manto raised a very valid point in the previous section of this debate which went unanswered. He said there is no "definition" of blasphemy in the blasphemy law of 295c.
If someone is a non-muslim, and says that prophet muhammad is not is the prophet of god, and prefers his own religious figure over him, would this be blasphemy?
What if a christian tries to preach his religion by advocating that we should believe in jesus christ being the son of god and not believe what prophet muhammad and qur'an said about him? Would that be blashpmey?
If so, you are taking someone's right to profess his beliefs, yet muslims enjoy this right. This is called discrimination and religious persecution.
And furthermore, this law is specifically discriminatory against religious minorities.
A muslim can hypothetically attack baba guru nanak - the founder and main figure of sikhism - and get away with it. No law will persecute this muslim! But if a sikh says something about prophet muhammad, he will be punished to death!
Is this justice?
Furthermore, ahmediyas are also citizens of pakistan. They also have their main religious figure in mirza qadiyani. Well, mirza qadiyani is repeatedly insulted in pakistan on tv channels and other avenues. Is there a law to protect their religious sensitives in pakistan?
Is this justice?
This article 295c is unjust and needs to be repealed.
Or
the main figures of all the religions should be included in this law. Then minorities will be on equal footing.
If you don't agree with either, do you support discrimination and oppression of minorities and, furthermore, injustice?
