European Court of Human Rights rules that defaming Prophet Muhammed is not free expression

[Thunderian]

I thought western civilization did away with blasphemy laws.

Oh, well. What could go wrong?

Defaming Prophet Muhammed not free expression: ECHR​

aa.com.tr/en/europe/defaming-prophet-muhammed-not-free-expression-echr/1292823​

​

Such defamation could stir up prejudice and risk religious peace, says European Court of Human Rights​

​

STRASBOURG ​

​

Defaming the Prophet Muhammed “goes beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate" and "could stir up prejudice and put at risk religious peace” and thus exceeds the permissible limits of freedom of expression, ruled the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on Thursday, upholding a lower court decision.​

The decision by a seven-judge panel came after an Austrian national identified as Mrs. S. held two seminars in 2009, entitled “Basic Information on Islam,” in which she defamed the Prophet Muhammad’s marriage.​

​

According to a statement released by the court on Thursday, the Vienna Regional Criminal Court found that these statements implied that Muhammad had pedophilic tendencies, and in February 2011 convicted Mrs. S. for disparaging religious doctrines.​

​

She was fined €480 (aprox. $547) and the costs of the proceedings.​

​

“Mrs. S. appealed but the Vienna Court of Appeal upheld the decision in December 2011, confirming, in essence, the lower court’s findings. A request for the renewal of the proceedings was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 11 December 2013,” it said.​

​

“Relying on Article 10 (freedom of expression), Mrs. S. complained that the domestic courts failed to address the substance of the impugned statements in the light of her right to freedom of expression.”​

​

On today’s ruling, the ECHR said it “found in particular that the domestic courts comprehensively assessed the wider context of the applicant’s statements and carefully balanced her right to freedom of expression with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected, and served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria.”​

​

The court held “that by considering the impugned statements as going beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate and classifying them as an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, which could stir up prejudice and put at risk religious peace, the domestic courts put forward relevant and sufficient reasons.”​

​

The statement also added that there had been no violation of Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, covering freedom of expression.​

​

 

[elsbet]

".. the right of others to have their religious feelings protected"

Really. -.-

 

[DesertRose]

Double standards apparent even on these forums........by the usual suspects.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize". Voltaire

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Double standards apparent even on these forums........by the usual suspects.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize". Voltaire

Do you see a gap between critique and defamation? I enjoy the first and hate the second and wonder if others can see the relationship between the two ideas?

 

[Etagloc]

Since when do people care about "western civilization"?

Western culture can lead the way in sterility, atheism, broken families, abortion, promotion of homosexuality, pornography, dudes wearing tight pants, hostility to religion

and the response is: *crickets*.

Suddenly some brown people show up and "we gotta save Western civilization!". No you don't. If that was really important to you, you'd care about the other issues. Muslims are a blessing for the West. Someone has to preserve sane values.

All this does is illustrate what I'm talking about. The European council of human rights or whatever talking about feelings.... who is on that council? Is it guys named Ahmed? Is it guys wearing thobes?

If we get a picture- it's probably a bunch of Europeans. And who invited Muslims anyways? Also Europeans. And on what basis did they rule this? Are they promoting sharia? No. This has nothing to do with sharia. This is Europeans and on a basis of Political Correctness.

Europeans are Europeans. I'm not being racist. Europeans are known for passing "hate speech" stuff. That's part of their culture. If you have a problem here... your problem here is with European culture and how Europeans do things. This is Western culture (at least in Europe). People are responsible for their own actions. There is zero reason to scapegoat Muslims. I doubt they were meeting and said "oh wait- time for Dhuhr" and stopped to pray. This wasn't a room full of guys named Ahmed. If someone pulls up a picture- it's a bunch of Europeans, I'm pretty sure. No reasonable, just person can get mad at Muslims over something non-Muslim Europeans decided to do. Honestly, this is just something Europeans do. Europe has all sorts of speech laws. If there's a problem, take it up with European culture. This is done as part of their European PC culture. I'm not going to be shocked insha'Allah if I hear Indians are against eating beef. This is just part of Europeans' culture. Europeans are known for having speech laws.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Since when do people care about "western civilization"?

Western culture can lead the way in sterility, atheism, broken families, abortion, promotion of homosexuality, pornography, dudes wearing tight pants, hostility to religion

and the response is: *crickets*.

Suddenly some brown people show up and "we gotta save Western civilization!". No you don't. If that was really important to you, you'd care about the other issues. Muslims are a blessing for the West. Someone has to preserve sane values.

All this does is illustrate what I'm talking about. The European council of human rights or whatever talking about feelings.... who is on that council? Is it guys named Ahmed? Is it guys wearing thobes?

If we get a picture- it's probably a bunch of Europeans. And who invited Muslims anyways? Also Europeans. And on what basis did they rule this? Are they promoting sharia? No. This has nothing to do with sharia. This is Europeans and on a basis of Political Correctness.

Europeans are Europeans. I'm not being racist. Europeans are known for passing "hate speech" stuff. That's part of their culture. If you have a problem here... your problem here is with European culture and how Europeans do things. This is Western culture (at least in Europe). People are responsible for their own actions. There is zero reason to scapegoat Muslims. I doubt they were meeting and said "oh wait- time for Dhuhr" and stopped to pray. This wasn't a room full of guys named Ahmed. If someone pulls up a picture- it's a bunch of Europeans, I'm pretty sure. No reasonable, just person can get mad at Muslims over something non-Muslim Europeans decided to do. Honestly, this is just something Europeans do. Europe has all sorts of speech laws. If there's a problem, take it up with European culture. This is done as part of their European PC culture. I'm not going to to shocked insha'Allah if I hear Indians are against eating beef. This is just part of Europeans' culture.

Freedom is like a bridge both you and your enemy can cross.

 

[Etagloc]

Freedom is like a bridge both you and your enemy can cross.

View attachment 16449

What does that have to do with my post???????

I had nothing to do with this. This was a decision made by a council of Europeans. I'm a guy that's never been to Europe. But Europe is known for having a different culture. In the US, we have the First Amendment. Europe has a completely different system. Europe is known for having all sorts of speech laws. This is just part of how Europe is run. I made a whole post about this and you haven't responded. Your post is like one of those motivational posters I remember from the principal's office in junior high. You could maybe sell it as a motivational poster but it doesn't address my post. I try to add substance and I know you're capable of substance and not just rhetoric.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

What does that have to do with my post???????

I had nothing to do with this. This was a decision made by a council of Europeans. I'm a guy that's never been to Europe. But Europe is known for having a different culture. In the US, we have the First Amendment. Europe has a completely different system. Europe is known for having all sorts of speech laws. This is just part of how Europe is run. I made a whole post about this and you haven't responded. Your post is like one of those motivational posters I remember from the principal's office in junior high. You could maybe sell it as a motivational poster but it doesn't address my post. I try to add substance and I know you're capable of substance and not just rhetoric.

Sometimes less is more @Etagloc

It's a bit like music - ban it because of the bad use some put it to, but miss the joy and beauty of great music as a result. Since freedom was one of the founding ideas of "Western Culture", that was the simple point I wanted to make with my motivational poster ;-)

 

[Etagloc]

Sometimes less is more @Etagloc

It's a bit like music - ban it because of the bad use some put it to, but miss the joy and beauty of great music as a result. Since freedom was one of the founding ideas of "Western Culture", that was the simple point I wanted to make with my motivational poster ;-)

"Freedom" is a slogan. It was one of the slogans of the Freemasonic French Revolution. "Freedom" is a slogan used to advance the NWO. "Freedom" was one of the slogans used to promote bombing Iraq. If they invade Iran, I'm sure we'll be hearing a whole lot about "Freedom". You can follow Freemasonic-promoted slogans. I want to follow substance. The replacement of substance with vapid slogans is not a good thing. It's a symptom of the dumbing down of society. Less is more if you're about rhetoric. But if your concern is truth, you want to give details.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

"Freedom" is a slogan. It was one of the slogans of the Freemasonic French Revolution. It's a slogan used to advance the NWO. You can follow Freemasonic-promoted slogans. I want to follow substance.

We just have different ideas about what is true @Etagloc . Freemasonry may have used the idea of freedom, just like other organisations use ideas and culturally approved memes to lend them support, but there is nothing intrinsically "freemasonic" about freedom.

 

[Etagloc]

We just have different ideas about what is true @Etagloc . Freemasonry may have used the idea of freedom, just like other organisations use ideas and culturally approved memes to lend them support, but there is nothing intrinsically "freemasonic" about freedom.

I haven't forgotten when Iraq wasn't invaded. My memory isn't that short. It's the same script over and over.

You stand in front of the flag and say "Freedom!". And then you drop the bombs on Muslims/Vietnamese/whoever.

You wanted to talk about "Freedom" and its role in Western culture. Let's talk about its role in Western culture. This whole "Freedom!" thing is a product of the Freemasonic "Enlightenment". Even your usage of "Freedom" in this thread traces back to the (so-called) "Enlightenment". It's nothing more than a propaganda device used to promote the NWO.

"Freedom!" (translated):

(not pictured: French revolutionaries delivering empassioned speeches about "Freedom!" before they chop priests' heads off)
(also not pictured: "Freedom!" being put into practice by Miley Cyrus as she twerks on Robin Thicke)

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

You raise some great points here that yield a bit more meaning...

Associating something negative with a positive attribute seems to be the way people have "got things done" for some time now!

To associate freedom with Crowley reminds me of the "Freemason KJV Bible"...



Filled with messages that contradict Freemasonry at every point, their Bible still has their badge on the front!

 

[Etagloc]

You raise some great points here that yield a bit more meaning...

Associating something negative with a positive attribute seems to be the way people have "got things done" for some time now!

To associate freedom with Crowley reminds me of the "Freemason KJV Bible"...

View attachment 16451

Filled with messages that contradict Freemasonry at every point, their Bible still has their badge on the front!

This is just rhetoric.

I don't think you're grasping what I said. Your conception of "Freedom!" does not come from the Bible.

The conception of "Freedom" that you are citing comes from the "Enlightenment". The conception of "Freedom!" that you have cited did not just come from nowhere. Whether you realize it or not, whether you know your history or not- you got it from the "Enlightenment".

To understand where you are today- you need to know your history. You are a product of the "Enlightenment". You are even defending its ideology. You're parroting its ideology. I think your thinking is so immersed in it so that you don't know to think outside of its ideology. It's like a fish who doesn't know a world outside of water.

With me, it's not that I don't understand Western culture. The issue is that I do understand it.

The Bible says:
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

-Romans 12: 2

If you were really to follow that, you would need to question things. You would need to question what you've been taught. You would need to find the basic presuppositions underlying what you've been taught and start really questioning those presuppositions. Not merely uncritically accepting them without really examining them.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

@Etagloc - you are no slouch at rhetoric either. The trouble with rhetoric is that it can help you win a false point in the court of Human opinion, but often leads to Pyrrhic victories.

My concept of freedom is as old as the tree of Knowledge of good and evil in the Garden. They were free to take from it or leave it alone, but without true freedom, true love is impossible.

 

[Etagloc]

@Etagloc - you are no slouch at rhetoric either. The trouble with rhetoric is that it can help you win a false point in the court of Human opinion, but often leads to Pyrrhic victories.

Well I appreciate the compliment. My concern is simply whether what I say is true or not, though. This whole forum could turn against me for I care (though I certainly respect the views of certain users here). Taking unpopular stands is not usually a way to win popularity.

My concept of freedom is as old as the tree of Knowledge of good and evil in the Garden. They were free to take from it or leave it alone, but without true freedom, true love is impossible.

Now this- I don't believe in that at all. You specifically cited the Western concept of "Freedom".

Freedom as conceptualized in Hinduism, in George Bush bomb-Iraq-in-the-name-of-"Freedom" speeches, in the Bible, in Western culture, etc.

These are not the same except in the instance of George Bush and Western culture. The Western conception of "Freedom" and Aleister Crowley's conception of "Freedom" are also the same.

If your conception of "Freedom" is the same as the Western conception of "Freedom"- this comes from the "Enlightenment".

And this conception of "Freedom" is not what is described in Genesis. God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree. If God followed the Western conception of "Freedom," God would have said "Don't eat from the tree! Or... well... eat from it if you want.... as long as you're not hurting anybody..... yeah man...... do whatever....".

I think your conception of "Freedom" is more akin to the Shaytaan's conception of "Freedom".

But firstly- what exactly is your conception of "Freedom"? Why don't you explain it?

And I'm not against freedom. I'm free to do certain things. You're free to do certain things. However, there's certain things I'm not free to do. There's certain things you're not free to do.

Now my question is- what exactly is your conception of "Freedom"? My other question is- is it okay for people to practice incest? Given your conception of "Freedom"- is incest wrong? Should people be allowed to practice it?

Now, again, to be clear- I'm not some cartoon supervillain who is against all freedom. However, "Freedom" as an ideology I'm against. I don't think God put us here to "you know...... do whatever feels good, man......".

 

[Etagloc]

I used to live in Europe and I dont believe this is European culture at all. Its a small subset consisting of the usual suspects who are forcing an agenda via another all too powerful agency. Don't forget how European countries historically fought each other tooth and nail to maintain their individuality, borders, and culture. Its a comparatively recent thing that Europe has become PC and neutered, and all fingers should point to the Globalists.

"Europe has become PC and neutered"..... I mean whether you look at it as Europeans are pushing this stuff or actually it's just a small cabal of agenda-pushers.... I mean however you look at it.... this is Europeans. Does it represent the general will of Europeans? European culture? However you view the answers to those questions- this stuff undeniably is being pushed by Europeans. My point was that it's not Muslims who were responsible for this. This was done by Europeans as part of the PC thing. This is part of what's going on with Europe and what you referred to as Europe becoming PC and neutered.

Stating facts is not defamation. I hear Jesus Christ truly defamed on a regular basis, but I have zero interest in squelching free speech or punishing anyone for not sharing my beliefs. This is not the case with Muslims, as has been seen over and over. Is being trampled on and punished in your own country a blessing to those who do not agree with Islam? No, not at all.

I'm not defending the ruling that people are not free to criticize Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). I haven't defended that and none of what I said here is in defense of that. I'm not attacking it either but- this is coming from the European PC crowd- this isn't coming from Muslims. If people don't like it, they should get mad at the people who are behind it- not Muslims. How can you blame Muslims over something done by non-Muslim Europeans?

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Well I appreciate the compliment. My concern is simply whether what I say is true or not, though. This whole forum could turn against me for I care (though I certainly respect the views of certain users here). Taking unpopular stands is not usually a way to win popularity.



Now this- I don't believe in that at all. You specifically cited the Western concept of "Freedom".

Freedom as conceptualized in Hinduism, in George Bush bomb-Iraq-in-the-name-of-"Freedom" speeches, in the Bible, in Western culture, etc.

These are not the same except in the instance of George Bush and Western culture. The Western conception of "Freedom" and Aleister Crowley's conception of "Freedom" are also the same.

If your conception of "Freedom" is the same as the Western conception of "Freedom"- this comes from the "Enlightenment".

And this conception of "Freedom" is not what is described in Genesis. God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree. If God followed the Western conception of "Freedom," God would have said "Don't eat from the tree! Or... well... eat from it if you want.... as long as you're not hurting anybody..... yeah man...... do whatever....".

I think your conception of "Freedom" is more akin to the Shaytaan's conception of "Freedom".

But firstly- what exactly is your conception of "Freedom"? Why don't you explain it?

And I'm not against freedom. I'm free to do certain things. You're free to do certain things. However, there's certain things I'm not free to do. There's certain things you're not free to do.

Now my question is- what exactly is your conception of "Freedom"? My other question is- is it okay for people to practice incest? Given your conception of "Freedom"- is incest wrong? Should people be allowed to practice it?

Now, again, to be clear- I'm not some cartoon supervillain who is against all freedom. However, "Freedom" as an ideology I'm against. I don't think God put us here to "you know...... do whatever feels good, man......".

From your understanding of my interpretation of freedom, I think I need to clarify...

Take the image below:-



The inner circle represents doing what God wants you to. The outer one represents doing what is permissable in a free society - it may be immoral but is not illegal. Outside that is what is illegal and immoral.

Such a society is not perfect but models free choice in our present age. I hate evil things but you cannot make somebody choose good.

I could write far more but this is a sketch.

 

[Etagloc]

From your understanding of my interpretation of freedom, I think I need to clarify...

No, I think I understood perfectly well. Your post doesn't really tell me anything.

I asked if people should be allowed to practice incest. Should people be allowed to practice it?

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

No, I think I understood perfectly well. Your post doesn't really tell me anything.

I asked if people should be allowed to practice incest. Should people be allowed to practice it?

Of course not - it is both immoral and illegal!

Should people be allowed to listen to music?

 

[DesertRose]

No, I think I understood perfectly well. Your post doesn't really tell me anything.

Very good brother colgate......
Take that image for example if they criticize Islam it is within the realm of freedom of speech.......that is the blue part. That is acceptable.
If they hit the yellow area and they have defamed and insulted the prophets any and ALL of them including Jesus peace be upon him........
We will defend him for ourselves and the Christians and Moses peace be upon him for ourselves and the Jews. (Do they bow down to the dictates of the enlightenment crowd their new Gods who will tell them what is halaal (permissible) and haraam (impermissible).)
The only other thing that I would say to them if you make it permissible make it permissible for or against everyone do not have selective freedom of speech and anti-defamation laws.
Be consistent and that is a word of advise for the Christian Zionists on here who squawk like parrots when certain topics are brought up.
Stop being hypocrites.....please.....that sucks.