[int_19h]

> Pakistan has a system of laws that is based on the British system

It also has a different set of laws, added later, that is based on Sharia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudood_Ordinances

[littletimmy]

An addition to a system of constitutional law does not make a country a theocracy.

[int_19h]

I didn't say that it does. But it seems to be an important addition to the claim that "Pakistan has a system of laws that is based on the British system". Hudood Ordinances are certainly not based on the British system. And they're a big part of the problem being discussed here.

[selimthegrim]

Nevertheless, the question of whether any given act of blasphemy is automatically deserving of a hadd punishment is by no means an open and shut case.

[int_19h]

I think for most westerners, the real WTF is the notion that any act of blasphemy can potentially deserve punishment at all.

[selimthegrim]

As the child of an Pak expatriate, believe me I'd love to get there too. Unfortunately, you don't eat a cow like this all at once.

[int_19h]

I didn't get an answer to my question in another thread; perhaps you could help with that? It is as follows:

Did Pakistan have its blasphemy law in its current state since founding, or was it significantly broadened under Zia-ul-Haq?

I'm genuinely curious about this, because if it's a later addition, then wouldn't several decades of Pakistan's existence without laws as stringent as they are today indicate that the society can actually handle this being dialed down quite a bit just fine?