Imagine a faraway country which, due to various circumstances, had remained entirely Catholic: The Church is united to the State, and the law protects religious dogmas from blasphemy.
Imagine further that in that country, ten years ago, a peasant woman who professed a different religion, was working in the field along with others, who happened to be fervent Catholics.
Imagine that it was a very hot day and that the work was arduous. To slake her thirst, imagine that the non-Christian decided to draw water from the common well and, using the workers’ common mug, drank several times. Imagine that this simple act infuriated the fervent Catholics who accused her of polluting the well’s water and the mug because she was not Catholic. Imagine that her fellow workers accost her menacingly, demanding that she renounce her religion and become Catholic. But imagine that the besieged woman refuses and in the ensuing argument, likened her god to the Christian Triune God. Imagine then, that the Catholic women go berserk with fury and, accuse her of blaspheming the Holy Trinity, and then start to beat her. They drag her to the local police station, where she is arrested and thrown into jail. Later, the trial court sentences her to death for blasphemy.
Imagine then that as the news of her death sentence spreads around the world, there is an outburst of indignation against this barbaric country and its unfair application of capital punishment. Since the prisoner is a woman, imagine that feminists take to the streets of the West’s major cities, in large numbers, denouncing and protesting the verdict, and letting their emotions run amok, they break shop windows, start fires, and shout insults at the police along the way. Imagine further that Western governments then threaten to sever diplomatic and trade relations with that cruel, Catholic country, and it is condemned by a majority vote in the United Nations General Assembly, which calls on its government to put a stop to the pending execution.
But imagine that despite all this international pressure many years go by, and the poor woman remains on death row, held in solitary confinement, in a narrow, windowless prison cell. The governor of the province, an enlightened Catholic, visits her in her sorrow. But he pays for his humanitarian gesture with his life. One of his bodyguards assassinates him, and, for his crime, is turned into a national hero. The country’s Minister of Minorities, a non-Catholic like her, is also murdered for speaking out in her defense.
Finally, after ten years of solitary imprisonment, imagine that the country’s Supreme Court rules that there is no evidence of blasphemy and acquits her. In fits of rage, Christians in that country immediately riot in the streets in an orgy of destruction, demanding that the woman be executed. The angry mobs stay in the streets for days threatening to destabilize the government. Finally, the latter caves in and agrees to have a new trial, and in the meantime prohibits the woman from leaving the country—although many countries offer her political asylum.
Faced with such perverse injustice, feminists, secularists and left-wing movements—all of whom cast themselves as the defenders of human rights—explode again in indignation, triggering new and more violent demonstrations.
As a result, with support from the UN and the World Council of Churches, Western governments resolve to adopt tougher measures against that Catholic country.
* * *
By now, the reader will have noticed that this is Asia Bibi’s story.
The only omission in the story was her name and that of her country, Pakistan.
The only alteration to the story was that the respective religions of the two sides were switched around. Her country is Muslim, not Catholic. She is Catholic, and her accusing attackers and the rioting mobs are Muslim.
The only addition to the story is the outbursts of general outrage in the West. They did not happen, but they would have occurred had the poor victim been Muslim instead of Catholic, and if the cruel and persecuting religion had been Catholicism and not Islam.
As is known, feminists do not care about protecting and helping women. They merely use them as ideological tools, as the Communists did for decades with the working class. For example, participants in Washington’s 2017 Women’s March were not worried about arrests or death sentences passed on innocent women in Islamic countries. Instead, they were led by a Muslim activist, Linda Sarsour, whose head was covered with the Islamic hijab.
What will feminists, Western governments, the UN and Pope Francis do now, in the face of the latest injustice perpetrated against Asia Bibi? Will they demand that Pakistan allow her to leave in freedom to one of the many countries offering her shelter? Will they demand that the Pakistan government reverse its cowardly decision to submit her to trial once again for the same crime and based on the same facts, thus recognizing to Asia the right afforded to all in civilized countries not to be placed in double jeopardy? A right whose roots appear to stretch back to ancient Rome’s legal principle of non bis in idem(“an issue once decided must not be raised again”)? Will Western governments remain in their complicit silence or will they act firmly and effectively for the sake of justice and to defend the honor of civilized nations?
The case of Asia Bibi is paradigmatic of the West and the modern world’s suicidal policies.
Faced with an increasingly arrogant and violent Islam, and prodded to do so by Pope Francis, the West has opened its borders to hordes of Muslim migrants, mostly military-age men, many among whom behave as Europe’s new masters raping women in the streets and carrying out deadly attacks while shouting, “Allahu akbar.”1
- See Luiz Sérgio Solimeo, Islam and the Suicide of the West, http://www.tfp.org/islam-and-the-suicide-of-the-west-origins-doctrines-and-goals-of-muhammads-religion/.