This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Pakistan Blasphemy Law versus Asia Bibi (critical update)

Pakistan Blasphemy Law versus Asia Bibi (critical update) - Comments

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 1 by Neodarwinian

" Meanwhile, a petition signed by activists is handed to the UN Human Rights Council to plead for her release, at the same time that Pakistan is running for a seat on that same UNHRC. "

Just releasing Bibi should not lift any block on these barbarians and repealing the blaspheny law would just be an intimation to a beginning here.

The supreme irony of Pakistan running for a seat on this council is overmastered by the fearful realization of what they would attempt to do once on the UNHRC. Talk about the fox in the hen house. Tell them to come back to that application for a council seat when they are civilized, or in 100 years, whichever comes first.

Tue, 20 Mar 2012 22:48:27 UTC | #929113

raytoman's Avatar Comment 2 by raytoman

All of the thousands of sects of the Jewish religion (including the more recent Muslim and most numerous Christian sects ) have as their first law

You can only worship the one true god (paraphrasing).

The penalty has always been torture and/or death for the 6 thousand years since the universe was created (or rather the superstition).

So maybe in some countries they may have largely stopped this practice but only very recently, only in some countries and not completely in any countries.

When was the last pregnant girl killed in the US for trying to have an abortion? This is clearly ignoring gods first law since, if she believed, she would not interrupt one of his creations.

Whilst we have the power and control mechanism that is religion, we will continue to suffer from the idiocy that is used to control people. No atrocity too large, no offence too small, keep them illiterate, ignorant and enslaved and give regular demonstrations of the power over others. They even kill and die to remain slaves

Tue, 20 Mar 2012 23:18:24 UTC | #929119

aroundtown's Avatar Comment 3 by aroundtown

I wouldn't even know where to start on this post and the calamity of the situation. Pakistan, Afghanistan, and similar cultures are so ingrained with dead end philosophy's & cultural implications that the prospect of any movement towards human rights would be nearly impossible in my opinion. When you keep walking the same road it is a given you will always reach the same destination at the end of the journey. Out of the frying pan and always back into the fire, you just get new players who assume the mantle of power and the oppression begins again, Libya, Iraq, take your pick.

I am flabbergasted that Asia Bibi intends to rely on prayer regarding her plight as the outcome of that endeavor will be fruitless I am afraid. I would say her only card to play would be the UN but we have seen repeatedly what their abilities are over the decades, I believe the statement was "never again" after Rwanda and you can judge for yourself how that hollow refrain worked out. Just ask a Syrian under fire how that is working for them with regards to UN proposals and demands. Russia & China always back despicable dictators and that should be engraved in granite somewhere lest mankind forget their actions, or should I say lack of action, but they always make it a no starter to achieve a unified voice against oppressive regimes just because they can I think.

Just keep trying to keep the story in the light of day and hope it has an effect in the real world and I would forget about the prayer option. I appreciate INQUISADOR for the heads up and RDFRS for posting this story. Lets hope she can escape this nightmare...

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 02:04:48 UTC | #929156

aroundtown's Avatar Comment 4 by aroundtown

I need to add this point to the post. Having Pakistan on the UN Human rights commission is like having the mythical Satan attending a child's lawn party for tea and cake, bottom line is someone is going to get burned.

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 02:15:24 UTC | #929159

MilitantNonStampCollector's Avatar Comment 5 by MilitantNonStampCollector

Comment 4 by aroundtown

Having Pakistan on the UN Human rights commission is like having the mythical Satan attending a child's lawn party for tea and cake, bottom line is someone is going to get burned.

I'd take mythical Satan over mythical Yahweh any day.

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 02:45:10 UTC | #929171

aroundtown's Avatar Comment 6 by aroundtown

Comment 5 by MilitantNonStampCollector - I'd take mythical Satan over mythical Yahweh any day.

I think the religiously deluded already have me signed up for that club. Maybe I should take a trip to the Caribbean and practice getting use to the heat.

Forgot to stay on topic though and should say if anyone would be damned for their actions I would think the perpetrators of injustice in the Middle East should receive that prospect of eternal damnation.

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 02:59:14 UTC | #929174

Tony d's Avatar Comment 7 by Tony d

Islam is a disgustingly evil belief system.Muslims who want to live in democratic countries should take advantage of our sane society's and leave the Islamic faith.

Can anyone tell me is there a difference between Islam and fascism?

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 10:25:50 UTC | #929232

inquisador's Avatar Comment 8 by inquisador

Just to touch on one of the themes raised so far;-

GW Bush made the same mistake that many of us did, including myself, in thinking that democracy was the answer for oppressive Islamic dictatorships. It evidently makes little difference to a largely Muslim population whether the dictator is elected or not. The government will be brutal, corrupt and Islamic; generally speaking.

Which is one reason why I argue for resistance to Islamification in western countries.

comment 7 by Tony d:

Can anyone tell me is there a difference between Islam and fascism?

Yes there are differences such as the religious absurdities peculiar to Islam, but they are about equally oppressive and evil.

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:20:21 UTC | #929249

Tony d's Avatar Comment 9 by Tony d

I think Douglas Murray has a good handle on the threat to our freedom of Islam and expresses it very well here.

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:36:49 UTC | #929306

inquisador's Avatar Comment 10 by inquisador

comment 2 by Raytoman:

Whilst we have the power and control mechanism that is religion, we will continue to suffer from the idiocy that is used to control people. No atrocity too large, no offence too small, keep them illiterate, ignorant and enslaved and give regular demonstrations of the power over others. They even kill and die to remain slaves

Yes, the ultimate irony. How long can such a system as this continue to rely on the complicit passivity of the religious and their habit of passing it on to the next generation in an endlessly rolling vicious circle?

Go down Moses, way down in Egypt's land. Tell old Pharaoh, to let my people go!

Or; tell the priests and vicars and mullahs and rabbis, to wake up and tell the truth for a change!!

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 20:41:47 UTC | #929407

danconquer's Avatar Comment 11 by danconquer

Comment 8 by inquisador :

GW Bush made the same mistake that many of us did, including myself, in thinking that democracy was the answer for oppressive Islamic dictatorships. It evidently makes little difference to a largely Muslim population whether the dictator is elected or not. The government will be brutal, corrupt and Islamic; generally speaking.

You're right; anyone who thinks that enabling a population to mark an 'X' on piece of paper once every five years or so will, by itself, enact a fundamental cultural and social shift is mistaken. There were rarely any immediate and dramatic shifts in the underlying cultures of European societies that arose merely from the introduction of universal suffrage, so there is no reason to expect a different outcome in other continents.

However, I don't know whether it was intentional but you make it sound as if whether democratic or not, all muslim-majority countries amount to pretty much the same thing. This is a patently absurd statement. The difference between Turkey and Saudi Arabia is vast. Perhaps you should go to Istanbul and sit at a table in the street drinking beer outside one of the rainbow-flag bedecked gay bars in the city, or visit a college where - in stark contrast to Saudi - women are banned from wearing the veil. Turkey still has lots of problems, but it is not helpful to effectively write off any muslim-majority country.

Which is one reason why I argue for resistance to Islamification in western countries.

Who here on RDF is arguing for 'Islamification'? It can't be a very interesting argument if you're having to conduct it entirely with yourself! What do you intend to do? Build a wall around Europe? There already are muslim-majority countries bang in the middle of continental Europe. If someone proposed dividing the UK up into neatly quarantined areas as a "solution" to any kind of conflict they would be thought rather mad; yet this is no different to what some people favour albeit at a global level. All that happens is that grievances are simply staged at the trans-national level (alá Pakistan & India) with all the raised stakes that brings with it.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 11:07:21 UTC | #929578

inquisador's Avatar Comment 12 by inquisador

Dan,

Turkey is a special case largely through the legacy of Kemal Ataturk.

His secularization and modernization of Turkey, which is now being undone through the Prime Minister, Recep Erdogan and his AK Party, is the reason for the present liberalism there, don't you think?

Who here on RDF is arguing for 'Islamification'?

No-one. However when it comes to showing some resistance, there are those who protest.

There already are muslim-majority countries bang in the middle of continental Europe.

Yes, I understand that the Balkan countries have endured histories of unequalled conflict in the last thousand years or more.

Why would that be I wonder?

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 12:07:25 UTC | #929583

danconquer's Avatar Comment 13 by danconquer

Comment 12 by inquisador :

Why would that be I wonder?

Presumably for much the same reason that all of Europe spent most of the last thousand years tearing itself to pieces. The biggest atrocities, the most shamelessly organised and systematic genocides, took place in the western countries and had nothing to do with muslims.

Whenever people try to pinpoint a particular group within the global society who are principally responsible for conflict, the finger is pointed sometimes at certain racial groups, sometimes certain nationalities and sometimes, as you are doing, at a certain religious group. However, even if it were true for some given cases, you would be identifying a common factor for only a relatively small number (certainly less than 20%) of the total tally of antagonist-combatants in the world.

Why do people keep ignoring the one really, truly statistically undeniable constant factor? Namely gender. Some 99.9% of antagonist-combatants are, and have been, men. Wouldn't that statistic make them the real underlying problem? A blight on what would clearly be a vastly more peaceful and co-operative women's world?

It seems that when certain facts become sufficiently ubiquitous they also become invisible.

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 22:33:43 UTC | #929739

Carl Sai Baba's Avatar Comment 14 by Carl Sai Baba

Comment 7 by Tony d :

Can anyone tell me is there a difference between Islam and fascism?

The fascists, being mainly Germans and Italians, probably had much better food.

Fri, 23 Mar 2012 04:36:24 UTC | #929797

mmurray's Avatar Comment 15 by mmurray

Comment 14 by Carl Sai Baba :

Comment 7 by Tony d :

Can anyone tell me is there a difference between Islam and fascism?

The fascists, being mainly Germans and Italians, probably had much better food.

And the beer and wine is much better on the Fascist side.

Michael

Fri, 23 Mar 2012 06:26:56 UTC | #929801

inquisador's Avatar Comment 16 by inquisador

Comment 13 by Danconquer,

Presumably for much the same reason that all of Europe spent most of the last thousand years tearing itself to pieces.

Your presumption must be correct of course. 'Cos it sounds like it. Politically at least.

The biggest atrocities, the most shamelessly organised and systematic genocides, took place in the western countries and had nothing to do with muslims.

Oh right.

In that case I'd better not say anything against Islam. Those Muslims who carried out the Armenian genocide were probably well-meaning but accident-prone then. I should have realized.

Please don't assume that because I condemn Islamic conflicts in Europe, that I am somehow trivializing those European conflicts that are non-Islamic.

And presumably you would say then that the approximately 80 million Hindus who were systematically and triumphantly massacred by Muslim armies in the conquest of India - err, that was just a scuffle compared to the European atrocities?

Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.]

I agree that there have been terrible wars in Europe.

Most of us are aware to some extent of the two world wars, the wars of the roses, the hundred years war, the war of Jenkins' ear, war of the Austrian succession and lots more.

But, how many of us know about the history of Islamic conquests and imperialism that preceded the crusades? Or the many other Islamic wars that were a part of history before revisionists came along?

I don't know, but I suspect that much of this stuff is the domain of specialist historians only. Some more partial than others. I think these things deserve to be more widely and accurately known. We need more hard facts and fewer presumptions, because while Islam is making inroads unhurriedly into the west, we need more clues to what it may mean for our great grandchildren.

Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:50:15 UTC | #929880

Ignorant Amos's Avatar Comment 17 by Ignorant Amos

Comment 16 by inquisador

I think these things deserve to be more widely and accurately known.

Funny ya mention it....no points for guessing number one on this list....8 Atrocities Committed in the Name of Religion

Fri, 23 Mar 2012 17:35:18 UTC | #929902

Ignorant Amos's Avatar Comment 18 by Ignorant Amos

@ inquisador

Anyway, as I always used to say in my military days, "lead by example"....and what an example there is in Islam...

The exemplary example and the perfection of humanity and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct that he was—Muhammad massacred, beheaded, tortured, terrorized, raped, and looted in the name of God.

In Islam's Own Writings: Muhammad's Massacres and Sex-slaves

Fri, 23 Mar 2012 17:49:21 UTC | #929908

inquisador's Avatar Comment 19 by inquisador

comment 17 by Ignorant Amos:

Funny ya mention it....no points for guessing number one on this list....8 Atrocities Committed in the Name of Religion

And another thing...

Examples abound of how proud of their genocidal military history are jihadists these days.

Although presented to the west as a peaceful religion, the truth is that those jihadis are, just between themselves, really into such islamic activities as killing Jews, the way Mohammed the exemplary jew-killer demonstrated.

Comment 18:

Muhammad massacred, beheaded, tortured, terrorized, raped, and looted in the name of God.

In the name of God?

Well then, that's alright!

Fri, 23 Mar 2012 21:57:33 UTC | #929968

inquisador's Avatar Comment 20 by inquisador

Comment 9 by Tony d:

I think Douglas Murray has a good handle on the threat to our freedom of Islam and expresses it very well here.

I think so too. Murray has long been a realist who clearly sees through the lies and taqiyya to the threat of sharia and jihad which inevitably follow wherever Islam goes.

Sat, 24 Mar 2012 11:31:37 UTC | #930136

raytoman's Avatar Comment 21 by raytoman

Comment 13 by danconquer

Comment 12 by inquisador :

Why would that be I wonder?

Presumably for much the same reason that all of Europe spent most of the last thousand years >tearing itself to pieces. The biggest atrocities, the most shamelessly organised and systematic >genocides, took place in the western countries and had nothing to do with muslims.

Why do people keep ignoring the one really, truly statistically undeniable constant factor? Namely >gender. Some 99.9% of antagonist-combatants are, and have been, men. Wouldn't that statistic make >them the real underlying problem? A blight on what would clearly be a vastly more peaceful and co->operative women's world?

Why do you think GW Bush and most other world leaders are against human cloning?

You need an egg and also a whole cell from any human. Women have both. Men don't. Consider her ways!

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 21:39:18 UTC | #930625

tamimisledus's Avatar Comment 22 by tamimisledus

I think we should thank Dan Conquer for letting us see his piece "What I did on my holidays in Turkey".

Unfortunately he is making the most gross reasoning error; judging the whole from a very limited sample. So here are some more applicable elements for making a true judgement of islam in Turkey.

Turkish Intolerance of other Faiths http://www.worldwatchmonitor.org/english/country/turkey/12322

The character of Turkish Prime Minister http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2270642.stm

Note especially the militaristic tone against non-muslims Also note the banning of alcohol.

Another view of Turkish Prime Minister

http://www.thememriblog.org/turkey/blog_personal/en/2595.htm

"There is no moderate islam"

Turkish suppression of Free Speech

http://www.aina.org/news/2012091994316.htm

http://atheism.about.com/b/2012/09/26/turkish-prime-minister-erdogan-blasphemy-is-a-crime-against-humanity.htm

(and in a wider context) http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/09/19/comment-calls-for-international-blasphemy-law-must-be-r

Turkey is a member of OIC and subscribes to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo_Declaration_of_Human_Rights_in_Islam which declares that the UDHR is is contrary to the values of islam, and all human rights are subordinate to sharia law

One final general point about muslims in Turkey De facto, all muslims believe in the absolute truth of the koran. The koran states that non-believers are sub-human therefore all muslims believe that all non-muslims are sub-human. Did those Turkish people that Dan met let him know that? Maybe not so different from the Saudis after all.

When considering the (lack of) menace of islam, just think on this ... http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2012/09/uk-signs-agreement-on-religious-freedom-with-oic

Sun, 20 Jan 2013 22:50:00 UTC | #951320