Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam's demands make them look weak and afraid, as they send the message to the rest of the world that their faith cannot hold its own in the free market of ideas or stand up to a challenge. Then again, avoiding the challenge altogether is often the idea. Clamping down on free speech can be as much a cynical labor-saving device as a power play.
But it is not just about them. This measure, if approved, would accelerate the purge of Christianity from Pakistan that they and their fellow travelers wish to complete. The ban would be an assault on liturgy, prayer, and teaching, effectively criminalizing every element of Christian religious life. It would be a giant step in the ongoing campaign to make life so intolerable as to induce Christians to leave the country or convert under terror.
"Pakistani Muslims demand a ban on the Bible," from Fides, June 3:
The Islamic party of Pakistan, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, has filed an appeal to the Supreme Court of Pakistan and launched a campaign asking to ban the circulation of the Bible, described as a "pornographic " and "blasphemous book". This is a new attack against the Christian community in Pakistan, frightened by the attacks and threats suffered after the death of Bin Laden, already under attack due to the damaging effects of the blasphemy law, with the consequence of death penalty to those who insult the Koran or the Prophet Muhammad. The radical group Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, with its headquarters in Karachi, launched the campaign at a public conference.
Whose prophet?
The allegations above demonstrate why Islamic laws against blasphemy are a ticking time bomb for non-Muslims. Any expression of a belief at variance with Islam can become fair game to be branded as "blasphemy" or "defamation."
According to the group's leader, Abdul Rauf Farooqi, some passages of the Bible describe characters that Muslims regard as prophets as being "vicious and immoral".
One does get into some trouble for describing "characters that Muslims regard as prophets as being 'vicious and immoral'."
"It is a move that could fuel religious hatred against Christians. It is a threat to peaceful coexistence, an attack on the heart of our faith", says a bewildered Fr. Saleh Diego, who presides over the "Justice and Peace Commission" in the Archdiocese of Karachi. "As Christians we are already very weak and subject to pressures for the unjust blasphemy law. These radical groups want to delete us entirely. Sure, they are only minority groups, and we hope for the rise of voices of moderate Muslim leaders to stop this campaign of hatred " he remarks.
JUI has also not taken into consideration one element of human psychology: the act of banning a book has a way of making even a hitherto obscure publication an object of fascination, as people ask what could be in it that so terrifies grown men in positions of power.
"Our response as Christians in Pakistan, already seen as targets, can be only to confirm the urgency of dialogue and respect for all religious symbols and sacred books of all religions. But we expect that, at an international level, a stronger and more determined answer might emerge, in order to sustain us", concludes Father Diego, calling for a mobilization of Christians and international institutions to stop the campaign against the Bible.
Christian Zion.
Make it happen.
It is all a bit of a muddle, but the "Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam" is divided into two political parties, the JUI-S and the JUI-F. Of the two only JUI-F took part in the 2008 Parliamentary elections, and are now 3rd largest in the Senate while of far less influence in the National Assembly, whereas the elections were boycotted by the JUI-S.
Our man Abdul Rauf Farooqi is of the JUI-S according to several sites on the web. At present not in the Parliament then.
They make up for this by vehement religious strictness and rigidity, demands for absolute obedience to Islamic law and alleged very close contacts to the Taliban.
In countries where it is possible courts should be approached to raise the issue of endemic hatred spread by the Koran...there's precedent for this
From faithfreedom we have
(http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/Sundaram60315.htm)
[Sri Chandmal Chopra, advocate of Calcutta High Court, Sri Hamangshu Kumar Chakraborthy and Sri Sital Singh filed an application in the Calcutta High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on 29 March, 1985, praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the State of West Bengal to declare each copy of the Quran, whether in the original Arabic or in its translation in any of the languages, as forfeited to the government...]
the history of the this court battle is quite instructive...
from wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Calcutta_Quran_Petition
[Chandmal Chopra tried to obtain an order banning the Koran, by filing a Writ Petition at the Calcutta High Court on 29 March 1985. The petition claimed that Sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code were often used by Muslims to ban or proscribe publications critical of Islam, and stated that "so far it had been the privilege of the Peoples of the Book to ban and burn the sacred literature of the Pagans.".[3] Chandmal Chopra thought that the Koran "on grounds of religion promotes disharmony, feeling of enmity, hatred and ill-will between different religious communities and incite people to commit violence and disturb public tranquility..."[4]
Chandmal Chopra also included a list of several dozens of Quran verses that "promote disharmony" in his petition. The book claims that these Quran verses embody one of the main themes of the book: "Nor have these passages been culled at random from different chapters of the Quran with a view to making the book sound sinister. On the contrary, they provide an almost exhaustive list of Allah’s sayings on a subject of great significance, namely, what the believers should believe about and do to the unbelievers..."]
"The ban would be an assault on liturgy, prayer, and teaching, effectively criminalizing every element of Christian religious life. It would be a giant step in the ongoing campaign to make life so intolerable as to induce Christians to leave the country"
Thanks and agreed.
Now try and be consistent and condemn Wilders for calling for the Koran to be banned.
Given that this website explicitly supports Wilders I wont be holding my breath.
And we demand a ban on the hate manual, Quran, and Islam!!
As an Indian its unnerving for me to see pakistan deteriorate in the basic moral values such as tolerance and peaceful coexistence. I dread that india will b the second country to face the nuclear fury ofcourse pak will b the third and it wont exist after that calamity but its true that the fact is india will suffer a lot too.
@flarov222:
Mr. Spencer has already addressed this seeming inconsistency.
Pakistan is striving for a complete separation of tolerance and religion.
I used to feel happy and vindicated that the world is seein pakistans evil face finally but off late im scared becos the actual evil is scarier that what i initially thought it ud b. Iam sure most indians want things to improve in pakistan atleast for her own selfish interests.
I used to feel happy and vindicated that the world is seein pakistans evil face finally but off late im scared becos the actual evil is scarier that what i initially thought it ud b. Iam sure most indians want things to improve in pakistan atleast for our own selfish interests.
But much worse than eradicating christianity in Pakistan will be the disapearance of Hinduism, its religion and civilisation for thousands of years.
I never had any respect for hindus who stayed back in pakistan i think they shud have seen this coming and definitely they cant complain about the growing islamic extremism if i were them i ud swiftly convert to islam.
Is there any major piece of literature that doesn't promote a certain disharmony in society? I wonder how the pre-Aryan peoples of the subcontinent looked on the Vedas; how supporters of Varna viewed the Buddhist and Jain criticism of the institution; etc. Most of the canon of "great books" in the West are also works criticizing the mores and traditions of the societies that wrote them.
Even if I weren't a Christian who feels insulted by the Jamiat Ulema e-Islam's proposal, the above would be a reason why I'll always support the First Amendment to the US Constitution.
"...characters that Muslims regard as prophets as being "vicious and immoral". Like Mo the child thigh masturbator? http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/mufa-khathat-cleaning-mess-up.html
Try as they may, it is written: ''Heaven and Earth shall come to pass, yet my words will never pass away''.
"Now try and be consistent and condemn Wilders for calling for the Koran to be banned"
flarov, the Koran is a book in which the mass-murder of all non-Moslems is mandated and rewarded by the Islamic god, Allah.
The Bible doesn't mandate such a thing at all.
Do you get the difference of why one should be banned and the other not?
The Koran is responsible for the Islamic Jihad of 9/11. It's the Jihad doctrine in Islam that needs to be abolished and should have never been invented in the first place.
The Bible doesn't contain a mass-murder Jihad doctrine.
Do you get the difference of why one should be banned and the other not? They're not equal, they're not the same. One is evil, the other isn't. The Koran is an evil book full of lies and it's poisoned the world for 1400 years.
“Islam is an absurd theology of an immoral Bedouin, a rotting corpse which poisons our lives." - Kemal Ataturk, a Muslim, Founder of modern Turkey
Exactly. Ban the Koran, it sucks. All it contains is death and destruction and hate and lies and reward for murder.
Hey. I could go along with this, after some "accommodation" with Pakistan. How about the West taking all Pakistani Christians in return for Pakistan receiving 10 repatriated Pakistanis, or American/ English/European Pakistanis with Pakistani heritage?
Same with Bangladesh, Egypt, and most Muslim countries.
I'm all for co-operation.
That way Pakistan could become totally Muslim and stew in its own juice with no Western "aid".
India could also be interested I suspect.
Perhaps we should also send European salad crops to Pakistan. (evil thought but evil begets evil)
badly explained. I meant 1 Christian per 10 returned Muslims
More proof, as if any were needed, that shows that devout Muslims are not interested in a free marketplace of ideas. Islam cannot compete against other belief systems in a free and open market. So, everywhere Muslims try to shut down that market for good.
Marisol can I contact you privately? I have a question for you.
3rd thought is the benefit claimants first and financed by the West, followed by the working/business owners who should pay for themselves after paying back their tax fiddles. (they all do it. How can a simple taxi driver pay for a $36k wedding in Pakistan?). Actually the tax cheats should pay for their Muslim brethren. I'm warming to this idea.
Just for the record: These two are the debated (typically islamic rubber-) blasphemy paragraphs:
295-B.Defiling, etc., of Holy Qur'an:
Whoever wilfully defiles, damages or desecrates a copy of the Holy Qur'an or of an extract therefrom or uses it in any derogatory manner or for any unlawful purpose shall be punishable with imprisonment for life.
295-C.Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet:
Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
Those two paragraphs were introduced by Zia ul Haq in 1986 to protect Islam as a state religion. Before, 295-A, introduced by Britain in 1927, gouverned "religious respect" till 1986 with less than ten "blasphemy cases". After that, it quickly rose to 4000.
The whole penal code:
http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/legislation/1860/actXLVof1860.html
Illuminating stats fron the Amadiyya - (btw. this islamic sect is only siding with Christinas in Pak, because in Pak it is treated like an infidel as for them, Mo wasn't the last prophet of Islam - but in the West it is rallying for the victory of Islam. Just shows the sneakyness of Islam. Nevertheless the figures are interesting:
http://ahmadiyyatimes.blogspot.com/2011/06/pakistani-muslim-clerics-want-to-ban.html?utm_source=BP_recent
http://ahmadiyyatimes.blogspot.com/2011/05/pakistan-blasphemy-laws-fact-sheet.html
Someone get on the horn to the UN.
They'll make short work of these haters!!
Take it that you are being sarcastic/ironic?
or flee.
"So long as there is this book there will be no peace in the world."
William Ewart Gladstone (1809–1898)
N.B. He was not talking about the Bible.
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/05/accursed-book-le-livre-maudit.html
Islam, the source of intolerance, yet they dare to say Islam means peace. Just now I have a debate with Indonesian muslim about islam in a online news comments, he said: "Who says Islam condone violence? If you don't know anything about Islam don't you dare to insult Islam, Islam is a peaceful religion, you Christians should have been wiped out of this land(Indonesia) you warmonger!".
You can easily see the hypocrisy in above statement, Islam is peaceful yet Christians should be wipe out from Indonesia because insulting Islam, and the worst part is I don't even mention myself as Christian and he just assume anyone who insult Islam must be a Christian.
Is the Bible as violent as the Qur'an?...
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/03/bible-and-quran-equally-violent.html
Traditionists have also reported on the authority of Ali ibn Ibrahim al - Qummi in his commentary of the Qur'an, as related on the authority of the sixth Imam as-Sadiq, Ja'far ibn Muhammad, who said:
"We were told that our forefathers said that the Messenger of Allah often indulged in kissing the mouth of Fatimah [Muhammad's own daughter]the mistress of the women of the world, so that 'A'ishah finally protested saying, 'O Messenger of Allah, I see you indulge so often in kissing the mouth of Fatimah and placing your tongue in her mouth.' He answered, 'Yes, O 'A'ishah, when I was taken up to heaven, Gabriel took me into Paradise and brought me near the tree of Tuba (beatitude). He gave me an apple of its fruits which I ate, and which became a sperm in my loins. Thus when I returned to earth, I laid with Khadijah, and she conceived Fatimah. Whenever, therefore, I yearn for Paradise, I kiss her and place my tongue in her mouth, for I find in her the fragrance of Paradise. I also sense in her the fragrance of the tree of Tuba. Fatimah is thus a celestial human being.'"
...Muslims follow this pervert but they have the nerve to call *the Bible* pornographic??
Bunty. Do you have a link to the source reference?
. .no need to now. .just Googled the Tuba tree. Thanks anyway.
"Pakistan: Islamic party appeals to supreme court to ban the Bible"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If the Islamic party in Pakistan had a clue they would appeal to OUR SUPREME COURT to ban the bible - they'd have more success... (i couldn't help myself - lol)
Maranatha!
"...the Koran is a book in which the mass-murder of all non-Moslems is mandated and rewarded by the Islamic god, Allah.
The Bible doesn't mandate such a thing at all.
Do you get the difference of why one should be banned and the other not?
The Koran is responsible for the Islamic Jihad of 9/11. It's the Jihad doctrine in Islam that needs to be abolished and should have never been invented in the first place.
The Bible doesn't contain a mass-murder Jihad doctrine.
Do you get the difference of why one should be banned and the other not? They're not equal, they're not the same. One is evil, the other isn't. The Koran is an evil book full of lies and it's poisoned the world for 1400 years."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You really nailed it, Courreges W, excellent post ...
And for those interested in Robert Spencer's books, a must read is this one:
"Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is And Islam Isn't"
...yeah the title of his book really says it all.
...and of course "The Truth About Muhammad" is another must read of Robert Spencer's books.
The qur'an is the instructions on how to walk as allah, in his third person direction, is directing a follower to walk.
A follower of islam is one who is flying the words of the qur'an into buildings with jets, killing as instructed.
You must ban the following of islam, it's practice, the book itself has never killed.
Outlaw the practice of islam, the teaching, the call to rage and hate.
However, this sounds like guns don't kill, only people using guns do.
Hair = split. Why must the path be so full of traps and pitfalls, ones that we place in front of ourselves?
Any State banning the Bible, Christian faith or persecuting Christians is, by definition, guilty of one of the offences defined as genocide - these States must be brought before the International Courts, not just Christians for persecuting muslins!
Any excuse to plunder non-Muslims and to abuse them and flex the muscles of supremacy over them, a "right" guaranteed to Muslims under Islam and enforced by Sharia law. And, restriction on freedom is essential in the establishment of Islam, which does NOT hold up under scrutiny or reasonableness or critical thinking. It is an ideology that caters to the passions of men for power and wealth and sex with no responsibility except to pay tribute to Islam, Muhammad, and Muhammad's allah.
Presumably if the decision of the Supreme Court is unfavourable, 'democracy' wii be enforced by decapitation and suicide bombers. It appears that Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam are all the offspring of first cousins.