A European court has ruled that people can be fined and prosecuted in criminal court for saying things about religious figures.
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled a woman convicted by an Austrian court of calling the Prophet Mohammed a paedophile did not have her freedom of speech rights infringed.
The court's primary reasoning, it appears, is that the woman's comments ought to condemned because they might "Stir up prejudice and threaten religious peace..." Notably Mrs. S is not accused of saying anything that encourages violence either generally or in any specific way.
In other words, human rights go right out the window if the exercise of those rights might cause other people to feel bad. This sort of thing is shocking to Americans, of course, but it's old hat by now in Europe where one can face large fines , and even imprisonment for saying unpopular things.
As noted by Murray Rothbard, the right to free speech is not a special right, but is intimately connected to property rights.
If Mrs. S was expressing her ideas in a place and in a way that did not violate anyone else's property rights, then she was acting peacefully and in a way that respects the rights of others.
This would appear to be important to most reasonable people, but presuming that Mrs S comments about Muhammad's child bride are accurate - which they appear to be - the court is basically taking the position that stating well-known historical facts constitutes some sort of hate speech.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-27/europes-war-free-speech-continues
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled a woman convicted by an Austrian court of calling the Prophet Mohammed a paedophile did not have her freedom of speech rights infringed.
The court's primary reasoning, it appears, is that the woman's comments ought to condemned because they might "Stir up prejudice and threaten religious peace..." Notably Mrs. S is not accused of saying anything that encourages violence either generally or in any specific way.
In other words, human rights go right out the window if the exercise of those rights might cause other people to feel bad. This sort of thing is shocking to Americans, of course, but it's old hat by now in Europe where one can face large fines , and even imprisonment for saying unpopular things.
As noted by Murray Rothbard, the right to free speech is not a special right, but is intimately connected to property rights.
If Mrs. S was expressing her ideas in a place and in a way that did not violate anyone else's property rights, then she was acting peacefully and in a way that respects the rights of others.
This would appear to be important to most reasonable people, but presuming that Mrs S comments about Muhammad's child bride are accurate - which they appear to be - the court is basically taking the position that stating well-known historical facts constitutes some sort of hate speech.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-27/europes-war-free-speech-continues
No comments:
Post a Comment