Simply getting it wrong
The orthodoxy in Pakistan has been speaking against liberalism and liberals in a very derogatory manner. Perhaps they think that it is an un-Islamic concept and means promiscuity. However, liberalism does not mean promiscuity nor does it encourage it. While some may question this view and may even argue about it, the fact remains that neither in theory nor in practice liberalism means promiscuity or free sex. The theoretical meanings of liberalism as given in western dictionaries, and it’s practice in those countries, does not signify promiscuity. The meaning of this word in English dictionaries, and in dictionaries of other major western languages, is almost the same or very similar, therefore I will not quote its meaning from other dictionaries to avoid repetition. As for English dictionaries, whether British or American, both give more or less the same meaning of the word;
(1) A political orientation that favours social progress by reform and by changing laws rather than by revolution.
(2) An economic theory advocating free competition and self regulating market.
(3) A political philosophy which supports the protection of an individual’s political and civil liberties.
(4) Quality or condition of being liberal.
As far as its practice is concerned, most people who have been to a western country, even for a short period, must have seen that political, cultural, social, and economic conditions there are based on enlightenment or liberalism. Hence, both in theory and practice it signifies rule of law and tolerance. Its most important features, which we Muslims also want in our countries are; (1) rule of law or equality before law for all citizens, and even foreigners; (2) judges in these countries are appointed and removed on the basis of laws which are incorporated in the constitutions and cannot be amended arbitrarily by the executive. Hence, the concept of “independence of judiciary”; (3 ) judges in the West decide cases within a reasonably short period, on the basis of the dictum that “justice delayed, is justice denied”.
The biggest deluge in recent times, called the Tsunami, occurred in Muslim Indonesia and some other non- Muslim developing countries located on the coast of the India Ocean, where homosexuality has not been legalised
These are all essential features of liberalism which most nations want to adopt today. Consequently, it does not mean that liberalism either in theory or in practice signifies free sex or promiscuity. It is a fact that extramarital sex in the West has become both common and open, but so is the case in all other societies. The main difference is that it has become common and relatively open in today’s West, particularly between unmarried couples. And so long as it is consensual it is not illegal.
Since the “rule of law” irrespective of gender, is practiced in the West, single men and women from a very young age start indulging in sex. What is new and common, however, is that lately some western countries have made laws, which make sexual relationship and even marriage between persons of the same sex legal so long as both partners are adults. This is clearly contrary to the teachings of the Bible and the Quran. But sociological studies and scientific research conducted in the West have come to the conclusion that the tendency for homosexuality in some people is an inborn condition. The divine retribution, in the form of natural disasters like earth quakes, deluge, brimstone etc, which God used to send upon the transgressors, has also ceased to visit the West. As a matter of fact the biggest deluge in recent times, called the Tsunami, occurred in Muslim Indonesia and some other non- Muslim developing countries located on the coast of the India Ocean, where homosexuality has not been legalised. Similarly, one of the biggest earthquakes, which destroyed nearly the whole area Azad Kashmir, occurred in Pakistan in 2005. Moreover, smaller but highly devastating earthquakes and floods happen more often in conservative Muslim countries like Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey, where a majority of people are simple, frugal, God fearing and pious Muslims.
The two other conditions for conviction of guilty, namely 1) self confession and 2) pregnancy of a single woman are also impossible to obtain, unless the guilty want to commit suicide. But even before the invention of modern day contraceptives, which have made it much easier to have extramarital sex without being detected, human beings were resorting to the method of “Coitus interruptus” to hide their guilt. As for homosexuality, both the Bible and the Quran forbid it in no uncertain terms, but Christians and Muslims alike have been indulging in it rather frequently.
It has been recently revealed by many victims of illegal sexual acts committed by Christian priests against choir girls and boys either by cajoling or coercing them to gratify their sexual urges, in violation of their oath of celibacy, that it has utterly surprised most Christians, who had placed their faith in their priests and were in denial that a number of supposedly pious and virtuous men of God could be guilty of such a crime. As for Muslim clerics, it is a well known fact that they also commit such acts in spite of the fact that Quran clearly condemns it. The New York Times of 20/7/14 reported that a 10 year old Afghan girl was raped by an Afghan mullah in the premises of the mosque itself.
This is not the first incident of this nature and is extremely surprising not only because the Quran condemns it unequivocally but because Muslim clerics are permitted to contract multiple marriages and have as many concubines as they like at the same time. Therefore the commission of such acts not only by the illiterate common man but theologians in violation of the clear Quranic precept is high surprising. This shows the very powerful nature of this basic human instinct.
Violation of man-made laws as well as divine laws is not confined to such matters alone but extends to others from lies to theft and murder. However, while Muslim clergy regards apostasy as the worst act of punishable by death, the Quran does not prescribe death for apostasy
Violation of man-made laws as well as divine laws is not confined to such matters alone but extends to others from lies to theft and murder. However, while Muslim clergy regards apostasy as the worst act of punishable by death, the Quran does not prescribe death for apostasy. Muslim clerics indoctrinate people to kill not only apostates but persons holding a different religious faith, although the Quran does not give any such command. On the contrary it strictly prohibits killing of any person “as killing of all humanity”.
But over the years ultra orthodox Muslim clerics have made it a part of Shari’a law, as the orthodox clergy of Christianity had done before the growth of tolerance and liberalism in the West. It is this kind of intolerance, bred by religious extremists in violation of their own Devine laws like “thou shall not kill”, etc, that lies at the root of most disgusting behaviour by man.
The cold blooded murder of Salman Taseer is illustrative of the heinous crime that uneducated men commit in the name of religion. But the most disgusting part of this story was that a bunch of lawyers, protectors of law and constitution, threw rose petals on his murderer.
The irony is that the narrow minded Muslim theologians also consider members of certain established Islamic sects, like the Barelvis and Shi’a, as non-Muslims, who deserve to be killed or at least declared non-Muslim like Qadianis. Most Muslims, particularly theologians, believe that converting people of other faiths to Islam is a virtue for which they will be amply rewarded by Allah in the afterlife. However, they also believe that no Muslim can give up his faith and be converted to another as it constitutes apostasy for which any Muslim can kill another.
Taking of human lives is disgusting but an equally disgusting thing is the utter silence of Muslim theologians, not only Pakistanis, but of other Muslim countries like Jordan, Turkey, etc. Two reasons for this kind of silence and hence collusion in the heinous crime seems to be 1) their bad judgment based on lack of education and enlightenment, and 2) their selfish interest that opposition to condemn it would lead to the loss of popularity among the masses. This attitude of the orthodoxy is nothing but extremely short sighted as it does not realise that one day public anger will explode like on the Peshawar killing.