Tolerance by the barrel of a Swedish gun
Last year I wrote about a minister in Sweden named Ake Green who was being prosecuted under Sweden's new "hate speech" laws for his comments about gays during a sermon; which included calling homosexuality a "deep cancer". Green was convicted and sentenced to 30 days in jail, but an appellate court would eventually acquit him of all charges.
Now the chief prosecutor of Sweden has taken the case to the Supreme Court of Sweden to get the appellate court's decision reversed. BBC reports:
Sweden's Supreme Court has said it will review the acquittal of a Pentecostal pastor who denounced homosexuality as "a deep cancer" in a sermon. [...] Sweden's chief prosecutor said that in his view, Mr Green's comments did amount to hate speech, and so he was seeking a review.
The Swedish constitution contains 4 documents, one of which is the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression. A Swedish constitutional lawyer is not needed to understand the intent of the document either; it states:
Every Swedish citizen is guaranteed the right under this Fundamental Law, vis-à-vis the public institutions, publicly to express his thoughts, opinions and sentiments[...]
Knowing the trickery that lawyers can play with constitutional language, the authors of this document go on to further remove any possible misinterpretation of its intent:
The purpose of freedom of expression under this Fundamental Law is to secure the free exchange of opinion, free and comprehensive information, and freedom of artistic creation. No restriction of this freedom shall be permitted other than such as follows from this Fundamental Law.
Hard to find any wiggle room in that statement. So what does the chief prosecutor expect to accomplish?
Fear.
By dragging this minister's name through the mud and ruining his reputation and career, the hope is to intimidate all other members of the clergy into submission. Who would dare speak out against homosexuality when it has been made clear that the full weight of the Swedish judicial system will come down on them? The issue here is not the protection of a minority class of citizens, Green never spoke of violence. This is about forced secularism by the godless socialist elite in Sweden.
Sweden has always had a strong tradition of tolerance. Now it seems tolerance in Sweden is only granted to special minority groups, annointed the title of "protected class" by some cabal of leftist elites. Those who resist will be met by men with guns and a prison cell.
These are dark days for Sweden.
posted by Kevin P. at
7:12 AM
5 Comments:
So, if someone called being black a "deep cancer" that is not a hate speech because you don't speak of violence?
I mean, the basis of being homosexual or black is the same - they are both genetic.
You talk about fear...I tell you, I don't get what is scaring people like you of people being homosexual? I promise, you don't have to take part in their activities if you don't want to. But everyone is different...
By
Anonymous, at 4:28 PM
Like most liberals, the previous poster completely misses the point. Freedom of speech is a street that goes both ways. People have the right to voice both there agreement with and disagreement with people and ideas. If that means they are construed as being "hateful", so be it. If you want to counter their speech, you go out and practice your own right to speak against them. You do not ask that the government police what people say.
If any homosexuals are fearful because of the comments of a Christian minister, one can only expect they are paranoid and there fears are not reasonable. They should be view in the same manner than homophobes are. Gays who live in utter fear of Christians because of their values should be shunned just as harshly as a male homophobe who has dillusional fears of being attacked and raped by a homosexual.
How ironic that so-called liberals now beg for the police state fascism that their cause claims to resist. Who will decide which speech is legal, and which is not? It is a slippery slope that only a fool would fail to recognize.
By
Kevin P., at 6:27 PM
Free speech is a great thing, but you have to draw the line somewhere. If you can't recognize that calling homosexuality a deep cancer is something disgraceful, I don't know what to say..really...
Second of all, I might be Swedish, however, that doesn't mean that you should assume that I'm a liberal. I voted for the right wing (Moderaterna) in the last Swedish election. I'm sick and tired of people using the system and then I have to pay for it - there has to be another way. However, I recognize that it is not only immigrants who is using the system, most people are. I don't care if you are muslim, christian, hindu, african, latino, and/or swedish. EVERYONE IS USING THE SYSTEM! I don't think we can change anything until we realize that their is more than the bipolar black and white, there is gray too. I hate to see Sweden as divided as the U.S. seems to be at the moment, where liberal means you are pro anything that the democrats say, and conservative --> anything the republicans say.
I liked your blog somewhat though you actually wrote something against Bush and it seems like you know that just beacuase you are on the right doesn't mean that you have to agree with everything - just wish more people could be like that. Only thing that made me a little bit confused was the homosexuality issue, which I thought you would understand. Some part of me is saying it is the free speech that bothers you, it is the homosexuals.
Anyhow, my point was that I personally think that who you, me, or anyone else get attracted too is something we shouldn't judge, we should instead embrace it. Love and hope is the only thing that still keeps us sane on this messed up planet. And if someone gets that love and hope from a person with the same sex, who I'm I to judge? And does it really affect me what two men or two women choose to do with each other on their spare time?
Don't know if anything made any sense...hope it did..
take care,
Anders
By
Anonymous, at 12:52 AM
This has nothing to do with homosexuality. This is about freedom of speech and expression. We travel a dangerous path when we attempt to curb "offensive" speech.
Check my latest post, maybe it will help you understand where I'm at on this issue.
Hej Då
By
Kevin P., at 5:21 AM
I like your last post, sorry if I judge you to be like everyone else. Everything has just become so freakin bipolar in this world, where both sides are just throwing shit on each other...it is so unconstructive and it breaks my heart to see it. I guess there will always be disagreement, but we have to be able to evolve as human beings in a better way than just trash talking each other, that is so non-constructive. Of course we have to challenge each other to greatness, but there has to be another way than just disagreeing on everything...like for instance, the flag burning, how f****** stupid is that? Oh, I'm so angry that I'm going to burn a flag. I'm upset, so now I'm going to make you upset. So freaking stupid and most of all non-constructive.
Well, keep the posts coming, I'll be checking in...
Take care
By
Anonymous, at 2:51 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home