fair enough thats a matter of personal take on it. I thought when you said breach of privacy law you meant it in techincal terms. He himself made his personal thought process public by sending it to strangers, abbasi wasnt his cousin.
Actually not only twice to Ansar abbasi, this is from the article you posted.
hmm could you please quote me where i suggested all the blasphmers should be killed? I have been saying that killing them has been an option under the islamic law since most alims appear united on this front however my personal preference would be to always have in an islamic country a law that makes it a punishable offence for anyone to openly commit blasphemy and that too in a purely provocating manner.
yes but regardless of the fact most seerah books would bring him and other instances as a blasphemer, there are also a handful of people who werent given protection after conquering Makkah.
Many scholars are concerned about a trend that might emerge where udner the guise of freedom of expression regular blasphemy becomes common place and gradually the concept of the “Holy” Prophet pbuh becomes a novelty as it has become a novelty an eg would be christianity and disregard for Hazrat Esa a.s. We already see the problems of factions in our society where impostors are acting as prophets and their followers call themselves muslims. So the threat by ignoring a flagrant act of blasphemy is to the cocnept of state in itself. Hardly a private matter.
I disagree munfiqeen were a known group of people to Allah and his Prophet pbuh, unless they openly were caught in a mischevious act they werent punished, that in my mind doesnot give us the message of ignoring blasphemy.
Yes well right and wrong and our perceptions of it are influenced by our cocnepts of morality. Where i look to inform my morality by religious decree some rely on their own senses and preferences. No one can claim moral superiority on each concept.
see once again to me this is non sequitur for freedom of speech and expression doesnot equate to provoking otehrs by disregarding their religious figures.
in secular country they should in a theocracy they cant.
yes but you need to appreciate that abbasi didnt take a gun to the guys head, nor did he enrage a rally to lynch him. He took the legal means provided to the citizens of pakistan. The basic concept behind the law of blasphemy is that only the state is at the liberty to punish not individuals.
perhaps you should think about the fact that if we are going to follow an austere sense of privacy we should also appreciate that religion then becoems a private matter. If someone is uncouth enough to then privately send messages to random strangers that are essentially offensive they loose the right to privacy.
Please ravage now you are being delierately obtuse. Calling names and posting offensive material about religious figures is not a religion nor is it required by any religion.
I wouldnt do anything other than reporting the person as public nuisance or as a spammer to the service provider or I would simply pursue the legal means available to me by the law of that country. You need to appreciate that the punihsment for blasphemy or anyother sin and crime are not carried out by individuals, the islamic laws come in place in an islamic state and only the state is at the liberty to carry them out. That is the basic understanding that all muslims must develop. According to me, ravage, the appropriate reaction of an islamic country is not to ignore it and tell its citizen to ignore it, i can understand while people living in non muslim countries have to tolerate alot since they are outsiders why should we impose it upon the people of pakistan? That is why perhaps i find your condemning a law that finds it roots in religion that our coutnry was supposedly created for most confusing.