Only a few weeks after Facebook is banned for including some contents that are offensive of Islam, the UK is banning Zakir Naik. This has started to raise some complaints from different voices about the exclusion of this speaker. But why should we complain?
APP reports today that UK-based Jammu and Kashmir Council for Human Rights (JKCHR) Secretary General Dr. Syed Nazir Gilani has said that Britons should be trusted to make their own decisions.
It adds that the decision should be left to the mature judgement of the members of the community in the audience to shout down any such cleric of hate and the government should steer clear of any for and against pressures or suggestions.
If Britons can be trusted to use mature judgment and not be influenced by hateful remarks, why can’t we be trusted to do the same? Is our faith so shallow that we must have an electronic burqa while the English are strong enough to resist corrupt influences?
Also, is this not the same Zakir Naik who said that it is proper for a people to ban any religious preaching that is not the majority?
If it is right for Islamic nations to ban other religions, why not the English who are Christians to ban him?
Here is a question for the very pious: Do you believe everything Zakir Naik teaches? Because if he makes some statements that are not correct, isn’t that misrepresenting Islam and therefore should be stopped?
Actually, I don’t think that Zakir Naik should be banned from the UK. Also I don’t think Facebook should be banned in Pakistan. All of this trying to control speech never works, and I believe that people should be trusted to use their minds to understand what is correct and what is incorrect. But if we are going to ban speech that we don’t like, how can we complain when others do the same?