however there should be some serious deterent, so for that category I think ruling out corporal punishment is not an option if by one mans book bashing a mob kills someone the book basher should be bashed to death too.
This applies to Molvi types who propogate unnecassry hatred and is my personal vengeance on such biggots but it extends to all religous leaders and politicians.
My main concern about the law of blasphemy, in fact my question to all the religious leaders who are shouting in favor of this law is;
where was your eeman before that law became the law, that is in 1984 or so. Were Muslims not living in Pakistan before that, or were they not in love with their Prophet before Zia brought in the death penalty?
JI was there, JUI was there, Noorani’s party was there before Zia’s time. Why is that they never thought that the law is needed then and why do they think that its only Un Islamic now to not to have that law.
^ Do YOU think we need the law. Why? or why not? (given conditions mentioned in OP)
If we did not need the law till 1984, we dont need the law now. The law is an insult to all the Muslims of Pakistan from before 1984. Zia brought the law not to make Pakistan a better islamic state, but to portray himself as a real Ameer-ul-momineen. His agenda was selfish and every amendment that he made in the constitution was based on that selfishness.
Pakistani authorities charged 647 people with offenses under the blasphemy laws between 1986 and 2007. Zero were charged before that law (btw, law was still there in some shape and form, death penalty was added by Zia).
The figures just throw me off. Either free speech has been abused after 1986, or people abused the law to take personal revenges.
chacha_Ghalib, It is not an argument. It is a question. Should people have freedom to do or say anything they want to? Is there anything wrong with have such a law?
TLK, I agree that the law has been misused, but does it mean that there is something fundamentally wrong with having such a law? You guys are not considering the (hypothetical, in case of Pakistan) conditions I mentioned in OP.
I just want to know what issues (if any) people have with the law other than misuse and improper application (which is a common problem with many other laws in Pakistan).
TLK are you sure it was Zia the traitor who bought the Blasphemy law and not Bhutto?
I thougth the Blasphemy law was from Bhutto era and same period when Ahmedis were technically stopped from having same rights as the rest of us… correct me if i’m wrong but thats just what I thought was the case.
Anyway with respects to Kaka’s question I have allready given my viewpoint I just am suprised that the others cannot compromise on it, so they are arguing not for better legislation rather a western style total secularist approach by throwing a valid law out…
Surely compromise is better than extremists on both sides who want a harsh law or a no law.
my concern is, if the law is true representation of shariah or not. I am very core hanafi, but I dont want to know what Imam abu Haneefa said about someone who insults Prophet Mohammed. I want to know what prophet himself or quran said about it.
Okay but the law was from before Zia's time... am I right?
So your issue is not with the law but the death penalty?
And by the way glad to know your a fellow Hanfi. :)
a general law against insult of religious figure was there as part of 1973 constitution. The current law was redefined in a very strict way and got this shape and form in 1984. Zia also added life imprimsoment and death penalty to it
yes, my main problem is with the harsh nature of punishment.
yes, my main problem is with the harsh nature of punishment.
On the harsh nature of the punishment I agree with you, you should not simply kill a guy for what he said in private or public...
The grey area for me is those who preach active hate speech and are rabble rousers, I mean the sort of persons who will shout how evil muslims are and burn a masjid a koran and heaven forbid will actually shoot a muslim given half a chance, likewise there are some Muslim ulema who will tell you that killing people becuase they are Jews or Hindu or whatever is sawab and you should go do it... that sort of person especially if his words led to bloodshed deserves death in my opinion as a deterent.
But it does not happen often so a fine or short term imprisonment or perhaps forced tableeg or something is far better punishment. :)
But I am sure you will agree we do need some form of legislation to prevent such blasphemy... so next time theres a Rushdie case or something we can just ban the book and even fine the author if he ever tries to sell such lies in Pakistan.
so next time theres a Rushdie case or something we can just ban the book
Oh dont get me started on Rushdie. He is one of the lousiest author I've ever read, but thanks to the wisdom of us Muslims, the useless publicity we gave him, his book became new york best sellers.
I am sure that in his down time, he must be thanking Khumeni and likes, as because of that fatwa and smilair ones, he became a millionaire and bought himself a hot wife.
Doesn't the blasphemy law have its origins in colonial law of British India, where it was illegal to blaspheme against any religion? The death penalty, of course, was added by Zia.
Would you guys support a law in Pakistan which penalizes blasphemy (disrespecting religious holy figures, orally or through any action) with a guarantee that (improbable but for sake of argument):
safeguards will be designed and implemented to prevent misuse
cases will go through proper scrutiny before punishment is handed out
blatantly false allegation of blasphemy will be prosecuted and punished.
Well why not. No reason anyone should disrespect anyone else's religion. But seeing as how most of the provisions seem extremely unlikely, probably bette of not having the law.