Pakistan mother denied (by Lahore's high court) presidential pardon for 'insulting Islam'

Source: The Guardian

A Pakistani court has barred President Asif Ali Zardari from pardoning a Christian woman sentenced to death on charges of insulting Islam, in a case that has prompted criticism over the country's blasphemy law. Asia Bibi, a 45-year-old mother of four, requested a pardon from the president after a lower court sentenced her to death on 8 November in a case stemming from a village dispute.

The Lahore high court today barred Zardari from pardoning Bibi in a petition filed by Shahid Iqbal, a Pakistani citizen. Iqbal's lawyer Allah Bux Laghari told Reuters a pardon was illegal as the court was already hearing an appeal against her sentence.

"We believe it is the court's duty to evaluate the evidence against her, not individuals, and if she is found innocent, she should be freed," he said.

Human rights groups have demanded the repeal of the law, which they say discriminates against religious minorities who make up roughly 4% of Pakistan's 170 million-strong population. A government minister said last week that an initial inquiry into the case of the Christian mother said she had not committed blasphemy but was falsely accused after a quarrel.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/pakistan-mother-charged-insulting-islam

---

Asia Bibi, who has been sentenced to death on charges of insulting
Islam. Photograph: Str/AP

Guess they love her so much they want to kill her.

She could always convert.

Not that this would amount to compulsion of any kind--she's free to choose, if the appeal fails and she's not pardoned, between death and conversion. Either way there's peace among the loyal followers of Muhammed, and she's at peace.

To be fair, the court in Pakistan is a bit more powerful than the court here and treats its power and prestige even more jealously than the US judiciary does. The few, the proud, the superior seriously don't like little bugs like politicians interfering in its jurisdiction. Still, there is an appeal; after the appeal then the court's reason will fall by the wayside--no appeal, no inteference with the Court Almighty. (Then again, the court may decide that any pardon would interfere with its sentence and declare that the court itself is a sufficient check to its own power.)

I can't tell if you forgot the sarcasm tag or not...

"Well, in all fairness she has an out. She could always convert. Not that this would amount to compulsion of any kind--she's free to choose, if the appeal fails and she's not pardoned, between death and conversion. Either way there's peace among the loyal followers of Muhammed, and she's at peace."

Really? Are you justifying the Pakistani courts here? Sentencing anyone to die for "insulting Islam" is completely backward and barbaric. There is nothing reasonable and civil about it.

Islam is a religion of peace.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Pakistan has done so well since its creation!

for sacrilege?

Islam is the state religion in Pakistan, as per its constitution.

Also it has anti-blasphemy laws that make it crime to give offense to Islam or Mohammad, not to any other religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_Pakistan

The largest religious group in England is Christianity, with the Church of England (Anglican) the Established Church: the church is represented in the UK Parliament and the British monarch is a member of the church (required under Article 2 of the Treaty of Union) as well as its Supreme Governor. The Church of England also has the right to draft legislative measures (related to religious administration) through the General Synod that can then be passed into law by Parliament.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_Kingdom#Christianity


And you know that I know about the law this OP is about. That doesn't make it a theocracy, though.

I reject the analogy.

I live in a country, for example, where for historical reasons, our constitution allows for the funding of Catholic schools.

That doesn't make Catholicism the State religion of Canada.

(Go ahead and have the last word.)

There you go, that's my last word. Not that I needed your permission to give it.

I find it noteworthy how relatively little outcry there is on the case of Asia Bibi compared to the outcry over the "convicted adulteress" Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani who has been sentenced to death by stoning in Iran.

Could it be that Ashtiani case allows for quick and easy condemnation of the appalling "justice" system of a country that hostile to and reviled by the U.S, while Asia Bibi is the victim of the appalling "justice" system of an important U.S ally?

I guess the question answers itself.

I don't buy the idea that there's enormous antipathy towards Christians in the West.

(I say that as a devout atheist.)

I think it's just politics at work. For example, Laureen Harper, the wife of PM Harper in Canada (where I live) has run a high-profile campaign on the Iranian case, but said nothing about the Pakistani woman. Laureen Harper is an evangelical Christian.

They don't even compare. Could also be desensitization.

In fact, there has been a lot more outcry about this case on DU than there was about the stoning case. I started a lot of the Ashtiani OPs right here in LBN and can remember what the reactions have been like.

http://www.google.com/search?q=Asia+Bibi&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8
About 1,730,000 results (0.34 seconds)

http://www.google.com/search?q=Sakineh+Mohammadi+Ashtiani&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8
About 1,510,000 results (0.24 seconds)

Your data is suggestive, but not conclusive.

I've been watching from a Canadian perspective, and I've not seen many reports in our media on the Pakistani case, but lots of reports on the Iranian one.

As I noted in another posting a moment ago, even our PMs wife is in on condemning Iran, but has said nothing about Pakistan.

Why? Well, she's an evangelical, so it isn't because she hates Xians. It's because it's easy to attack anything involving the Iranian government, and less easy when a so-called allied country is involved.

That';s my point. Both instances are, for me, equally appalling injustices.

However, even though there maybe a difference in Canada for political reasons, globally they are both generating a massive amount of outcry.

Anyway, relative media coverage volume is not the central issue anyway.

faith. If I were Muslim, this would be enough incentive to find some other faith. Killing a mother because of some perceived disrespect is disgusting. What is so abhorrent is that this isn't simply a story from the backwoods of Pakistan involving the uneducated but that clerics and educated Muslims share this sort of vicious inhumanity.


Back int 80's I had my first encounter with devout Msulims when I was a voluntary literacy teacher to new immigrants. I remember being amazed when one of my students told me about praying 5 times a day and thinking how amazing it was to have faith be so part of one's life. That was my first brush with Islam and it left me with a positive impression.

Afterthe Iranian revolution, I fell out with a number of people I knew on the far Left who supported Khomeini because I thought he and his cabal were fucking despots, control freaks who were making up their own religion. I never regarded the Iranian theocracy as a reflection on Islam. In my mind Islam was a benign religion.

Also in the 80s I became a staunch defender of Palestinians and lost a very good Jewish friend as a result. He associated my anti-Zionism with antisemitism and refused to accept the fact that my opinion of Israel was separate from my feelings about Jews. In fact I felt Israel's treatment of Palestinians flew in the face of what I had long respected about Jews. That said, I have never condoned PLO violence but I never associated their violence with their faith.

Fast-forward to 9-11. As I watched the aftermath I never concluded that the acts of a few in any way reflected on Islam. However, over the last several years my respect for Islam has tanked. I respect it as much as I respect Scientology.

One of the things that has contributed to lessening my respect for Islam are the deafening acusations of Islamophobia when anyone expresses negativity about the religion. I know and like many Muslims and my opinion of their religion is separate issue. Disliking an idea even when the idea is presented as a religion is not bigotry.

Islam can be a comfy religion for many within the faith but I don't judge it by that. IMO any god that created the universe could have done a lot better job dictating his final statement to man. The Koran like very other holy book just isn't up to par. If mercy and love is a aspect of god than violence would not be part of any religion that fancies itself to be the word of god. Period.

It will be a horribly painful, blood process - but to compete in the modern world Islam will have to modernize. That is what is really going on in the world right now. There is no real "war on terror", the war is between fundamentalist, conservative Muslims and modernist Muslims.

One thing we can do to help is stop with the PC crap and call out Islamic backwardness whenever we see it. There is no excuse for any court putting anyone to death for blasphemy. There is no excusing the apostasy laws within Sharia. And no, no modern justice system should accept any aspect of Sharia for settling disputes or anything else.

the term Islamophobia has to be laid to rest as it denigrates people who criticize the ideas that make up Islam. People who like to throw that word around have to learn that ideas can be criticized, that religions are composed of ideas authored by men. People within a faith may believe that a text has divine origins and they have the right to do so but they have to accept that those outside the faith won't concur.

Unfortunately I don't see that happening in more than a minorty of Muslims because the the foundation of Islam is that the Koran cannot be changed as it is the direct word of god.

The Hadith is what causes most of the problems. You cannot just modernize it without changing it dramatically, then the faith no longer has the same sort of centrality that Christianity benefits from.

It appears not.

Saying "the term Islamophobia has to be laid to rest" makes as much sense as saying "the term anti-Semitism has to be laid to rest".

Because both terms can be misused doesn't render them meaningless, it just means the people who misuse them need to educate themselves about what those terms actually mean.

Interesting analogy.

The main difference I see is that it is usually people on the left who are quick to brand as "Islamophobic" anyone who expresses candid and serious criticism of Islam, while it is people on the right who typically smear serious critics of Israel as being "anti-Semitic."

In both cases, the intention is the same: to silence critics.

I agree with the poster that retiring terms that are typically misused this way is a precondition for serious debate.

Once those terms enter any discussion, the possibility of intelligent and civil debate is gone.

Just not here.

Just because both terms can be misused doesn't render them meaningless, it just means that people who misuse them (like is being done here to supposedly defend "free speech") need to educate themselves about what those terms actually mean.


Edited to add this to help you out...

What I'd really like is for hyper-sensitive people to stop trying to prevent others from discussing here openly and honestly their honest concerns about Islam.

And we should all refrain from using debating tactics that aim to silence viewpoints that differ from our own, because we think may be offensive to someone.

I get the sense that there are, unfortunately, people who seem to sit around eagerly waiting for someone to post a poorly-framed phrase, or express an ill-thought out idea about Islam and/or some Muslims, so they can shout "Gotcha" and try to intimidate them into silence by hurling accusations at them.

Pretty simple really.

Have a nice day.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"Blasphemy convictions are common although the death sentence has never been carried out. Most convictions are thrown out on appeal, but angry mobs have killed many people accused of blasphemy."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/pakistan-mother-charged-insulting-islam


but people in the u.s. are complaining because they have to be frisked at the airports. like it or there are religious nuts in the world who think they hear the voice of the heavenly father.