We hate the Taliban because they’re a group of religious fanatics that use their interpretation of Islam to justify violence against humanity; that they are strict in their belief and have absolutely no tolerance for debate, discussion or worse, criticism. They impose themselves and their beliefs upon other people with complete disregard to the social good of society. They are evil in their ways because they celebrate oppression and murder with much pride, all in the name of God. But we disregard their views claiming they have misinterpreted religion. Why? Because of our belief that Islam is a tolerant and peaceful religion.

But lets turn around our scope of criticism and look at our own country. What makes the Taliban think that Shariah, or their version of it, can be implemented so easily in Pakistan? Are they implying we’re in the same league?

The truth of the matter is that the extremism and religious fundamentalism not only exists in parts of our society, but within the constitution of our country. These aforementioned laws work the way the Taliban works; violence against humanity in the name of religion.

Take, for example, article 298 B. and C of the Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1960)

298-B. Misuse of epithets, descriptions and titles, etc., reserved for certain holy personages or places:

(1) Any person of the Quadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves ‘Ahmadis’ or by any other name who by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation

…shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
(2) Any person of the Qaudiani group or Lahori group (who call themselves “Ahmadis” or by any other name) who by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation refers to the mode or form of call to prayers followed by his faith as “Azan”..shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

298-C. Person of Quadiani group, etc., calling himself a Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith…outrages the religious feelings of Muslims shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

As if declaring Ahmadi’s non-Muslims were not enough. Our constitution singles out this particular minority and discriminates against them. Promulgated by Z.A Bhutto to please Islamist pressure groups at the time, this law has not contributed to the peace and progress of Pakistan. Instead, it has only served to alienate the Ahmadi community (which produced Pakistan’s first Nobel laureate, Dr Abdus Salam) in Pakistan and triggered a diaspora of Ahmadi’s most of who have settled abroad with anti Pakistan sentiments in their heart. Our constitution is doing what the Taliban are doing; justifying oppression in the name of religion. If the Taliban can justify the beheading of journalists in the name of Jihad, are we not justifying oppression of this community in the name of Islam?

Then there is the infamous blaspheme law.

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.

This law was inserted by General Zia-Ul Haq in 1986 as part of his islamisation program. After his demise, the only attempt to repeal this law was met with the murder of Governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer. What good does this law serve? Is this law not another excuse for oppression and discrimination in the name of Islam?

Article 295.C discriminates against minorities, threatening them with death and life imprisonment if they commit blaspheme against Islam. All religions in one way or another contradict one another and therefore it is highly likely that one’s religious practices may be considered sacrilegious by someone belonging to a different religion. In most cases this law is used by Muslims to threaten minorities and settle personal scores. Not unlike article 298 B and C, this law also has only managed to alienate the religious minorities in Pakistan many of whom are sitting in jails awaiting trials for their alleged blaspheme. Is our constitution, like the Taliban, not using religion to justify discrimination and oppression?

Given the horrific acts of violence that the Taliban have overwhelmed our country with recently. I think its safe to assume that we as a nation, despite our differences and disputes, stand against the Taliban. It is always at the darkest hour that some things seem clear and stark. In these dark times we need to introspect and understand how we, like the Taliban, are using religion to justify violence and oppression. We must ask ourselves, What good have we achieved through these laws? Do these laws portray Islam as a peaceful and tolerant religion for the rest of the world to follow? And how does Pakistan benefit from these laws?

If we don’t, then not only are we doing a disservice to Islam as a religion, but to humanity.

The increasing religious extremism and fanaticism has led to sectarianism, violence against minorities, terrorism and social discord. It is imperative for Pakistan to curb these effects through effective and thoughtful lawmaking but the country seems to be doing the exact opposite by sustaining these laws thereby legitimizing intolerance and ignorance. These laws not only alienate the religious minorities in Pakistan, but also instill anti-state sentiments in their heart.

Besides being a conservative state where liberals are a dying breed of politicians, the Pakistani “ideology” as they call it borders around theocracy mainly because of the existence of these laws. In the kind of globalized world we live in, it is necessary for a country to be open to ideas and to base its constitution upon rational ideas for the sake of progress. Is it so hard to understand that religion is personal and sacred for every individual and by including religion in politics a certain limit is imposed upon our ability to reason and rationalize which in turn creates a very awkward all political actors that wish to do some good for the country.

And for those that support these laws and justify their existence, do they really believe that they’re portraying Islam as a very peaceful, tolerant and non-violent religion for the rest of the world to follow? Do they really consider intolerance a virtue?