Dutch scrap blasphemy law
* Just for the moment to bring a worse version of it back later…
“A majority of parties argued that offering religious groups an extra layer of legal protection is outdated.”
Good news? Not so much. See the update below. “Blasphemy law ditched by the Dutch,” by Hans Andringa forÂ Radio Netherlands, from DW
A controversial anti-blasphemy law is being scrapped by the Dutch government. The move is remarkable as two of the current three members of the ruling coalition are Christian parties and they had originally wanted to maintain the ban.
More delusional stupidity from the Christian Democrats:Â Dutch Christians for sharia law
It helps “foster” democracy, you see. Move overÂ Rowan Williams: you’ve got competition. “CDA Says Islam Can Promote Democracy,” fromÂ NIS News,
THE HAGUE, 08/11/08 – The Christian democrats (CDA) conclude in a study that Islam can be a source for fostering democracy. The sharia, or Koran-inspired law, can play a role in this process, the study compiled by Arie Oostlander finds.
In scrapping the law the cabinet is meeting the demand of parliament where a majority of parties argued that offering religious groups an extra layer of legal protection is outdated.
This spring the Dutch minister of justice Hirsch Ballin wrote a note to parliament asking them to consider stiffening blasphemy laws. In the aftermath of the scandal surrounding the arrest ofÂ Gregorius NekschotÂ parliament refused to go along, and this proposal is the compromise that the government came up with.
As an alternative the cabinet is now seeking to strengthen anti-discrimination laws against groups whatever their background, thus taking the religious component out of the equation.
Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin (photo right), says the law will now offer the same protection to all.
Freedom of speech/from discrimination
There has been much discussion about the balance between freedom of speech and the right not to be discriminated against in the past few years in the Netherlands, particularly around the role of Islam in society.
Populist politicians like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who has now left the Dutch political scene, and Geert Wilders, have been constant critics of what they see as the negative influence of Islam on society. […]
Threat of prosecution
The Dutch anti-blasphemy law was much talked about – against the backdrop of the continual criticism ofÂ FitnaÂ and of its maker Geert Wilders – as a possible means of redress for those who felt offended.Â Stand-up comedians and cartoonists who sought to satirise extremist Islam have also found themselves being threatened with possible prosecution under the anti-blasphemy law in the past few years.
The discussion about the use of the law, which dates back to the 1930s, made a lot of people worried that the right to freedom of speech was being eroded and that the rights of the religious not to be offended was being given the upper hand….
UPDATE: Several readers have pointed out that this is simply a bait-and-switch. “Dutch blasphemy law – the bad news,” fromÂ Media Watch Watch:
It appears we were a little hasty in celebrating the demise of the Dutch blasphemy laws.
Danish journalist Flemming Rose has contacted MWW, relating the concerns of a Dutch colleague about this supposed repeal. All is not as it seems.
The intention is to introduce the concept of “indirect insult” and expand an existing law which protects people on the basis of race, age, disability, and sexual orientation to include protection on the basis of religion or “conviction”. This means that remarks directed at Islam, Christianity, Buddism or – depending on your interpretation of “conviction” – even homeopathy and astrology, could be interpreted as indirect insults to people, and prosecuted as such.
According to a commenter on the original story, this law carries a maximum sentence of 12 months, whereas the original defunct blasphemy law carried a maximum 3 month sentence.
5 thoughts on “Netherlands: the dirty little tricks of Hirsch Ballin”
What difference does it all make in the end? Sharia shall trump all infidel laws anyway. It’s the wave of the future.
“What difference does it all make in the end? ”
A lot, because free men will not put up with it. They will rise up a put and end to it, someday.
Sharia is a 5th century collection of Bedouin laws – nothing more. If muslims wish to force this on us by force then they will be destroyed. They know this. So they choose to inundate our societies – eventually if the present trend continues they may be able to use the laws of democracy against non-muslims by force of sheer numbers. So we have to prevent our legal systems from being abused in this manner and we have to enusre that these muslim scum are in the minority in our societies. Muslims contribute nothing and they have never contributed anything useful for the last 600 years. Western society left these aggressive and stupid thugs behind a long time ago and I will not let muslim scum destroy what we have built.
Kaw, I endorse everything you say and these scum had better believe that ONE DAY the worm will turn and we will fight and we will not lay ourselves down to surrender. People of the West, take a look at some factual and truthful websites regarding the true nature of islamic fundamentalism – anti=mullah is one, take a look at fitna, obsession etc., but be warned the videos are very graphic but you will have no better example of sharia in action and it’s scary and if we don’t fight this scurge it will become part of everyday life for us in the West. Never vote a muslim into your governments as the soft jihad is all part of the infiltration into our western governments. These people are now planning to buy up our banks, control the price of oil with a fixed price of $80/$90 per barrel and steadily beginning to control our world. This is not a conspiracy theory as the mullahs in Saudi Arabia declared this should happen, and it is. My heart goes out to all those people, especially women, who have no choice but to live in such rotten societies.
The Bush families and the Royal families, did they sell us to the Saudi”s?
Comments are closed.