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 being “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 in the years to come. In countries like Finland, the population will enter these uncertain times with even more uncertain rights.
Given the various religious dicta against homosexuality, it’s obvious that homosexuality has been a social taboo for thousands of years. Without various accepted social norms, there is no agreement that makes us a “society”. People may debate various social norms, but when they begin forcing new social norms on people, it is pure authoritarianism … and authoritarianism rates a strong response. Nip it in the bud.
I’m one of those who will proudly say that I have had enough of the pseudo-intellectual parsing of words and the ridiculous creative (false) interpretation of Scripture. The Bible is clear. The words have meaning. It’s not like one can assign new meaning as a matter of convenience. Homosexuality is viewed as an abomination. In those very words. Agree with it or disagree with it, that’s your call. Nonetheless, that’s what it says. So, the Finish dilemma centers on a matter of freedom of speech, mixed with freedom of religion and a condemnation of the very heart of the Christian faith, the Bible. To end, how is the Finish legal system dealing with the Quran, the teachings in the Mosques or the posts by Muslims? Or is this treatment reserved for Christians only? The lesson many of us are learning from the horrific civil liberties abuses being institutionalized in Europe is really simple. Our new attitude our once cherished allies and the roots of our heritage? Screw Europe! You are acting like the totalitarian states you profess to despise. By the way, don’t call on us the next time you need the blood of our best to deliver you from harm.
When do you Anonymous turn 13 years old?
Would any nice American ladies like to meet a Mexican man over wine?
I got former girlfriends and a wife who did.
LOL (-:
Whores?
What, you are a pimp?
No ladies here, but a lot of Karens. Will that do?
Does anyone know where an illegal alien can get a job as a butcher? Asking for a friend.
You could run for Alderman in our next city election.
A core principle of civility is to direct criticism toward the behavior, not the person as a whole. Since around 2010, with the advent of unedited “anyone-can-publish” social media, we’ve seen this principle wither away. Its demise is complete in the leftist style of political oppo-branding (while only some on the right stoop to ad-hominem attack).
Note how this Finnish MP Räsänen is calling out homosexual behavior, but is careful not to denounce the persons engaging in it. I suspect that distinction made all the difference in her being acquitted on the first two occasions.
I’m pretty sure the way these hate speech laws are written, respectful criticism meted out with civility is still protected speech. They draw the line at blanket denunciation of the person or group.
Note how 3 out of 5 Finnish Supreme Court judges convicted her for her “derogatory towards homosexuals on the basis of their sexual orientation.” The quote is the tell. Their mental mistake is to oppo-brand civil criticism as having crossed the line into incivility — as if there is no difference anymore. The 2 Judges who voted to uphold the acquittal (if my analysis is correct) have not forsaken the principle of civility, and can still recognize it when they see it.
This case, with its 2 acquittals and narrow 3:2 conviction at the Supreme Court reveals that not all Europeans are leftist lunatics when it comes to speech standards. The fanatics are slowly being isolated, and their radical policies will not stand the test if time. It’s important not to paint all Europeans with a broad brush of denigration.
Mental mistake? How did you derive that, considering Finnish law is different than US law.
“not all Europeans are leftist lunatics when it comes to speech standards. ” But, but, but everyone here sez they’re morons and sickos. Who to believe?
The MP made a common mistake in reading Romans. Read in context, abandoning straight sex and engaging in homosexual acts was PUNISHMENT for bad behavior, specifically their failute to qorship the one true God. Instead, they worshipped idols. They were NOT punished FOR same-sex sex.
At most, Romans says same-sex sex is unnatural, weird.
the left are fascists
either fight them now…or wait for WWIII
Fascists? How so? The Finnish Supreme Court adjudicated the case. Fascist countries don’t have courts.
“Fascist countries don’t have courts.”
Both fascist Italy and fascist Germany had courts.
Stick to ankle-biting. You make less of a fool of yourself.
But the article was about Finland… so all countries with courts are fascists, is what you’re saying?
IT and DE had courts? Okay. The USA has courts? That makes it fascist right? Got it.
One of the major things that was missed in the discussion is they apparently have no concept of double jeopardy since she was acquitted twice but then convicted by the Supreme Court. So I suppose the government gets to keep charging you till they get a conviction. Sort of similar to the law in New York except there just throw every law they can at you and hope for something to stick.
Unless of course you are one of the protected species.
I think the Trump administration should maintain one outlet for the Voice of America, place it in Zurich and broadcast all over Europe that free speech is alive and well in the U.S. and we would welcome them to come here. You might have to battle a little bit that’s ok.
You’re applying US legal concepts to a foreign country. Apart from you not speaking Finnish, you have no Finnish legal qualifications. Do you get that?
What does VOA have to do with the Finnish case?
Rocket scientists such as yourself should try to show some intellectual mercy to the rest of us rubes
Unfortunately, VOA has become a mouthpiece for the woke and ideology of the globalists. Not sure if Kari Lake has been able to make any strides in ridding the woke propaganda coming from VOA.
VOA, NPR, PBS, etc., are all in the liberal camp, yet they rely on us for financial support to let them spew their ideology. I stopped watching PBS and listening to NPR a long time ago. Glad we have Trump and conservatives to call out their one-sided view of reality.
Land of the Vikings! Kill’em first then apologize a few decades later – the woke population of now pacifists are doing a better job of becoming communist than Stalin or Putin could have hoped for! Excellent work by the comrades on the ‘Supreme’ Illuminati Court!
“Land of the Vikings” is not a single country but refers to the Scandinavian region comprising today’s Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, which were the historical homelands of the Vikings.
No mention of Finland.
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 was thinking the same thing about you . . .being a typical ignorant American. Try flame throwing your thoughts for us “ignorant” Americans.
Offended? Why? Your comments reflect ignorance as well as stupidity. Not my fault you’re atypically ignorant American, which you readily acknowledged.
I want to eat a gringo.
Today’s special: $3.75 a pound.
“Today’s special: $3.75 a pound.”
$50/lb in two years of the left gets their way. Supply (scarcity) and demand..
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.
the left are backed by enemies of the west, to DESTROY the west
men in women sports
massive money printing
fascism
LGBTQ, etc…which GOAL is to END the production of children!
Drugs
importation of illegals from the 3rd world
releasing criminals
And many on the left have no idea HOW BRAIN WASHED THEY ARE!
The right wants small government and freedom
The left want absolute central power to DESTROY all others
The left claim the right are fascists…because they are 100% hypocrite Morons!
Is there a point some where in that nonsense?
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?
Diatribe, deluded mind? You must have not done well in English and speech while in high school. Casting aspersions to others with whom you disagree is a sign of anger waiting to explode. Lighten up Bud!!
OLLY,
Well said.
Let this case and others we have seen coming out of the UK and EU be fair warning to us all.
Warning? How’s that? Give us you’re intellectual insight please.
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?
Hey Anonymous, I thought maybe we wouldn’t hear from you and then I realized I was mistaken, today isn’t No Dinks Day.
I thought maybe we wouldn’t hear from you and then I realized I was mistaken, today isn’t No Drunks Day on the blog. My bad.