 |
Pakistanis cannot afford to encourage intolerance
by
Huma Yusuf*
by
Huma Yusuf*
Ahmadiyya is a religious sect founded by 19th century Indian religious leader Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who claimed he was the promised Messiah foretold by the Prophet Muhammad and many religions' scriptures. Though Ahmadis consider themselves Muslims, Pakistani law considers them non-Muslims due to ideological differences on theological issues, such as Ahmad's claim of prophethood, whereas Muslims affirm the Prophet Muhammad as the last and final prophet.
Even as the attack was unfolding, law enforcement officers started pointing fingers at the Taliban and its affiliated terror groups. But we can no longer pretend that Friday's attacks were the extreme actions of a lone terror group. Instead, attacks of escalating horror and violence, growing in their scope, against the Ahmadi community are the most terrible articulations of a widespread social sentiment -- that members of this community are, because of their religious beliefs, lesser people.
For letting this ill-conceived notion flourish over the decades, Pakistanis are collectively complicit in the attacks.
The May 27 attacks demand soul-searching at all levels of the state and society. The fact is, young men, not automatons, carried out these attacks. In a way, the attackers were fed the idea that some views, practices or people are anti-Islamic and blasphemous and should therefore be obliterated. This basic idea is manifest in the sweeping ban against Facebook and other websites believed to host sacrilegious content, in the murder of a former Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) official accused of having links to the Ahmadi community and now in the slaughter of more than 70 people at prayer.
It may seem inappropriate to compare these disparate events, but the logic deployed in each instance has been the same: Wherever a difference of opinion or a divergent belief is detected, it must be snuffed out, no matter what the toll on human life, human rights, freedom of belief, freedom of expression and social harmony. Political rhetoric aside, the ferocity of these attacks demands a concrete and drastic government response.
It has been well documented over the years that growing intolerance of minority beliefs is a consequence of Pakistan's controversial blasphemy laws, which carry severe punishments including death. These have been used to justify censorship, settle personal vendettas, facilitate land grabs and inflict violence on minorities.
In August 2009, Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani announced the establishment of a committee to review “laws detrimental to religious harmony,” which was understood to include the blasphemy laws. Nothing came to pass from that process. Subsequently, in February, the government announced that it would implement procedural changes to laws that can be exploited to create “violence and disharmony” in society.
Sadly, no changes have been implemented and the battle cry of blasphemy is increasingly invoked. There is no more time for dithering on this issue.
Pakistan is currently leading 56 other Muslim-majority countries in an anti-defamation of religion campaign. But it is too ironic -- indeed insulting -- to see our government lobby for the rights of religions on the world stage when it cannot defend the rights or lives of its own people at home.
The fact is that if our government truly rejects the violent attacks on the Ahmadi community, it should take all the necessary steps to address the root causes of discrimination against religious minorities. In addition to outlawing the blasphemy laws, the government must support open debate, interfaith dialogue and school curriculum reform -- including religious school curricula -- with an eye to dispelling misconceptions about different religions and sects.
*Huma Yusuf is a freelance writer.
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AMANDA PAUL |  |
||
| Ukraine: a lost country | |||
| BÜLENT KENEŞ |  |
||
| What befell Niyazi-i Misri in the past is happening to Fethullah Gülen now | |||
| MÜMTAZER TÜRKÖNE |  |
||
| The 52nd anniversary of May 27 | |||
| EKREM DUMANLI |  |
||
| When a call for fairness and reason finds acceptance | |||
| ARZU KAYA URANLI |  |
||
| On Memorial Day a few words to make your day memorable | |||
| CUMALİ ÖNAL |  |
||
| Critical months for Egypt | |||
| ŞAHİN ALPAY |  |
||
| Uludere, test case for democracy in Turkey | |||
| EMRE USLU |  |
||
| Are the Kurds mentally divorced from Turkey? | |||
| GÖKHAN BACIK |  |
||
| Erdoğan, Gül and Davutoğlu: the inner bargain on Turkish foreign policy | |||
| DOĞU ERGİL |  |
||
| Qualities of power | |||
| MARKAR ESAYAN |  |
||
| Taking lessons from previous experiences with the military | |||
| YAVUZ BAYDAR |  |
||
| Qualm | |||
| ÖMER TAŞPINAR |  |
||
| A new phase in Syria? | |||
| JOOST LAGENDIJK |  |
||
| Europe can’t have it all. Or can it? | |||
| İHSAN DAĞI |  |
||
| Turkish foreign policy: Time for a re-evaluation | |||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
