We have previously discussed the scourge of blasphemy laws, particularly in Muslim nations, used to punish and even execute people with differing views of religion. We have a deeply disturbing new case outside of Lahore, Pakistan where a Christian couple was accused of desecrating the Koran (Quran), beaten by a mob, and then burnt in a brick kiln where they worked. The couple, known only as Shama and Shehzad, were killed at the behest of a local Muslim mullah in Kot Radha Kishan, some 60 kilometres from Lahore.
One promising aspect to this story is that the police have actually made 44 arrests and identified some 468 others who might be involved. The government has called for prosecutions and a committee has been set up.
However, the greatest step would be for Pakistan to eliminate all blasphemy laws from its own books. It is not just the murders but the underlying allegation that is offensive. By allowing people to be arrested for blasphemy, the government reinforces the view that people should be punished for religious views and expressions. This point was made by Louis Brandeis:
Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means — to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal — would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face.
Dissenting, Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928).
I am relieved to read of the arrested but Pakistan has to make a choice in whether to join the modern world and stand with free speech and free exercise against blasphemy and apostasy laws. 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.
Recently, we discussed a Christian pastor accused of blasphemy who was shot and killed in a Pakistani jail by a guard.
There are Muslim countries that do not need our money. The witholding of funds isn’t going to do a darn thing in those countries, Saudi Arabia comes to mind. We need to recognize who are not our allies.
DBQ, I agree w/ both Paul and yourself. But it is not only monetary support. Our President supports blasphemy laws. That is the fundamental problem, not monetary, but philosophical.
Professor Turley: thank you for raising this point. Because we have constitutional protections, we should not compromise.
@ Tony Viera
I don’t think you understand irony or sarcasm.
I fully agree with Paul in that we can’t go in and STOP people in their country from doing horrific things (unless you want a full on war) but we certainly can withhold any monetary support until they “repent” …so to speak.
DBQ – it is called ‘tough love.’ You just withhold the money until they do what you want them to do. The Feds do it to the states all the time, no reason we cannot do it to other countries.
Believer, you have had a comment deleted under our civility rule.
Lets drop crates of small arms and ammo in every church yard across the ME. The people will remember our support of their rights and freedom in a time of need. The only way they will ever be safe is if they take it upon themselves to become safe. We can help them without putting our people directly there.
Tony, If you are a believer, a Christian, you should condemn “Believer” immediately and without reservation. It may be that “believer” is being ironic, if so, my response will go with that irony. But if believer is saying something they really want to be done, you need to step forward and condemn it! Killing people for not being your religion? YUCK!
Our current President supports blasphemy laws.
Jill, one person pen named “Believer” makes a ridiculous and offensive statement and in response you say “Go team Jesus!!!” The broad brush is out and doing it’s thing. Yuck.
It appears that stories are being made up about townspeople they don’t like, be it Christians or developmentally disabled girls, etc. depicting them as having desecrated or spoken out against the Quran or Islam. The offense of the Muslims is beyond blasphemy laws, it’s one in which a state religion is so all powerful that any ‘other’ isn’t tolerated in their midst. When a state adopts or recognizes a deity and incorporates it into their societies laws, it’s the end of the freedoms for individuals and the beginning of tyranny fo all it’s citizens. We here in the West need to take a lesson and recognize the dangers of combining state and religion. Blasphemy laws of other countries should never be recognized in free countries and that would include countries that practice all religions. Fundamentalism is a scourge on humanity.
This is what they do, they bring false accusations of desecrating the Quran or criticizing the Prophet. These accusations do not need to be proven. The mob just descends.
It’s not safe for other faiths in this savagery.
And I agree with vigorously opposing US or International blasphemy laws.
Hillary Clinton needs to wake up or step aside.
Oh my God! Burned alive in a kiln! I can’t conceive of how awful, or long, that must have taken. They were basically baked alive in an oven.
How Roman. That’s like the Iron Bull torture.
Islamic extremism has just taken over the Middle East, which was never very friendly to non-Muslim residents, anyway. I believe at this point that all non-Muslims should be evacuated. It’s just not going to work. There is no hope to live in harmony with ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, etc.
Believer, yes , what you say makes perfect sense! The best response to murder of an innocent Christian is the murder of an innocent Muslim. WOW, that has never been done before and I bet it is really effective!!! It’s a fabulous way of showing Christian love in the world. I’m sure Jesus would approve! Go team Jesus!!!
The unbelievable cruelty that people will inflict on others who don’t believe what they believe is a problem with many religions (official and political religions). What drives the hearts and minds of people to punish, up to and including murder, because of this?
We need to understand why people do this and we need to stop acting this way. We are so ready to turn on others. I notice that a group of people is even more willing than individuals to gang up on and harm others. This is some kind of ugly, horrific thing people are capable of doing to each other.
Some people love to gang up on others, verbally or physically. It appears to make them feel powerful and connected to “their” group. Surely there are better ways of not only feeling powerful, but being powerful and being connected to a group that do not involve harming others.
And yes, governments are absolutely involved in either working up this kind of violence or tamping it down. If your religion is so weak that you have to kill everyone people who won’t accept it, I think that shows just how unsure of your own faith you are. Being willing to murder someone else is an horrific act. To justify it by your so called “faith” is an abomination.
Strong people, strong nations, do not kill others because they they don’t “believe” in their god/dess. Only the weakest thinkers and people of “faith” would do such a thing.
This applies to political parties in the US. Only the weakest thinkers and political partisans who would gang up on other people to harm them for having a different form of thought from what they have.
This tendency is everywhere and as a specious, it is time to find a better way of life.
Awful, still I bet this post doesn’t get near the number of comments as one mentioning a Christian that believes the biblical creation story.
Tony – you would win that bet. 😉
Reblogged this on My Blog FAITHLIFE.
I am going to state the same thing I do every time. Their country, their rules. I do not like, but they get to do it. We do not have to support them financially, however.
There must be a decent balance in a culture between order and freedom. Cultures thrive when they have a precariously narrow balance of tolerance for conflicting ideologies and enforcement or order. It’s not only blasphemy killings in Pakistan that are wrong, but the rest of the world is wrong to kill every living thing, slowly but surely, as a result the freedom to promote ubiquitous extraction and burning of fossil fuels, known to raise temperatures creating conditions unsuitable for life on earth.
Reblogged this on Citizens, not serfs.