A New Form of Censorship is Spooking Through Europe

Gates of Vienna ^ | 19 Nov, 2018 | Ralph Schöllhammer, Baron Bodissey

[MtnClimber]

Much has been reported in the past few days on the decision by the European Court of Human Rights that the designation of the Prophet Mohammed as “pedophilic” in the context of a 2009 seminar led by the Austrian Islam-critic Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is not legally covered by the right of free expression of opinion. The waves caused by this decision were detectable even in the USA, where the popular Fox show, “Tucker Carlson” dedicated a full segment to the case. Independent of whether this was a “scandalous decision,” it indicates a disturbing trend: a re-clericalization of public space in which — under cover of religion — discussions of broad interest are strangled in the cradle. The decision weighs the right to freedom of expression against the right to protection of religious feelings, to decide whether the latter must prevail in order to preserve religious peace in Austria. Intention is Problematic

The statement designating Mohammed’s behavior as pedophilic is thus moved to the neighborhood of biased persecution, and a new legal situation is created. According to the European Court, it is not the statement as such that is the problem, but the intent with which it was made.

[MtnClimber]

Really??? Mohammad was a warlord, thief, murderer, slave trafficker, sex trafficker, pedophile, rapist...I am probably missing a lot. When the government outlaws truth, the people need to oust their government in any way necessary.

[SunkenCiv]

• Federal judge orders female genital mutilation charges dropped in Detroit
• EU votes for total ban on organizations opposed to mass Muslim migration, thought police to be...

[2banana]

Voltaire: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise”

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Fascists always pretend other people are the fascists.

[ZinGirl]

It wasn’t Voltaire...(but that doesn’t negate the truth)

https://www.quora.com/Voltaire-once-wrote-“To-find-out-who-rules-over-you-simply-find-out-who-you-are-not-allowed-to-criticize-”-Who-in-American-politics-are-people-not-allowed-to-criticize

[dp0622]

Judge in Detroit said that was “local criminal activity” and that fed didn’t have a right to pass laws on it.

But that ####ING RIDICULOUS hate crime laws, i’m sure F.ckman, I mean Friedman, would uphold those laws.

[SunkenCiv]

He's unfit for the bench.

[golux]

I have read (some years ago) koranic / historical scholarship on how Aisha played with dolls and how the Great Mohammed could, for years, only partially penetrate her. Where is the debate here? There is certainly no debate about this among koranic scholars, unless it’s all been deep-sixed.

[golux]

Just for the many Freepers who would rather post "WHERE'S YOUR SOURCE" than look things up themselves I refer to items like this, of which there were once many.


ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ 12 : ﻻ ﻳﺠﻮﺯ ﻭﻁﺀ ﺍﻟﺰﻭﺟﺔ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺇﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺗﺴﻊ ﺳﻨﻴﻦ ، ﺩﻭﺍﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻜﺎﺡ ﺃﻭ ﻣﻨﻘﻄﻌﺎ , ﻭ ﺃﻣﺎ ﺳﺎﺋﺮ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻤﺘﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﻛﺎﻟﻠﻤﺲ ﺑﺸﻬﻮﺓ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻀﻢ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺨﻴﺬ ﻓﻼ ﺑﺄﺱ ﺑﻬﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻓﻰ ﺍﻟﺮﺿﻴﻌﺔ ، ﻭ ﻟﻮ ﻭﻃﺄﻫﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻊ ﻭ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻔﻀﻬﺎ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘﺮﺗﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺷﻰﺀ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﻻﺛﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻗﻮﻯ ، ﻭ ﺇﻥ ﺃﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺟﻌﻞ ﻣﺴﻠﻜﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻮﻝ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺾ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺍ ﺃﻭ ﻣﺴﻠﻜﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺾ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﺋﻂ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺍ ﺣﺮﻡ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﻃﺆﻫﺎ ﺃﺑﺪﺍ ﻟﻜﻦ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺣﻮﻁ ﻓﻰ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ ، ﻭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻱ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺨﺮﺝ ﻋﻦ ﺯﻭﺟﻴﺘﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻗﻮﻯ ، ﻓﻴﺠﺮﻱ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺃﺣﻜﺎﻣﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﺭﺙ ﻭ ﺣﺮﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻣﺴﺔ ﻭ ﺣﺮﻣﺔ ﺃﺧﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻌﻬﺎ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻫﺎ ، ﻭ ﻳﺠﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻧﻔﻘﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﺎﺩﺍﻣﺖ ﺣﻴﺔ ﻭ ﺇﻥ ﻃﻠﻘﻬﺎ ﺑﻞ ﻭ ﺇﻥ ﺗﺰﻭﺟﺖ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﻄﻼﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺣﻮﻁ ، ﺑﻞ ﻻ ﻳﺨﻠﻮ ﻣﻦ ﻗﻮﺓ ، ﻭ ﻳﺠﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﻓﻀﺎﺀ ، ﻭ ﻫﻰ ﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ، ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺣﺮﺓ ﻓﻠﻬﺎ ﻧﺼﻒ ﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﻞ ﻣﻀﺎﻓﺎ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﻘﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺪﺧﻮﻝ ، ﻭ ﻟﻮ ﺩﺧﻞ ﺑﺰﻭﺟﺘﻪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺇﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻊ ﻓﺄﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺤﺮﻡ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺜﺒﺖ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﺔ ، ﻭ ﻟﻜﻦ ﺍﻻﺣﻮﻁ ﺍﻻﻧﻔﺎﻕ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻣﺎﺩﺍﻣﺖ ﺣﻴﺔ ﻭ ﺇﻥ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻻﻗﻮﻯ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺏ .


Ruling # 12: It is not permissable to have intercourse before (her) being 9 years old, be it in nikah (permanent marriage) or temporary marriage. And as for all other pleasures such as lustful touch, embracing, and thighing, there is no problem in it even with a suckling infant. If he does have sexual intercourse before nine years of age and does not penetrate, there is no penalty, but he has committed a sin. If he does penetrate causing the vagina and urethra openings to be one, she will become forever haram for him, but this is as a precaution. And it is more probable that her status as his wife is not removed. And the rulings of inheritance, and the prohibition of a fifth wife or marriage to her sister applies. And it is waajib upon him for her maintenance as long as she is alive, even if he divorces her and even if she marries after divorcing her as a precautionary measure. And it is waajib upon him for blood money for the penetration and the amount is equivalent to that of an individual. If she is a free-woman, the amount is half that of a man, plus the dowry that she became entitled to through the `aqd and penetration. If he penetrates his wife after the age of nine, she does not become haram to him and there is no evidence that blood money is liable, but as a precautionary measure, he should maintain her as long as she is alive, although it is more probable that this is not obligatory."


Source: al-Khomeini, Tahreer al-Waseelah, vol. 2, pg. 241, Kitaab al-Nikaah, Ruling # 12

[GOPJ]

It’s too late for Western Europeans - the Germans finally ‘won’... they’re self destructing.

[GOPJ]

Guess Europeans will have to stop condemning warlords, thieves, murderers, slave traffickers, sex traffickers, pedophiles, and rapists too. Don't want to offend anyone, right?

[This I Wonder32460]

We call people, who do the things Mohammed did, a criminal, not a prophet. If Mohammed was not a criminal, then there are a lot of prophets in jail and other prophets who belong in jail. Tolerating, accepting and approving of one historical person’s criminal behavior in the name of religious diversity is immoral and evil, as well as unforgiveable.

[MtnClimber]

The followers of islam follow his actions too.

[alexander_busek]

[...] a disturbing trend: a re-clericalization of public space in which — under cover of religion — discussions of broad interest [...]

Pleonasm.

Also: Shouldn't that be (if at all) "under color of religion?"

Regards,

[Concentrate]

There are no religions; they are all political parties.
Likewise, there are no political parties; they are all religions.

Philosophies are all almost the same. To wit:

- We have the only truth.
- People who don’t believe our truth are damned.

[Concentrate]

Voltaire: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise”

Gotta check this out!

[Robert DeLong]

France has company now as all of Europe have become surrender monkeys. Oh well, you can’t fix stupid, and we won’t be saving them this time around. That will be the third strike for Europe, which makes them out.