Good news atheists: Danish government to protect your religious beliefs from being mocked

[LordKiran]

@ronburgundy
If a US court rules (in a civil trial) that you have defamed someone (by your free speech) and you ignore that ruling and refuse to pay the costs awarded to the plaintiff you, guess what the government does next.
Civil law is still law and it's an institution of The State.
Therefore anti-defamation laws are as much a limit on free speech as any other law.

In that case, you're not being hauled away for speaking, you're being hauled away for ignoring a court order. These kinds of semantics matter in the realm of law.

 

[Lion IRC]

Yeah. LOL
They do.
The court doesn't care so much about whether defamation laws should be...you know... enforced.

 

[Syed]

Danish man who videoed himself burning the Quran charged with blasphemy

saying Quran is false is free speech

the burning Quran is expressing hate toward those who believe in the Quran

 

[dismal]

Danish man who videoed himself burning the Quran charged with blasphemy

saying Quran is false is free speech

the burning Quran is expressing hate toward those who believe in the Quran

which is also protected by free speech.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Danish man who videoed himself burning the Quran charged with blasphemy

Jan Reckendorff, from the public prosecutor’s office in Viborg, said: “It is the prosecution's view that circumstances involving the burning of holy books such as the Bible and the Quran can in some cases be a violation of the blasphemy clause, which covers public scorn or mockery of religion.

“It is our opinion that the circumstances of this case mean it should be prosecuted so the courts now have an opportunity to take a position on the matter.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...lam-prosecuted-charged-46-years-a7594796.html

Though, I guess it says "religion" not "religious beliefs" so maybe atheists religious views are the only ones that can be mocked.

Indeed, maybe atheists views are a mockery or a scorn of Religion.

It's an old law passed in 1938 when conservative nationalism/Nazism was the populist flavour of the day. The law was pushed through to shut them up. Hilarious that it came back to bite the racists

My guess is that they're going to hurry up and strike this law. Denmark is very anti-Islamic at the moment. So I have a feeling the Danes will have none of this nonsense for long in their country.

 

[dismal]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...lam-prosecuted-charged-46-years-a7594796.html

Though, I guess it says "religion" not "religious beliefs" so maybe atheists religious views are the only ones that can be mocked.

Indeed, maybe atheists views are a mockery or a scorn of Religion.

It's an old law passed in 1938 when conservative nationalism/Nazism was the populist flavour of the day. The law was pushed through to shut them up. Hilarious that it came back to bite the racists

Hilarious that the left are the fascists now, you mean.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's an old law passed in 1938 when conservative nationalism/Nazism was the populist flavour of the day. The law was pushed through to shut them up. Hilarious that it came back to bite the racists

Hilarious that the left are the fascists now, you mean.

I wish I could say it wasn't so

 

[dismal]

New York Times article on the subject with a few more facts:

The decision to charge the Quran burner was made by a regional prosecutor in Viborg, on the Jutland peninsula, and had to be approved by the country’s attorney general.

The blasphemy law has been invoked only a handful of times since its creation in 1866, most recently in 1971, when two people broadcast a song mocking Christianity and stirred a debate over female sexuality. They were acquitted.

No one has been convicted of the crime since 1946, when a man dressed himself up as a priest and mock-baptized a doll at a masquerade ball.

Mr. Paludan also noted that in 1997, a Danish artist burned a copy of the Bible on a news show by a state broadcaster but was not charged. “Considering that it is legal to burn a Bible in Denmark, I’m surprised then that it would be guilty to burn the Quran,” he said in a phone interview.

There is some cleverness in this defense:

His lawyer, Rasmus Paludan, argued that his client had burned the Quran in “self-defense.”

“The Quran contains passages on how Mohammed’s followers must kill the infidel, i.e. the Danes,” he said. “Therefore, it’s an act of self-defense to burn a book that in such a way incites war and violence.”

He appears to be hoisting those who would silence speech on the grounds of "incitement" with their own petard.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/world/europe/denmark-quran-burning.html?_r=0

 

[Tom Sawyer]

What if you download a copy of the Koran onto your kindle and then delete it? Does that count as blasphemy? What if you were using the kindle app on a Samsung phone and the battery explodes and sets it on fire while the copy of the Koran is there?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Danish man who videoed himself burning the Quran charged with blasphemy

saying Quran is false is free speech

the burning Quran is expressing hate toward those who believe in the Quran

No. It's expressing hatred of the ideas in the Quran.

 

[Syed]

saying Quran is false is free speech

the burning Quran is expressing hate toward those who believe in the Quran

No. It's expressing hatred of the ideas in the Quran.

if you hate quran you will also hate those who believe in the quran ?

- - - Updated - - -

What if you download a copy of the Koran onto your kindle and then delete it? Does that count as blasphemy? What if you were using the kindle app on a Samsung phone and the battery explodes and sets it on fire while the copy of the Koran is there?

its ok to burn the quran if you dont need/want

 

[Syed]

saying Quran is false is free speech

the burning Quran is expressing hate toward those who believe in the Quran

which is also protected by free speech.

expressing hate toward other people is not free speech

 

[Keith&Co.]

which is also protected by free speech.

expressing hate toward other people is not free speech

And you can support this with a court decision...?

 

[dismal]

which is also protected by free speech.

expressing hate toward other people is not free speech

Well, only because you've messed up the English language there.

If you had said "expressing hate toward other people is not protected under free speech" you'd have been wrong.

 

[Syed]

expressing hate toward other people is not free speech

Well, only because you've messed up the English language there.

If you had said "expressing hate toward other people is not protected under free speech" you'd have been wrong.

protection shouldn't be given to those who spreading hates INTENTIONALLY toward other group of people

 

[Syed]

expressing hate toward other people is not free speech

And you can support this with a court decision...?

we need to change the law

 

[Keith&Co.]

And you can support this with a court decision...?

we need to change the law

So, it IS free speech, you don't think it should be.

Fuck off, then.

 

[dismal]

Well, only because you've messed up the English language there.

If you had said "expressing hate toward other people is not protected under free speech" you'd have been wrong.

protection shouldn't be given to those who spreading hates INTENTIONALLY toward other group of people

You mean like when Mohammed tells his people to kill infidels wherever you find them? As an infidel I find that very hateful.

What should we do to silence that speech?

Collect up Korans and burn them?

 

[Speakpigeon]

Danish man who videoed himself burning the Quran charged with blasphemy

Jan Reckendorff, from the public prosecutor’s office in Viborg, said: “It is the prosecution's view that circumstances involving the burning of holy books such as the Bible and the Quran can in some cases be a violation of the blasphemy clause, which covers public scorn or mockery of religion.

“It is our opinion that the circumstances of this case mean it should be prosecuted so the courts now have an opportunity to take a position on the matter.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...lam-prosecuted-charged-46-years-a7594796.html

Though, I guess it says "religion" not "religious beliefs" so maybe atheists religious views are the only ones that can be mocked.

Indeed, maybe atheists views are a mockery or a scorn of Religion.

The only problem here is this:

Under clause 140 of Denmark’s penal code, anyone can be imprisoned or fined for publicly insulting or degrading religious doctrines or worship.

If people are allowed to express their religious views in public, and they usually are in EU countries, even if there are restrictions, then criticism of those views should be allowed as well.

This is different from restrictions in Europe against incitement to violence and hatred, as long as these restrictions are meant to protect all forms of beliefs, life-styles and cultures, not specifically religious beliefs like is unfortunately the case in the U.K. for example or indeed apparently in Denmark as the quote above seems to show.
EB

 

[Syed]

protection shouldn't be given to those who spreading hates INTENTIONALLY toward other group of people

You mean like when Mohammed tells his people to kill infidels wherever you find them? As an infidel I find that very hateful.

in war you can kill who want to kill you