Yesterday CBN News posted a story about Lars Hedegaard, who was charged with racism under Denmark's hate speech law after telling someone at a gathering about the problem of rape committed against Muslim girls by male relatives.
The article reports:
"Under Denmark's hate speech law, it doesn't matter if what you said was true. It doesn't matter if it is factual - if it offends someone, you could be charged.
"A guilty verdict hinged on whether what Hedegaard said was intended for a wider audience. A lower court decided it was not, and acquitted him.
"Meanwhile, in a Dutch court on Monday, Dutch parliament member Geert Wilders denounced his hate speech trial as "unjust." He branded it a "political trial" and an attempt to suppress free speech.
"Wilders is on trial for comparing Islam to fascism."
The thing to keep in mind here is the definition of slader under Sharia Law. The concept of slander under Sharia means saying anything that is perceived to be negative against Islam. It doesn't matter if what you say is true or not--if it is perceived to be a negative comment about Islam, it can be considered slander (or as in the case of Denmark, hate speech). This is a very dangerous precedent to set up anywhere. One of the foundations of a free society is the ability to speak the truth. I am sure the court that decided this did not intend to move Denmark a step closer to Islamic law, but that is what they have done. This is a dangerous road to start down.
Leave a comment