This article on the BBC reports on the blocking of Wikipedia in Pakistan because of "blasphemous content".

The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) had demanded that the "blasphemous content" be removed; Wikipedia had removed some, but not all, and so have been blocked.

I have written before in this thread about how ridiculous it has to have legislation against blasphemy, because:

• One religion's doctrine is another religion's blasphemy,
• Holy books often contain so-called history which contradicts established historical facts (and Wikipedia contains a lot of history).

Wikipedia embodies a plurality of views and religions, and some of its content will inevitably be seen as blasphemous by some.

Whilst Pakistan was founded as an Islamic state, its constitution guarantees freedom of religion. The table to the right shows the mix of religious beliefs in Pakistan, and shows that, despite Islam being by far the majority religion, it is not the only one in Pakistan. Monotheistic religions such as Islam and Christianity consider the beliefs of multi-theistic religions like Hinduism, Buddhism and and Paganism to be inherently blasphemous, and vice versa. Does this mean that Hindus can petition to have much Islamic online material similarly blocked on the basis that it is, to them, blasphemous; I suspect not, which would mean that the laws against blasphemy are biased and flawed.

When will we see an end to the hypocrisy and stupidity of legislation against blasphemy?

I think it is time that the freedom from laws about blasphemy was declared an inalienable human right, and international sanctions brought against states that have them.