SIGN UP

Q."what Do We Call It, If It Is Not Paedophilia?'”

Avatar Image
Khandro | 09:07 Sat 27th Oct 2018 | News
16 Answers
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that defaming the Prophet Muhammad “goes beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate”, upholding an earlier conviction by an Austrian court on the grounds it “served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria”.

The ECHR found that a 47-year-old woman from Vienna had not had her right to freedom of expression impinged and added that domestic courts had been correct to convict her for “disparaging religious doctrines” as her comments “could stir up prejudice and threaten religious peace”.

According to the ECHR, the woman held two seminars in 2009 “in which she discussed the marriage between the Prophet Muhammad and a six-year-old girl, Aisha, which allegedly was consummated when she was nine. Inter alia, the applicant stated that Muhammad ‘liked to do it with children’ and ‘… A 56-year-old and a six-year-old? … What do we call it, if it is not paedophilia?'”

The Austrian court found that “by making the statements the applicant had suggested that Muhammad was not a worthy subject of worship”. The ECHR has now agreed that this is a crime which trumps a person’s right to free speech. On the same day that Ireland is finally voting to take blasphemy laws out of its constitution, the ECHR seems determined to put them back in…

[i] Source; Guido [i]

Answers

1 to 16 of 16rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Question Author
Only just seen naomi's thread
Most European countries adopted the European Convention of Human Rights. This meant that centuries old blasphemy Laws were at odds with the new rights that Ireland, UK Austria etal had on legislation.
So the Blasphemy laws were abolished and were replaced with laws prohibing hatred in the specific country. We introduced the Racial and Relugious Hatred Act 2006, the Austrian introduced its equivalent, and now it seems Ireland is doing the same.
Freedom of Speech is not carte blanche to say anything you like, it comes with responsibilities. Oeose is to not stir up Religious Hatred because that is against the law and prosecutable.
Has anyone defined what would be a very helpful line, that separating complete and utter disdain and 'hatred'?
Question Author
Gromit; //Freedom of Speech is not carte blanche to say anything you like, it comes with responsibilities. //

Disagree!! freedom of speech should not cause harm or fear - shouting "fire" in a theatre (unless there IS a fire) etc.
Otherwise, no one has the right not to be offended.
douglas9401
It is probably context. If the paedaphile comment is made in a seminar for far right activists, then the reason for saying it is clear. It was was not a theological debate, it was about immigrants to Austrian, and how their religious beliefs are not compatible.
"it was about immigrants to Austrian, and how their religious beliefs are not compatible. "

Ah, of course the EU project wants to silence the dissenters as is floods countries with immigrants to dilute National pride.

All clear now, thanks Grmoit.
Europistan takes another step closer, surely now any sort of criticism will be taken as an insult and thus illegal. TFOJ: 1 - Common Sense: 0
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.



Hands up those who think marrying a 6 year old and having sex with a 9 year doesn't indicate pedophilic tendencies...
it's ok seemingly to bash the CofE, Catholics, but dare to criticise the Prophet and all hell breaks loose.
if we don't have freedom of speech what the hell are we doing.
ToraToraTora
She was addressing activists of a far right party founded by an SS Guard and Nazi. Her comment was not innocent, it was calculated to stir up religious hatred, which is a crime in Austria.
She knew the law, she broke, so she has to face the consequences.
End of.
yes but the fact remains that marrying a 6 year old girl and consummating that at 9 is paedophilia is it not? Is stating facts now illegal?
Question Author
Gromit //She was addressing activists of a far right party..

To whom it was initially addressed, is entirely inconsequential.
Can't see many hands.


It is interesting that out of the social-media sites I frequent, The Answerbank is the main source of support for this diabolical decision.
// The Answerbank is the main source of support for this diabolical decision.//

No Talbot...… just a few "fanatics" on the Bank.
Question Author

The European Court of Human Rights — which has jurisdiction over 47 European countries, and whose rulings are legally binding on all 28 member states of the European Union — has effectively legitimised an Islamic blasphemy code in the interests of "preserving religious peace" in Europe.

The ruling effectively establishes a dangerous legal precedent, one that authorises European states to curtail the right to free speech if such speech is deemed to be offensive to Muslims and thus pose a threat to religious peace.

"In other words, my right to speak freely is less important than protecting the religious feelings of others." – Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. The Austrian overruled plaintiff

1 to 16 of 16rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Q."what Do We Call It, If It Is Not Paedophilia?'”

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.