Message from @Weez
Discord ID: 627656878599438347
"In addition, the impugned statements had not been phrased in a neutral manner aimed at being an objective contribution to a public debate concerning child marriages but rather amounted to a generalisation without factual basis."
<:pot_of_kek:544849795433496586>
"Muh freedom of speech!"
"Thus, by considering them as going beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate and classifying them as an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, which was capable of stirring up prejudice and putting at risk religious peace, the domestic courts had come to the conclusion that the facts at issue contained elements of incitement to religious intolerance. They had thereby put forward relevant and sufficient reasons and had not overstepped their – wide – margin of appreciation."
Here is a better one
That last one is where I draw the line.
Cain killed Abel
Im a criminal
an abusive attack on the prophet of islam. so, blasphemy then.
How?
"Capable of stirring up prejudice."
The bible isnt evidence
The context
I have defamed cain
moses killed the midianites
You're not holding a seminar, claiming to be an "expert" on the religion, where the wording of the title of said seminar implies fact.
That's the difference
Right so if I held a seminar, as an expert, say a priest.
its not actually illegal to misrepresent history in an essay or lesson
The seminar is typical religious BS like "God is truth" or something
and then read from the bible
Stating that Cain did in fact kill abel
Lying isn't against the law.
I can now be arrested for preaching the religion
Defamation is.
defamation of a historical religious figure?
Again, read for it yourself
but Muhammad is not pressing charge
Should imams be arrested for preaching Muhammed had sex with kids?
Which you can read in there.
They are creating blasphemy laws
and not even that
Under very specific conditions?
Sure.
laws against even preaching
Conditions hardly anyone will meet, ever?
Sure.