FIA arrests person for expressing blasphemous thoughts to Ansar Abbasi

[ravage]

@Croquet

I believe these two points are connected. The breach of privacy issue is not applicable. If authorities have a clear evidence of someone breaking a law they are authorised to ascertain further evidence. In either we donot know whether or not the authorities went through regular channel to pursue the identity of a the blasphemer.

I am not talking about the legal aspect of privacy. the authorities did not breach privacy, because they didnt tap the email, it was given to them along with the person’s location.

The person who made a private correspondence public committed the privacy breach.

no actually the two incidents are quite different in nature. Since we donot know the entire content of the email the comparison would be futile.

You asked me for an instance where munafiqeen were not punished (in the manner this guy is threatened with) once the Islamic state was established. dont move the goalposts.

But the punishment in itself changed so we are arguing how should blasphemous acts should be tackled with .

I brought this one up to show that punishment and conducts towards munafiqeen has chagned. Not as an example of uniform nature of crime or punishment.

Show me where the punishment changed wrt the Abdullah ibn Ubayy case. That guy died a year before the Prophet did, this is not some early years of Islam case.

Actually shia religion also has very strict ruling about blasphemy. Khomeinin infamous fatwa about rushdi in 1989 and recent confirmation of its validity Death fatwa against Rushdie still valid, says Iran

Because Im shia doesnt mean I am orthodox or believe in holy iran. iran has some terrible human rights abuses going on. the salman rushdie fatwa is the least of their worries.

i didnt assume , you yourself said that i donot know much about history. In any case can you give the background religious information to condemn a law that has its basis in religion. Until then i am afraid i will continue with my aalim knows the best approach.

I condemned it without invoking religion till discussing with you. And I gave you religious basis when asked.

a)Regardless of the population abroad a coutnry forms its consitution to serve the interests and represent the populaiton in it. I donot see saudis hiding for cover and they are governed by much more stricter laws then Pakistanis.

Maybe that has to do with the saudies you meet

b) Pakistanis abroad have every right to expect to be treated as per the law of the country they are residing in

And if they wish to protest any new laws that limit the free speech/thought/expression of Muslims? Do they have any grounds to ask for better treatment? Say France banning hijab, American patriot act, some law against Muslims preaching or speaking out against Israel.

In any case i wouldnot redicule the prophets of christianity since that is blasphemy as per my believes regardless of the law of land. So yes i donot mind if western govt enforce a law where disrespecting their reliigous icons is a punishable offence.

You do not get to decide for other nations where free speech boundaries should be. Also this isnt about Western countries, or christianity. Say India, where the other major religion is one who’s icons we do not respect and preach against.