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.
On this blog there are really two kinds of participants. Some add substantive arguments to the debate; others merely critique the debaters with no real engagement on the merits. If we take free‑market principles seriously, the simplest remedy is not more rules or more outrage, but the selective withdrawal of our attention. Those who wish to argue in good faith can engage one another and build on each other’s points. Those who offer only content‑free sneers can be left to speak into the void. We will soon see who is as interested in feeding the trolls as they are in providing substance.
For my part, I intend to stop feeding them, even when I am tempted to make a point. If something is worth saying, it can be framed as a general comment to the readership rather than as a direct response that rewards bad‑faith behavior with attention.
Is it lawful in Finland to derogate heterosexuals? They do sinful things in the bedrooms and other places. But I only know this second hand.