I previously wrote about Finland’s prosecution of Christian Democrat MP Päivi Räsänen for raising objections to homosexuality. She has now been convicted with a decision this week from the Finnish Supreme Court. Free speech is now in a free fall in Finland.
Räsänen is a Christian Democratic member of parliament and former Minister of the Interior. Räsänen is also a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland and is married to a pastor.
She was critical of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland for its support of the Helsinki LGBT Pride events in June. She spoke out against the involvement while highlighting a quote from Romans 1:24-27 , which reads:
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
In the United States, this would of course be entirely protected as the exercise of religious freedom and free speech. However, the former Interior Minister was accused of “hate speech” against LGBT+ people over a 2004 publication, a 2018 radio appearance, and a 2019 social media post that included a bible verse.
While she was acquitted by the District Court of Helsinki and the Court of Appeal, the case was eventually brought to the Finnish Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has now voted 3-2 to convict her for her “derogatory towards homosexuals on the basis of their sexual orientation.”
In a statement, the Court declared that “Räsänen’s statements were in this way derogatory towards homosexuals as a group on the basis of their sexual orientation. However, certain other passages referred to in the charge were not held to be derogatory.”
The Court imposed fines on Räsänen and the manager of Luther Foundation Finland. Notably, the other person named in the filing is bishop Juhana Pohjola, who published the pamphlet. Pohjola reportedly leads the 2,749-member church, as well as being the chairman of the International Lutheran Council,
It also ordered both to take down the “unlawful passages” in the publication.
The Court did uphold Räsänen’s acquittal on a charge stemming from a 2019 social media post in which she posted a picture of Romans 1:24–27.
Räsänen stated that she may appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, stressing:
“Freedom of speech is needed precisely when we disagree on things. I hope that despite this decision, constructive discussions can be held, even on difficult issues, under the protection of freedom of speech and religion.”
In Rage and the Republic, I have a chapter on “Why Big Fierce Rights Are Rare” that specifically discusses the collapses of free speech and other rights in Europe. This case is just another example of how our European allies are abandoning core Western principles from free speech to free exercise.
Given the sweeping economic changes unfolding in this century, those rights will be even more important than in the years to come. In countries like Finland, the population will enter these uncertain times with even more uncertain rights.
Would be interesting to know what the Finnish people think of that case? Turley, you are the typical ignorant American pushing your deranged ideology on a people with different values.
I want to eat a gringo.
Today’s special: $3.75 a pound.
Fascism has a long tradition in Europe, and Democrats are trying to impose it in the United States. Of course, if the opposition to homosexuality was couched as “Islamic” beliefs, she would have been just fine. European Fascists are afraid of offending Muslims. They know that Christians do not fight back.
So says the fascist… how you arrived at “Islamic” beliefs is quite the leap considering its not a factor in the story.
What troubles me most in this case is not only the conviction itself, but the obvious asymmetry it reveals in how “hate” and “harm” are now being defined and enforced.
If a Christian cites Scripture and articulates a traditional moral judgment about homosexual conduct, that expression is treated as an actionable injury to a protected group. If, however, a speaker attacks Christianity, condemns Christian doctrine as bigotry, or ridicules believers for holding those same moral views, there is no corresponding impulse to prosecute. One set of consciences is commanded to be silent in the name of tolerance. The other set is effectively licensed to denounce, so long as its denunciation tracks the prevailing orthodoxy.
That is not neutral application of a speech standard. It is viewpoint discrimination dressed up as protection of human dignity. A legal regime that punishes citizens for expressing long standing religious doctrine, while shrugging at equally harsh attacks on the faith itself, has ceased to be an honest referee. It has become an active participant in deciding which convictions are permissible and which are forbidden. That is precisely why some of us see these “hate speech” prosecutions as a direct attack on both free expression and freedom of conscience, not as a measured effort to prevent violence or genuine incitement.
You got any sources for that diatribe?
BTW, you miss the main factor of the story… its takes place in Finland not in your deluded mind. Other cultures, other values.
You’re so stunted in your thinking, that you believe the entire world must think like you.
Does your mommy know you’re on this blog 10 hours a day?
How 2% has such power to control the Western world is beyond my understanding. Be nice to everyone but if I want to critize anybody such as Germans or Chinese or Egyptians then that should be my right. The same thing for Homosexuals, Trans gender or Christian Nationals or Muslims.
To criticize other people’s religions is “your right”? It’s not. If you do, then are you willing to accept the consequences?