Blasphemy Laws - Page 3

Bilal Hassan · #21 Monday, September 23, 2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddha of Suburbia

Why are you denying that they are Muslims? Do you also deny that Taliban, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and other sectarian outfits that carry out acts of terrorism are Muslims? That just by the virtue of the fact that someone is a Muslim, he can't be the one who carry out such acts? This is absurd. This hypothesis of denial has led TV anchors and journalists-some of them quite notable- to conclude that suicide bombers are in fact Hindus and Jews sent by Raw and Mosad. They even claim that inspection of the genitals of suicide bombers revealed that they were uncircumcised non-Muslims!

Well my dear, you missed that point, I had also said that they are not true Muslims, had they been, the would not have killed a single human being, That's it. Well as far as Raw and Mosad agents are concerned, you again missed the point, I don't know if there has been a claim by ISPR or APP that categorically the suicide bomber has been an uncircumcised, BUT now what I am going to say is an established fact, dear I have been in armed forces of Pakistan and I don't rely on media for any news, my friends who are in command in SWAT and Waziristan, they had themslves told me that TTP fighters who were slain in fighting against Pak Army belonged to Gorkha Regiment of Indian Army Mountaineers division. They are not Muslims.

Pak Army had found caches of Satellitne Homing beacons that are not easy to copy as US company makes it only for US DOD, M-16 Rifles that are only used by Americans. Dear that all tells us who are really fighting against us. So kindly don't refute anything for the reason because it is not in your knowledge. It is called argument from Ignorance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddha of Suburbia

Didn't you miss a very important point: Exactly which Muslims are dying? You're just generalizing 'all the people dying because of terrorism' into one category of Muslims. Shias Muslims are dying, they are routinely targeted esp. Hazara Shias. People of Barelvi sect are being targeted. Security people are being targeted because they represent the state which is countering-feebly though- their extremist ideology. And I'm not even counting the violence against Ahmadis. Not everyone is dying. There is a pattern in the targeted attacks and they are mostly these minority sects. You cannot deny there is no minority persecution. And two wrongs don't make one right: If Muslims die daily, what's the big deal if a few Christians died today? Isn't that what you're saying?
And as far as state decree concerning minority discrimination is concerned do you know how did Rana Bhagwandas take oath? By saying it out aloud he will protect the Islamic Ideology. Imagine a Muslim taking an oath saying he will protect the Christian or Hindu Ideology. A non-Muslim cannot become a Prime Minister or President. Doesn't it fall under the category of religious discrimination?

And seriously man your analogy in which you equated minorities of Pakistan to tigers and Muslims to deers and implied that it is the nature of non-Muslims to criticize Islam-or blaspheme to be exact- can never get more misleading. In fact it is sad how you think. It is just an assumption and you have no evidence to that claim. The truth is minorities are just too scared to even dare to say something that remotely suggest a debate on or denial of Islam. They don't want to be lynched, do they?

It seems you are accusing me of being behind that everything, I'm not, please spare me.

If Rana Bhagwan Das said that he will protect the Islamic Ideology and won't make any discrimination then is it wrong? You want him to destroy the Islamic ideology? You want him to discriminate between a Muslim and a non Muslim? Absurd point.

And in USA, can a Muslim become a president? If they can do this, why can't we do? We are an Islamic State.

And again, you also missed the point of deer and Tiger analogy, it was a beautiful analogy but fell a prey to people's "Wisdom", so I'd better not say anything about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irtika

Bilal Hassan, you are right that we do not throw bike if there are defects, but.......................
If bike continously breaks down then there comes time to change it and throw it. And Sometime even we replace it by car.

The bike continuously broke down because never that minor loophole was not removed, if your bike is punctured and you keep driving then it would surely break down, although loophole was very minor, would someone throw out a bike because it is punctured? dear he will only remove the punctured tube, that's it.

Buddha · #22 Monday, September 23, 2013

Quote:

Well my dear, you missed that point, I had also said that they are not true Muslims, had they been, the would not have killed a single human being, That's it. Well as far as Raw and Mosad agents are concerned, you again missed the point, I don't know if there has been a claim by ISPR or APP that categorically the suicide bomber has been an uncircumcised, BUT now what I am going to say is an established fact, dear I have been in armed forces of Pakistan and I don't rely on media for any news, my friends who are in command in SWAT and Waziristan, they had themslves told me that TTP fighters who were slain in fighting against Pak Army belonged to Gorkha Regiment of Indian Army Mountaineers division. They are not Muslims.

Pak Army had found caches of Satellitne Homing beacons that are not easy to copy as US company makes it only for US DOD, M-16 Rifles that are only used by Americans. Dear that all tells us who are really fighting against us. So kindly don't refute anything for the reason because it is not in your knowledge. It is called argument from Ignorance.

Why should I take your word for it? What kind of proof you're giving us? I was in the Army and my friend was in the army and he said that! That is called Appeal to unqualifying authority: My friend told me that so it must be true. The burden of the proof is on YOU. And you surely don't have the knowledge of bombers who'd been traced back to their families. Or you're deliberately ignoring that knowledge because it doesn't support your point.

Quote:

If Rana Bhagwan Das said that he will protect the Islamic Ideology and won't make any discrimination then is it wrong? You want him to destroy the Islamic ideology? You want him to discriminate between a Muslim and a non Muslim? Absurd point.

No I don't want him to destroy Islamic Ideology. Not protecting doesn't mean destroying. False Dilemma: Either you protect if or you destroy it. Hindus aren't supposed to protect Islamic Ideology.

No I don't want him to discriminate between a Muslim and a non-Muslim. I wonder how you reached this stupid conclusion!

Quote:

And in USA, can a Muslim become a president?

The answer is Yes.

Quote:

And again, you also missed the point of deer and Tiger analogy, it was a beautiful analogy but fell a prey to people's "Wisdom", so I'd better not say anything about it.

Yeah it was as beautiful as Narendar Modi. I'm not here for the aesthetics of weak analogies.

There isn't a scale on which you measure how 'true Muslim' a person is. There are factions of some (true or non-true -the choice is yours-)Muslims called TTP, Sipah Sahaba, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi that are involved in terrorist activities. How Muslim are they? It doesn't concern me. It's a matter between Allah and them. The matter that concerns me is that they are killing my country-people and I gotta do something about it, at least KNOW for real who our enemy is.

sabahatbhutta · #23 Monday, September 23, 2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by zarraar

(1) Is this suicide attack on the church is the only suicide attack in pakistan then you can say that pakistan is a hell for religious minorities. But the reality is different. There are suicide attacks on mosques, imambargahs and even on the residency of our beloved Muhammad Ali Jinah. (2) There is always a possibility of misuse of every law and rule in the world then why there is a too much discussion about Blasphemy law?

Who said that Blasphemy Laws are for only non-muslims?These laws are for every one including muslims and non-muslims in Pakistan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Invincible

Because it is the only law where vast majority of Pakistani Muslims firmly believe that they are duty bound to murder anyone who bad-mouths our beloved Prophet(SAW) by taking LAW into their own hands to weave place in Paradise.

Please stand corrected.

295-C states:- 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."

It has been mostly misused against minorities.
Examples:
Rimsha Maseeh case
Asia Bibi Case
Shahid NAdeem case
Shahbaz Bhatti Case
Gojra incident
Badami bagh incident
And so on... There is a long list.
Moreover When the case proceeds, the accused faces problems of Harassment, distrust and defame even if he/she is innocent.
No lawyer is courageous enough to plead the case on accused' behalf.
Even judges are reluctant to give verdict in favour of the accused.
No one is even allowed to speak in favour of the accused, Murder of Salman Taseer is a proof.

@Bilal and others
It would be better to replace Blasphemy law by law against Hate speech. So that it could not be abused on religious basis. Accused should be protected until found guilty. Justice should be made without any prejudice. And those who misuse rather abuse this law, should be hanged for the sake of peace and justice.
It is our dilemma, Terrorists never get hanged whilst innocent get burnt for a mere accusation.

Invincible · #24 Monday, September 23, 2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabahatbhutta

[/SIZE]

It has been mostly misused against minorities.
Examples:
Rimsha Maseeh case
Asia Bibi Case
Shahid NAdeem case
Shahbaz Bhatti Case
Gojra incident
Badami bagh incident
And so on... There is a long list.

Moreover When the case proceeds, the accused faces problems of Harassment, distrust and defame even if he/she is innocent.
No lawyer is courageous enough to plead the case on accused' behalf.
Even judges are reluctant to give verdict in favour of the accused.
No one is even allowed to speak in favour of the accused, Murder of Salman Taseer is a proof.

This law is direct, unambiguous & applied to 180 million people of Pakistan irrespective of its faulty implementation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabahatbhutta

@Bilal and others
It would be better to replace Blasphemy law by law against Hate speech. So that it could not be abused on religious basis. Accused should be protected until found guilty. Justice should be made without any prejudice. And those who misuse rather abuse this law, should be hanged for the sake of peace and justice. [/SIZE]

1.How 'Hate Speech' can not be abused?

2.How can it be determined that someone's words which are outraging someone's "religious feelings" lie in the jurisdiction of Blasphemy or Hate speech?

Bilal Hassan · #25 Monday, September 23, 2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddha of Suburbia

Why should I take your word for it? What kind of proof you're giving us? I was in the Army and my friend was in the army and he said that! That is called Appeal to unqualifying authority: My friend told me that so it must be true. The burden of the proof is on YOU. And you surely don't have the knowledge of bombers who'd been traced back to their families. Or you're deliberately ignoring that knowledge because it doesn't support your point.

If those who are in the line of fire don't know then who does? You? You are the right authority? They are the real authority.

And correct Fallacy is Appeal to Inappropriate Authority not Unqualifying Authority, furthermore Unqualifying is not a gerund Noun nor is it an Adjective found in English corpus. It is simply No word.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddha of Suburbia

No I don't want him to destroy Islamic Ideology. Not protecting doesn't mean destroying. False Dilemma: Either you protect if or you destroy it. Hindus aren't supposed to protect Islamic Ideology.

No I don't want him to discriminate between a Muslim and a non-Muslim. I wonder how you reached this stupid conclusion!

And his not protecting it does not render him unqualified for the post, I think.
And I don't think I said Hindus are supposed to protect it, but as far as I remember a Sikh commissioned officer took the oath that he will fight for the Motherland and lay down his life for it, he is supposed to protect the ideology and ideology of what? Pakistan's ideology and Pakistan is an Islamic state so link the chain. If someone does not want to, he may not join. Because after joining the national services, one is bound to serve and safeguard the Pakistan's ideology.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddha of Suburbia

The answer is Yes.

Dear there is nothing written in the US constitutions that a Muslim can't be, but I think conventions are also part of constitution as in UK these are the linchpin of UK const, and by convention never has been a case when a Jew, Hindu, Muslim or even a Roman Catholic christian reached the White House, President Kennedy did and he was assassinated and since then we don't see one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddha of Suburbia

Yeah it was as beautiful as Narendar Modi. I'm not here for the aesthetics of weak analogies.

or you don't have prudence to assimilate and appreciate a strong one

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddha of Suburbia

There isn't a scale on which you measure how 'true Muslim' a person is. There are factions of some (true or non-true -the choice is yours-)Muslims called TTP, Sipah Sahaba, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi that are involved in terrorist activities. How Muslim are they? It doesn't concern me. It's a matter between Allah and them. The matter that concerns me is that they are killing my country-people and I gotta do something about it, at least KNOW for real who our enemy is.

Oh come on dear, I am not here to provide you a yardstick to measure the truthfulness of a Muslim, that is a point simple that a true Muslim fears Allah and if he fears Allah, he won't kill a human being for nothing.

Conclusion:
Dear you are getting beside the point so I hereby conclude.

The law has some loopholes which must be removed in order to prevent an innocent person from being affected. The law safeguards the honor of Holy Prophet (PBUH) and as a Muslim we have to do everything to the honor of our holy Prophet but at the same time we must not punish an innocent person for an act that he has not committed because that would be a bad thing.

Irtika · #26 Monday, September 23, 2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilal Hassan

The bike continuously broke down because never that minor loophole was not removed, if your bike is punctured and you keep driving then it would surely break down, although loophole was very minor, would someone throw out a bike because it is punctured? dear he will only remove the punctured tube, that's it.

Like your bike you are not going to change your thinking

Well it is your thinking, but I will replace it by brand new model

or may be i replace it by a car

. I will do it after repairing many times

How can I drive a puntured bike???????? And I cannot run bike of modal 1950 for many years, time will come when I have to change it.

P.S. And I am just saying about the bike. It does not mean that I back your example of bike. The killing in name of Prophet is not like bike. It is about the death of innocent, and much serious issue than a bike.

Bilal Hassan · #27 Monday, September 23, 2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irtika

Like your bike you are not going to change your thinking

Well it is your thinking, but I will replace it by brand new model

or may be i replace it by a car

. I will do it after repairing many times

How can I drive a puntured bike???????? And I cannot run bike of modal 1950 for many years, time will come when I have to change it.

P.S. And I am just saying about the bike. It does not mean that I back your example of bike. The killing in name of Prophet is not like bike. It is about the death of innocent, and much serious issue than a bike.

Did I say that drive a punctured bike? I said repair the puncture and then drive it. The point is simple that remove the loopholes and then keep the law, and once the loopholes are removed the law is as useful as is the bike whose puncture is removed. That was a simple point.

P.S: When you don't have a point to make then it is better to stay quit, by laughing you are making your own mockery, it is not at all harming me or any other person. Wise people don't laugh that much, those who do, they let others have a chance to laugh on them. By laughing you cannot refute an argument.

Stay Blessed and keep my advice, it is not necessary that you had to reply me, if you did not have any solid point then it was wise choice to remain silent. .

Now people are getting beside the mark, it is better to conclude which I have done in earlier post, apologies to everyone If i hurt someone's feelings, it was not deliberately done if done at all.

Last Island · #28 Monday, September 23, 2013

Tragically, discussion by common people starts from "point of views" and leads to "personal criticism".

Learn to hold discussions at first.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Asma Jilani ---- Vs---- Govt. of the Punjab	sajidnuml	Constitutional Law	5	Saturday, November 11, 2017 06:00 PM
The constitution of the islamic republic of pakistan, 1973[1]	IMTIAZ AHMAD KHAN	Constitutional Law	0	Thursday, February 14, 2013 05:40 PM
blasphemy law	Mir khetran	Current Affairs	0	Monday, November 26, 2012 11:59 PM
Need help: Constitution's questions	rqabutt	Constitutional Law	11	Monday, February 07, 2011 11:06 PM
The Holy Quran	Argus	Islam	9	Saturday, October 13, 2007 06:10 AM

The Following User Says Thank You to Buddha For This Useful Post:
Mutu (Monday, September 23, 2013)

The Following User Says Thank You to sabahatbhutta For This Useful Post:
Mutu (Monday, September 23, 2013)

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Irtika For This Useful Post:
alihashmatkhoso (Monday, September 23, 2013), Mutu (Monday, September 23, 2013)

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Last Island For This Useful Post:
Bilal Hassan (Monday, September 23, 2013), Irtika (Monday, September 23, 2013), Muhammad Ali Chaudhry (Monday, September 23, 2013)