قہر برپا کیا تم نے نبیﷺکا نام لے کر

[Verve]

The Blasphemy law (after amendment) is flawed due to the following reasons:

- It is not compliant
- Criminalising “insult” to religion in the penal code, lends legitimacy to the social persecution of individuals and groups who are said to “offend” mainstream religious sensibilities, based on rumours spread with the intention of whipping up violence.
- restricts the ability of members of the majority religious community to practice their faith in the way they choose, and even to settle personal grudges
- It does not take into consideration background of the accuser, for e.g. a 10yr old with mental disabilities was allegedly accused of blasphemy.
- All faiths have different views, asking a question may wrongly be taken as 'offending beliefs' resulting to 'blame of blasphemy'
- To label it as being part of 'Faith' which is incorrect, people feel self-satisfied taking law into their own hands which in their 'psychic' is acceptable - when in actuality it isn't and leads to a concept of ideology.

The question isn't whether someone commits blasphemy or not - but the fact that if someone even gets a whiff of it you're lynched.

Blasphemy Laws need amendments which ALSO suggest that false accusation will lead to serious consequences because they have endangered other peoples lives.

If you were the PM, when would you propose start this debate in the Parliament and bringing about the ese changes in these laws, whilst considering everything including terrorist, governance, politics, geopolitics and regional gameplay?

What is the timeline you are proposing from TODAY?

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Google difference between hadith and sunnah please.

 

[Hell hound]

The Blasphemy law (after amendment) is flawed due to the following reasons:

- It is not compliant
- Criminalising “insult” to religion in the penal code, lends legitimacy to the social persecution of individuals and groups who are said to “offend” mainstream religious sensibilities, based on rumours spread with the intention of whipping up violence.
- restricts the ability of members of the majority religious community to practice their faith in the way they choose, and even to settle personal grudges
- It does not take into consideration background of the accuser, for e.g. a 10yr old with mental disabilities was allegedly accused of blasphemy.
- All faiths have different views, asking a question may wrongly be taken as 'offending beliefs' resulting to 'blame of blasphemy'
- To label it as being part of 'Faith' which is incorrect, people feel self-satisfied taking law into their own hands which in their 'psychic' is acceptable - when in actuality it isn't and leads to a concept of ideology.

The question isn't whether someone commits blasphemy or not - but the fact that if someone even gets a whiff of it you're lynched.

Blasphemy Laws need amendments which ALSO suggest that false accusation will lead to serious consequences because they have endangered other peoples lives.

Let me add one more point to this excellent post
People thinks that getting involve in mob justice will somehow get them a straight ticket to heaven and blasphemy law being part of constitution of Islamic republic of Pakistan gives further credence to their believe that this act is somehow Islamic

 

[Divergent]

If you were the PM, when would you propose start this debate in the Parliament and bringing about the ese changes in these laws, whilst considering everything including terrorist, governance, politics, geopolitics and regional gameplay?

What is the timeline you are proposing from TODAY?

Step aside if you can't back your points with constructive and valid points.

This is a debate. Not an election.

Let me add one more point to this excellent post
People thinks that getting involve in mob justice will somehow get them a straight ticket to heaven and blasphemy law being part of constitution of Islamic republic of Pakistan gives further credence to their believe that this act is somehow Islamic

Thank you, I've done thorough research on this subject for months on end. I know exactly what I'm talking about

 

[Verve]

But simply amending the law to remove the death penalty at least for non-Muslims and first-time offenders shouldn't be a problem.

Yes, it shouldn't be a problem but in the current scenario when the pseudo liberals have hyped this matter to such an extent that it people have taken hard stances on it. Situation now is that these ridiculous so called Islamic political parties (full of enemy snakes) are fighting for their survival (with the pending system collapse) and will cling on to this issue with dear life and on the other hand these liberals just keep pressing for immediate change. This is asking for chaos.

Step aside if you can't back your points with constructive and valid points.

This is a debate. Not an election.

You should try to understand the validity of the question posed and answer to your best ability. Rubbishing it is counter productive.

Main issue is of timing, as to WHEN these changes should be brought in.

I'd like to ask @The Sandman as well considering he is well versed with the what is going on around us.

 

[TankMan]

If you were the PM, when would you propose start this debate in the Parliament and bringing about the ese changes in these laws, whilst considering everything including terrorist, governance, politics, geopolitics and regional gameplay?

What is the timeline you are proposing from TODAY?

Brother, in Parliament our politicians waste so much time arguing over petty things, insulting each other, making jokes and so on - our Govt spends more time and resources trying to insult Imran Khan than they do on foreign affairs. Amending this law is certainly more important than those things.

If I was the PM, making sure our laws are reasonable and Islamic would be among the top priorities, alongside ensuring that the law is actually enforced properly. Justice is not a trivial matter. Terrorism can only be eliminated through rule of law.

But this is not an election campaign, it's a discussion on a forum.

 

[Hell hound]

Yes, it shouldn't be a problem but in the current scenario when the pseudo liberals have hyped this matter to such an extent that it people have taken hard stances on it. Situation now is that these ridiculous so called Islamic political parties (full of enemy snakes) are fighting for their survival (with the pending system collapse) and will cling on to this issue with dear life and on the other hand these liberals just keep pressing for immediate change. This is asking for chaos.

Mate I still can't understand what you want on one hand you know only snakes are backing this law on other hand you don't want us liberal to say anything about it

 

[Divergent]

Yes, it shouldn't be a problem but in the current scenario when the pseudo liberals have hyped this matter to such an extent that it people have taken hard stances on it. Situation now is that these ridiculous so called Islamic political parties (full of enemy snakes) are fighting for their survival (with the pending system collapse) and will cling on to this issue with dear life and on the other hand these liberals just keep pressing for immediate change. This is asking for chaos.

Its not asking for chaos. People have lost lives! How many MORE do we need to lose to get it? Changes need to be made so people can't harm other people.

No non-Muslim is getting killed in the name of Faith even IF they commit blasphemy because they are NOT of that Faith, their understanding cannot comprehended and it is beyond their means.

How can you kill someone who is incapable of understanding something?

Ultimately they do NOT have the right to attack or run anti-Faith pages which harm sentiments, if done and proven they should be sentenced and imprisoned.

Further to that blasphemy isn't questioning or critiquing Faith either IF done in an appropriate manner because without questions you are not able to expand nor explore different avenues or learn.

 

[TankMan]

Yes, it shouldn't be a problem but in the current scenario when the pseudo liberals have hyped this matter to such an extent that it people have taken hard stances on it. Situation now is that these ridiculous so called Islamic political parties (full of enemy snakes) are fighting for their survival (with the pending system collapse) and will cling on to this issue with dear life and on the other hand these liberals just keep pressing for immediate change. This is asking for chaos.

Look, we can not give up on justice because some people have taken hardline stances. It needs to be made clear that this law is not being changed because of psuedo-liberals but because it is unjust and goes against Islamic principles.

Besides, even from a political point of view, If the blasphemy law becomes fair, those who are anti-Pakistan will lose it as a talking point.

 

[Fawadqasim1]

hadith includes akhbar e ahaad whereas sunnah e mutawatir is consensus of jumhoor ummah right from the time of the holy prophet saw till date.

 

[The Sandman]

I'd like to ask @The Sandman as well considering he is well versed with the what is going on around us.

When is the best time to bring change? it's now if you want to defeat terrorism than you first need to defeat extremism we should start from this unIslamic law first.

 

[Verve]

It needs to be made clear that this law is not being changed because of psuedo-liberals but because it is unjust and goes against Islamic principles.

Where is that narrative though? When we have political parties who don't want to promote this narrative because it may hurt their vote bank (such as PMLN, JUI-F, JI etc!), who will do this and when?

Look at what the lack of this narrative did in Qadri's case? Salman couldn't keep his gob shut and Qadri couldn't control his trigger finger, and a shrine is the result despite capital punishment for murder! And this is what I keep saying to these liberals, without taking measured steps and in the absence of an effective narrative, changes will result in chaos and you will have even more loudmouths Salmans and killer Qadris!

 

[Hell hound]

No non-Muslim is getting killed in the name of Faith even IF they commit blasphemy because they are NOT of that Faith, their understanding cannot comprehended and it is beyond their means.

people need to understand that other faiths which are derived from islam (i.e ahmedi) are going to some what contradict with islam .that's the reason these sects are declared kawarij in the first place but this doesn't mean we should punish them for their beliefs under blasphemy law. Declaring them kafir was enough and now their right to practice their religion must be protected under Islamic laws.

 

[Verve]

Look, we can not give up on justice

That message clearly didn't get to the rulers ... is there justice in the society yet? If there was, a lot of the public wouldn't be studying in madrassah's being radicalised!

 

[Hell hound]

Look at what the lack of this narrative did in Qadri's case? Salman couldn't keep his gob shut and Qadri couldn't control his trigger finger, and a shrine is the result despite capital punishment for murder! And this is what I keep saying to these liberals, without taking measured steps and in the absence of an effective narrative, changes will result in chaos and you will have even more loudmouths Salmans and killer Qadris!

So you want us to shut up because some people can't handle the truth and might get agitated by mere mention of it