A woman was convicted and forced to pay a heavy fine for stating the historical fact that the Islamic prophet Muhammad was a pedophile. This is not surprising. This is what happens when you live in an Islamic theocracy such as Saudi Arabia or Iran. Obviously, this conviction was made based on Sharia Law by a Sharia court. Except she’s an Austrian.
In 2011, the Vienna Regional Criminal Court convicted her for disparaging religious doctrines. On October 25th, 2018, the European Court of Human Rights upheld that conviction stating that it wasn’t a violation of freedom of speech. Getting convicted for insulting Islam isn’t a violation of free speech?
One of the reasons given to abandon individual rights and liberties was “right of others to have their religious feelings protected.” There is no such right. Human rights is not religious rights. Human rights mean rights for each human, rights for each individual. Anyone who doesn’t understand that basic principle shouldn’t be on a human rights council.
Another reason was to keep the peace. In other words, giving up individual rights and liberties for the illusion of safety. These actions never lead to peace. These action reward violence. Since Christians don’t become violent when their religion is criticized, they don’t get special protection. But if members of a religion are to be violent against criticism, they are to receive special privileges that no one else has. They are to be held at lower standards of behavior.
The following is from the European Court of Human Rights. This ruling proves that they are unfit to judge on such matters and should be abandoned. Best for Austria to gain independence and freedom from such a body that would pervert the rule of law, pervert the very foundation of modern Western civilization, and the founding principles of freedom.
Conviction for calling Muhammad a paedophile is not in breach of Article 10
In today’s Chamber judgment1 in the case of E.S. v. Austria (application no. 38450/12) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been: no violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The case concerned the applicant’s conviction for disparaging religious doctrines; she had made statements suggesting that Muhammad had had paedophilic tendencies. The Court found in particular that the domestic courts comprehensively assessed the wider context of the applicant’s statements and carefully balanced her right to freedom of expression with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected, and served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria. It held that by considering the impugned statements as going beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate, and by classifying them as an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam which could stir up prejudice and threaten religious peace, the domestic courts put forward relevant and sufficient reasons.
The applicant, E.S., is an Austrian national who was born in 1971 and lives in Vienna (Austria). In October and November 2009, Mrs S. held two seminars entitled “Basic Information on Islam”, 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?”. On 15 February 2011 the Vienna Regional Criminal Court found that these statements implied that Muhammad had had paedophilic tendencies, and convicted Mrs S. for disparaging religious doctrines. She was ordered to pay a fine of 480 euros and the costs of the proceedings. Mrs S. appealed but the Vienna Court of Appeal upheld the decision in December 2011, confirming in essence the lower court’s findings.
Gad Saad - European Court of Human Rights: Do NOT Insult the Noble Religion (THE SAAD TRUTH_765) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAoK_vys8Vo
European Court of Human Rights(ECHR) - Judgment E.S. v. Austria - conviction for a critic of Islam did not violate Article 10 http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press?i=003-6234980-8105265
Filed under: Uncategorized