We have previously discussed the outrageous case of Asia Bibi who is the latest victim of a death sentence under the medieval Sharia law system imposed in Muslim countries — sentenced to death for insulting Mohammad. Now, a court in Lahore upheld the verdict and affirmed the death sentence for the 50-year-old motion of five. She said that her nightmare began when she took a drink of water from a bucket being used by Muslim women. As a Christian, she was viewed as unclean and the women assailed her and later accused her of saying something insulting to Mohammad. Not only did leading Muslim clerics in Pakistan support her execution but one offered a reward for any faithful Muslim to murder her.
The incident leading to the charge began when Bibi fetched water as a farmhand and offered it to other women. The Muslim women refused because it had been touched by a Christian (Bibi) and thus “polluted.” Later a mob tried to beat her to death and she was rescued by police, who then charged her with blasphemy after the same women accused her of saying bad things about the Prophet Mohammed.
Even assuming that she insulted Mohammad, such an offense should not justify a criminal charge, let alone death, as a matter of basic human rights and civil liberties. It is the latest example of the inherent conflict between free speech and free exercise on one hand and Sharia law and Islamic orthodoxy on the other. However, We have seen a comprehensive crackdown on the West on free speech under some laws combating hate speech, discriminatory speech, and even disruptive speech. While the first amendment only deals with government action, we have become increasingly concerned over the chilling effect of private action over speech. For example, we have discussed the controversy involving Yale University Press. 
In a shocking decision, Yale University Press published Jytte Klausen’s “The Cartoons That Shook the World” (on the cartoons that led to riots and over 200 killed in protests worldwide). However, Yale removed the the 12 cartoons from the book so not to insult Muslims. Thus, you could read the book but not actually see the cartoons themselves. It was a decision by Yale University Press that is still discussed as anti-intellectual and cowardly in academic circles.
Bibi now has 30 days to appeal to the nation’s highest court.
In a chilling statement, Qanta Ahmed, a British-born Pakistani human rights activist, said that usually cases do not get this far because “The vast majority of those being accused of blasphemy don’t even make it to execution. They are usually lynched or murdered in custody.” We recently discussed such a case of a jailer killing a Christian accused of blasphemy in prison.
For many years, I have been writing about the threat of an international blasphemy standard and the continuing rollback on free speech in the West. For recent columns, click here and here and here.
Much of this writing has focused on the effort of the Obama Administration to reach an accommodation with allies like Egypt and Pakistan to develop a standard for criminalizing anti-religious speech. We have been following the rise of anti-blasphemy laws around the world, including the increase in prosecutions in the West and the support of the Obama Administration for the prosecution of some anti-religious speech under the controversial Brandenburg standard.
These cases reflect the true purpose of blasphemy laws: to silence minority sects and religious critics in the name of a “true faith.” Fortunately the effort of Hillary Clinton and others in the Administration to reach a compromise on blasphemy failed, though there continue to be efforts to create an international standard.
Muslim nations will remain in fundamental conflict with human rights until they renounce the crimes of apostasy and blasphemy. There are no greater offense to basic civil liberties than to punish people for expressing their religious beliefs and following the religion (including no religion) of their choice. It is difficult to see the moral distinction between extremists like Islamic State beheading Westerners and nonbelievers and our allies like Pakistan executing the unfaithful. One certainly has a longer “judicial process” but both are enforcing medieval religious canons with lethal effect. Indeed, the judicial process is based on religious dictates and rejects claims of free speech and free exercise by definition. While such cases can later lead to commutations (after international outcry), the basic claim remains the same: those who do not believe as we do are worthy of death.
Source: CNN
Oily,
You poor baby, I did not know you were so serious about republican addictions.
Here …
Paul,
It’s taken me awhile to get there, but I see that the survival of this blog is just as dependent upon unsupportable opinions and hyperbole as any other I’ve come across. This blog is like the Roman Coliseum with JT (and weekend bloggers) crafting a theme by which the gladiators do battle. I believe some of these opinions stem from serious concerns that are supportable and then there are those that are simply for sport. This is why I asked the question.
I thought it would have been a legitimate direction to follow your “fundamentalism” point to see if it really would apply ONLY to liberals; I also was curious to know what the “track marks” were that Dredd used to identify the addicted conservative.
The discredited domino theory has been revised at the pent
agonhouse.The new theory is that “if we warriors don’t start wars we will just be sitting around playing dominoes.”
Olly – great Lincoln excerpt. He was a rousing orator. So sad that he lost a child in the WH. People used to sleep in the hallways and just wander in and out to seek an audience, and disease spread rapidly in the cities.
It’s my understanding his widow absolutely lost her mind after he was assassinated. Last straw, I guess.
People lost that easy access to their president after that.
slohrss:
I asked my dad, once, who should know, why we give aid and training to people who ultimately turn against us. Bin Ladin is an example. We trained the mujahadeen against the USSR. Why not just let them wallow in their own violence?
He spent a long while explaining the domino effect of these desert regions, and how they can have far reaching effects around the globe. It was like a cross of Game of Thrones and the Butterfly Effect. What would have happened if the USSR had claimed the region. He also explained that, at least at that time, we do not give superior weapons and training to those who, quite obviously, will bite us later. We keep the best weapons, etc, for ourselves, so that when they do later turn against us, which was inevitable in an unstable, anti-Western region, we would retain the advantage.
By contrast, the reason given for financial aid is typically to stabilize the region and improve human rights. Well, if it’s not producing either effect, then we change our approach and shut off the tap! We should be analyzing the effects of our efforts and be willing to change our approach. But try explaining that novel concept to a politician!
Karen,
That is a great point. It reminds me of Lincoln’s Fragment on the Constitution and the Union.
“All this is not the result of accident. It has a philosophical cause. Without the Constitution and the Union, we could not have attained the result; but even these, are not the primary cause of our great prosperity. There is something back of these, entwining itself more closely about the human heart. That something, is the principle of “Liberty to all”—the principle that clears the path for all—gives hope to all—and, by consequence, enterprise, and industry to all.
The expression of that principle, in our Declaration of Independence, was most happy, and fortunate. Without this, as well as with it, we could have declared our independence of Great Britain; but without it, we could not, I think, have secured our free government, and consequent prosperity. No oppressed, people will fight, and endure, as our fathers did, without the promise of something better, than a mere change of masters.
The assertion of that principle, at that time, was the word, “fitly spoken” which has proved an “apple of gold” to us. The Union, and the Constitution, are the picture of silver, subsequently framed around it. The picture was made, not to conceal, or destroy the apple; but to adorn, and preserve it. The picture was made for the apple—not the apple for the picture.
So let us act, that neither picture, or apple shall ever be blurred, or bruised or broken. That we may so act, we must study, and understand the points of danger”
What is so difficult is that democracy and the value of human rights cannot be taught from the outside. It has to come from within the population of these countries. They have to change their own hearts and minds.
Paul C. Schulte
Olly – I was just looking for an article about liberals being most likely to defriend people on Facebook because of their political views. Thought I had book marked it, but I guess I didn’t. Hopefully it will pop up later today. As you will notice, there is a lock-step thinking that seems to go along with it. Those who do not agree are attacked, not logically, because they do not have logic on their side, but with emotional attacks and changing the argument.
==================================
Another example.
From the Shakey Spear blog: A global surge of great earthquakes from 2004-2014 and implications for Cascadia
Pakistan has had major quakes and floods.
Who hasn’t?
Are the gods angry or are these caused by civilization lost on a planet they don’t recognize?
Don’t leave yourself out slick.
Olly
“Paul C. Schulte
I have decided that liberalism is a form of fundamentalism. It has all the hallmarks.
……
I have decided that conservatism is a form of addiction. It has all the track marks.”
Paul and Dredd,
Can either of you support these opinions? What are the “hallmarks” and what are the “track marks”?
===================================
Opinions need no support.
If you want to do a good work, take a count of how many commenters never provide “support.”
Just opining …
“Thou wilt fall backward when thou hast more wit.” – Shakespeare (Romeo and Juliet)
“Paul C. Schulte
I have decided that liberalism is a form of fundamentalism. It has all the hallmarks.
=================================
I have decided that conservatism is a form of addiction. It has all the track marks.”
Paul and Dredd,
Can either of you support these opinions? What are the “hallmarks” and what are the “track marks”?
Olly – I was just looking for an article about liberals being most likely to defriend people on Facebook because of their political views. Thought I had book marked it, but I guess I didn’t. Hopefully it will pop up later today. As you will notice, there is a lock-step thinking that seems to go along with it. Those who do not agree are attacked, not logically, because they do not have logic on their side, but with emotional attacks and changing the argument.
And while I am on my religion rant I need to say what I think about Christians and ask some questions. Why did those dumb schmucks move Christ’s birthday from mid summer to December 25th? There are some who say that the Christians were trying to find some cover for their celebration by putting the holiday in here with Jewish holidays. Others say that they wanted to fall right on Sintur Klaus Day and associate the religion with all the gift giving and other down the chimney sort of stuff. So, is that true, they wanted to make use of the good Santa feelings? Some Xtian out there enlighten me. And how could Christ die for our sins when I was not even born yet? And why did all those Germans turn into Nazis when they had been born into Christianity? Cause and effect. What came first, Hitler or the egg? And if Christ was born a jew then why did the Nazis want to kill all Jews? Did they tear his statue down off the cross and burn it at Auschwitz? What is the true “thread” of this article here and the comments? If they hung Christ up on the cross with thread then what kind of thread was it?
“[Thou] appeareth nothing to me but a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours.” – Shakespeare (Hamlet)
Paul C. Schulte
I have decided that liberalism is a form of fundamentalism. It has all the hallmarks.
=================================
I have decided that conservatism is a form of addiction. It has all the track marks.
“We should be hearing soon about the horrors of the glass ceiling, and pay inequities, soon.”
Nick,
This story has nothing to do with that but yet you are encouraging the thread go that way. Why?
I would counter that a lot of these people have anger that manifests itself in malicious fundamentalism. John Oliver has a pretty good take on it here.
Darren, As in this country, the ideologues run the Pakistani schools. Much different indoctrination, but indoctrination nonetheless.
If these governments did not turn a blind eye to these outrages and actually took the lead in promoting justice they would not be considered complicit in attacking minorities.
I believe in addition to this a long term endeavor that would bring some positive change is to institute schooling standards that teach the youth of those nations from the beginning to accept others and not tolerate injustices. If this and similar measures are taken hopefully by default at the very least these types of outrages will be relegated to the past as an enlightened society becomes to grow with age.