Do we know whether such a sentence is required by the religion itself or is it instituted by the extremists in control.

Les

 

Well, as we've spent the last two months discussing across about a dozen threads, within Islamism mosque and state aren't seperate. Islamists do not support secularism. What it says in the Quar'an is the law, economic, social and education policy. Pakistan's 'democracy' is a sham.

You keep chucking this question in and it's because you feel religion is
coming under attack. It's the religious-political movement of Islamism being criticised here, not religion generally. I shall look forward to repeating this point next week and the week after and the week after and......

 

In other words, these are not "extremists" like people keep saying, these are ordinary Pakistani people! This is how they all live, not a minority like people keep saying.... ALL OF THEM

 

I think the first assertion would be a matter of opinion.

 

Sure, I doubt they would define themselves as extremists or even Islamists.

 

I really don't remember asking that particular question before. I asked if the religion itself requires the death penalty or is it the extremists associated with the religion. I think it is a reasonable question to ask.

You can repeat weekly whatever you like, but if you must make assumptions and criticise, at least make an attempt to answer the question I asked!

Les

 

I still believe this could all be sorted out by inventing a bacon sarnie cannon.

 

Inciteful Mickey and it might just work - could also be pointed as Israel as well

 

It works multiple ways, it is a GREAT thing for the planet.

Hard a hard day fighting terrorists, fire a bacon sarnie at yourself and feel instantly refreshed.

Want to save starving people in africa, fire a few bacon sarnies over.

Miners trapped down a well, fire some bacon sarnies down.

 

It seemed very similar to other questions, however, the response was rude and unhelpful. Sorry.

Pakistan operates a Federal Sharia Court within which Jurists operate. Jurists make the laws, one of which has deemed blasphemy "repugnant to Islam" and that the penalty for "contempt of the Holy Prophet" is death. These people aren't extremists associated with the religion, they are the religion and make the laws for the 170 million living within the Islamic Republic.

 

Above @ leslie.

 

Yes it's incorporated into the legal system, but otoh the death penalty tends to get dropped on appeal with the powerful secular organs of the state acting as a moderator.

Still you are right that by any measure in Pakistan it is not simply a minority of 'extremists' agitating for the imposition of harsh blasphemy laws; it's actually law.

 

Another stupid thread!

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11882019

Does the world feel a bit edgy at the moment, or what?

 

I did post a reply which seems to have disappeared.

Thanks for the answer, your apology accepted of course.

With what you are saying above, it seems to me that the jurists you mention are pretty extreme if they feel they have to provide a death penalty for what they call blasphemy. They can only be one step removed from what we understand as extremists.

Les

 

Well, it's all relative of course, and I made the point to Lee. What the West perceives as 'extreme' is mainstraim in many Islamic states. The danger of using the word 'extreme' is that it implies that there's this moderate majority who shun and turn away from these black sheep when that simply isn't the case. It suits popular sensibilities to wield the word extremist for two reasons, a) so we don't alienate the whole of Islam and b) it's comforting to think of the bad guys as being a tiny minority. I find it a bit weak.

 

I think that sentencing a person to death for so called blasphemy against a religion on the say so of some biased reports can only be regarded as extremist by any definition of the word.

Les

 

At the front on the right, with the sideboards and moustache. HTH

 

So Pakistan is an extremist state, then?

 

That is it, exactly and yes it probably is a bit weak.
I find the fact they seem to get upset over the slightest thing and expect people to be killed for the most ridiculous reason, to be totally and utterly unbelievable. They seem to be the most highly strung people on the planet.
I can only go off the people I know, like Maz and Banny. I could never imagine them behaving like those idiots in the OP, hence my choice to call those who do, extremists.
If they want to behave like barbarians in their own Country, so be it. I do not want them to come to GB and think they can get away with the same thing.
Islam is not a problem, Islamism most certainly is. Leave it in Pakistan. We don't want it

 

Why do you have to put words into my mouth? Show me where I said that.

I was referring to the "jurists" who want to institute such a sentence for that alleged offence.

If you have to try to quote me out of context then you are pretty well short of something significant to say!

Les

 

But it's ok if the reports are unbiased?

 

So the Jurists are extreme. What about the legal system within which they operate and the establishment that controls it?

 

The jurists created the offence of blasphemy and it has been made part of Sharia law. It is Sharia law which has made the death penalty part of the sentence for blasphemy amongst a whole list of other penalties for the same offence.

Do you deny that is an extreme penalty regardless of who has awarded it? How would you regard yourself if you personally awarded such a sentence?

Les

 

There are times when you confound any kind of a sensible reaction.

You must really be scraping the barrel if you are also trying to make it seem as though I said something that I didn't.

Just try reading what I said again and work out the true meaning of what I said!

Les

 

The point is, Les, that it's only extreme relative to your and my experience. In Pakistan it is not extreme, it's simply how the state operates.

 

could we not just shoot all the god and allah botherers and have global peace instead? Does anyone know when the last non god bothering war was? I reckon about 4000BC, when it was about power and global domination......

Oh - Hang on - same motive, different excuse

 

I pretty much agree there.

 

Genocide?!

Ban her!!!!

 

Maybe I should have been more specific....