I don’t normally delve into international politics, but this situation – see also here, here and here – is an absolute disgrace.

• A Christian woman (Asia Bibi) is in jail, pending appeal against a death sentence for alleged blasphemy against Islam.
  [And yet Islam is supposed to be a tolerant religion.]
• Her death sentence is being endorsed by the Pakistani media, and by implication if not in fact, by the government.
• Her case cannot properly be tried in open court because to do so would mean repeating the alleged blasphemy, thus compounding the offence.
  [Clearly contrary to all the accepted rules of justice.]
• A senior politician has been murdered by his bodyguard for supporting her.
  [Islam, just like Christianity, forbids murder.]
• The murderer is being fêted by the Islamic community as a hero.
  [Is this not a sinful as the actual murder?]

That any country, or any (supposedly tolerant) religion, can allow such a state of affairs to come to pass is, at the very least outrageous. And every right-thinking government must surely put the utmost pressure on Pakistan to not just resolve this particular situation but to put in place safeguards against any repeats.** I just don’t know what more I can say and preserve some semblance of normal blood pressure and dignity.

As Heresy Corner says: What we are seeing in Pakistan – established under Jinnah as a secular country, but one explicitly for Muslims – is precisely what happens when you let religion (above all this particular religion) form the basis of political organisation.

And also, to quote Inayat: The truth is that Muslims in power are every bit as prone to abusing that power as non-Muslims. Only, most ‘Islamic states’ or ‘Islamic republics’ do not have anywhere near the same legal safeguards and restrictions on power that most modern secular states do. (And, heaven knows, ours are far from foolproof.) Inayat also describes it as the moral collapse of a nation.

Much as I am personally areligious, I would never deny anyone their right to believe and worship as they wish providing they live within the moral precepts agreed by society at large (which in this day and age means globally!). Should the state, therefore, not be a mechanism for living together rather than promoting or securing an ideology? Thus it seems to me all this whole situation does is to reinforce the argument for secularism of both state and individual.

Wither now free speech and justice?

** Note I do not say “It must never happen again” because whatever safeguards are put in place cannot ensure 100% effectiveness. That, my friends, is life.