Pakistan’s first woman sentenced to death for blasphemy loses appeal

[Warren Stupidity]

A Pakistani court upheld the death penalty on Thursday against a Christian woman accused of blasphemy, her lawyer said, in a case that drew global headlines after two prominent politicians who tried to help her were assassinated.

In 2010, Asia Bibi, a mother of four, became the first woman to be sentenced to death under Pakistan’s controversial blasphemy law.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/pakistans-first-woman-sentenced-to-death-for-blasphemy-loses-appeal/article21138660/



I'm sure that somehow this has nothing to do at all with religion.

[msongs]

1. religionists with weak beliefs cannot stand criticism nt

[bvf]

7. Those with strong beliefs can stand it even less, IMO.

The more closely you hold to an imaginary being and the attendant instructions to follow in life, the more likely you are to respond to criticism as an almost existential challenge, I would think.

OTOH, greater firmness of belief is probably more likely to lead one to believe that one's critics will spend an eternity in a burning pit.

[NYC_SKP]

16. Theists, believers, and religious adherents don't have a monopoly on intolerance and bigotry.

Sad to say, many self-proclaimed atheists and agnostics exhibit remarkable levels of intolerance, though I think they are the exception, not the rule.

Similarly, believers (in my experience) of all faiths don't often project their faith against my lack of it.

The lesson to draw is that people come in all faiths and forms and among each group are a few who are obsessed about their beliefs, or lack of beliefs.

When it sinks to a level of insults and exclusive treatment is when, IMO, it's gone too far, it's uncivil and it sure ain't progressive.

People of all faiths and of no faith and those who just don't know are all capable of living the golden rule, and most do:

[bvf]

17. Nobody said they do.

I stand by what I said. I don't see you addressing that here, unless it's to remind me that some believers I come in contact with think I am doomed to hellfire.

I suppose I shouldn't care about that, but I do.

I've had to go so far as to request that people not pray for me (when I am told they intend to), as I find the very idea insults us both.

YMMV.

[bvf]

2. As horrifying as the excerpt is

it actually gets worse at the link.

Blasphemy is undefined under the law, evidence cannot be reproduced in a court hearing, and there is no penalty for false accusations.

No, this must be all about politics.

[rug]

3. Look at Pakistan's constitution.

2 Islam to be State religion
Islam shall be the State religion of Pakistan.

2A The Objectives Resolution to form part of substantive provisions.
The principles and provisions set out in the Objectives Resolution reproduced in the Annex are hereby made substantive part of the Constitution and shall have effect accordingly.

3 Elimination of exploitation
The State shall ensure the elimination of all forms of exploitation and the gradual fulfillment of the fundamental principle, from each according to his ability to each according to his work.

4 Right of individuals to be dealt with in accordance with law, etc.
(1) To enjoy the protection of law and to be treated in accordance with law is the inalienable right of every citizen, wherever he may be, and of every other person for the time being within Pakistan.
(2) In particular :-
(a) no action detrimental to the life, liberty, body, reputation or property of any person shall be taken except in accordance with law;
(b) no person shall be prevented from or be hindered in doing that which is not prohibited by law; and
(c) no person shall be compelled to do that which the law does not require him to do.

5 Loyalty to State and obedience to Constitution and law.
(1) Loyalty to the State is the basic duty of every citizen.
(2) Obedience to the Constitution and law is the (inviolable) obligation of every citizen wherever he may be and of every other person for the time being within Pakistan.

6 High treason
(1) Any person who abrogates or subverts or suspends or holds in abeyance, or attempts or conspires to abrogate or subvert or suspend or hold in abeyance, the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by any other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason.
(2) Any person aiding or abetting (or collaborating) the acts mentioned in clause (1) shall likewise be guilty of high treason.
(2A) An act of high treason mentioned in clause (1) or clause (2) shall not be validated by any court including the Supreme Court and a High Court.

http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/part1.html

Pay close attention to Article 5.

Now tell me Henry VIII's Act of Supremacy was all about religion and not state power.

The deliberate political naïveté at work here is appalling.

[Fumesucker]

4. Blasphemy is a charge that does not exist without religion, it is a quintessentially religious crime

No amount of hair splitting, camel swallowing or gnat straining will change that undeniable fact.

[bvf]

5. Right, but I have a feeling we're about to see

some people attempting a lot of splitting, swallowing, and straining presently.

[rug]

9. You've already seen it in most of the replies.

[rug]

8. Treason is.

When the state melds itself to a handy religion, blasphemy is treason.

Anne Boleyn was not beheaded for adultery; she was beheaded for treason against the state.

[Fumesucker]

10. Chicken or egg?

Did the state meld itself to religion or did religion meld itself to the state?

I would argue more of the latter.

[rug]

11. An interesting question.

The RCC was the state religion in England prior to Henry. For political reasons he had Parliament pass the Act of Supremacy making the monarch the head of the Church in England, along with all of its property. The bishops acquiesced, with the notable exception of the Bishop of Rochester.

From a pure Marxist analysis, assuming the religious ideoiology is all unproven bullshit, what remains is pure economic and political power. So, I'd say the state had the interest here. As it did with Constantine in the 4th century and the German princes of the 16th.

I am less familiar with Pakistan's history but I'm sure the colonial period and the Partition had a lot to do with its current Constitution making Islam the state religion. Hence, an offense against Islam is an offense against the state - treason.

[Fumesucker]

12. But the reason for the Partition in the first place was religion

Yeah, it gets all tangled up with culture and economics and politics and Allah knows what else but religion is definitely a big part of the mix and unfortunately in a theocracy it throws the ultimate master of the universe on the side of the state.

[rug]

14. Before the conquest the subcontinent was a patchwork of states.

Religion was only one component. Under the British Raj, there was an attempt to unify. The partition was based on Hindu heritage and Moslem heritage but there was a lot more to it than simply that.

The more fractured a society is, the more pronounced religious differences become. Religion is a very powerful tool to mobilize people around. As is nationalism and racism. Look at the Buddhists in Myanmar right now.

But, when a society is not fractured along other lines, religion loses its value as a political weapon. I think it always is about politics, economics and class at the root.

[bvf]

13. It's an offense against Islam first and foremost.

Hence the state merely enforces a religious law. Got it. No religion there, nope.

[rug]

15. Ass backwards.

[ZombieHorde]

6. Fuck. Super lame.

I really don't care for some people's relationship with their religion.