Adil Najam
Read this news from The Express Tribune and tell me how this is not idiotic:
KARACHI: A doctor has been arrested on charges of blasphemy in Hyderabad, police said on Sunday. Naushad Valiyani was detained on Friday following a complaint by a medical representative who visited the doctor in the city of Hyderabad. “The arrest was made after the complainant told the police that Valiyani threw his business card, which had his full name, Muhammad Faizan, in a dustbin during a visit to his clinic,” regional police chief Mushtaq Shah told AFP. “Faizan accused Valiyani of committing blasphemy and asked police to register a case against the doctor.”
Shah said the issue had been resolved after Valiyani, a member of the Ismaili community apologised but local religious leaders intervened and pressed for action. “Valiyani had assured Faizan that he did not mean to insult the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) by throwing the visiting card in the dustbin,” Shah said, adding that the police had registered a case under the Blasphemy Act.
Please tell me, who is insulting the Prophet (PBUH) in this case (as in so many others)? Who is the real “threat” to the “Namoos-e-Rasool“?
Using the Prophet’s name in vain and for spreading personal and petty hatred is itself an insult to the Prophet’s (PBUH) message and person. Anyone who cares for “Namoos-e-Rasool” should feel insulted and incensed at how this “namoos” is being ridiculed by the purveyors of hate in the name of blasphemy.
Maybe we should have a law against parents naming their children ‘Muhammad’. Let me confess I have two children whose middle name is ‘Muhammad’ and I sometimes do end up shouting at them or chiding them for not doing their homework. Does this, now, also count as blasphemy?
For Allah’s sake, give me a break. Please! If not me, at least give the Prophet (PBUH) a break!
P.S. For those unable to read Urdu, the verse at the top of this post is from Iftikhar Arif: “Rehmat-i-Syed-i-Lolaak pey kamil eeman / Ummat-i-Syed-i-Lolaak say khauf aata hai.” I hope readers who are better translators than me can provide a translation befitting this verse.
This blasphemy law is really evil. It must go. It is used only by idiots to take revenge on people they do not like. Please, lets repeal this law.
The real enemies of Islam are these people who use the religion to spread their hate.
@Salahuddin
(December 14th, 2010 11:21 am)
I am a lay man knowing little of the legal intricacies of jurisprudence but I wonder whereas there is much stress on intention, called mens rae in legal jargon, there is no provision in the law to require the establishment of the bona fide of the accuser. My point is why any dick and harry with ulterior motives, having no genuine cause of action, is given the right to accuse somebody of blasphemy. Perhaps, as it is, even a person like Abulehb can accuse any body of blasphemy to get all genuine Muslims exterminated or at least make them go through the tyranny of police and judiciary, which seem to be hand in glove with the theocracy for obvious reasons.
very well said
the normal dealing between a sales agent and a possible buyer are always the same as has happened in this issue.
Throwing the visiting card of a person with the word Muhammad written on it can never be termed as insulting Muhammad (the prophet).
In pakistan we just add the name Muhammad as ADDITIONAL to the original name of a child. So we in pakistan usually dont call the boy with the name of Muhammad.
But in arab culture the name Muhammad is a noırmal name for anybody………insulting any person whose name is muhammad is just norm of life in arab culture.
Insulting a person with the name Muhammad is not insulting Hazrat Muhammad (the prophet)
Salahuddin says:
December 14th, 2010 11:21 am
A good exposition of the law. But what about the justification of the prescription of death in the law of blasphemy. The basic principal for justice is tooth for tooth, eye for eye and so on. In this case the person blasphemed is no longer alive. In any case why should a third person have a genuine cause of action against any body having no verifiable relation to the person blasphemed. There are so many whys which arise in the mind of a lay man about the very justification of the law and flaws in its actual application that would justify its out right repeal.