So how often do we see clerics accused of blasphemy, and not some poor Christian peasant who would almost surely be attacked for the crime.
A crime without a victim, of course.
But let's take the case of our pop singer turned hymn-singing amateur Islamic scholar Junaid Jamshed.
I really want to sympathize with Junaid Jamshed over here, but cannot bring myself to. You know, eventually you would have no choice but to defend him against the blasphemy case. But not without the frustration, or satisfaction, that the devil is caught in his own trap.
It is the same religious scholars who have conditioned people like Pavlov dogs to outrage at the remotest imagination of what could be termed as a blasphemy. With the achievement of a Muslim majority humanitarian utopia, it is ensured that the entertainment for such public outrage is mostly reserved for the dominant faith. Not that better things are expected from the minority faiths, believe me, who want their own versions of this madness.
But what makes you want to walk away from supporting Junaid Jamshed is his utter hatred of women. The part of his lecture for which he was accused of blasphemy was actually about demonizing women. And like most of our misogynistic Shia and Sunni scholars, his favorite target was a woman as well.
So, the real blasphemy that Junaid Jamshed has committed is against women. But unlike his fellow overzealous brothers in faith, they could actually forgive him.
He apologized for his alleged blasphemy. But would Junaid Jamshed repent over how he insulted women? Instead he is worried about saving his life from the very crowd in which he enjoyed mixing.
I bet a part of him would be regretting becoming an Islamic scholar.
So what happens in this case? When someone influential such as Junaid Jamshed is accused of blasphemy.
Well, since registration of cases of blasphemy has become the standard operating procedure for settling disagreements, there is nothing surprising about it. As a matter of fact, just mentioning something about religion can actually qualify you for the honors.
Speaking of which, this piece is not about religion.
It is strictly about politics. It's always about politics.
It's about politics, because the powerful and the influential can always get away with accusations. And the likes of the Christian couple that was burned alive in Kot Radha Kishan cannot.
This is just proof that a religious and Islamic system of government is not safe for Muslims, let alone the non-Muslim minority subjects living under its influence. This busts the myth that the rules of this religious system of governance guarantees safety for everyone.
So there is no wonder why the likes of Junaid Jamshed have to go in hiding in secular countries such as Britain. But they don't think for a moment about people who cannot escape an Islamic Republic.
This is the sort of hypocrisy which makes Pakistani Muslims call for a theocratic state at home but demand secularism in non-Muslim majority countries such as India, so that the Muslims there would feel safe from Hindu oppression. How convenient.
This is precisely why an objective and universally acceptable secular social contract is needed.
And everyone who thinks that blasphemy law should stay is a part of the problem. They are a part of the problem because they block every possibility of using logic and reason when the word religion is mentioned. And by doing so, they are indirectly jeopardizing lives.
But then again, I must confess, there must be some sort of protection for the sacred.
But just to give them a treatment of their medicine, let us accuse mainstream Islamic scholars and politicians of blasphemy more often.
Until they are forced to consider supporting repealing the blasphemy law.
Haroon Riaz is a Rawalpindi-based independent blogger and believes in promoting free speech and secularism. Follow him on Twitter