Law4 mins ago
Should the Authorities in Pakistan throw the book at this scoundrel?
40 Answers
Not only has he defiled the book his people consider the word of God, he's also tried to frame an innocent Christian child for his own crime.
Lapidation, rather than being pelted with books, might be a more appropriate punishment.
http://
Lapidation, rather than being pelted with books, might be a more appropriate punishment.
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sandyRoe. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
/// argorstran
The article clearly states (1/2 way down the page) "Convictions are common , although the death sentence has never been carried out . "
This speaks volumes for the Western journalism's choice of headlines - "Christian girl faces death..." etc.
I've been following the posts on this story and it was always absolutely clear that she was NOT facing the death penalty and also that she didn't do it (she has a mental illness) .
As for the cleric , he's now going to have to face the Pakistani law .///
No she doesn't have a mental illness, she has Down's Syndrome which is a genetic condition, mental illness can be cured, Down's can't.
The article clearly states (1/2 way down the page) "Convictions are common , although the death sentence has never been carried out . "
This speaks volumes for the Western journalism's choice of headlines - "Christian girl faces death..." etc.
I've been following the posts on this story and it was always absolutely clear that she was NOT facing the death penalty and also that she didn't do it (she has a mental illness) .
As for the cleric , he's now going to have to face the Pakistani law .///
No she doesn't have a mental illness, she has Down's Syndrome which is a genetic condition, mental illness can be cured, Down's can't.
Her condition shouldn’t be a consideration. The fact is this archaic law renders Islam beyond reproach – and it isn’t. It’s high time Muslims realised and acknowledged that the rest of the world doesn’t think as they do – and neither should it be expected to – or obliged to resort to sycophancy for fear of endangering personal freedom or safety. If they want to revere a book, that’s their business, but they have no right to demand that same adulation from everyone else.
To my eyes, if you ignor physical things such as TVs, cars, modern plumbing, the printed (as opposed to written) word, etc., Islamic societies such as that of (at least parts of) Pakistan are at a developmental stage entirely analogous to that of Christian ones some centuries ago. Social pressures are inordinately important and therefore they are used to individual ends. Thus there will be people who will try to impart their own view to manipulate others - this is simply a matter of taking and exercising power through the network. In the West a form of this is widespread - take the way people feel they must conform regarding fashion, labels, gadgets (not least mobile phones), etc., etc. and the advertising industry are a stupendous master of these pressures over here.
In said Muslim societies the same applies whereby certain people try to bring on (and all too often succeed) a mood that leaves large sections of the population trying to outdo each other in observance. We have current examples (not least in the USA) where people are trying to ostensibly show that they are more faithful, more correct, more within God's circle than the rest. This is, to me, what is behind these extremes of religious observance, a form of power play together with an attempt to feel better about oneself. It is very often motivated by the perpetrator's desire to bestow upon him/herself a kind of halo of goodness by deluding him/herself into actually believing that they are at the forefront of goodness. Others are far more cynically motivated.
The common populous is frequently its own worst enemy when it comes to this sort of following the leader. That is equally true in isolated communities of Pakistan and other such places as it is in the West when some "must have" item is touted as the badge of cool and people fight to get it when it is (deliberately ?) in short supply. I see no difference in substance, only appearance/manifestation.
However, as the hold of the Christian establishment over its people has mostly been pushed to where it belongs (still allowing religious belief) so Islamic practice is evolving. This is actually happening at a much faster pace than the appearance of the same developments in Christianity. Already there are significant sections of the world's Muslim community that abhor the extremes. Again, it is my belief that the extremes we witness today will become a tiny minority exactly like extremist Christians are a minority among Christians. Who knows, maybe the two extremes will in 50 or 100 years only be found in the US of A. In enlightened societies these will be dealt with in an appropriate way, in less enlightened ones appeasing the extremes will be de rigeur at election time.
In said Muslim societies the same applies whereby certain people try to bring on (and all too often succeed) a mood that leaves large sections of the population trying to outdo each other in observance. We have current examples (not least in the USA) where people are trying to ostensibly show that they are more faithful, more correct, more within God's circle than the rest. This is, to me, what is behind these extremes of religious observance, a form of power play together with an attempt to feel better about oneself. It is very often motivated by the perpetrator's desire to bestow upon him/herself a kind of halo of goodness by deluding him/herself into actually believing that they are at the forefront of goodness. Others are far more cynically motivated.
The common populous is frequently its own worst enemy when it comes to this sort of following the leader. That is equally true in isolated communities of Pakistan and other such places as it is in the West when some "must have" item is touted as the badge of cool and people fight to get it when it is (deliberately ?) in short supply. I see no difference in substance, only appearance/manifestation.
However, as the hold of the Christian establishment over its people has mostly been pushed to where it belongs (still allowing religious belief) so Islamic practice is evolving. This is actually happening at a much faster pace than the appearance of the same developments in Christianity. Already there are significant sections of the world's Muslim community that abhor the extremes. Again, it is my belief that the extremes we witness today will become a tiny minority exactly like extremist Christians are a minority among Christians. Who knows, maybe the two extremes will in 50 or 100 years only be found in the US of A. In enlightened societies these will be dealt with in an appropriate way, in less enlightened ones appeasing the extremes will be de rigeur at election time.
argorstran
The article clearly states (1/2 way down the page) "Convictions are common , although the death sentence has never been carried out . "
This speaks volumes for the Western journalism's choice of headlines - "Christian girl faces death..." etc.
I've been following the posts on this story and it was always absolutely clear that she was NOT facing the death penalty and also that she didn't do it (she has a mental illness) .
As for the cleric , he's now going to have to face the Pakistani law .
11:19 Sun 02nd Sep 2012
In a land where the law is 'blasphemy', the judge, jury, and executioner become the will of public. Arbitrary beliefs lead inevitably to arbitrary practices. Laws are (or should be) intended to protect the rights and freedom of the innocent, not the other way 'round. Laws, when turned on their head, are worse than no law at all. Blasphemy laws are not instituted to promote justice but rather to justify the arbitrary actions of those who institute them. What difference is it to the victim whether she dies in jail or upon being released into the hands of her accusers except perhaps that the legal system might have been more merciful in its execution?
The article clearly states (1/2 way down the page) "Convictions are common , although the death sentence has never been carried out . "
This speaks volumes for the Western journalism's choice of headlines - "Christian girl faces death..." etc.
I've been following the posts on this story and it was always absolutely clear that she was NOT facing the death penalty and also that she didn't do it (she has a mental illness) .
As for the cleric , he's now going to have to face the Pakistani law .
11:19 Sun 02nd Sep 2012
In a land where the law is 'blasphemy', the judge, jury, and executioner become the will of public. Arbitrary beliefs lead inevitably to arbitrary practices. Laws are (or should be) intended to protect the rights and freedom of the innocent, not the other way 'round. Laws, when turned on their head, are worse than no law at all. Blasphemy laws are not instituted to promote justice but rather to justify the arbitrary actions of those who institute them. What difference is it to the victim whether she dies in jail or upon being released into the hands of her accusers except perhaps that the legal system might have been more merciful in its execution?
Just read what I think is an interesting and powerful indictment of the blasphemy laws in Pakistan, and thought those here might be interested in reading it.....
http://
from the article
"Before the current law came into existence, in 60 years there were six reported cases of blasphemy. Since the current law was constituted there have been more than four thousand. But the law has such power that even pleading the statistics is considered blasphemous."
http://
from the article
"Before the current law came into existence, in 60 years there were six reported cases of blasphemy. Since the current law was constituted there have been more than four thousand. But the law has such power that even pleading the statistics is considered blasphemous."
This thread, amongst many others in this category, is yet one more example of the seemingly limitless and needless consequences of belief in the arbitrary for the sake of the refusal to face the inevitability of death which invariably negatively impacts our quality of life. In the absence of such arbitrary beliefs there would be no niche for religion to gain a foothold and subsequently the concept of blasphemy and this question which highlights the consequences of laws created solely to provide the stranglehold of religion a safe haven, like god, would not exist.
If you want to know who the principal scoundrel is, look for the one trying to relegate the blame to someone else.
If you want to know who the principal scoundrel is, look for the one trying to relegate the blame to someone else.
International human rights laws should include a section stating that no signatory shall have laws on blasphemy nor any other limitation upon the criticism of relgion or its practices.
I don't see the problem with this since they acknowledge that religious freedom should be supported.
It is hypocritical that the choice to disbelieve in religion is not afforded the same status as the belief in religion.
I don't see the problem with this since they acknowledge that religious freedom should be supported.
It is hypocritical that the choice to disbelieve in religion is not afforded the same status as the belief in religion.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank5 mins ago
ChatterBank11 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles18 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles30 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles56 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.