Marrying a child is not paedophilia says ECtHR

Troll Account

PI Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2018
Messages
89
Likes
113
The European Court of Human Rights have outdone themselves on this one!

In 2009 an Austrian woman was holding seminars critical of Islam and was quoted as saying the following, which landed her in trouble with the law:

"A 56-year-old and a 6-year-old? What do you call that? Give me an example? What do we call it, if it is not pedophilia?"

In 2011 she was convicted of "disparaging" Islam and fined 480 euros. She appealed to the ECHR on the basis that her claims were true and religious groups should have to tolerate criticism.

The 7 judge panel in the ECHR rejected her case noting the following (it gets worse as you read down): While Muhammad may have married a 6-year-old, there's a difference between child marriage and pedophiliaShe had sought to defame "the Prophet Mohammed" by not "providing evidence that his primary sexual interest in Aisha had been her not yet having reached puberty or that his other wives or concubines had been similarly young.

"That the "purpose of her statements" (and here we get into thought crime) was not to show "that Muhammad was not a worthy subject of worship.

"Presenting objects of religious worship in a provocative way capable of hurting the feelings of the followers of that religion could be conceived as a malicious violation of the spirit of tolerance." Regardless of one's opinion of this kind of vitriolic and out-to-offend criticism we're now well into the 21st century and courts (which no Irish court can overrule) are issuing what are in practice, if not technically, sharia-style restrictions on what Europeans can say about Islam.

Here's is the report:

Calling Prophet Muhammad a pedophile does not fall within freedom of speech:

European court | News | DW | 26.10.2018 This comes in the context of decades-long pressure by the OIC via the UN to restrict free speech about Islam. Naturally, EUrope's Islamists and the "Muslim world" are enraptured by the news. Maybe your vote to abolish "blasphemy" won't change much after all.

Calling Prophet Muhammad a pedophile does not fall within freedom of speech: European court | DW | 26.10.2018
 

Atlantean Irish

PI Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
3,391
Likes
3,843
Location
Atlantis
Part of Open-Border Extremists reason for Multicult is to bring about a chaotic society all mixed up and less cohesive, where law and order and natural abhorrance to sick and twisted ideas such as paedophilia can never become the norm - can then become the norm
Step by baby-step they will try bring this in, they already tried decades ago, they have been biding their time ever since.

European Parliament member promotes pedophilia as part of the sexual revolution

EU making paedophilia legal across Europe |

Germany Pulls Booklet Encouraging Parent-Child Sexual Massage, but not Child Song Book Encouraging Masturbation
 
Last edited:

Troll Account

PI Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2018
Messages
89
Likes
113
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
Part of Open-Border Extremists reason for Multicult is to bring about a chaotic society all mixed up and less cohesive, where law and order and natural abhorrance to sick and twisted ideas such as paedophilia can never become the norm - can then become the norm
Step by baby-step they will try bring this in, they already tried decades ago, they have been biding their time ever since.

European Parliament member promotes pedophilia as part of the sexual revolution

EU making paedophilia legal across Europe |

Germany Pulls Booklet Encouraging Parent-Child Sexual Massage, but not Child Song Book Encouraging Masturbation
It sound crazy but you are on point here, they are trying to destroy european culture and nation state culture with third world savegry.
 

FairstoodtheWind

PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
2,836
Likes
5,172
meanwhile in canada

https://www.liveaction.org/news/assisted-suicide-children-canada/?utm_content=78782652&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter


Sick children in Canada may soon be euthanized without parental consent

FacebookTwitterGoogle+EmailShare80.3k
UPDATE 10/14/18: Adam Rapoport, co-author of the report told CTV News that it is incorrect for news agencies to say they would be euthanizing children without parental knowledge.

“Those articles that have made it sound like we would do this without parental knowledge — that’s just not how we operate as an organization,” he said in a phone interview with CTVNews.ca. “To think that we would ever do that — I couldn’t even imagine the circumstance.”

However, there is a difference between parental “knowledge” and parental “consent”. Allowing a minor who is deemed “capable” to choose assisted suicide with parental knowledge is much different than a minor who does so with the consent of his or her parents. Knowing your child is choosing death is one thing, but approving it is completely different. Some may argue that no minor is actually capable of making such a decision based on the simple fact that he or she is a minor. Rapoport said the hospital will “err on the side of caution” when doctors are unsure about a child’s capabilities to make such a choice.

It is important to note that this policy is not in effect and was written out as a possible option for the future.

Doctors at Toronto’s Hospital for Sick Children, known as SickKids, have laid out a “road map” for killing their patients, including cases in which they would do so without parental permission.

In the proposed policy published in the British Medical Journal’s Med Ethics, backed by the University of Toronto’s Joint Centre for Bioethics, doctors, administrators, and ethicists look at the “ethical challenges of providing Medical Assistance in Dying in a paediatric setting” and outline how assisted suicide would play out for children at Sick Kids. Their flowchart does not include discussing assisted suicide with parents until a “reflection period” occurs after the child has already been killed.

Since legalization, assisted suicide deaths have risen sharply in Canada
 

Tadhg Gaelach

Moderator
Donator
PI Member
Premium Account
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
38,228
Likes
37,125
The European Court of Human Rights have outdone themselves on this one!

In 2009 an Austrian woman was holding seminars critical of Islam and was quoted as saying the following, which landed her in trouble with the law:

"A 56-year-old and a 6-year-old? What do you call that? Give me an example? What do we call it, if it is not pedophilia?"

In 2011 she was convicted of "disparaging" Islam and fined 480 euros. She appealed to the ECHR on the basis that her claims were true and religious groups should have to tolerate criticism.

The 7 judge panel in the ECHR rejected her case noting the following (it gets worse as you read down): While Muhammad may have married a 6-year-old, there's a difference between child marriage and pedophiliaShe had sought to defame "the Prophet Mohammed" by not "providing evidence that his primary sexual interest in Aisha had been her not yet having reached puberty or that his other wives or concubines had been similarly young.

"That the "purpose of her statements" (and here we get into thought crime) was not to show "that Muhammad was not a worthy subject of worship.

"Presenting objects of religious worship in a provocative way capable of hurting the feelings of the followers of that religion could be conceived as a malicious violation of the spirit of tolerance." Regardless of one's opinion of this kind of vitriolic and out-to-offend criticism we're now well into the 21st century and courts (which no Irish court can overrule) are issuing what are in practice, if not technically, sharia-style restrictions on what Europeans can say about Islam.

Here's is the report:

Calling Prophet Muhammad a pedophile does not fall within freedom of speech:

European court | News | DW | 26.10.2018 This comes in the context of decades-long pressure by the OIC via the UN to restrict free speech about Islam. Naturally, EUrope's Islamists and the "Muslim world" are enraptured by the news. Maybe your vote to abolish "blasphemy" won't change much after all.

Calling Prophet Muhammad a pedophile does not fall within freedom of speech: European court | DW | 26.10.2018

Actually, the ECHR is showing its ignorance here. Any Muslim would agree that Mohammad is not a worthy subject of worship. In Islam, only Allah is worthy of worship. However, it's likely that Mohammad was not a pedophile, as his first wife was older than him and Aisha seems to have been the only wife he married in childhood. This marriage seems to have been more about making an alliance with the powerful warlord Abu Bakir, who did take over the Caliphate from Mohammad when he died.
 
Top Bottom