I have to indulge into small talk this time. There is a lot of it that I gather during my usual daily dose of newspaper reading and some of it springs right from my genius brain.
Anwer Syed indulges into the liberty of exploring and dissecting the blasphemy laws in Pakistan. He begins well telling us why these laws were required in the first place. But falls shy of stressing on the point that there is one important reason that he has so skilfully omitted from his reasoning. Defiling a religious personality is frowned upon not only because it keeps the social society together but also because it serves to set standards of morality for the society. And we can also argue that Muslim faith is different from others in the sense that here religion is no different from politics and society. He begins
He then moves onto the clauses specifically introduced for the Ahmadis. He writes
I am an ignorant person on this topic and would like to have more knowledge before I can comment on hos writing. But his is certainly one view point that merits thought and discussion.
His suggestions that the law may remain on the Statute Book, but let it be ignored, and thus made inoperative is already being practiced in most higher courts of the country. If this is not the case he should name one of those "innocent persons" upon whom it has "visited unspeakable suffering".
Shaukat Umer on the other hand _ and incidentally on the other page _ has written an impressive piece of writing. He is calling upon the Pakistani diplomats to try and defeat the Indian motion for their candidate as the next UN secretary General. His reasoning is very valid and extensive. His approach is simple yet looks to be pretty effective in taking your cause forward. We have to move in the right direction to protect our national interests.
The other day I saw a picture on the front page of Nawa-e-Waqt of or federal health minister seen dancing with a jean clad foreign woman on the opening ceremony of the National Aids Control Programme. Well I must say the seemingly drunk couple are making the right point. You need an Aids control programme only if you have ways of spreading the disease. There approach is that of getting in the evil first so that work can be done with the intention of removing it subsequently. Our ministry of Health has ample time on its hand to be asking for troubles so that it can spend its resources at removing it. The minister should do this nation a favour and leave his throne. He is already involved in a big scandal that lead to his leaving the US we don't want incompetent people like him leading our way.
Anwer Syed indulges into the liberty of exploring and dissecting the blasphemy laws in Pakistan. He begins well telling us why these laws were required in the first place. But falls shy of stressing on the point that there is one important reason that he has so skilfully omitted from his reasoning. Defiling a religious personality is frowned upon not only because it keeps the social society together but also because it serves to set standards of morality for the society. And we can also argue that Muslim faith is different from others in the sense that here religion is no different from politics and society. He begins
There was a time when religion kept a society together, and denial of its truth or efficacy could work as a disintegrative agent. It had, therefore, to be protected from the invasions of non-believers and heretics. None could be allowed to ridicule the dominant majority's religion, its doctrine and dogma. Those who uttered or published such insults would be punished. Thus began the blasphemy laws in England and Europe.Then came the time, albeit gradually, when the role of religion as a preserver of the social fabric diminished. Consequently, blasphemy laws have been repealed, or made dormant and inoperative, in a number of societies during the last 50 years or so, if not since even earlier...
He then moves onto the clauses specifically introduced for the Ahmadis. He writes
...Additions to Section 298 (B and C) are addressed exclusively to members of the Ahmadi community. They will go to jail if they do any of the following things: call their faith Islam and themselves Muslim; preach their faith; refer to anyone of their own community as Ameer-ul-Momineen; designate such a mans companions as Sahaba and his wife as Ummul Momineen; invite Allahs blessings upon one of their chosen persons; call their place of worship a masjid or make the traditional Muslim call for prayer. They are not to outrage the religious sensitivities of Muslims. Subsequent developments forbid them to post the Muslim declaration of faith (kalima) on their places. And, unless I am mistaken, they may not even greet a Muslim in the latters traditional language....
...Constraints placed upon the Ahmadis in sub-sections B and C of section 298 are perplexing, to say the least. They are forbidden to follow Muslim expressions, observances, usages, and practices in spite of the fact that these are all parts of their faith. Or, to put it in another way, the law says their faith must not be what it is.The law says the Ahmadis must not call themselves Muslim and their faith Islam. This puts them in an impossible position. They are not merely pretending to be Muslim. They honestly and truly believe themselves to be Muslim. The law requires them to lie about their self-perception. It calls upon them to be duplicitous. This is incredible...
I am an ignorant person on this topic and would like to have more knowledge before I can comment on hos writing. But his is certainly one view point that merits thought and discussion.
His suggestions that the law may remain on the Statute Book, but let it be ignored, and thus made inoperative is already being practiced in most higher courts of the country. If this is not the case he should name one of those "innocent persons" upon whom it has "visited unspeakable suffering".
Shaukat Umer on the other hand _ and incidentally on the other page _ has written an impressive piece of writing. He is calling upon the Pakistani diplomats to try and defeat the Indian motion for their candidate as the next UN secretary General. His reasoning is very valid and extensive. His approach is simple yet looks to be pretty effective in taking your cause forward. We have to move in the right direction to protect our national interests.
The other day I saw a picture on the front page of Nawa-e-Waqt of or federal health minister seen dancing with a jean clad foreign woman on the opening ceremony of the National Aids Control Programme. Well I must say the seemingly drunk couple are making the right point. You need an Aids control programme only if you have ways of spreading the disease. There approach is that of getting in the evil first so that work can be done with the intention of removing it subsequently. Our ministry of Health has ample time on its hand to be asking for troubles so that it can spend its resources at removing it. The minister should do this nation a favour and leave his throne. He is already involved in a big scandal that lead to his leaving the US we don't want incompetent people like him leading our way.
Comments