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
The more the merrier and more sane.
May I loose that contest!!!!
Dredd, few can match your quick wit and intelligence here. The dull knives can spread butter but they can’t cut a steak. You Dredd are a sharp knife. You are welcome, you are welcome very much.
Annie
Dredd,
I find it amusing when those individuals who are one of the commenters with the MOST comments month after month makes allegations of “manic” behavior in others. LOL!
=================================
Yep.
The mostest with the leastest.
Dredd,
I find it amusing when those individuals who are one of the commenters with the MOST comments month after month makes allegations of “manic” behavior in others. LOL!
Dredd, I just want to tell you I appreciate the heck out of you.
Dredd, and I would suggest they don’t forget to wash themselves thoroughly with hot water and bleach after sexual encounter.
***This is a joke, please do NOT use bleach on your skin or on mucus membranes***
Bye Knicker lovers.
“In our country, fruit grows on trees and from trees, and meditation upon sin grows from contrition. But in your land, trees may grow on fruits, contrition from sins, people walk on their ears, and everything is upside down.” – Martin Luther (Defense and Explanation of All the Articles, pg. 38, Luther’s Works, Vol. 32)
It’s JT’s blog but there are some cancers that just don’t respond to radiation or chemo. They require excision. JT and everyone here deserve better.
There is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much love in Amurka that we have to take it to the Pakistanis.
“You arsonists, enemies of languages and truth!” – Martin Luther (Against Latomus, pg. 205, Luther’s Works, Vol. 32)
Jill
Dredd …
===============
Yep.
Love ’em as you see ’em.
Reloveicans gotta lub em when they call themselves luveatarians.
Dredd, This is what Justice Holmes wrote above: “Blasphemy and apostasy are “crimes” that have no place in a civil society or secular governments. Theocracies are dangerous to human beings and the US should not provide any support to such governments, NONE.
Their countries, their law but we don’t have to give them money or arms to enforce their awful policies.
As to an international blasphemy standard, such a standard is offensive and wrong. The only “standard” that would be acceptable is that there is NO SUCH thing and that under international law prosecutions for such “crimes” are violation of human rights. Obama is wrong to support any type of criminalization of “anti religious” speach. What more do churchs and other religious entities want; they already receive billions of our tax dollars and enjoy many other religious privileges and more seem to be on the way.
Knickers to kill Pakistanis, Afghanis, Iraqis, Syrains, Iranians, and non-Amurkan Amurkans.
On sale now.
Maybe the worst in a couple years.
Obviously a severe manic phase.
Jill
Justice Holmes has an exactly correct analysis.
…
====================================
Yep.
We’re gonna love each other to death.
“Life in Lubbock, Texas, taught me two things: One is that God loves you and you’re going to burn in hell. The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy thing on earth and you should save it for someone you love.” -Butch Hancock
Dredd = sport; got it. Thanks
Justice Holmes has an exactly correct analysis.
This case does show a very evil side to human nature. People will work themselves into hating others for all sorts of truly stupid reasons. The whole idea that some people are “polluted” is insane, yet it is accepted as perfectly normal to those who have been indoctrinated to believe such things.
It is also insane to put someone to death because they insulted your religious leader. Again, indoctrination will do the trick, making this barbaric cruelty seem normal and just.
I have a theory these and other horrific behavior against others comes from the idea of the “master race”. The “master race” idea appeals to many people, all over the world. Be it religion, race, gender, sex, class, nation, region, political party, I see that people are easily convinced their group is the “master race” and everyone else may be harmed in the name of that superiority.
Here we have an extreme case where the master race believes it is perfectly within its rights to kill someone over what was {alleged} to have been said. Something in the human psyche allows people to act out vicious cruelty on those they consider the “other”.
What is going on with this? I think part of the answer lies in the fact that most people actually feel powerless, because, in many ways, we are. To compensate for this powerlessness, we do not join with others to confront the injustices we face, thus attempting to take back real power. Instead, we grab false power by harming those who have even less power than we do.
As a species, we truly need to consider the consequences of the master race fallacy. Instead of turning on each other, using horizontal and downward violence to falsely fill our sense of self worth, we could genuinely work together towards justice for as many people as possible.