Search

The paper examines the discursive practices of religious discourse constructing devout religious identity that instigates fiery sentiments not only to rule out law of the state but also to assassinate others in the name of Allah (Hussain, 2018.). The religious discourse analysis is the framework and methodology of the paper. Religious polemics are categorized on the basis of spirituality present in them in contrast to the political discourse that constructs the rule of power. For analysis of the religious discourse on blasphemy case of Aasia Noreen Bibi, five speeches of the prominent religious figures of right and left wing have been selected and analysed on the basis of intertextuality for authenticity, affective, logic and lexical and syntactic construction to perpetuate the discursive practices in the realization and legitimization of the power of ideology of the actors through language. The paper delimits its scope to the case of Aasia Bibi, and the lives taken in reference to this case, i.e. assassination of the former governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer (Taseer's Omen: Salman Taseer's assassination shows how entrenched the religious right has become in Pakistan's polity, 2011) and former minister of religious minorities Shahbaz Bhatti. The study focuses on the construction of an accusative, extremist, violent religious discourse employing abusive lexemes by some of the right winged scholars that led extremists to protest country wide and cause damage to the public property on hearing the Supreme Court's acquittal of Aasia Bibi in October 2018 (Zafar, 2018; Hashim, 2018). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides an account of the emergence of the common law jurisdiction over blasphemy, arguing that the blasphemy laws first developed in "Rex v. Taylor" had an explicitly secular purpose. Instead of understanding this crucial decision as an emblem of the early modern fusion of church and state, this article reads Sir Matthew Hale's axiom that "Christianity is parcel of the laws of England" as a step toward the emergence of an English civil religion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cristóbal Duarte Ballester was tried twice by the Spanish Inquisition. To the principal accusation of blasphemy the prosecutor added Ballester's faulty observance of the basic precepts of Christianity: eating meat on days forbidden by the church, not confessing his sins, and not attending mass. The Inquisition assigned a moral value to what came out of Ballester's mouth—oaths—as well as to what entered it—certain foods at forbidden moments. The defendant's oral crimes of blasphemy and nonobservance of fasts were compounded by such suspicion-provoking verbal behaviors as Ballester's fluency in Arabic and his love of singing songs in that language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]