In the West governments have the duty to protect free speech as well as other freedoms (exceptions for reasonable censorship – for example, sexually explicit content). The point is that ideas and concepts should be up for debate in order for society to learn and advance. Unfortunately, in much of the Islamic world certain ideas are not only prohibited by they can be punishable up to a death sentence. Let’s take a look at some examples of Muslim support for blasphemy laws.
First, a case in the UK reveals how Mufti Shah Sadruddin, a prominent figure among Bangladeshi Brits, has advocated for the death of those who insult Islam. This is the same Sadruddin who apparently ran for a “local councillor” position a couple years ago, the UK’s Mirror reports:
Footage has emerged of Mufti Shah Sadruddin making a shocking hate speech in London – a year before he tried to become a local councillor.
In his hate-filled rant, he rages against atheists and suggests those who insult his religion should be killed.
The shocking comments were unearthed ahead of a documentary about the abuse, violence and hatred suffered by some Muslims who choose to leave the religion.
Raging against non-believers, Sadruddin says in the video clip: “No son of a b*****d will remain alive after swearing at my prophet.”
The comment was filmed a year before he stood as aConservativecandidate for Newham council in 2014.
In the run-up to the election, he claimed: “I believe in equality, I believe in fairness, I believe in loving the human race and I hate to hate anybody.”
So basically equality, fairness, and love are being defined by Sharia standards or Sadruddin is blatantly lying in order to advance his Islamist agenda in the UK. An ICM Unlimited survey released earlier this year shows that other British Muslim adults (18 years and older) also have particular sensitivities in matters regarding Islam’s prophet. For example, when asked: “In your opinion, should any publication have the right to publish pictures of the Prophet?” – 4% of the Muslims surveyed said “Yes” while 78% responded by saying “No[.]” And that question just deals with simply posting a picture – whether it’s a positive or negative portrayal of Muhammad is irrelevant here! Another question the survey asked reads: “And in your opinion, should any publication have the right to publish pictures which make fun of the Prophet?” – 1% of Muslims said “Yes” while 87% said “No[.]” While no one who is serious about their faith typically enjoys when other people insult or mock one’s beliefs, the fact that just the mere drawing of Muhammad causes such ire within the Islamic community is a real cause for concern within the UK.
A second case reveals how blasphemy laws are not only enforced in Pakistan but they also apply to non-Muslims as well – and an influential segment of Pakistanis support such laws. A recent article from the Pakistan Christian Post shows that “about 150 top Muslim Clerics (Muftis) issued a religious decree and demanded from Government to hang Asia bibi and all other prisoners of blasphemy laws and also demanded speedy trial of pending cases of blasphemy in Pakistani courts.” Asia Bibi is the Christian mother of five children who has been behind bars since 2009, and is facing the death penalty because of “allegations of blasphemy.” This shouldn’t come as a huge surprise considering a 2013 Pew Research Center article shows that 81% of Muslims in Pakistan believe “sharia is the revealed word of God[.]” The same Pew article found that “[a]mong Muslims who support making sharia the law of the land” (84% in Pakistan) about one third (34%) of those believe Sharia should apply to non-Muslims as well.
Another case exposes how even in America there’s an influential sector of Muslims that essentially help enforce de-facto blasphemy laws by stoking anti-blasphemy anger within the Islamic community when a Muslim Reformer wants to be truthful about the life of Muhammad. Recently, Muslim Reformer (and writer at Counterjihad.com), Shireen Qudosi, testified in front of a House Homeland Security Committee about the subject of radical Islam. At one point during the hearing Qudosi explained how Muhammad switched from being non-violent to violent during his “prophethood[,]” while he and his followers conducted jihad on their adversaries – however, CAIR clipped the segment into a video and basically suggested that Qudosi insulted the Islamic prophet (video here). Not only does the Hamas linked CAIR (professed to be “America’s largest Muslim civil liberties organization”) know that such a video stirs up animosities within the Muslim community that threatens the very life of Qudosi, but they are also trying to shut down any reasonable analysis of Muhammad’s life. One would like to see CAIR try and refute the fact that Muhammad did wage jihad, which included the vicious killings of innocent people. How long are Islamists going to keep painting Muhammad as a peaceful saint when the Quran and Sunnah tell a different story? We must be able to discuss these things without the fear of physical retaliation for offending somebody’s religion.