ECHR decrees Europe wide blasphemy law ...for Islam only

[Greater vakolicci haven]

King Charles II is a religious figure as well
But lets make it Henry VIII. Can I say that the founder of the Church of England liked to kill women or is that blasphemous ?

You'd have to ask London.

Pretty sure the English blasphemy law was hardly enforced for about 100 years and has recently been abolished.

[Ifreann]

You may wish to reconsider your post in light of the fact that the thread title is a complete lie.

Meh. When I’m wrong I’m wrong. I’m not going to edit my posts to make myself look right

A sound policy.

[Olerand]

You'd have to ask London.

Pretty sure the English blasphemy law was hardly enforced for about 100 years and has recently been abolished.

So you can blaspheme against Henry VIII, and the ECHR will have nothing to say about it.

[The Grims]

King Charles II is a religious figure as well
But lets make it Henry VIII. Can I say that the founder of the Church of England liked to kill women or is that blasphemous ?

You'd have to ask London.

Not if I say it in Austria.

"Henry VIII, founder of the church of England, fucked little girls and killed women"

Somehow I doubt I would be fined for those words.
But if one says it about Mohammed the bill falls on my mat.
A small bill, but still.

And the bill comes regardless of the truthfullness of the
statement

[Olerand]

You'd have to ask London.

Not if I say it in Austria.

"Henry VIII, founder of the church of England, fucked little girls and killed women"

Somehow I doubt I would be fined for those words.
But if one says it about Mohammed the bill falls on my mat.
A small bill, but still.

And the bill comes regardless of the truthfullness of the
statement

It depends on how you're saying it in Austria. If you do as part of a discussion, and as a debatable factual statement, then maybe not. Either way, it's Austria's issue. Not the ECHR, not Europe's.

[Ifreann]

You'd have to ask London.

Not if I say it in Austria.

"Henry VIII, founder of the church of England, fucked little girls and killed women"

Somehow I doubt I would be fined for those words.
But if one says it about Mohammed the bill falls on my mat.
A small bill, but still.

And the bill comes regardless of the truthfullness of the
statement

Maybe hire an Austrian lawyer and ask them about the legal implications of chatting shit about British monarchs.

[Western-Ukraine]

It's practically meaningless that blasphemy laws are being abolished. Most European countries already have equivalent laws to punish criticism against religions by means of disguising it as hate speech. Not to mention that many European countries are working on new hate speech laws.

[Olerand]

It's practically meaningless that blasphemy laws are being abolished. Most European countries already have equivalent laws to punish criticism against religions by means of disguising it as hate speech. Not to mention that many European countries are working on new hate speech laws.

That's an opinion. One that's right in some places (Britain), not so much in others (France). But it's an opinion.

[TURTLESHROOM II]

That the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يُوسُفَ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنْ هِشَامٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ عَائِشَةَ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم تَزَوَّجَهَا وَهْىَ بِنْتُ سِتِّ سِنِينَ، وَأُدْخِلَتْ عَلَيْهِ وَهْىَ بِنْتُ تِسْعٍ، وَمَكَثَتْ عِنْدَهُ تِسْعًا‏.‏

Source

I heard about this on a chat room and thought it was just a non-binding opinion. The idea that suggesting Muhammad met the definition of a pedophile because he did a kid at nine isn't defamatory. It's fact.

Is this actually going to be put in force?

All blasphemy laws are abominations that should never be supported under any circumstances. Ever. The same goes with "hate speech": if I can't criticize any organized religion (or the lack thereof) at any time, in any way, for any reason, I am not a free man.

However, God will not be mocked! God will deal with blashemy against His holy Name on His time, on His own terms. We should respect the Free Will of fools and allow them to dig their own grave. Free speech doesn't end when you disagree with it.

[Olerand]

That the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يُوسُفَ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنْ هِشَامٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ عَائِشَةَ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم تَزَوَّجَهَا وَهْىَ بِنْتُ سِتِّ سِنِينَ، وَأُدْخِلَتْ عَلَيْهِ وَهْىَ بِنْتُ تِسْعٍ، وَمَكَثَتْ عِنْدَهُ تِسْعًا‏.‏

Source

I heard about this on a chat room and thought it was just a non-binding opinion. The idea that suggesting Muhammad met the definition of a pedophile because he did a kid at nine isn't defamatory. It's fact.

Is this actually going to be put in force?

All blasphemy laws are abominations that should never be supported under any circumstances. Ever.

There's nothing to be put into force. Do you know how the ECHR works?

The Austrian courts have already ruled against this woman, her fine is upheld.

[Neoliberal Vampires]

Except that it's not for Islam only, is it? Because way back in 1994 the ECHR ruled in Otto-Premiger-Institut v. Austria that the Austrian authorities were allowed to ban the showing of a film Das Liebeskonzil that was considered by some to be insulting to Catholics.

And it's not really Europe wide either, because this permits governments to have blasphemy laws (within limits), it doesn't require it.

But I guess "ECHR rules that Austria's blasphemy laws cover all religions, not just the ones I'd like them to" isn't quite as snappy as the lie that is the thread title.

What a fucking retarded comparison.

There's a difference between censoring art and censoring speech. Artistic freedom and the basic freedom of speaking your mind is two completely different things on radically different levels of importance to a democratic society.

There's nothing "retarded" at all about the comparison. Both cases involve the same Austrian law on vilification of religious figures, imagery, rituals etc and both tried to justify it based on the same human rights convention. The laws in question make no distinction between artistic expression and other forms of expression, so why would a court judge them differently?

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

That the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يُوسُفَ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنْ هِشَامٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ عَائِشَةَ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم تَزَوَّجَهَا وَهْىَ بِنْتُ سِتِّ سِنِينَ، وَأُدْخِلَتْ عَلَيْهِ وَهْىَ بِنْتُ تِسْعٍ، وَمَكَثَتْ عِنْدَهُ تِسْعًا‏.‏

Source

I heard about this on a chat room and thought it was just a non-binding opinion. The idea that suggesting Muhammad met the definition of a pedophile because he did a kid at nine isn't defamatory. It's fact.

Is this actually going to be put in force?

All blasphemy laws are abominations that should never be supported under any circumstances. Ever.

It’s a binding ruling, but only in this case for these specific parties. Had there been a violation, Austria would be ordered to pay a fine. Now, there is nothing wrong, basically. Everything goes on like it did yesterday.

Also, facts can be defamatory. Depends on the jurisdiction.

[Western-Ukraine]

It's practically meaningless that blasphemy laws are being abolished. Most European countries already have equivalent laws to punish criticism against religions by means of disguising it as hate speech. Not to mention that many European countries are working on new hate speech laws.

That's an opinion. One that's right in some places (Britain), not so much in others (France). But it's an opinion.

That's fair enough. But that's not to say France is a haven for free speech: Last time I remember the Prophet was brought up in French discourse, people got gunned down.

[Olerand]

That's an opinion. One that's right in some places (Britain), not so much in others (France). But it's an opinion.

That's fair enough. But that's not to say France is a haven for free speech: Last time I remember the Prophet was brought up in French discourse, people got gunned down.

That has nothing to do with French law, though, no?

[Western-Ukraine]

That's fair enough. But that's not to say France is a haven for free speech: Last time I remember the Prophet was brought up in French discourse, people got gunned down.

That has nothing to do with French law, though, no?

Of course not. It's just another way free speech is threatened. Because the French authorities haven't done enough to stop extremism, I dare say. Are they even willing to? Maybe not.

[Olerand]

That has nothing to do with French law, though, no?

Of course not. It's just another way free speech is threatened. Because the French authorities haven't done enough to stop extremism, I dare say. Are they even willing to? Maybe not.

They're willing. As much they should be? Perhaps, perhaps not. Has it been very effective? Perhaps, perhaps not.

But what happened isn't the fault of French law. France does not have a blasphemy law, and certainly does not apply the death penalty for it.

[Loben]

Jesus christ they are not even hiding it anymore.

[Neoliberal Vampires]

The idea that the actions that saw this woman prosecuted would be better received in Russia is quite amusing though. Try holding a seminar in Grozny accusing Muhammad of being a pedophile and see what happens to you

It’s not an accusation but a fact

I don't have any desire to delve into the accuracy of what she said, but in the end a statement can be both accusation and fact.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Then they need to change that ASAP.

Austria gave us Vienna, one of the most revered cities in the world. I'd hate to see that country slip into censorship, let alone of truthful statements about a religion and its prophet.

The best way to remove Austria's blasphemy law would be for Austrians to campaign to have their government repeal it. Trying to get the Council of Europe to change the ECHR would be vastly more difficult.

But also far more lasting in the long run than a short-term political victory any future government could overturn.

[Olerand]

Jesus christ they are not even hiding it anymore.

They being? The people like the OP?

[Vassenor]

Jesus christ they are not even hiding it anymore.

Respecting national sovereignty and the decisions of its courts is bad now?

[Ifreann]

Jesus christ they are not even hiding it anymore.

Who's not hiding what?

---

The best way to remove Austria's blasphemy law would be for Austrians to campaign to have their government repeal it. Trying to get the Council of Europe to change the ECHR would be vastly more difficult.

But also far more lasting in the long run than a short-term political victory any future government could overturn.

Not a relevant consideration when it is not realistically possible.

[Western-Ukraine]

Jesus christ they are not even hiding it anymore.

Respecting national sovereignty and the decisions of its courts is bad now?

Sometimes brave but controversial statements have to be made. This could have been that chance.

[Olerand]

Respecting national sovereignty and the decisions of its courts is bad now?

Sometimes brave but controversial statements have to be made. This could have been that chance.

And it would have been entirely unlike the ECHR's usual rulings, and it would have made the half of Europe that has blasphemy laws very mad.

The ECHR's job has always been to strike a good balance. A good balance has been found. Now it's on Austria, governed by a coalition government including the FPO, to solve this issue.

[Frievolk]

The greatest part is when you guys don't blame Autriche, the country ruled by a coalition made of a German Nationalist, Eurosceptic, and generally Right-wing populist party and a Conservative Right-wing party, but the union (which doesn't even have anything to do with this situation) for the Council of Europe and the European Convention of Human Rights's respecting a country's national sovereignty.