sohaibbhatti
Citizen
Dear Contra,
Faith is something one attains when all the questions and suspicions are locked in a box; and you drop the box in the deepest of oceans and throw away the key. However, this applies to the core beliefs that never change. What does change is interpretation of the code of life that instils and regulates the society at large. We have 4 imams and they have different interpretation of the religion and we follow either of them e.g. Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shahafi etc.
Having said that, I must now refer you to your earlier post, which details the sections from the Constitution, and you have unjustly labelled them as "blasphemy laws". I would reiterate that such sensational statements serve no one; such provocation is a redundant exercise that is fruitless and a waste of time. On the contrary they deter most reasonable people from a rational debate; as faith is something that is very personal and dear to not only Muslims but to people of other faiths also and in such matters people do get emotional and rightly so.
But the issue here is not personal beliefs. The issue you raise is that in Pakistan there are blasphemy laws which are contrary to the idea of a democratic society. I stand firm in opposing this view. I must point out that hate laws or racial incitement is a crime in most countries; the very countries that might even be regarded as liberal democracies in your dictionary. And when it comes to the issue of laws, I must let it be known that law is what it is; and not what it ought to be. A country, keeping in mind its culture, heritage, history and countless other things, legislate according to those aforementioned needs and caters to its population. A legislature may pass any law it sees fit and if the people of that country consent to it then no outsider has any right to opine on its legality or morality. Let me be very clear here and address you, and any other who disagree with the passages you quoted, and say that there is nothing wrong in preserving the sanctity of Islam as our religion, the stature of Prophet Muhammad (May peace and blessing of Allah be upon Him) and to protect and preserve our way of life! Pakistan is not a secular state; it is Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the law of the land should protect, preserve and respect Islam.
And those who live within your borders must, and I reiterate must, adhere to our laws. Islam tells me to adhere to the laws of the country that I am in, regardless of the countrys religious inclinations, save for in instances that may break the Shariah law. So, if the law of the land, in Germany, does not permit a Muslim to over speed and he breaks that law then he is in breach of Shariah law. But if, to give an extreme example, the British Parliament legislates to make every person have a glass of wine before dinner then we are not to obey that law and then Quran tells us to leave that country and go reside in a place where we can freely practice our religion because (to the nearest meaning) Allah has made a big earth and you should then move to a more suitable place. So, if I can agree with the laws of Great Britain or Germany or Spain then people of other nationalities should respect the laws of my country. You cannot and should not label them as hate laws or as curtailment of freedom of speech. And if I am told to move to another country should my beliefs clash with the law of the land then those who do not agree with the laws of an Islamic State are free to move elsewhere too. Ignorance of the law is not a defence; and I must also say that ignorance of ones feelings regarding ones religion is abhorred universally.
Coming back to my first point regarding faith I must say that we are protecting and preserving and respecting our faith. That is our faith, our religion, our way of life, and our past, present and future. Without it we cannot exist and we shall be destined to the dustbins of history and hell. And there is nothing wrong in preserving your faith and there is everything wrong in criticising laws or measures that one takes to protect and safeguard ones faith and religion.
I must also say that calling such laws blasphemy laws has greatly offended me and I would ask you, in all reasonableness, to render an apology or, at least, retract the statement.
There is absolutely nothing wrong in the passages of the constitution that you quoted. They are morally, ethically, legally, socially, religiously, historically and culturally correct and the mere fact that I have to defend them is nothing but a reflection on the prejudices that you harbour.
Regards,
Ebu
Faith is something one attains when all the questions and suspicions are locked in a box; and you drop the box in the deepest of oceans and throw away the key. However, this applies to the core beliefs that never change. What does change is interpretation of the code of life that instils and regulates the society at large. We have 4 imams and they have different interpretation of the religion and we follow either of them e.g. Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shahafi etc.
Having said that, I must now refer you to your earlier post, which details the sections from the Constitution, and you have unjustly labelled them as "blasphemy laws". I would reiterate that such sensational statements serve no one; such provocation is a redundant exercise that is fruitless and a waste of time. On the contrary they deter most reasonable people from a rational debate; as faith is something that is very personal and dear to not only Muslims but to people of other faiths also and in such matters people do get emotional and rightly so.
But the issue here is not personal beliefs. The issue you raise is that in Pakistan there are blasphemy laws which are contrary to the idea of a democratic society. I stand firm in opposing this view. I must point out that hate laws or racial incitement is a crime in most countries; the very countries that might even be regarded as liberal democracies in your dictionary. And when it comes to the issue of laws, I must let it be known that law is what it is; and not what it ought to be. A country, keeping in mind its culture, heritage, history and countless other things, legislate according to those aforementioned needs and caters to its population. A legislature may pass any law it sees fit and if the people of that country consent to it then no outsider has any right to opine on its legality or morality. Let me be very clear here and address you, and any other who disagree with the passages you quoted, and say that there is nothing wrong in preserving the sanctity of Islam as our religion, the stature of Prophet Muhammad (May peace and blessing of Allah be upon Him) and to protect and preserve our way of life! Pakistan is not a secular state; it is Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the law of the land should protect, preserve and respect Islam.
And those who live within your borders must, and I reiterate must, adhere to our laws. Islam tells me to adhere to the laws of the country that I am in, regardless of the countrys religious inclinations, save for in instances that may break the Shariah law. So, if the law of the land, in Germany, does not permit a Muslim to over speed and he breaks that law then he is in breach of Shariah law. But if, to give an extreme example, the British Parliament legislates to make every person have a glass of wine before dinner then we are not to obey that law and then Quran tells us to leave that country and go reside in a place where we can freely practice our religion because (to the nearest meaning) Allah has made a big earth and you should then move to a more suitable place. So, if I can agree with the laws of Great Britain or Germany or Spain then people of other nationalities should respect the laws of my country. You cannot and should not label them as hate laws or as curtailment of freedom of speech. And if I am told to move to another country should my beliefs clash with the law of the land then those who do not agree with the laws of an Islamic State are free to move elsewhere too. Ignorance of the law is not a defence; and I must also say that ignorance of ones feelings regarding ones religion is abhorred universally.
Coming back to my first point regarding faith I must say that we are protecting and preserving and respecting our faith. That is our faith, our religion, our way of life, and our past, present and future. Without it we cannot exist and we shall be destined to the dustbins of history and hell. And there is nothing wrong in preserving your faith and there is everything wrong in criticising laws or measures that one takes to protect and safeguard ones faith and religion.
I must also say that calling such laws blasphemy laws has greatly offended me and I would ask you, in all reasonableness, to render an apology or, at least, retract the statement.
There is absolutely nothing wrong in the passages of the constitution that you quoted. They are morally, ethically, legally, socially, religiously, historically and culturally correct and the mere fact that I have to defend them is nothing but a reflection on the prejudices that you harbour.
Regards,
Ebu
