Geert Wilders & The New Blasphemy Courts

[Khandro]

'Europe is currently seeing the reintroduction of blasphemy laws through both the front and back doors, initiated in a country which once prided itself on being among the first in the world to throw off clerical intrusion into politics.

By prosecuting Wilders, the courts in Holland are effectively ruling that there is only one correct answer to the question Wilders asked. They are saying that if someone asks you whether you would like more Moroccans or fewer, people must always answer "more," or he will be committing a crime.

At no point would it occur to me that anyone saying he did not want an endless flow of, say, British people coming into the Netherlands should be prosecuted. Nor would he be.

The long-term implications for Dutch democracy of criminalising a majority opinion are catastrophic. But the trial of Wilders is also a nakedly political move.

The Dutch courts are behaving like a religious court. They are trying to regulate public expression and opinion when it comes to the followers of one religion. In so doing they obviously aspire to keep the peace in the short term, but they cannot possibly realise what trouble they are storing up for our future.'


Douglas Murray

[woofgang]

link please?....also not sure what the link is between blasphemy and immigration?

[Khandro]

woof; //https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9253/europe-blasphemy-courts//

[Khandro]

may have to paste it in

[Old_Geezer]

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9253/europe-blasphemy-courts/

[Old_Geezer]

Not sure I want to read the article, but surely the only sensible answer to the question is "None" ? Well unless one's country is desperate for more population, that is.

[whiskeryron]

All part of Islamic World Domination. Going well isn't it ?

[ichkeria]

Context is also important onvenuentky
If I post on here that there are too many Moroccans in Holland then that's one thing
It if I'm a political leader at a mass rally and I smirk that I am going to 'arrange that' having just whipped up my audience with a leading question, then that is a different matter entirely. Not saying any more, but just adding the detail conveniently overlooked by that link

[Old_Geezer]

I think all politicians try to whip up support for the policies they want. I'm unsure that should make a difference in law. It's not like he seems to be enticing a riot, or something. Smother the views you don't like and the speaker gets more support because it is seen as being unfair. Reasoned argument is a better course, explaining why the Netherlands need all these Moroccan folk.

[Khandro]

Ichi; Saying, //Not saying any more// is an innuendo leaving me for one puzzled, perhaps you wish to sound wisely enigmatic, but if you have something to add, please get it off your chest and enlighten us.
Douglas Murray is an honourable chap, everything he writes is well researched.