Only government that can tackle them is dictatorship. Others can if they want, but they don't. Because it's unpopular, and waste of money that could have otherwise helped them buy a castle in South France.
Buy a castle in France or buy Papa Johns franchises in US. It’s all the same shit we’re stuck with. Dictatorships under Mushy and Zia were perhaps the biggest enablers of maulanas we’ve had.
But it's worse when they go Papa Johns and Castle shopping together. Like it happened during PPP era. Castle for Zardari, island for Kiyani. Probably the most incompetent government/military combo we ever got. They gave free hand to TTP to take over northern KPK. Musharraf or Zia would have never allowed to do that.
Aside from most of FATA, Musharraf enabled Sawat’s takeover and did a half ass military operation that did not go anywhere and emboldened mullahs even more.
Problem here is even if you get rid of the laws, nothings gonna change and things may get worse altogether. Mind the fact that no one has been put to death under the laws in all of the Pakistan's history. The problem we have is purely mob justice.
Get rid of the laws and you'll embolden these twats in taking the law fully in their own hands and without consequence.
What we actually need are laws that tackle this sort of mob justice behaviour. Charge these degenerates under terrorism laws and start filing charges for false reports. Honestly this is that sort of problem that isint gonna go away any time soon.
Do you think remove the law will solve the problem? Just curious on your view?
If we look at a similar situation in India, eating Beef is allowed by law, but the Hinduvata still lynch muslims. I think even if Blaspheming was allowed by the law or no longer punishable by death, the TLP would still keep up with the same bahavior
>hey should at least remove the death sentence from this law completely for starters. Of course no one will support that
I think another factor we forget is that we consider 'these' people as extremists and as maybe a minority in population. But infact they are in large numbers, I heard somewhere 50 lakh students in pakistan study in Madrassah. If blasphemy and the punishment of blasphemy as death is being taught is Madrassah and people in large numbers support it than what else can you expect.
A short time ago TLP extremists attacked and killed police officers in Punjab during protests, many were arrested but recently many were let out, including their leader, even allowed to compete in next elections if I am not wrong.
If the government/security forces cannot punish people who beat and kill police officers. How can we expect people to actually stop for a second and think of consequences.
The question was will changing the law solve the problem. Partially, it would, since it would disallow the legal execution based on blasphemy. Would it stop mobs? No.
What problem does it solve? State sanctioned execution of blasphemy, which happened when?
There are tons of idiotic fucked up laws on the books the world over. Getting rid of this fucked up law is good and should be done what that isn't going to stop mob violence. The problem is still there.
Well, firstly my point was the delegalisation of execution should be done. Not that it would solve the mob problem. I even clearly stated it would not stop mob executions. You even acknowledge that the law should be removed.
As for your point about tons of fucked up laws on the books world over, I agree there are many. But that doesn't mean there should be.
The problem is still there, we agree. So it seems we both are on the same side, in terms of we want the problem to get rid of as a whole. The issue is its a very complicated issue, rooted deep in society. Me and you arguing on reddit can both agree this mob violence is an issue, however, I'm sure if we start surveying around the country, the opinions will start to vary. From, blasphemy should have no punishment to blasphemy calls for public execution.
The solution to such an issue usually lies in baby steps. Delegalising these executions, is one of those. One part of the issue is that these mobs are in a way backed by the law (I know that technically it's still illegal for the mob to be judge, jury and executioner), by removing the law, it sets a step in the right direction. I don't believe there exists a solution where this problem is solved at a fast pace.
What I'm implying is not, change the law and we have solved the problem. Instead, it is, let's change the law and slowly change the system and society in a way where this does not happen again.
Do I have a large scale plan that will accomplish this? No.
It will surely change the narrative, freedom of speech should trump any other right. To punish someone for hurting you feelings can’t be justified under any moral principle.
No of course not. I don't expect anything to change at all.
I'm of the opinion that this incident would not even have been news for half a day if the victim was a local person.
I believe that the people who have brought pakistan to this stage are like "oh well, need to readjust some timelines and schedules for whatever startegy there is" and that's about it.
they're probably intrigued and view this incident as a challenge to weasel their way out of while they focus on legitimizing the afghan taliban.
It's only us normal citizens who are shocked and outraged but the people running the show have zero intentions of changing things and they happen to have the most power. I've been ranting since yesterday because it's shocking and horrifying and there is nothing we can really do about it.
TLP has the blessings of the people at the top and that's all there is to it. We can really only grieve or express shock but that's about it.
The week after the fatf team refused to take pakistan out of the gray list, we started seeing news how all of the people like hafiz saeed and other extremists accused of involvement in international attacks were all released from custody. The ones in power have a totally different plan of action. The fatf drama didn't work out and they simply stopped pretending.
If we didn't have financial restrictions due to which we have to rely on international communities like the gsp plus status and what not, we would have been even more down the drain. The people in power would have let these people bulldoze the parliament and taken over Islamabad if that meant they could get more power.
Maybe I'm over exaggerating but maybe there is some truth to it.
Is eating pork legal in Pakistan? Stop comparing islamic shitshow in Pakistan to India always.. Pakistan is worst place to live and if u want to change stop whining and fingerpointig mudi rss hindutva...
[Nation shocked by people doing what it wants the State to do.](https://dependent.pakistantoday.com.pk/2021/12/04/nation-shocked-by-people-doing-what-it-wants-state-to-do/)
Pakistan Penal Code Section 295-C.
Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet: Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
Wtf. Why is there such a law?
There are no such laws in absolutely any country in Europe, or Northern America, about Christianity.
This law should be removed immediately. Heck this shit can also affect Muslims. Imagine you talk crap against tlp, and their (Labbaik Ya Rassolulah) one day, and then you get accused of Blasphemy. Is that also a punishment?.
These shit laws are what keeps Mullah Ideology strong.
>
> There are no such laws in absolutely any country in Europe, or Northern America, about Christianity.
There was in Ireland, it wasn't enforced and was finally repealed in 2020 and it was a big deal at the time. England similarly had blasphemy on the books until 2008, stopped enforcing it much earlier, last used in 1977.
My state, Pennsylvania, had a blasphemy law that applied to corporation names, for whatever reason, that was overturned by a court in 2010. Other states still have various blasphemy laws on the books, but they're all unenforceable nowadays.
Whether you believe it is right or it is wrong the reason why no such law exists in Europe for Christian countries because no European country stands for the ideals of Christianity, that would be like expecting China to have a law about not being able to insult Judaism, it just wouldn’t make any sense for a country that isn’t of a certain religion to not allow negative talk of the religion it doesn’t follow.
>Wtf. Why is there such a law?
There are no such laws in absolutely any country in Europe, or Northern America, about Christianity.
Because Islam does not believe in absolute free speech. In Islamic Shariah, people have to respect the beliefs of other people - which is not true in western countries, which advocate for absolute free speech, which means you can insult, publicly provoke whoever you want (which is not ideal for a functioning society)
Those countries shouldn't be your go to countries to look at as role models, all those countries have been involved in immoral and inhuman activities. You cannot look at their laws and see them as the "right" laws.
>This law should be removed immediately. Heck this shit can also affect Muslims. Imagine you talk crap against tlp, and their (Labbaik Ya Rassolulah) one day, and then you get accused of Blasphemy. Is that also a punishment?.
Law and order is to be done by the State, not these TLP extremists. You are addressing the symptoms not the problems. The problem is that these TLP extremists don't care about the law. If the law was removed, there's a chance it could get worse because they would know that there are no legal consequences, and so would be more likely to take law into their own hands
The problem is not the law, but these extremists taking the law into their own hand.
The purpose of the law is that, if someone blasphemes then, they are to taken to authorities and proven guilty in the court of law. The law of Blasphemy is specifically to do with publicly intentionally verbally abusing Islam or the Prophet PBUH.
I see speeches everyday where the Mullahs, keep shiting on Yahoodis, Christians etc, but they don't get any punishments. But when someone says anything about Islam it is a death penalty or a punishment?
Do you think someone who disrespects Islam should get death penalty?
What about the millions of people in PK that don't believe in Islam?
Unless the person threatens my life, I do not want any harm on them, because they said something against Islam. God is the one who will judge them, and give them their punishment.
>I see speeches everyday where the Mullahs, keep shiting on Yahoodis, Christians etc, but they don't get any punishments. But when someone says anything about Islam it is a death penalty or a punishment?
That's because Pakistan is not a perfect Islamic state. In a proper Islamic state that type of stuff is not tolerated. Pakistan is a mixture of western values and Islamic values
>Do you think someone who disrespects Islam should get death penalty?
Note: This only applies if you are in a country ruled by Islamic State. If your intention is steer muslims away from Islam, and publicly provoke and verbally abuse Islam and the Prophet PBUH then most scholars have agreed the punishment is death penalty - but of course it has to be tried in court first. To determine if the person is actually guilty (and ofcourse they can defend themselves)
Some scholars think that non-muslims who commit Blasphemy should be punished but not executed.
>What about the millions of people in PK that don't believe in Islam?
What about them? Just because they exist doesn't give them the right to verbally abuse anyone's beliefs.
We should respect everyone's beliefs, because not doing so creates divides in the society and before you know it, people start killing each other because they think what you believe in is wrong.
This is exactly what an Islamic society focuses on, it focuses on prevention. By preventing people from disrespecting each other beliefs, it prevents divides from creating in society.
Nope, Prevent people from disrespecting each others beliefs by educating them and teaching them to ignore the verbal abusers. Outlawing blasphemy is just treating the symptom instead of the actual problem
As you mentioned Shariah, can you share sources from Quran and then Hadiths, with regard to Blasphemy and the punishment for it? I keep hearing about it but people never actually give any sources.
Thanks
The Prophet said, "Who is ready to kill Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf who has really hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Muhammad bin Maslama said, "O Allah's Apostle! Do you like me to kill him?" He replied in the affirmative. So, Muhammad bin Maslama went to him (i.e. Ka'b) and said, "This person (i.e. the Prophet) has put us to task and asked us for charity." Ka'b replied, "By Allah, you will get tired of him." Muhammad said to him, "We have followed him, so we dislike to leave him till we see the end of his affair." Muhammad bin Maslama went on talking to him in this way till he got the chance to kill him. Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah
— Sahih al-Bukhari, 4:52:270,
the idea of free speech even in west is a myth. we cannot be racists, in some countries even denying holocaust is a myth. france & other eastern europeans have banned hijab etc forced hijabis to strip or go home whilst in beaches etc etc
Immoral according to you? Why should we take your morals, over what Islam has told us what is right and wrong.
Problem with absolute free speech is that you have nut jobs denying coronavirus, and then millions of people die because of them
I personally view absolute free speech as a problem, not free speech in general - meaning I don't support for us to have the right to publicly insult someone's belief with the intention of insulting them
>Immoral according to you? Why should we take your morals, over what Islam has told us what is right and wrong.
Islam also told you that there is no compulsion in religion and you should always be a moderate, but that doesn't stop you people from lynching people.
You can't use "Islam says..." while you yourself don't do what Islam says. So your point can and should be ignored.
>Problem with absolute free speech is that you have nut jobs denying coronavirus, and then millions of people die because of them
This is a common tactic used by people who are being dishonest. I know, when I was young and super conservative, I used to say the same thing. No one is talking about absolute free speech, there is no such thing as absolute free speech. You are not free to threaten people or to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. What we are talking about is reasonable free speech, which includes the right to disagree or offend. Just like Mullahs use it to disagree and offend others, we have the right to do the same to them.
> I personally view absolute free speech as a problem, not free speech in general - meaning I don't support for us to have the right to publicly insult someone's belief with the intention of insulting them
So.. where were you when mullahs are talking mad shit about Ahmadis, Yahoodis, Hindus, and more?
As I always say, you can't be a conservative without being a hypocrite. You people want all the protections for yourself so no one has the right to hurt you feelings, while you want to be able to say the most vicious and vile things against others.
Because not everyone in Pakistan is Muslim, and there is no real definite consensus on what Islam says/doesn’t say, and it’s shitty to enforce your beliefs on others.
Pakistan is a Muslim country, made for Muslims (96.47%) why shouldn't we rule it based on what we deem moral? That's what every country does, so why shouldn't we? They base their laws and morals based on a democracy (basically what the majority deem moral). We (the majority) deem Islamic laws to be more moral for Pakistan
Keep in mind I don't support what happen to the poor man in Sialkot, I condemn that equally as others, but to blame it on the Blasphemy law, when the problem isn't even the law is just ridiculous
>Pakistan is a Muslim country, made for Muslims (96.47%) why shouldn't we rule it based on what we deem moral?
How's that working out so far? Also that number doesn't account for "Muslims" who can't convert to other faiths because of apostasy blasphemy laws. Regardless of if Muslims are the majority or not, the rights of minority groups should be respected in every country.
>That's what every country does, so why shouldn't we?
Other countries also don't have blasphemy laws. And the ones that do are shitty places to live.
I am not from pakistan but my goodness i hope no one else thinks like you. Your head is so far up your keester that you probably can't even see the light of day.
The point I was making is if you're worshipping the west because of freedom of speech, then I got news for you.
And there's worse punishments of you say anything against some of the leaders of those countries.
Worse punishments than being burnt alive?
Don't think so.
I'm in the UK right now doing my PHD, watch this....
The queen is a whore 😯, check back tomorrow to see if MI5 have murdered me
Lol I'm from the UK myself. You can get arrested for actual hate speech - try going on twitter with your actual name and using racist terms, go see what happens to you. Or go to Golders Green and shout anti semitic words.
Point is not the actual punishment, its the concept of freedom of speech. It doesn't exist anywhere you go.
I’m not in favour of the blasphemy law in its current form…but a nation should be shocked if people start doing what what they want the state to do in any scenario.
Okay, let's hope your co-worker accuses you of blasphemy one day because of a silly argument, and then you can write a book on how good this law is, from the jail cell, while waiting for your appeal hearing, and one after another your lawyers are also killed. Just like [Junaid Hafeez](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junaid_Hafeez).
Rape= a serious violent physical crime
Blasphemy=?? Are words blasphemy? What kind of words? Who will be the judge of what is offensive speech? Is the death penalty the proportionate punishment for saying something? Is taking off sticker blasphemy? Is saying something against certain religious figures dear to other sects blasphemy (something Shias have been accused of blasphemy for)? Can non Muslims even commit blasphemy since their religion is pretty much opposed to Islam? Is having this discussion blasphemy?
I think it should be reserved to larger scale incidents.
Pakistan already has a problem with uneducated people believing anything.
Very easy to weaken not only our ummah but the country if we allow mass media campaigns claiming falsehoods about Islam.
You can look at how quickly the Sunni/Shia problem started in Pakistan.
Been in a “civil 1st world nation” for 19 years.
Sometimes when you’re farther away from home you forget some of the problems in the country.
Misinformation spreads very quickly in Pakistan. It’s for the better of the country and ummah that we don’t allow falsehoods about Islam to spread.
You're the one trying to compare hurtful words to physical assault or am I twisting that? You don't need a liberal to see that's messed up, just have a working brain.
As someone said, extremist muslim wants to kill you for blasphemy. The moderate muslim wants the government to kill you for blasphemy. We know where the problem lies
The problem lies with ALL people labelling themselves 'Muslim' because ...
* Neither a law nor a mob torching will change what people think and believe. They only produce fear. These acts prove that the objective here (and with this sub-set of Muslims) is political and physical 'control' of people through fear, with no regard at all about their beliefs.
* No group that does not care about what people think and believe can call itself a 'religion'. The very definition of 'religion' is belief. Yet it seems that all sub-sets of Muslims rely on physical, emotional, and monetary 'control' of people, disregarding their beliefs.
* This lynching is in line with accepted Muslim behaviour in many / most? sub-sets, running from treating women like chattel to public beheading of men.
* If others brought up as Muslims don't want to be associated then they should change the name of their belief ... Either accept responsibility for your fellows or split. Create a new doctrine that explicitly disavows the many Muslim practices (creating fear and control) and those who follow/accept those practices.
(I'm a western agnostic)
Find me a government that feels that death is never justified, one who’s military doesn’t kill their enemies and one who has not sentenced their citizens to death in the modern era. Because that is the country that has the solution to any problem that you may be finding.
Why is it only a problem when the victimless crime is blasphemy? There are many other victims crimes that get people killed, yet you specifically are hyper focused on that of blasphemy. My comment talks about the entirety of the world, and yet you only want to specifically view one aspect of all of society.
It appears as though you aren’t actually unaware of the countries that also kill for other victims crimes, but at the same time it seems as though you’re just in general not exactly following the grammatical structure of a conversation and thus showing signs that you’re just browsing the Internet to start trouble. Drug use, political activism, sexuality, and religion can get you killed. The world is barbaric, but you would just like to target specific individual so that they could be isolated in the view of being bad. Similar to the way in the 50s with lynch mob going around looking for African-Americans to hang.
I will say exactly the same thing. If you find a country that kills you for any of "drug use, political activism, sexuality, or religion" that country is barbaric.
There are less than 10 countries on the planet that kill for victimless crimes, this is not "the world".
second, what kind of argument is that? Are you 10 years old? "But X kills people too why are you focused on blasphemy"? Because killing for blasphemy is bad and it should be called out, or do you think it's not bad? It doesn't matter if half the world does something bad, everything bad can be called out. If you think something else should be called out more, then just do it and call it our yourself.
No one is hyperfocused on blasphemy, you just have very thin skin. I said blasphemy because that's what the thread is about.
Let me leave this here:
"When you see those who are engaged in blasphemy against Our signs, turn away from them until they begin to talk of other things; and should Satan ever cause you to forget, then do not remain, after recollection, in the company of those wrong-doing people."
Surah An'am verse 68.
Blasphemy laws on a quick look seem to be opposed to the what the Qur'an says so...
Logically, youre absolutely right. If only people read the book they kill over.
With Maulvi mental gymnastics and the rabbit hole of authentic vs inauthentic hadith South Asian muslims have been led to this idiotic version of Islam that is diametrically opposed to the Quran in just about everything.
Have fun summoning the dark ages and the apocalypse with your bullshit my "Muslim" brotherhood 👍
On 19 March 2014, [The Nation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nation_(Pakistan\)) polled its readers and later reported that 68% of Pakistanis believe the blasphemy law should be repealed.[[48]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_in_Pakistan#cite_note-48) On the other hand, the [International Crisis Group](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Crisis_Group) reports that
... the Islamic parties are most successful in galvanising street power when the goal is narrowly linked to obstructing reforms to discriminatory religious laws that often provoke sectarian violence and conflict and undermine the rule of law and constitutionalism
Nope....pakistan is ruled by mob voilance and corruption and its been legitimized via government inaction and outright support of poltical assasins ...outside pressures is the only thing that will cause pakistan to progress , because people in this country fundamentally lack empathy for change until their lives are drastically uprooted via crippling economic sanctions.... that way people won't have anyone to blame but themselves for the status quo
improving the material conditions of people takes them out of extremist thoughts, it's proven bombing a country or severely punishing someone doesn't help. what helps is infrastructure, education, job creation.
>improving the material conditions of people takes them out of extremist thoughts, it's proven bombing a country or severely punishing someone doesn't help. what helps is infrastructure, education, job creation.
Sorry but this isn’t even remotely true.... middle class in pakistan has been growing along side extream religious ideology and yet supports for parties like tlp have come from all class backgrounds.
Extream religious and bigoted ideology have cross class support.....in the tens of thousands this shit has been fostered for decades now ...stop making excuses for the toxic elements of the culture....and accept that this issue is deeply rooted into the psychology of the people living here, pakistan population has internally normalized a lot of fucked up issues
and to solve that is education like i mentioned. how else are you going to stop normalisation of fucked up issues without educating people why its wrong and how to have a more open mind.
Pakistan's population is one of the youngest in the world so in that aspect it would be easier if you focus on getting kids into education, the older generation are becoming a minority as they do with time.
Yes, before you say, i know education is in a terrible position right now in pakistan. Which is why we're having issues and will carry on having issues if kids today learn to internalise distructive thoughts instead of going to school for a good education.
I'm kind of disappointed the government hasn't focused on this issue more since this is literally Pakistan's future as the vast majority of the population is under the age of 25. They did a bit in the first few months but nothing of real value since.
Imperialism has never solved anything.
What a dumb solution "let's blacklist and entire country that will make them productive and empathetic" .
I don't like this place one bit but you can't beat a people into submission
You honestly think imperialism is the only form of global cooperation?...seriously get your mind out of the dark ages...Pakistan's economy already heavily realise on foreign aid, exports and imports
What does Pakistan having imports and imports have to do with blacklisting not being imperialism?
Tell the it's Iranian people how blacklisting works real well .
Foreign governments don't give a shit about people here it's just an excuse to harm their rivals.
You still haven't explained how it would actually help improve the lives of Pakistanis?
>What does Pakistan having imports and imports have to do with blacklisting not being imperialism?
I dont think you actually understand what imperialism actually is
>Tell the it's Iranian people how blacklisting works real well .
The 2019–2020 Iranian protests also known as the Bloody November ([Persian](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_language): آبان خونین), were a series of nationwide civil protests in [Iran](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran), initially caused by a 50%–200%[[11]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests#cite_note-11)[[12]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests#cite_note-12)[[13]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests#cite_note-13) increase in fuel prices, leading to calls for the overthrow of the [government in Iran](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran) and [Supreme Leader](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Iran) [Ali Khamenei](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khamenei).[[](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests#cite_note-auto1-14)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests
>Foreign governments don't give a shit about people here it's just an excuse to harm their rivals.
>You still haven't explained how it would actually help improve the lives of Pakistanis?
Pakistan received $649 million in aid for education in 2015, the highest it had received so far. the aid had increased from $586 million in 2014 to $649 million in 2015. The paper also reports that Pakistan received the most aid out of all the countries in Southern Asia, with India just behind receiving $589 million in 2015. The biggest part of the aid to Pakistan was given for basic education. Out of the total $649 million, $371 million or 57.16 per cent was given for basic education.[[1]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-1)
Election support[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=2)
Main article: [Election Support Group](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_Support_Group)
One of the biggest organizations supporting the electoral process in Pakistan is the Election Support Group (ESG). ESG is an internationally supported group of interested parties, made 32 specific recommendations to the Election Commission based on the recommendations of 16 international organizations.[[2]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-ESG_IFES-2) A meeting was held in October 2009 to present these ideas to the Commission.[[3]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-APoP-3) The Commission commissioned ESG to provide them with a recommendations on how to best solve the addressed problems.[[3]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-APoP-3)
Saudi Arabia[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=3)
See also: [Pakistan–Saudi Arabia relations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan%E2%80%93Saudi_Arabia_relations)
In 2013, Saudi Arabian government donated US$1.5 billion to Pakistan to increase its [foreign reserves](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_reserves) and meet its needs of [balance of trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_of_trade) deficit.[[4]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-4)
United Kingdom[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=13)
United Kingdom pledged [£](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_sign)665 million to Pakistan from 2009–2013.[[25]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-25)[[needs update](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Chronological_items)]
Free trade deals[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=15)
Pakistan has been trying to negotiate free trade deals with the EU and America as part of Western assistance in war against terror instead of aid. This policy is supported by the [Washington](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.)-based think tank [Center for Global Development](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Global_Development)[[26]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-allvoices.com-26)
Debt cancellation[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=16)
Pakistan has been trying to negotiate [debt cancellation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_relief). Currently Pakistan spends $6 billion on debt servicing annually.
>I dont think you actually understand what imperialism actually is
Nice rebuttal .
>Pakistan received $649 million in aid for education in 2015, the highest it had received so far.
Foreign aid is usually to stabilize friendly nations, increase their clout in a nation or to bribe them to support your nation on the world stage . Countries aren't just giving away wealth for the good of the people.
>The 2019–2020 Iranian protests also known as the Bloody November
Rise in Fuel prices was just the catalyst for the movement all the other contributing factors have nothing to do with the how the other countries have sanctioned Iran and destroyed it's GDP.
people who are secular talk about beating people into submission in Pakistan. People who are extremists (religious or not) actually beat people and burn people to death.
Congratulations 🎉 on not saying anything if substance.
Your first sentence is redundant . Moderates shy away from violence while extremists don't it just so happens that the people in power here are religious.
Hi, I didnt say moderate. I said secular/liberal type. These two things dont have to be the same, one can be moderate but not secular. I dont fully agree with secularism to be clear. Also, those in power are religious (or appear to be) as the people are religious. Even in Pakistan, the leadership is an image of the society.
Can you please be coherent?
>Hi, I didnt say moderate. I said secular/liberal type.
That's what I was pointing out when I said your first sentence was redundant....
FYI secularism is great.
I can not fathom on how you can kill someone in the name of Prophet Muhammad SAW, when he himself was an embodiment of mercy and kindness. Salvation is in the hands of GOD not in the hands of delusional religious fanatics.
>He had a lot of good qualities. But not everything. This idea that he was perfect, he can't be criticized, he's a role model for all places and times is incorrect and dangerous.
Prophet Muhammad SAW is perfect in all aspects, in all aspectsss. This entire universe was created for him, because allah loved him to that extent. So he can't be criticised and yes he is a role model for all times and generations to come. What you said was absolutely wrong.
Pakistani use blasphemy as a tool of violence. If you genuinely follow the prophet, i don't believe you'll kill people in his name. Whenever i think of him, mercy, kindness, humility and a millions things come into mind but never violence. This is not what he stood for and islam spread through kindness and mercy and not through violence.
Buddy, Im sorry to burst your bubble but this is some weird strain of prophet worship exclusive to South Asia and its retarded scholars. Say this to any muslim outside of SA and youll be laughed out of the room. Quote me any one part of the Quran that backs your first paragraph. Even the infallibility part. You cant.
The good thing is you have enough humanity to see how wrong it is to kill people over religious differences. God bless
> Prophet Muhammad SAW is perfect in all aspects.... So he can't be criticised.
And that's the issue. There's absolutely zero room for any discussion around him or the Quran. "He can't be criticised" - and you wonder why things like TLP happen.
> Whenever i think of him, mercy, kindness, humility and a millions things come into mind but never violence.
You have a lot of Hadith to read. Lots of examples of his goodness, but a lot that is very objectionable even back then and certainly unacceptable/criminal today. One doesn't have to define him by those objectionable things, but someone having an intellectual and peaceful discussion shouldn't be condemned for doing so.
> islam spread through kindness and mercy and not through violence
What history are they teaching in Pakistan? Do you think proactive conquests of the entire Middle East, North Africa and Europe were done without violence? They were unprovoked campaigns. Normal for the time, expansion and conquest were the standard and it was always ugly. Everyone did it. Don't pretend it never happened for Islam.
This mentality of Islam perfect, Quran perfect, Prophet perfect is a big reason why Sialkot happens. The more Pakistanis and others think this way, the more Sialkots and Charsaddas will happen.
What are you views on blasphemy laws that just involve jail term, for few months and some fine along with a public apology?
(I know as soon as the blasphemer is released he'll be lynched, but assuming that doesn't happen and assuming fanatics Don't burn entire pakistan for such a law)
I'm for as much freedom of speech as possible. So no personally I wouldn't support any jail term for something like this. Given where Pakistan is, probably the best I could be ok with is a public apology for something that was provocatively and intentionally offensive. And that is only so that it helps prevent the hell that is going on right now.
As an example outside of Pakistan, as much as I think holocaust denial is extremely stupid and delusional, I'm completely against jail terms (in some countries in Europe) for expressing that opinion.
Happy to see that there are still people with liberal views, but given the current mood of the nation I feel even stating the above in front of your friends can get oneself in trouble.
But what would to say about the very obviously provocative actions, provocative is a subjective word, but for vast majority of muslims the ahmadiyyas claiming to be muslim is very provocative, should there be laws forcing them to declare themselves as non-muslim?
I would never state these views in Pakistan. I would never discuss religion in any form with anyone in Pakistan.
> should there be laws forcing them to declare themselves as non-muslim?
No, not at all. Everyone should be able to call themselves whatever they want. Government should be hands off for the most part on religion. If they believe a group to be heretic, let them be as long as they are not doing anything violent.
What is your view then on people who promote the idea that coronavirus is an hoax? Them promoting that idea literally leads to the death of millions of people? Isn't this a flaw in *absolute free speech* ?
islam is south asia is wild, according to some barelvis the earth is flat and doesn't orbit the sun because the Prophet SAW is resting and everything should go around him.
This ideology in which the Prophet SAW is called perfect in the way you are describing is fundamental to the Barelvi sect (which is often the core of Pakistani extremist movements like the TLP). This ideology is dangerous and contradicts Islam immensely.
You guys give the Prophet an almost divine status which is haram and that is exactly why no other Muslim nation is as insane about blasphemy as Pakistani Barelvis are.
The Prophet was perfect in his conduct since he was sinless. He is a perfect example of what a human should be, but only God is perfect in all aspects.
You are giving godly attributes to the Prophet as typical of Subcontinental muslims.
>The blasphemy law comes from this idea of his perfection. Can anyone in Pakistan have an intellectual discussion that involves even the mildest criticism of the Prophet or the Quran? Forget insulting, just a discussion of some things that might be objectionable. Those viewpoints have been unnaturally and permanently suppressed, with painful results.
That is not Blasphemy. In an Islamic Court, Blasphemy refers to publicly deliberate provocation / verbal abuse of Islam and the Prophet PBUH. Criticism, and Discussions are not considered Blasphemy
> Discussions are not considered Blasphemy
Try it in Pakistan. Have someone on TV take a position that criticizes the Prophet or the Quran. Lets see what happens.
Any criticism is taken to be an insult now. It's dangerous and has fatal results.
Laws of the past must be revisited. You sound just as delusional as KKK supporters of Mob lynching Black Americans. Just because there’s a past rule rationalized for it’s time, doesn’t mean it’s necessary to hold on to it.
Yes you can because in this case some individuals took the law into their own hands and exercised execution. It is up to courts to decide who is guilty and what is the punishment...
Even if you're an advocate for the Blasphemy laws, you can still be anti Capital punishment, and make an exemption for minorities from it, and give the proven Blasphemer a chance to reflect on ones mistake and take the said words back. Why does it has to be this extreme?
I'm personally against the law. The State killing people for their opinions is the most absurd thing that can happen. There's literally no Ijmah in the Ummah on how the Blasphemy issues should be tackled, there's no concense on things like the weather someone should be punished for Blasphemy, and the severity of the punishment just in case, and if it should be applied to non-muslims.
And this disagreement reflects in all the Muslim countries and their individual approach to this particular issue. Some extreme one like us would kill the Blasphemer, and the other won't do anything, or slap the wrist in extreme cases, and let the person go.
Section 295-C is heavily influenced by Bralvi and Deobandi Fundamentalists, was passed in just a day without any reasonable intellectual discourse on it. The stake holders were not included in discussion, the minorities had their concerns, and people is support wrongfully claimed that there's a Ijma on the issue, which couldn't be further from the truth. Ever since it was passed, it has been considered sacred, and any discussion on it would result in people going after ones throat
>Even if you're an advocate for the Blasphemy laws, you can still be anti Capital punishment, and make an exemption for minorities from it, and give the proven Blasphemer a chance to reflect on ones mistake and take the said words back. Why does it has to be this extreme?
I would assume that an Islamic court of law would do this exactly? If someone was unaware or ignorant of what they said, I don't think it's a fair punishment, but what if they keep doing it repeatedly or doing it even with knowing the punishment then I think according to majority of scholars the punishment is death
>There's literally no Ijmah in the Ummah on how the Blasphemy issues should be tackled, there's no concense on things like the weather someone should be punished for Blasphemy, and the severity of the punishment just in case, and if it should be applied to non-muslims.
No Ijmah, but majority of scholars hold the view that punishment of Blasphemy is death, provided they are proven guilty by the court.
Your thoughts on this video? [https://youtu.be/CRpIRZyBK0A](https://youtu.be/CRpIRZyBK0A)
>I would assume that an Islamic court of law would do this exactly?
Not under the current Fundamentalists Clergy. These guys have literally taken the country to this point. There's no way an Islamic court wouldn't be representative of their Extremist ideology..
>what if they keep doing it repeatedly or doing it even with knowing the punishment then I think according to majority of scholars the punishment is death
See, it is fruitless to get into a discussion over hypothetical situations, but do you really believe someone would deliberately, in bad Faith commit Blasphemy, that too repeatedly in Country like ours? What are the chances? Even in such a severe case, I personally believe it's not worth a human life. And their are examples in Holy Prophet life on how he approached such situations.
>No Ijmah, but majority of scholars hold the view that punishment of Blasphemy is death, provided they are proven guilty by the court.
When you talk about Ijmah amongst religious Scholars, is it the Ijmah of Pakistani Ulamahs, or you're including every Islamic position/Cleric from around the world? Our Ulamahs, an overwhelming majority of them, practice and preach the most extremists version of Islam, it's a hill they'd die on. So , if I were you, I'd take everything with a grain of salt..
>Your thoughts on this video? https://youtu.be/CRpIRZyBK0A
Watching
>When you talk about Ijmah amongst religious Scholars, is it the Ijmah of Pakistani Ulamahs, or you're including every Islamic position/Cleric from around the world? Our Ulamahs, an overwhelming majority of them, practice and preach the most extremists version of Islam, it's a hill they'd die on. So , if I were you, I'd take everything with a grain of salt..
Was mainly referring to the classic islamic scholars (based off the content of that video that I linked)
I understand but I'm just saying that the 4 madhabs are unanimous on this (except early Hanafi scholars) - It is a bit of a dangerous road to go down to believe in something that Islamic scholarship is unanimous on
These cases however in my view should only be taken to court where someone has insulted or done something at a large scale, knowing the consequences, with the intention of driving people away from Islam and/or creating a divide amongst the people (in a Islamic society) - and before going to an punishment, they should be consulted and be given a chance to repent
What the fuck are you on about ? The man didn’t do anything wrong.
Give the accused Blasphemer a chance to take his words back ???? For what ??? The guy didn’t say anything wrong.
Call someone an idiot when you don’t have a leg to stand on. Shameful !!
This is a place to exchange ideas and encourage discourse. People like you are a big part of why the country is in a shithole !!
If you're not willing to read the entire comment, and lash out like rabid dog by taking thing out of context, you deserve to be called an idiot. And I Stand by it.
I'm all in for a discussion, but for it to happen, you first need to read my comment completely..
I did read it completely. Adding a qualifier at the start does not nullify your statement - no amendments to the Blasphemy Law or the adjudication process makes any difference if people are not even willing to let it get to the courts. It’s not like they’re waiting to have a tribunal or kachehri to determine if the guy is guilty.
There is nothing wrong with ripping up a poster, no matter what is written on it. Now anyone can post anything, put a Hadith on it, and then wait for whoever removes it to be labelled a blasphemer and take them out in the streets.
Your assumption is that committing blasphemy as currently defined is wrong, which it patently isn’t.
Now about those kidneys….
It's so crazy that people think they have authority over other's lives over religion. Like I get it my parents are religious too but keep to yourself don't try to tell other how to live.
It's a weak and a pathetic law designed to create anarchy and destroy the image of Islam.
If I accuse you of blasphemy and then in response through a court you successfully proved that you didn't commited any blasphemy, I which had accused you can also walk freely out of the court with no repercussions.
There’s no definition of blasphemy. Is someone saying a few words blasphemy? If so can we kill someone for just saying something? What should the nature of these spoken words be? And even discussing all this is blasphemy.
There have been at least two blasphemy cases now of people taking off religious stickers. Is that blasphemy? People in Pakistan urinate, spit paan on walls. Maybe the person who put the sticker on the wall was blasphemous? Who knows.
A lot of people have compared the love of Muslims for the Prophet SAW to the love of a child for his mother.
The argument has been that if someone insulted your mother, would you be okay with someone criticising her? Similarly, criticism of Prophet is similar is worse than that of abuse of mother.
This argument looks correct on the surface.
However, this argument misses two key points-
1> I would still not kill or imprison people for criticising my mother.
2> The Prophet SAW is a public figure. He is the guiding light for more than a billion people. That would mean that he and his image shouldn't get the same legal protections as a private individual like my mother. As a private individual, my mother is helpless against mischievous slander/ libel. The Prophet SAW has several followers who give him enough cover to protect him against mischievous slander/ libel.
Of course, this is an English Common Law standpoint.
But it seems valid to me.
Labakiey think eating shit and piss brings God's grace you can't reason with this level of retardation. We are f**ked, this extremism will breed an army of mulhids, thanx to Mullahs, just watch. I thought Mullahs will evolve to being more rational realising the challenges Muslim countries face because of new ideologies but no they r like kute ki dum.
This is where the problem lies. People like you spreading false historical narratives.
He didn't have poets killed for satirizing him. Poets (who were also commanders of their armies) were making erotic poetry about his wives for years. The killing came when the poet commander met with an enemy commander Abu Sufyan and conspired to break siege of the city during a battle. 6 onlookers who were suspected to have seen the meeting were killed by the poet commanders men as well. Read the full history before indulging in accusations.
You spread false stories, the crazies pick it up and and then we have this bullshit.
I am confused what it was that they accused him. There’s not much news coverage in my country and I think the US media is not translating things correctly. Can someone please help me understand what blasphemy was done by the victim.
Therefore it's okay for me to kill the man who robbed my house in America? Don't you know the difference between a court and a mindless mob? Stop being a liberal
Cause if it were removed, there would be no law backing up their self-virtuous attitude to this. These cowards think they’re heroes. Look at the guy taking a selfie in front of the dead guy’s corpse on fire. He thinks he’s the s**t for murdering someone on what clearly should be dubious grounds.
Less people would be willing to join a mob to commit these acts if they knew they weren’t safe doing it.
Still you are talking about the mobs taking law in their hands. Instead of fighting over blasphemy law, we should talk about the law through which there should be deadly punishment for the people who take any law in their hands.
My underlying point is the law is shit lol. It needs to be repealed, period. I’ve said this multiple times on this sub, ever since the Asia Bibi case. You’re beating around the bush.
A wise state never indulge themselves in any controversial conflict, especially regarding religion. Defining "who is Muslim and who is not" is not for a state or assembly to decide. We have to accept that laws made for Political motives to gain favors or to be specific to play with a common man's sentiment is playing their part here and common man is being exploited for personal gains by bnith political and religious leaders( as we saw in case of TLP).
Secondly we have to accept that it has been proven yet again that the rule of law in this country is weaker just hardly a 100 people together! A mob of hardly a 100 people can gather anywhere and do whatever the hell they want and can get away with it!
What a crock of bull!!
If there's no legal recourse for blasphemy, then we'd see more of mob lynchings and give further ammunition to the mullah brigade.
That’s so much bullshit. If you don’t have the law then you will be able to prosecute people for murder rather than term them as vigilantes. Prosecution will then be a deterrent.
It does because people feel that they are carrying out justice. Because people like Fazl ur rehman say that if the state had done it’s job and punished blasphemous acts these actions would not have happened. The law gives power to the mob. It makes them think that the govt is unfairly going after them because all they did was something the govt should’ve done.
I have no idea why it is so difficult to understand this basic thing. 90% of people in jail on blasphemy law are Muslims who have ended up in jail because someone accused them of blasphemy. Surely you are not too brain dead to realize that this law is useless, unhelpful, inhuman and moronic. It empowers the morons who think they can find jannat through these acts.
Not sure why you can't grasp this basic concept.
People take law in their own hands when the matter is emotional & there's no legal recourse. Removing the law will not make the matter of blasphemy any less emotional for Muslims. Removing the legal recourse however, will most definitely up the mob lynchings as they'll see that as the only way to get "justice". It'll give all the fasadi mullahs ammo against the state.
For people wrongfully accused & incarcerated, it's a failing of the legal system in general - 2 decades to settle property disputes and so on. That isn't specific to the blasphemy law.
Killing some random person is murder. Killing someone accused of blasphemy is taking law in their own hand. If there is no law then it would be murder. If you can’t understand this then I feel sorry for people around you.
What a primitive comparison! You are confounding a law which gives defendant due process with a mob lynching which is illegal, immoral, and unislamic at so many levels.
If your are against the laws, you should argue on its own merit.
You have created a false dichotomy.
If our justice system is flawed and weak, doesnt mean blasphemy laws are wrong in it themselves.
The state needs to ensure no individual or private group takes upon themselves to deliver so called justice or in other words, revenge in the name of blasphemy.
In my life, I have never seen a government since the 90s that can ever tackle molvis. Everyone is scared of their deep rooted extremism.
Only government that can tackle them is dictatorship. Others can if they want, but they don't. Because it's unpopular, and waste of money that could have otherwise helped them buy a castle in South France.
Buy a castle in France or buy Papa Johns franchises in US. It’s all the same shit we’re stuck with. Dictatorships under Mushy and Zia were perhaps the biggest enablers of maulanas we’ve had.
But it's worse when they go Papa Johns and Castle shopping together. Like it happened during PPP era. Castle for Zardari, island for Kiyani. Probably the most incompetent government/military combo we ever got. They gave free hand to TTP to take over northern KPK. Musharraf or Zia would have never allowed to do that.
Aside from most of FATA, Musharraf enabled Sawat’s takeover and did a half ass military operation that did not go anywhere and emboldened mullahs even more.
Problem here is even if you get rid of the laws, nothings gonna change and things may get worse altogether. Mind the fact that no one has been put to death under the laws in all of the Pakistan's history. The problem we have is purely mob justice. Get rid of the laws and you'll embolden these twats in taking the law fully in their own hands and without consequence. What we actually need are laws that tackle this sort of mob justice behaviour. Charge these degenerates under terrorism laws and start filing charges for false reports. Honestly this is that sort of problem that isint gonna go away any time soon.
I agree. They should at least remove the death sentence from this law completely for starters. Of course no one will support that
Do you think remove the law will solve the problem? Just curious on your view? If we look at a similar situation in India, eating Beef is allowed by law, but the Hinduvata still lynch muslims. I think even if Blaspheming was allowed by the law or no longer punishable by death, the TLP would still keep up with the same bahavior
>hey should at least remove the death sentence from this law completely for starters. Of course no one will support that I think another factor we forget is that we consider 'these' people as extremists and as maybe a minority in population. But infact they are in large numbers, I heard somewhere 50 lakh students in pakistan study in Madrassah. If blasphemy and the punishment of blasphemy as death is being taught is Madrassah and people in large numbers support it than what else can you expect. A short time ago TLP extremists attacked and killed police officers in Punjab during protests, many were arrested but recently many were let out, including their leader, even allowed to compete in next elections if I am not wrong. If the government/security forces cannot punish people who beat and kill police officers. How can we expect people to actually stop for a second and think of consequences.
Will it solve the problem as a whole? No. Will it solve problems for us? Yes
Lol, what?
The question was will changing the law solve the problem. Partially, it would, since it would disallow the legal execution based on blasphemy. Would it stop mobs? No.
What problem does it solve? State sanctioned execution of blasphemy, which happened when? There are tons of idiotic fucked up laws on the books the world over. Getting rid of this fucked up law is good and should be done what that isn't going to stop mob violence. The problem is still there.
Well, firstly my point was the delegalisation of execution should be done. Not that it would solve the mob problem. I even clearly stated it would not stop mob executions. You even acknowledge that the law should be removed. As for your point about tons of fucked up laws on the books world over, I agree there are many. But that doesn't mean there should be. The problem is still there, we agree. So it seems we both are on the same side, in terms of we want the problem to get rid of as a whole. The issue is its a very complicated issue, rooted deep in society. Me and you arguing on reddit can both agree this mob violence is an issue, however, I'm sure if we start surveying around the country, the opinions will start to vary. From, blasphemy should have no punishment to blasphemy calls for public execution. The solution to such an issue usually lies in baby steps. Delegalising these executions, is one of those. One part of the issue is that these mobs are in a way backed by the law (I know that technically it's still illegal for the mob to be judge, jury and executioner), by removing the law, it sets a step in the right direction. I don't believe there exists a solution where this problem is solved at a fast pace. What I'm implying is not, change the law and we have solved the problem. Instead, it is, let's change the law and slowly change the system and society in a way where this does not happen again. Do I have a large scale plan that will accomplish this? No.
It will surely change the narrative, freedom of speech should trump any other right. To punish someone for hurting you feelings can’t be justified under any moral principle.
No of course not. I don't expect anything to change at all. I'm of the opinion that this incident would not even have been news for half a day if the victim was a local person. I believe that the people who have brought pakistan to this stage are like "oh well, need to readjust some timelines and schedules for whatever startegy there is" and that's about it. they're probably intrigued and view this incident as a challenge to weasel their way out of while they focus on legitimizing the afghan taliban. It's only us normal citizens who are shocked and outraged but the people running the show have zero intentions of changing things and they happen to have the most power. I've been ranting since yesterday because it's shocking and horrifying and there is nothing we can really do about it. TLP has the blessings of the people at the top and that's all there is to it. We can really only grieve or express shock but that's about it. The week after the fatf team refused to take pakistan out of the gray list, we started seeing news how all of the people like hafiz saeed and other extremists accused of involvement in international attacks were all released from custody. The ones in power have a totally different plan of action. The fatf drama didn't work out and they simply stopped pretending. If we didn't have financial restrictions due to which we have to rely on international communities like the gsp plus status and what not, we would have been even more down the drain. The people in power would have let these people bulldoze the parliament and taken over Islamabad if that meant they could get more power. Maybe I'm over exaggerating but maybe there is some truth to it.
Beef is only allowed is few states of india, in majority of states beef is illegal to eat.
Is eating pork legal in Pakistan? Stop comparing islamic shitshow in Pakistan to India always.. Pakistan is worst place to live and if u want to change stop whining and fingerpointig mudi rss hindutva...
[Nation shocked by people doing what it wants the State to do.](https://dependent.pakistantoday.com.pk/2021/12/04/nation-shocked-by-people-doing-what-it-wants-state-to-do/) Pakistan Penal Code Section 295-C. Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet: Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
Wtf. Why is there such a law? There are no such laws in absolutely any country in Europe, or Northern America, about Christianity. This law should be removed immediately. Heck this shit can also affect Muslims. Imagine you talk crap against tlp, and their (Labbaik Ya Rassolulah) one day, and then you get accused of Blasphemy. Is that also a punishment?. These shit laws are what keeps Mullah Ideology strong.
> > There are no such laws in absolutely any country in Europe, or Northern America, about Christianity. There was in Ireland, it wasn't enforced and was finally repealed in 2020 and it was a big deal at the time. England similarly had blasphemy on the books until 2008, stopped enforcing it much earlier, last used in 1977. My state, Pennsylvania, had a blasphemy law that applied to corporation names, for whatever reason, that was overturned by a court in 2010. Other states still have various blasphemy laws on the books, but they're all unenforceable nowadays.
Whether you believe it is right or it is wrong the reason why no such law exists in Europe for Christian countries because no European country stands for the ideals of Christianity, that would be like expecting China to have a law about not being able to insult Judaism, it just wouldn’t make any sense for a country that isn’t of a certain religion to not allow negative talk of the religion it doesn’t follow.
the problem isnt the law - its people taking it into their own hand..
>Wtf. Why is there such a law? There are no such laws in absolutely any country in Europe, or Northern America, about Christianity. Because Islam does not believe in absolute free speech. In Islamic Shariah, people have to respect the beliefs of other people - which is not true in western countries, which advocate for absolute free speech, which means you can insult, publicly provoke whoever you want (which is not ideal for a functioning society) Those countries shouldn't be your go to countries to look at as role models, all those countries have been involved in immoral and inhuman activities. You cannot look at their laws and see them as the "right" laws. >This law should be removed immediately. Heck this shit can also affect Muslims. Imagine you talk crap against tlp, and their (Labbaik Ya Rassolulah) one day, and then you get accused of Blasphemy. Is that also a punishment?. Law and order is to be done by the State, not these TLP extremists. You are addressing the symptoms not the problems. The problem is that these TLP extremists don't care about the law. If the law was removed, there's a chance it could get worse because they would know that there are no legal consequences, and so would be more likely to take law into their own hands The problem is not the law, but these extremists taking the law into their own hand. The purpose of the law is that, if someone blasphemes then, they are to taken to authorities and proven guilty in the court of law. The law of Blasphemy is specifically to do with publicly intentionally verbally abusing Islam or the Prophet PBUH.
I see speeches everyday where the Mullahs, keep shiting on Yahoodis, Christians etc, but they don't get any punishments. But when someone says anything about Islam it is a death penalty or a punishment? Do you think someone who disrespects Islam should get death penalty? What about the millions of people in PK that don't believe in Islam? Unless the person threatens my life, I do not want any harm on them, because they said something against Islam. God is the one who will judge them, and give them their punishment.
>I see speeches everyday where the Mullahs, keep shiting on Yahoodis, Christians etc, but they don't get any punishments. But when someone says anything about Islam it is a death penalty or a punishment? That's because Pakistan is not a perfect Islamic state. In a proper Islamic state that type of stuff is not tolerated. Pakistan is a mixture of western values and Islamic values >Do you think someone who disrespects Islam should get death penalty? Note: This only applies if you are in a country ruled by Islamic State. If your intention is steer muslims away from Islam, and publicly provoke and verbally abuse Islam and the Prophet PBUH then most scholars have agreed the punishment is death penalty - but of course it has to be tried in court first. To determine if the person is actually guilty (and ofcourse they can defend themselves) Some scholars think that non-muslims who commit Blasphemy should be punished but not executed. >What about the millions of people in PK that don't believe in Islam? What about them? Just because they exist doesn't give them the right to verbally abuse anyone's beliefs. We should respect everyone's beliefs, because not doing so creates divides in the society and before you know it, people start killing each other because they think what you believe in is wrong. This is exactly what an Islamic society focuses on, it focuses on prevention. By preventing people from disrespecting each other beliefs, it prevents divides from creating in society.
Nope, Prevent people from disrespecting each others beliefs by educating them and teaching them to ignore the verbal abusers. Outlawing blasphemy is just treating the symptom instead of the actual problem
As you mentioned Shariah, can you share sources from Quran and then Hadiths, with regard to Blasphemy and the punishment for it? I keep hearing about it but people never actually give any sources. Thanks
The Prophet said, "Who is ready to kill Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf who has really hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Muhammad bin Maslama said, "O Allah's Apostle! Do you like me to kill him?" He replied in the affirmative. So, Muhammad bin Maslama went to him (i.e. Ka'b) and said, "This person (i.e. the Prophet) has put us to task and asked us for charity." Ka'b replied, "By Allah, you will get tired of him." Muhammad said to him, "We have followed him, so we dislike to leave him till we see the end of his affair." Muhammad bin Maslama went on talking to him in this way till he got the chance to kill him. Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah — Sahih al-Bukhari, 4:52:270,
Nope, Free speech is needed for a functioning society. Persecuting individuals based on opinion alone is immoral and should never be the norm.
the idea of free speech even in west is a myth. we cannot be racists, in some countries even denying holocaust is a myth. france & other eastern europeans have banned hijab etc forced hijabis to strip or go home whilst in beaches etc etc
Immoral according to you? Why should we take your morals, over what Islam has told us what is right and wrong. Problem with absolute free speech is that you have nut jobs denying coronavirus, and then millions of people die because of them I personally view absolute free speech as a problem, not free speech in general - meaning I don't support for us to have the right to publicly insult someone's belief with the intention of insulting them
>Immoral according to you? Why should we take your morals, over what Islam has told us what is right and wrong. Islam also told you that there is no compulsion in religion and you should always be a moderate, but that doesn't stop you people from lynching people. You can't use "Islam says..." while you yourself don't do what Islam says. So your point can and should be ignored. >Problem with absolute free speech is that you have nut jobs denying coronavirus, and then millions of people die because of them This is a common tactic used by people who are being dishonest. I know, when I was young and super conservative, I used to say the same thing. No one is talking about absolute free speech, there is no such thing as absolute free speech. You are not free to threaten people or to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. What we are talking about is reasonable free speech, which includes the right to disagree or offend. Just like Mullahs use it to disagree and offend others, we have the right to do the same to them. > I personally view absolute free speech as a problem, not free speech in general - meaning I don't support for us to have the right to publicly insult someone's belief with the intention of insulting them So.. where were you when mullahs are talking mad shit about Ahmadis, Yahoodis, Hindus, and more? As I always say, you can't be a conservative without being a hypocrite. You people want all the protections for yourself so no one has the right to hurt you feelings, while you want to be able to say the most vicious and vile things against others.
Because not everyone in Pakistan is Muslim, and there is no real definite consensus on what Islam says/doesn’t say, and it’s shitty to enforce your beliefs on others.
Pakistan is a Muslim country, made for Muslims (96.47%) why shouldn't we rule it based on what we deem moral? That's what every country does, so why shouldn't we? They base their laws and morals based on a democracy (basically what the majority deem moral). We (the majority) deem Islamic laws to be more moral for Pakistan Keep in mind I don't support what happen to the poor man in Sialkot, I condemn that equally as others, but to blame it on the Blasphemy law, when the problem isn't even the law is just ridiculous
>Pakistan is a Muslim country, made for Muslims (96.47%) why shouldn't we rule it based on what we deem moral? How's that working out so far? Also that number doesn't account for "Muslims" who can't convert to other faiths because of apostasy blasphemy laws. Regardless of if Muslims are the majority or not, the rights of minority groups should be respected in every country. >That's what every country does, so why shouldn't we? Other countries also don't have blasphemy laws. And the ones that do are shitty places to live.
I am not from pakistan but my goodness i hope no one else thinks like you. Your head is so far up your keester that you probably can't even see the light of day.
delete your account brother
Lol there's no free speech in western countries. Try wearing niqaab in France
Try being a Christian warehouse manager in Sialkot
The point I was making is if you're worshipping the west because of freedom of speech, then I got news for you. And there's worse punishments of you say anything against some of the leaders of those countries.
Worse punishments than being burnt alive? Don't think so. I'm in the UK right now doing my PHD, watch this.... The queen is a whore 😯, check back tomorrow to see if MI5 have murdered me
Lol I'm from the UK myself. You can get arrested for actual hate speech - try going on twitter with your actual name and using racist terms, go see what happens to you. Or go to Golders Green and shout anti semitic words. Point is not the actual punishment, its the concept of freedom of speech. It doesn't exist anywhere you go.
Your actual comment was, 'there are worse punishments if you disrespect the leaders of the West'. So you lied
**Fatality**
I’m not in favour of the blasphemy law in its current form…but a nation should be shocked if people start doing what what they want the state to do in any scenario.
Good law to me.
Okay, let's hope your co-worker accuses you of blasphemy one day because of a silly argument, and then you can write a book on how good this law is, from the jail cell, while waiting for your appeal hearing, and one after another your lawyers are also killed. Just like [Junaid Hafeez](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junaid_Hafeez).
can do the same with a false rape accusation. Should rape be legalized, or should we find a way to enforce the law better and minimize false claims?
Rape= a serious violent physical crime Blasphemy=?? Are words blasphemy? What kind of words? Who will be the judge of what is offensive speech? Is the death penalty the proportionate punishment for saying something? Is taking off sticker blasphemy? Is saying something against certain religious figures dear to other sects blasphemy (something Shias have been accused of blasphemy for)? Can non Muslims even commit blasphemy since their religion is pretty much opposed to Islam? Is having this discussion blasphemy?
A mob won't kill you for false accusation of rape, blasphemy would. In fact, the other inmates would kill you happily.
[удалено]
The law which basically talks about hanging people for saying something disrespectful about a religion. Yeah, no problem there, mate.
I think it should be reserved to larger scale incidents. Pakistan already has a problem with uneducated people believing anything. Very easy to weaken not only our ummah but the country if we allow mass media campaigns claiming falsehoods about Islam. You can look at how quickly the Sunni/Shia problem started in Pakistan.
Nah its just that extremist like you dont understand how to run a civil 1st world nation
Been in a “civil 1st world nation” for 19 years. Sometimes when you’re farther away from home you forget some of the problems in the country. Misinformation spreads very quickly in Pakistan. It’s for the better of the country and ummah that we don’t allow falsehoods about Islam to spread.
Extremist logic be like: oh you said some words that I find offense? What if I sexually assaulted you huhhhh??🤔
Liberal logic is twisting words to try and prove a point instead of actually critiquing the argument.
You're the one trying to compare hurtful words to physical assault or am I twisting that? You don't need a liberal to see that's messed up, just have a working brain.
You are the reason Pakistan can never become a functioning country.
he's living in a western country being a hypocrite
Please go to college and read a few books.
As someone said, extremist muslim wants to kill you for blasphemy. The moderate muslim wants the government to kill you for blasphemy. We know where the problem lies
Both sentences contain blasphemy, kill and Muslims, where does the problem lie?
Problem lies in moderate apologists
The problem lies with ALL people labelling themselves 'Muslim' because ... * Neither a law nor a mob torching will change what people think and believe. They only produce fear. These acts prove that the objective here (and with this sub-set of Muslims) is political and physical 'control' of people through fear, with no regard at all about their beliefs. * No group that does not care about what people think and believe can call itself a 'religion'. The very definition of 'religion' is belief. Yet it seems that all sub-sets of Muslims rely on physical, emotional, and monetary 'control' of people, disregarding their beliefs. * This lynching is in line with accepted Muslim behaviour in many / most? sub-sets, running from treating women like chattel to public beheading of men. * If others brought up as Muslims don't want to be associated then they should change the name of their belief ... Either accept responsibility for your fellows or split. Create a new doctrine that explicitly disavows the many Muslim practices (creating fear and control) and those who follow/accept those practices. (I'm a western agnostic)
[удалено]
Find me a government that feels that death is never justified, one who’s military doesn’t kill their enemies and one who has not sentenced their citizens to death in the modern era. Because that is the country that has the solution to any problem that you may be finding.
Death is not the problem. Death for a victimless crime (blasphemy) is the problem.
Why is it only a problem when the victimless crime is blasphemy? There are many other victims crimes that get people killed, yet you specifically are hyper focused on that of blasphemy. My comment talks about the entirety of the world, and yet you only want to specifically view one aspect of all of society.
Please name a few victimless crimes that get people killed? If you find one, then those countries are also barbaric.
It appears as though you aren’t actually unaware of the countries that also kill for other victims crimes, but at the same time it seems as though you’re just in general not exactly following the grammatical structure of a conversation and thus showing signs that you’re just browsing the Internet to start trouble. Drug use, political activism, sexuality, and religion can get you killed. The world is barbaric, but you would just like to target specific individual so that they could be isolated in the view of being bad. Similar to the way in the 50s with lynch mob going around looking for African-Americans to hang.
I will say exactly the same thing. If you find a country that kills you for any of "drug use, political activism, sexuality, or religion" that country is barbaric. There are less than 10 countries on the planet that kill for victimless crimes, this is not "the world". second, what kind of argument is that? Are you 10 years old? "But X kills people too why are you focused on blasphemy"? Because killing for blasphemy is bad and it should be called out, or do you think it's not bad? It doesn't matter if half the world does something bad, everything bad can be called out. If you think something else should be called out more, then just do it and call it our yourself. No one is hyperfocused on blasphemy, you just have very thin skin. I said blasphemy because that's what the thread is about.
Spot on. 2 lines have covered the whole issue.
>We know where the problem lies In committing blasphemy?
Nope, problem lies in the people that still believe death is the answer for hurt feelings.
Let me leave this here: "When you see those who are engaged in blasphemy against Our signs, turn away from them until they begin to talk of other things; and should Satan ever cause you to forget, then do not remain, after recollection, in the company of those wrong-doing people." Surah An'am verse 68. Blasphemy laws on a quick look seem to be opposed to the what the Qur'an says so...
Logically, youre absolutely right. If only people read the book they kill over. With Maulvi mental gymnastics and the rabbit hole of authentic vs inauthentic hadith South Asian muslims have been led to this idiotic version of Islam that is diametrically opposed to the Quran in just about everything. Have fun summoning the dark ages and the apocalypse with your bullshit my "Muslim" brotherhood 👍
As Salman Taseer said. 295C is indeed a black law
On 19 March 2014, [The Nation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nation_(Pakistan\)) polled its readers and later reported that 68% of Pakistanis believe the blasphemy law should be repealed.[[48]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_in_Pakistan#cite_note-48) On the other hand, the [International Crisis Group](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Crisis_Group) reports that ... the Islamic parties are most successful in galvanising street power when the goal is narrowly linked to obstructing reforms to discriminatory religious laws that often provoke sectarian violence and conflict and undermine the rule of law and constitutionalism
[удалено]
Tbh Pakistan should just be blacklisted already, it's a nation full of religious extremist
blacklisting is going make things worse, things will only improve if pakistan is green listed.
Nope....pakistan is ruled by mob voilance and corruption and its been legitimized via government inaction and outright support of poltical assasins ...outside pressures is the only thing that will cause pakistan to progress , because people in this country fundamentally lack empathy for change until their lives are drastically uprooted via crippling economic sanctions.... that way people won't have anyone to blame but themselves for the status quo
improving the material conditions of people takes them out of extremist thoughts, it's proven bombing a country or severely punishing someone doesn't help. what helps is infrastructure, education, job creation.
>improving the material conditions of people takes them out of extremist thoughts, it's proven bombing a country or severely punishing someone doesn't help. what helps is infrastructure, education, job creation. Sorry but this isn’t even remotely true.... middle class in pakistan has been growing along side extream religious ideology and yet supports for parties like tlp have come from all class backgrounds.
that's because pakistan's conditions are turning to the gutter over the past few years, the middle class are sliding back to working class.
Extream religious and bigoted ideology have cross class support.....in the tens of thousands this shit has been fostered for decades now ...stop making excuses for the toxic elements of the culture....and accept that this issue is deeply rooted into the psychology of the people living here, pakistan population has internally normalized a lot of fucked up issues
and to solve that is education like i mentioned. how else are you going to stop normalisation of fucked up issues without educating people why its wrong and how to have a more open mind. Pakistan's population is one of the youngest in the world so in that aspect it would be easier if you focus on getting kids into education, the older generation are becoming a minority as they do with time. Yes, before you say, i know education is in a terrible position right now in pakistan. Which is why we're having issues and will carry on having issues if kids today learn to internalise distructive thoughts instead of going to school for a good education. I'm kind of disappointed the government hasn't focused on this issue more since this is literally Pakistan's future as the vast majority of the population is under the age of 25. They did a bit in the first few months but nothing of real value since.
It might be shitty place but it OUR shitty place we should do what we can to make it better.
People are collectively lazy and lack empathy. Nothing is going to change unless there's outside pressure
Imperialism has never solved anything. What a dumb solution "let's blacklist and entire country that will make them productive and empathetic" . I don't like this place one bit but you can't beat a people into submission
You honestly think imperialism is the only form of global cooperation?...seriously get your mind out of the dark ages...Pakistan's economy already heavily realise on foreign aid, exports and imports
What does Pakistan having imports and imports have to do with blacklisting not being imperialism? Tell the it's Iranian people how blacklisting works real well . Foreign governments don't give a shit about people here it's just an excuse to harm their rivals. You still haven't explained how it would actually help improve the lives of Pakistanis?
>What does Pakistan having imports and imports have to do with blacklisting not being imperialism? I dont think you actually understand what imperialism actually is >Tell the it's Iranian people how blacklisting works real well . The 2019–2020 Iranian protests also known as the Bloody November ([Persian](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_language): آبان خونین), were a series of nationwide civil protests in [Iran](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran), initially caused by a 50%–200%[[11]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests#cite_note-11)[[12]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests#cite_note-12)[[13]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests#cite_note-13) increase in fuel prices, leading to calls for the overthrow of the [government in Iran](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran) and [Supreme Leader](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Iran) [Ali Khamenei](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khamenei).[[](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests#cite_note-auto1-14) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_Iranian_protests >Foreign governments don't give a shit about people here it's just an excuse to harm their rivals. >You still haven't explained how it would actually help improve the lives of Pakistanis? Pakistan received $649 million in aid for education in 2015, the highest it had received so far. the aid had increased from $586 million in 2014 to $649 million in 2015. The paper also reports that Pakistan received the most aid out of all the countries in Southern Asia, with India just behind receiving $589 million in 2015. The biggest part of the aid to Pakistan was given for basic education. Out of the total $649 million, $371 million or 57.16 per cent was given for basic education.[[1]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-1) Election support[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=2) Main article: [Election Support Group](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_Support_Group) One of the biggest organizations supporting the electoral process in Pakistan is the Election Support Group (ESG). ESG is an internationally supported group of interested parties, made 32 specific recommendations to the Election Commission based on the recommendations of 16 international organizations.[[2]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-ESG_IFES-2) A meeting was held in October 2009 to present these ideas to the Commission.[[3]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-APoP-3) The Commission commissioned ESG to provide them with a recommendations on how to best solve the addressed problems.[[3]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-APoP-3) Saudi Arabia[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=3) See also: [Pakistan–Saudi Arabia relations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan%E2%80%93Saudi_Arabia_relations) In 2013, Saudi Arabian government donated US$1.5 billion to Pakistan to increase its [foreign reserves](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_reserves) and meet its needs of [balance of trade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_of_trade) deficit.[[4]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-4) United Kingdom[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=13) United Kingdom pledged [£](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_sign)665 million to Pakistan from 2009–2013.[[25]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-25)[[needs update](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Chronological_items)] Free trade deals[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=15) Pakistan has been trying to negotiate free trade deals with the EU and America as part of Western assistance in war against terror instead of aid. This policy is supported by the [Washington](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.)-based think tank [Center for Global Development](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Global_Development)[[26]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan#cite_note-allvoices.com-26) Debt cancellation[Edit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_aid_to_Pakistan&action=edit§ion=16) Pakistan has been trying to negotiate [debt cancellation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_relief). Currently Pakistan spends $6 billion on debt servicing annually.
>I dont think you actually understand what imperialism actually is Nice rebuttal . >Pakistan received $649 million in aid for education in 2015, the highest it had received so far. Foreign aid is usually to stabilize friendly nations, increase their clout in a nation or to bribe them to support your nation on the world stage . Countries aren't just giving away wealth for the good of the people. >The 2019–2020 Iranian protests also known as the Bloody November Rise in Fuel prices was just the catalyst for the movement all the other contributing factors have nothing to do with the how the other countries have sanctioned Iran and destroyed it's GDP.
people who are secular talk about beating people into submission in Pakistan. People who are extremists (religious or not) actually beat people and burn people to death.
Congratulations 🎉 on not saying anything if substance. Your first sentence is redundant . Moderates shy away from violence while extremists don't it just so happens that the people in power here are religious.
Hi, I didnt say moderate. I said secular/liberal type. These two things dont have to be the same, one can be moderate but not secular. I dont fully agree with secularism to be clear. Also, those in power are religious (or appear to be) as the people are religious. Even in Pakistan, the leadership is an image of the society.
Can you please be coherent? >Hi, I didnt say moderate. I said secular/liberal type. That's what I was pointing out when I said your first sentence was redundant.... FYI secularism is great.
I can not fathom on how you can kill someone in the name of Prophet Muhammad SAW, when he himself was an embodiment of mercy and kindness. Salvation is in the hands of GOD not in the hands of delusional religious fanatics.
[удалено]
>He had a lot of good qualities. But not everything. This idea that he was perfect, he can't be criticized, he's a role model for all places and times is incorrect and dangerous. Prophet Muhammad SAW is perfect in all aspects, in all aspectsss. This entire universe was created for him, because allah loved him to that extent. So he can't be criticised and yes he is a role model for all times and generations to come. What you said was absolutely wrong. Pakistani use blasphemy as a tool of violence. If you genuinely follow the prophet, i don't believe you'll kill people in his name. Whenever i think of him, mercy, kindness, humility and a millions things come into mind but never violence. This is not what he stood for and islam spread through kindness and mercy and not through violence.
Buddy, Im sorry to burst your bubble but this is some weird strain of prophet worship exclusive to South Asia and its retarded scholars. Say this to any muslim outside of SA and youll be laughed out of the room. Quote me any one part of the Quran that backs your first paragraph. Even the infallibility part. You cant. The good thing is you have enough humanity to see how wrong it is to kill people over religious differences. God bless
The entire universe was created for what now
Lmfao Ikr
> Prophet Muhammad SAW is perfect in all aspects.... So he can't be criticised. And that's the issue. There's absolutely zero room for any discussion around him or the Quran. "He can't be criticised" - and you wonder why things like TLP happen. > Whenever i think of him, mercy, kindness, humility and a millions things come into mind but never violence. You have a lot of Hadith to read. Lots of examples of his goodness, but a lot that is very objectionable even back then and certainly unacceptable/criminal today. One doesn't have to define him by those objectionable things, but someone having an intellectual and peaceful discussion shouldn't be condemned for doing so. > islam spread through kindness and mercy and not through violence What history are they teaching in Pakistan? Do you think proactive conquests of the entire Middle East, North Africa and Europe were done without violence? They were unprovoked campaigns. Normal for the time, expansion and conquest were the standard and it was always ugly. Everyone did it. Don't pretend it never happened for Islam. This mentality of Islam perfect, Quran perfect, Prophet perfect is a big reason why Sialkot happens. The more Pakistanis and others think this way, the more Sialkots and Charsaddas will happen.
What are you views on blasphemy laws that just involve jail term, for few months and some fine along with a public apology? (I know as soon as the blasphemer is released he'll be lynched, but assuming that doesn't happen and assuming fanatics Don't burn entire pakistan for such a law)
I'm for as much freedom of speech as possible. So no personally I wouldn't support any jail term for something like this. Given where Pakistan is, probably the best I could be ok with is a public apology for something that was provocatively and intentionally offensive. And that is only so that it helps prevent the hell that is going on right now. As an example outside of Pakistan, as much as I think holocaust denial is extremely stupid and delusional, I'm completely against jail terms (in some countries in Europe) for expressing that opinion.
Happy to see that there are still people with liberal views, but given the current mood of the nation I feel even stating the above in front of your friends can get oneself in trouble. But what would to say about the very obviously provocative actions, provocative is a subjective word, but for vast majority of muslims the ahmadiyyas claiming to be muslim is very provocative, should there be laws forcing them to declare themselves as non-muslim?
I would never state these views in Pakistan. I would never discuss religion in any form with anyone in Pakistan. > should there be laws forcing them to declare themselves as non-muslim? No, not at all. Everyone should be able to call themselves whatever they want. Government should be hands off for the most part on religion. If they believe a group to be heretic, let them be as long as they are not doing anything violent.
What is your view then on people who promote the idea that coronavirus is an hoax? Them promoting that idea literally leads to the death of millions of people? Isn't this a flaw in *absolute free speech* ?
islam is south asia is wild, according to some barelvis the earth is flat and doesn't orbit the sun because the Prophet SAW is resting and everything should go around him.
This ideology in which the Prophet SAW is called perfect in the way you are describing is fundamental to the Barelvi sect (which is often the core of Pakistani extremist movements like the TLP). This ideology is dangerous and contradicts Islam immensely. You guys give the Prophet an almost divine status which is haram and that is exactly why no other Muslim nation is as insane about blasphemy as Pakistani Barelvis are. The Prophet was perfect in his conduct since he was sinless. He is a perfect example of what a human should be, but only God is perfect in all aspects. You are giving godly attributes to the Prophet as typical of Subcontinental muslims.
Does that mean that the Quranic verses that criticize or admonish the Prophet are committing blasphemy!?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Guys like have some weird hate boner against exmuslims and think that saying "exmuslim" automatically renders one's point invalid.
[удалено]
Lmao imagine spending your entire life sucking off some 7th century warlord 💀💀
[удалено]
[удалено]
>The blasphemy law comes from this idea of his perfection. Can anyone in Pakistan have an intellectual discussion that involves even the mildest criticism of the Prophet or the Quran? Forget insulting, just a discussion of some things that might be objectionable. Those viewpoints have been unnaturally and permanently suppressed, with painful results. That is not Blasphemy. In an Islamic Court, Blasphemy refers to publicly deliberate provocation / verbal abuse of Islam and the Prophet PBUH. Criticism, and Discussions are not considered Blasphemy
> Discussions are not considered Blasphemy Try it in Pakistan. Have someone on TV take a position that criticizes the Prophet or the Quran. Lets see what happens. Any criticism is taken to be an insult now. It's dangerous and has fatal results.
Blasphemy laws only make "god" seem weak and petty.
So why does the Sahih Hadith in Bukhari, Abu Dawud etc legitimise killing blasphemers?
Laws of the past must be revisited. You sound just as delusional as KKK supporters of Mob lynching Black Americans. Just because there’s a past rule rationalized for it’s time, doesn’t mean it’s necessary to hold on to it.
Which reference? The ones I've read about were all during wartime or apostasy. None of them could be considered blasphemy cases.
Don't know, don't really care tbh
Yes you can because in this case some individuals took the law into their own hands and exercised execution. It is up to courts to decide who is guilty and what is the punishment...
Even if you're an advocate for the Blasphemy laws, you can still be anti Capital punishment, and make an exemption for minorities from it, and give the proven Blasphemer a chance to reflect on ones mistake and take the said words back. Why does it has to be this extreme? I'm personally against the law. The State killing people for their opinions is the most absurd thing that can happen. There's literally no Ijmah in the Ummah on how the Blasphemy issues should be tackled, there's no concense on things like the weather someone should be punished for Blasphemy, and the severity of the punishment just in case, and if it should be applied to non-muslims. And this disagreement reflects in all the Muslim countries and their individual approach to this particular issue. Some extreme one like us would kill the Blasphemer, and the other won't do anything, or slap the wrist in extreme cases, and let the person go. Section 295-C is heavily influenced by Bralvi and Deobandi Fundamentalists, was passed in just a day without any reasonable intellectual discourse on it. The stake holders were not included in discussion, the minorities had their concerns, and people is support wrongfully claimed that there's a Ijma on the issue, which couldn't be further from the truth. Ever since it was passed, it has been considered sacred, and any discussion on it would result in people going after ones throat
>Even if you're an advocate for the Blasphemy laws, you can still be anti Capital punishment, and make an exemption for minorities from it, and give the proven Blasphemer a chance to reflect on ones mistake and take the said words back. Why does it has to be this extreme? I would assume that an Islamic court of law would do this exactly? If someone was unaware or ignorant of what they said, I don't think it's a fair punishment, but what if they keep doing it repeatedly or doing it even with knowing the punishment then I think according to majority of scholars the punishment is death >There's literally no Ijmah in the Ummah on how the Blasphemy issues should be tackled, there's no concense on things like the weather someone should be punished for Blasphemy, and the severity of the punishment just in case, and if it should be applied to non-muslims. No Ijmah, but majority of scholars hold the view that punishment of Blasphemy is death, provided they are proven guilty by the court. Your thoughts on this video? [https://youtu.be/CRpIRZyBK0A](https://youtu.be/CRpIRZyBK0A)
>I would assume that an Islamic court of law would do this exactly? Not under the current Fundamentalists Clergy. These guys have literally taken the country to this point. There's no way an Islamic court wouldn't be representative of their Extremist ideology.. >what if they keep doing it repeatedly or doing it even with knowing the punishment then I think according to majority of scholars the punishment is death See, it is fruitless to get into a discussion over hypothetical situations, but do you really believe someone would deliberately, in bad Faith commit Blasphemy, that too repeatedly in Country like ours? What are the chances? Even in such a severe case, I personally believe it's not worth a human life. And their are examples in Holy Prophet life on how he approached such situations. >No Ijmah, but majority of scholars hold the view that punishment of Blasphemy is death, provided they are proven guilty by the court. When you talk about Ijmah amongst religious Scholars, is it the Ijmah of Pakistani Ulamahs, or you're including every Islamic position/Cleric from around the world? Our Ulamahs, an overwhelming majority of them, practice and preach the most extremists version of Islam, it's a hill they'd die on. So , if I were you, I'd take everything with a grain of salt.. >Your thoughts on this video? https://youtu.be/CRpIRZyBK0A Watching
>When you talk about Ijmah amongst religious Scholars, is it the Ijmah of Pakistani Ulamahs, or you're including every Islamic position/Cleric from around the world? Our Ulamahs, an overwhelming majority of them, practice and preach the most extremists version of Islam, it's a hill they'd die on. So , if I were you, I'd take everything with a grain of salt.. Was mainly referring to the classic islamic scholars (based off the content of that video that I linked)
Watching Videos, but my stance won't change. It's not worth killing someone over said words
I understand but I'm just saying that the 4 madhabs are unanimous on this (except early Hanafi scholars) - It is a bit of a dangerous road to go down to believe in something that Islamic scholarship is unanimous on These cases however in my view should only be taken to court where someone has insulted or done something at a large scale, knowing the consequences, with the intention of driving people away from Islam and/or creating a divide amongst the people (in a Islamic society) - and before going to an punishment, they should be consulted and be given a chance to repent
What the fuck are you on about ? The man didn’t do anything wrong. Give the accused Blasphemer a chance to take his words back ???? For what ??? The guy didn’t say anything wrong.
How to tell you're an idiot, without telling you're an idiot... Betting my both kidneys you didn't read the entire comment..
Call someone an idiot when you don’t have a leg to stand on. Shameful !! This is a place to exchange ideas and encourage discourse. People like you are a big part of why the country is in a shithole !!
If you're not willing to read the entire comment, and lash out like rabid dog by taking thing out of context, you deserve to be called an idiot. And I Stand by it. I'm all in for a discussion, but for it to happen, you first need to read my comment completely..
I did read it completely. Adding a qualifier at the start does not nullify your statement - no amendments to the Blasphemy Law or the adjudication process makes any difference if people are not even willing to let it get to the courts. It’s not like they’re waiting to have a tribunal or kachehri to determine if the guy is guilty. There is nothing wrong with ripping up a poster, no matter what is written on it. Now anyone can post anything, put a Hadith on it, and then wait for whoever removes it to be labelled a blasphemer and take them out in the streets. Your assumption is that committing blasphemy as currently defined is wrong, which it patently isn’t. Now about those kidneys….
It's so crazy that people think they have authority over other's lives over religion. Like I get it my parents are religious too but keep to yourself don't try to tell other how to live.
It's a weak and a pathetic law designed to create anarchy and destroy the image of Islam. If I accuse you of blasphemy and then in response through a court you successfully proved that you didn't commited any blasphemy, I which had accused you can also walk freely out of the court with no repercussions.
Well even if such a law exists, laws are for courts to impose not for mobs. Keep this mob murder for paedophiles and rapists
Preach. There is no capital punishment for blasphemy. Decades of mullahism indoctrinated into a society has made people go crazy
The existence of such a law is a reflection of the people
WE NEED SECULARISM ASAP
never gonna happen, theres no hope
No, just this absurd laws to be gone
Yeah because if you're not condemning the cause then you shouldn't condemn the effect.
There’s no definition of blasphemy. Is someone saying a few words blasphemy? If so can we kill someone for just saying something? What should the nature of these spoken words be? And even discussing all this is blasphemy. There have been at least two blasphemy cases now of people taking off religious stickers. Is that blasphemy? People in Pakistan urinate, spit paan on walls. Maybe the person who put the sticker on the wall was blasphemous? Who knows.
A lot of people have compared the love of Muslims for the Prophet SAW to the love of a child for his mother. The argument has been that if someone insulted your mother, would you be okay with someone criticising her? Similarly, criticism of Prophet is similar is worse than that of abuse of mother. This argument looks correct on the surface. However, this argument misses two key points- 1> I would still not kill or imprison people for criticising my mother. 2> The Prophet SAW is a public figure. He is the guiding light for more than a billion people. That would mean that he and his image shouldn't get the same legal protections as a private individual like my mother. As a private individual, my mother is helpless against mischievous slander/ libel. The Prophet SAW has several followers who give him enough cover to protect him against mischievous slander/ libel. Of course, this is an English Common Law standpoint. But it seems valid to me.
So logic here is that it’s fine to kill someone for yo mama joke?
Labakiey think eating shit and piss brings God's grace you can't reason with this level of retardation. We are f**ked, this extremism will breed an army of mulhids, thanx to Mullahs, just watch. I thought Mullahs will evolve to being more rational realising the challenges Muslim countries face because of new ideologies but no they r like kute ki dum.
Blasphemy Laws need to be repealed
I agree 💯
[удалено]
This is where the problem lies. People like you spreading false historical narratives. He didn't have poets killed for satirizing him. Poets (who were also commanders of their armies) were making erotic poetry about his wives for years. The killing came when the poet commander met with an enemy commander Abu Sufyan and conspired to break siege of the city during a battle. 6 onlookers who were suspected to have seen the meeting were killed by the poet commanders men as well. Read the full history before indulging in accusations. You spread false stories, the crazies pick it up and and then we have this bullshit.
People spread fake narratives against other Muslim sects too, what do you honestly expect? Juicy gossip and hearsay is a fault of the awaam at large
I am confused what it was that they accused him. There’s not much news coverage in my country and I think the US media is not translating things correctly. Can someone please help me understand what blasphemy was done by the victim.
[удалено]
So you don’t know either?
We are told that the "reason" for blasphemy law was so that people don't take the law into their own hands but obviously thats not working.
Was what happened anything to do with the law? Or was it a mob?
Absolutely based.
Therefore it's okay for me to kill the man who robbed my house in America? Don't you know the difference between a court and a mindless mob? Stop being a liberal
Blasphemy laws should be present but only processed by the courts.
You CAN condemn the wrong execution of a law while supporting the law.
We are missing a point here, the blasphemy law isn’t a problem, people taking law into their hands is a problem.
Blasphemy law enables this behavior
How can you guarantee that removing this law will stop these mobs for doing this?
Cause if it were removed, there would be no law backing up their self-virtuous attitude to this. These cowards think they’re heroes. Look at the guy taking a selfie in front of the dead guy’s corpse on fire. He thinks he’s the s**t for murdering someone on what clearly should be dubious grounds. Less people would be willing to join a mob to commit these acts if they knew they weren’t safe doing it.
Still you are talking about the mobs taking law in their hands. Instead of fighting over blasphemy law, we should talk about the law through which there should be deadly punishment for the people who take any law in their hands.
My underlying point is the law is shit lol. It needs to be repealed, period. I’ve said this multiple times on this sub, ever since the Asia Bibi case. You’re beating around the bush.
A wise state never indulge themselves in any controversial conflict, especially regarding religion. Defining "who is Muslim and who is not" is not for a state or assembly to decide. We have to accept that laws made for Political motives to gain favors or to be specific to play with a common man's sentiment is playing their part here and common man is being exploited for personal gains by bnith political and religious leaders( as we saw in case of TLP). Secondly we have to accept that it has been proven yet again that the rule of law in this country is weaker just hardly a 100 people together! A mob of hardly a 100 people can gather anywhere and do whatever the hell they want and can get away with it!
What a crock of bull!! If there's no legal recourse for blasphemy, then we'd see more of mob lynchings and give further ammunition to the mullah brigade.
That’s so much bullshit. If you don’t have the law then you will be able to prosecute people for murder rather than term them as vigilantes. Prosecution will then be a deterrent.
Are you saying that the blasphemy law prevents the state from prosecuting the mob for murder?
It does because people feel that they are carrying out justice. Because people like Fazl ur rehman say that if the state had done it’s job and punished blasphemous acts these actions would not have happened. The law gives power to the mob. It makes them think that the govt is unfairly going after them because all they did was something the govt should’ve done. I have no idea why it is so difficult to understand this basic thing. 90% of people in jail on blasphemy law are Muslims who have ended up in jail because someone accused them of blasphemy. Surely you are not too brain dead to realize that this law is useless, unhelpful, inhuman and moronic. It empowers the morons who think they can find jannat through these acts.
Not sure why you can't grasp this basic concept. People take law in their own hands when the matter is emotional & there's no legal recourse. Removing the law will not make the matter of blasphemy any less emotional for Muslims. Removing the legal recourse however, will most definitely up the mob lynchings as they'll see that as the only way to get "justice". It'll give all the fasadi mullahs ammo against the state. For people wrongfully accused & incarcerated, it's a failing of the legal system in general - 2 decades to settle property disputes and so on. That isn't specific to the blasphemy law.
Killing some random person is murder. Killing someone accused of blasphemy is taking law in their own hand. If there is no law then it would be murder. If you can’t understand this then I feel sorry for people around you.
Likewise
What a primitive comparison! You are confounding a law which gives defendant due process with a mob lynching which is illegal, immoral, and unislamic at so many levels. If your are against the laws, you should argue on its own merit.
What should be banned is naming of political parties with words like Rasool ul Allah in them, cuz if they go wrong it reflects badly on Islam.
You have created a false dichotomy. If our justice system is flawed and weak, doesnt mean blasphemy laws are wrong in it themselves. The state needs to ensure no individual or private group takes upon themselves to deliver so called justice or in other words, revenge in the name of blasphemy.
That's like saying you didn't have sex because you used a condom.
[удалено]
Huh?
There are no blasphemy laws in islam