“What is the right punishment for blasphemy?”
H Farook, 31, from Bilal Estate in South Ukkadam here, was hacked to death by a four-member gang, late Thursday night. He was a member of Dravidar Viduthalai Kazhagam (DVK), and an atheist. According to police, Farook was administering a WhatsApp group where he posted rationalistic views against his religion. He also posted rationalistic messages on his Facebook page which came in for criticism by members of the community.
Meanwhile, Ansath, 30, a Muslim realtor, surrendered before the judicial magistrate court -V on Friday evening in connection with the murder.
“Farook’s anti-Muslim sentiments had angered people. This may be a possible motive for murder,” said S Saravanan, DCP, Coimbatore.
Yesterday BBC Asian Network tweeted this:
What is the right punishment for blasphemy?
Tweet @ShaziaAwan with what you think using the hashtag #AsianNetwork pic.twitter.com/HVAKQrdhBr
— BBC Asian Network (@bbcasiannetwork) March 17, 2017
It has since apologized, but how clueless (or worse) do you have to be to say that in the first place?
Apologies for poorly worded question from #AsianNetwork yday. Q was in context of Pak asking FB to help we shd have made that clear 1/2
— BBC Asian Network (@bbcasiannetwork) March 18, 2017
Pakistan says it has asked Facebook to help investigate “blasphemous content” posted on the social network by Pakistanis.
Facebook has agreed to send a team to Pakistan to address reservations about content on the social media site, according to the interior ministry.
Blasphemy is a highly sensitive and incendiary issue in Pakistan.
“Blasphemy” shouldn’t even be a meaningful concept in a reasonable world. We obviously don’t live in such a world, but we have our hopes and dreams.
Earlier this week Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif voiced his support for a wide-ranging crackdown on blasphemous content on social media.
In a statement on his party’s official Twitter account, he described blasphemy as an “unpardonable offence”.
Shame on him then. What theocratic zealots mean by “blasphemous content” is anything at all that questions supernaturalist claims. We should all be free to create and share that sort of content.
Then on Thursday, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar reasserted Pakistan’s determination to tackle the issue, saying he would take “any steps necessary” to make sure Pakistan’s message got across.
He said he had asked officials to liaise with the FBI in the US and with social media platforms on a daily basis.
“Facebook and other service providers should share all information about the people behind this blasphemous content with us,” he is quoted as saying by the Dawn newspaper.
There has been little official description of what blasphemous content has been found online so far, but in the past blasphemy accusations have ranged from depictions of the Prophet Muhammad to critiques and inappropriate references to the Koran.
Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. The Koran presumes to tell everyone what to do, down to the smallest details of private life. Of course we get to talk back to the Koran. The Koran is not the boss of us.
Inappropriate references to the Koran would be references that the civil government make to tell them what is acceptable. It is simply inappropriate to use any holy book to determine crime and punishment in a civil society.
Pakistan doesn’t have a “blasphemy” problem, it has a PEOPLE BEING HACKED TO DEATH problem. Maybe they should be dropping the former and addressing the latter?
I didn’t know the answer to your headline’s question, so I looked it up. Needless to say, Islam prescribes many punishments ranging from fines, imprisonment, flogging, amputation, hanging, or beheading. Not much surprise there.
Then I came across this: “Muslim women may be permitted to repent, and may receive a lesser punishment than would befall a Muslim man who committed the same offense.” That’s got to be one of the few times in any religion when women come out ahead!
The answer to “What is the right way to punish blasphemy?” is to kill all humans.
Belief in any god is a blaspheme to some other god somewhere.
Belief in no gods is blasphemy against them all.
Besides, if you get rid of all of us, there are no gods left to offend.
Seppuku is rapidly looming to become BBC’s only way to preserve its “honour”.
The corporation’s live death will ensure a gigantic flash of ratings.
After that, England may feel free to sever its last ties to Scotland and the rest of Europe.
Well, it was fun while your dwindling civilisation lasted.
Yes, I actually am in a fowl mode and can’t even spell, either.
““Facebook and other service providers should share all information about the people behind this blasphemous content with us,” he is quoted as saying by the Dawn newspaper.”
Hold on… what’s to guarantee that the officials in question won’t “accidentally leak” or otherwise pass this information to the vigilantes with machetes? If Facebook and other service providers indeed capitulate and turn this information over, they will for all intents and purposes have blood on their hands if and when the people mentioned in the briefs are killed.
Though I imagine it wouldn’t even dent the stock prices so who cares.
Of course we get to talk back to the Koran. The Koran is not the boss of us.
No you don’t and yes it is.
http://nypost.com/2017/03/18/nyc-to-remove-islamic-names-from-sidewalk-due-to-vandalism/
Mohamed’s image on the Supreme Court building’s facade should soon be removed, as well.
Harem Scare ’em!
‘…he posted rationalistic views against his religion.’
HIS religion? Since he wasn’t a Muslim, we have to assume they mean ‘the religion that owned HIM.’ Anyone passing out machetes for the BJP?
But religious warfare is somehow not related to blasphemy. Islam holds the entire world to be ‘blasphemous’ for daring to exists outside the Ummah.