ECHR rules that defamation of Mohammed doesn't count as free expression

[Destination]

Let's be clear, it's not a blasphemy law. Just like s5 of the Public Order Act 1988 isn't a blasphemy law.

Lets be clear the 1000 year old dead guy is classed as being in a 'political life'. WTF?

 

[inogen]

I have read the ruling.
I still disagree with blasphemy laws in general.
Austria has one, they chose to enforce it.
Seems odd if this child marriage was consummated at age 9, that the chap who does that isn't termed a paedophile.
IS there any other instance of someone having sex with a 9 year old where that conclusion wouldn't be drawn, child marriage or not, the child living to 18 or not, his primary motivation being whatever the hell he likes, how can't it be termed this?

Perhaps if you want to call Muhammad a paedo, that's fine, just don't invite a load of people including muslims to a religious "seminar" then stand up on a stage and do it?

 

[Deluxe1]

Dowie, do yourself (and all of us) a favour: stop posting drivel.

You don't speak for everyone so stop pretending you do.

 

[G-MAN2004]

Would defamation of christ be treated in the same manner?

No, because Christians wouldn't want to kill you over it.

 

[Diddums]

You don't speak for everyone so stop pretending you do.

Yes I do.

 

[Jokester]

Lets be clear the 1000 year old dead guy is classed as being in a 'political life'. WTF?

Crossed my mind as well. The "person" doesn't actually exist as regards a legal entity surely?

 

[Sankari]

Well, this is an extraordinarily bad ruling.

 

[Caracus2k]

The court seems to have take only one (medical) literal and narrow definition of what a paedophile is...

Pedophilia (alternatively spelled paedophilia) is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children

It would interesting to see whether the ECHR would uphold the right of a living person who was defending their 'right' not to be labelled a paedophile because they didn't only have sex with children so that was not their apparent primary or exclusive form of sexual attraction.

 

[enkoda]

Are they going to afford the same rights to Hitler, Stalin, etc?

 

[rare]

A dangerous road to go down this. Islam is not a progressive religion, it’s a static one at best and regressive at worst when it encounters western modernity.

 

[Hotwired]

Advertising an educational seminar on religion then taking the **** punished with a 480 euro fine.

As I understand it if it was not deceptively advertised as objective, in other words, advertised as an anti-islam seminar it would have been ok.

You also don't want to be slandering people in the present with a values judgement thrown over 1000 years into the past. Life expectancy used to average 30 years.

Perfectly fine to accuse people in the present of breaking modern rules of course. You know exactly what the law is.

 

[D.P.]

A dangerous road to go down this. Islam is not a progressive religion, it’s a static one at best and regressive at worst when it encounters western modernity.

No religion is particular progressive, so that is pretty moot.

 

[rare]

No religion is particular progressive, so that is pretty moot.

That may be, but Christianity has shown itself to be much more of a ‘progressive’ religion in the main.

 

[Caracus2k]

Life expectancy used to average 30 years.

It's a common misunderstanding that people take life expectancy figures as meaning a lot of adults died around whatever the age quoted was at the time.

This is a untrue as the life expectancy figures, being averages, also reflect the very high child mortality rates that used to exist in the past.

A person that survived childhood could still often expect quite a long adulthood by the 7th century in large parts of the world, including the Arabian peninsula.

Therefore (considerably) older adults marrying six year olds and consummating marriages, very likely before puberty had finished, at nine was not a necessity born out of a lot of adults dieing at around 30 but rather a practice that was somewhat more acceptable at the time then it is now in the West.

A major determinant of life expectancy at birth, especially in our ancestral past and in many developing nations today, is infant and child mortality rate. Life expectancy in such societies is so low because many infants and children die before they reach adulthood. For example, Professor Anthony A. Volk of Brock University in Canada estimates that as many as half the children during our evolutionary history, and as recently as the 18th century in Europe, may have died before the age of 12. The figures are comparable in many poor African nations today, where as many as a third of the children die before the age of 5.

Think about it. If half the children die before the age of 12 (let’s say, at the average age of death of 6), then the remaining half would have to live on average to be 74, for the life expectancy at birth to come out to be 40, with the implication that roughly half of the remaining half – a quarter of all babies born – live to be older than 74. In many contemporary hunter-gatherer tribes, the modal lifespan for adults (excluding those who die in childhood) is between 70 and 80 years; in other words, most adults die when they are around 70 or 80. This is essentially the same as that in contemporary industrialized societies. The difference is that, in the latter, virtually everybody survives childhood.

You also don't want to be slandering people in the present with a values judgement thrown over 1000 years into the past.

That's a fine general principle....

And one that completely falls apart if the person concerned is consisted to a be an eternal moral exemplar.....

 

[Dis86]

Hotwired genuinely defending ****ing a child. Brilliant.

 

[Hotwired]

Advertising an educational seminar on religion then taking the **** punished with a 480 euro fine.

As I understand it if it was not deceptively advertised as objective, in other words, advertised as an anti-islam seminar it would have been ok.

You also don't want to be slandering people in the present with a values judgement thrown over 1000 years into the past. Life expectancy used to average 30 years.

Perfectly fine to accuse people in the present of breaking modern rules of course. You know exactly what the law is.

It's a common misunderstanding that people take life expectancy figures as meaning a lot of adults died around whatever the age quoted was at the time.

This is a untrue as the life expectancy figures, being averages, also reflect the very high child mortality rates that used to exist in the past.

An person that survived childhood could still often expect quite a long adulthood by the 7th century in large parts of the world, including the Arabian peninsula.

Therefore (considerably) older adults marrying six year olds and consummating marriages, very likely before puberty had finished, at nine was not a necessity born out of a lot of adults dieing at around 30 but rather a practice that was somewhat more acceptable at the time then it is now in the West.

Why are you posting a false reply to something I didn't say.

 

[Roar87]

Advertising an educational seminar on religion then taking the **** punished with a 480 euro fine.

As I understand it if it was not deceptively advertised as objective, in other words, advertised as an anti-islam seminar it would have been ok.

You also don't want to be slandering people in the present with a values judgement thrown over 1000 years into the past. Life expectancy used to average 30 years.

Perfectly fine to accuse people in the present of breaking modern rules of course. You know exactly what the law is.

Yeah nah, still not ok to have sex with a kid, life expectancy was 30 years old because of high infant mortality, people who survived past childhood mostly didn't die at 30. I love how ignorant people are who think they're actually smart

 

[Dis86]

Why are you posting a false reply to something I didn't say.

You did say it. It's right there. Blue and white. Three people now have seen it.

 

[Caracus2k]

Why are you posting a false reply to something I didn't say.

Why don't you explain the relevance of you referring to life expectancy being 30 if not to suggest that this made for a far more compelling reason for adults to have sex with young children in the past? (which isn't true for the reasons stated above re adults generally living long lives, in the past, assuming they had survived the very high child mortality rates at the time)

 

[Hotwired]

Why don't you explain the relevance of you referring to life expectancy being 30 if not to suggest that this made for a far more compelling reason for adults to have sex with young children in the past? (which isn't true for the reasons stated above re adults generally living long lives, in the past, assuming they had survived the very high child mortality rates at the time)

The first thing I say to you, is that your mind needs to be in the gutter to think that. Although you were considerably less crass than @Dis86 and @Roar87.

The second is that I chose that to indicate a generally lower age of all things historically. For context of:

You also don't want to be slandering people in the present with a values judgement thrown over 1000 years into the past.

Because historically acceptable ages are generally considered underage today.