Pakistani man accused of insulting Islam killed in court

[Spirit of Light]

The difference is that atheists and agnostics don’t use fear, violence, and death as our tools to disseminate our thoughts to those who disagree with us. We hold discussions and present evidence.

To use murder as a way to convince the survivors to convert is violent mob-rule, not a religion. To say that anyone who so much as speaks out against my way of thought is to be beaten, imprisoned, and/or killed, makes me nothing more than a petty thug or bully. A dangerous and homicidal bully.
This point is not up for debate, it is a definition.

Perhaps we can agree that speaking out against people of another belief system is rude. Sure. But criminal? Dangerously criminal on par with being an arsonist or pedophilic rapist, or serial killer? No.

You say I’m free to not worship Allah....but what about my sister-in-law. She grew up Muslim but isn’t anymore. Should she be beaten to death?
You want things to be equal, right? Well, if I knew a friend that had previously been an ardent atheist, but now they follow the teachings of Muhammad regarding Allah. Then . I’d be happy to talk to them about why they changed their minds if they so desired. Not pull a gun and execute my former friend.

So you do see how it is no way equal, right? Please say yes.

To kill someone is of course not acceptable for anyone, no matter the topic.
Personally I think anyone should be free to believe in what they want, without fear for their life. I know that feels because of China hunting down falun gong practitioners all over the world.
This world is not equal in any shape or form. It can not be until human beings see each other as human beings, and not tell someone they are terrorists because they being to a belief like Islam.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

In fairness some of the biggest and most destructive riots in the US were over sports games. I cannot possibly fathom having enough stakes in a sports game to riot over it either.

That's a ridiculous comparison. No one is sentenced to death in the US for cheering for the wrong sports team. And people's religious beliefs deserve no more respect than their allegiance to their favorite team, in my opinion. Islam should be mocked and ridiculed.

 

[QuestioningMind]

‘A young Pakistani man has walked into a courtroom in the north-western city of Peshawar and shot and killed a fellow Muslim who was on trial for blasphemy, a police officer has said.

It was not immediately clear how the assailant, identified as Khalid Khan, managed to get into the court amid tight security. The attacker was subsequently arrested.

The man on trial, Tahir Shamim Ahmad, had claimed he was Islam's prophet and was arrested two years ago on blasphemy charges, according to Azmat Khan, the police officer.

Mr Ahmad died before he could be transported to hospital.’


Read more here: Man on trial for blasphemy shot dead in court in Pakistan

It's pure insanity... people killing other people because they disagree about their imaginary friends. How sad and pathetic.

 

[stvdv]

You didn't add a link. Here's one from me.

Links can be helpful, I agree.

Here is another link, just about Pakistan; below quote is from this link: Application of Sharia by country - Wikipedia. I read here, that Pakistan has it's Law based on Islam, not in conflict with Koran, and Sharia was declared the Supreme Law of Pakistan in the 1991 Enforcement of Shariat Act.

The text below says "Most of it" did not conflict with Sharia. So, that can be 51% did not conflict. If it is 51% that does not conflict, you still have 49% that does conflict. That would be huge. But even 10% could be too much conflicting difference.

So, my reply was quite valid it seems. I did not check this before, it was just my gut feeling; mostly this is correct.

Pakistan[edit]
The Constitution of Pakistan acknowledges God as the sole sovereign of the universe and the Parliament as a delegate. The Constitution of Pakistan requires that all laws conform with Islam and not conflict with the Quran or Sunnah. The Council of Islamic Ideology reviewed the British era legislation and found most of it did not conflict with Sharia.[148] Sharia was declared the Supreme Law of Pakistan in the 1991 Enforcement of Shariat Act. Section 4 stipulates that courts select an interpretation of law consistent with Islamic jurisprudence and principles.[149]

 

[Windwalker]

After the scrutiny of critical thought women realised they don't need to wear clothes in public?

You mean nudist colonies? I've never gone to one of those, so I've not seen women not wearing clothes in public. Where have you? Where were you? Why were you there?

But I will say this, after the scrutiny of critical thought, we realize that women are not inferior to men and don't need to be owned by them, and that is okay for them to get educated, get jobs, and have careers. These are positive benefits to the overall health of a society. Not something to be feared. Let women choose for themselves.

Don't worry about seeing naked women in public. Most civilized societies have laws about public nudity.

..could it be that the human intelligence has varied during the last 10 000 years and women add clothing and take it off depending on the current average iq of man?

You seem rather fixated on sex. May I ask how old you are? Late teens, early adult? Again, not sure where you are seeing naked women, or why you are there in the first place.

 

[danieldemol]

Apparently it's not the liberals. They just call Islam the "religion of peace."

I think many liberals would only say that satirically, as in the religion of peace strikes again.

That being said, there is no orthodoxy in liberalism. So saying liberals say this or that is like saying atheists say this or that. Sure you can find examples of liberals calling Islam the religion of peace, but what statistical studies have you undertaken of liberals to determine that is the general rule?

 

[Father Heathen]

Do you think butthurt is a proper word?

For the behavior I'm discribing, yes.

 

[Father Heathen]

I do not inprision others, all I ask is that one side should not have to be ridiculed but when they chose to answer back they become terrorists or bad? Muslims are allowed to answer back when people criticise them. Or is it only the white man who can defend them self?

Of course people can offer their own words as a response to other people's words, but violence isn't a rational, proportionate, or civilized reaction. Neither is censorship. Freedoms supersedes feelings.

And "the white man"? Nobody said a damned thing about race, son.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You are aware of that to draw Muhammad is against Islam, and when done it will rase anger from some but maybe not all Muslims, is it then wrong of Muslims to say that it is wrong?
And yes some Muslims extremists did answer back in a wrong way, that I agree to too.

It is wrong to expect amd demand they be silenced. It is wrong to protest their right to free speech.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Of course people can offer their own words as a response to other people's words, but violence isn't a rational, proportionate, or civilized reaction. Neither is censorship. Freedoms supersedes feelings.

And "the white man"? Nobody said a damned thing about race, son.

I did say that about white man, so. Yes nobody else did.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It is wrong to expect amd demand they be silenced. It is wrong to protest their right to free speech.

Are you saying Muslims are not allowed to freely? Or am I misunderstanding you?
Sorry if misunderstood

 

[Father Heathen]

I did say that about white man, so. Yes nobody else did.

Yeah, okay, and how exactly is that even remotely relevant?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Yeah, okay, and how exactly is that even remotely relevant?

Because white man is known for dislike of other cultures, and want to change them in to how white man thinks.

I don't agree with those things.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

That's a ridiculous comparison. No one is sentenced to death in the US for cheering for the wrong sports team. And people's religious beliefs deserve no more respect than their allegiance to their favorite team, in my opinion. Islam should be mocked and ridiculed.

You uh... jumped the gun a bit there buddy. I wa making a joke. But feel free to stereotype a dynamic belief group.

 

[Father Heathen]

Because white man is known for dislike of other cultures, and want to change them in to how white man thinks.

I don't agree with those things.

I dislike things that foster and promote misogyny, homophobia, subjugation, scientific illiteracy, and violence. This is because I value liberty, logic, equality, compassion, and justice.
But no, I'm a de facto villain simply due to being of European descent? Racist rubbish. Also, stop conflating race, religion, culture, and nationality; they're all completely different things.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Apparently it's not the liberals. They just call Islam the "religion of peace."

George Bush is a liberal now?

 

[Rational Agnostic]

You uh... jumped the gun a bit there buddy. I wa making a joke. But feel free to stereotype a dynamic belief group.

Well, either way...I see the allegiance of a person to their god as similar to a person's allegiance to their favorite sports team. Maybe they should have a competition where various imaginary sky gods face off against each other. Who would win the Sky God Olympics?

 

[Rational Agnostic]

George Bush is a liberal now?

Well, some conservatives said it too. I'm no fan of Bush by any means.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What'd he say/do?

For starters, its a they.
They portrayed heavily satarized caricatures of Islamic radicals and their extremist ideology. They (several people) where butchered for practicing their rights and standing against those who get their way through fear.

 

[stvdv]

None of the religions are blasphemy to me.

Of course not. Religions are never blasphemy. It's the followers who blaspheme

But speaking badly or try to hurt them is.

Nobody tries to hurt "good religions". Any sane person tries to prevent religious people hurting others. See the examples below.

Some would consider it "blasphemous" to criticize the practice of clit-snipping.

Great first example. Too horrible to be true. Done in name of Religion. They should be ashamed of themselves. That's blasphemy multiplied by 1000

Should we turn a blind eye to horrific abuse out of "respect" for such beliefs?

Good point. Those religions protecting this deserve no respect at all. They should be annihilated IMHO.

People will cloak things in religion with the expectation that it will be regarded as beyond reproach

Hypocrites are masters in this behavior.

but all things should be subject to critique and scrutiny.

Amen.