Sunday, December 12, 2010
Free Speech in Denmark
Hat tip to Vlad Tepes
There is an interesting case in Denmark regarding Jesper Langballe, a member of the Danish Parliament, who has pled guilty to a charge of hate speech. He faces a fine and possible jail time.
http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=28189
Fousesquawk comment: As I have pointed out numerous times, European laws are much different from our laws when it comes to hate speech. In this country, hate speech is protected unless there is a direct connection between words spoken that lead directly to a substantive act. In Europe, it is much different. In Denmark (the statute is in the article), hate speech is a criminal offense in and of itself. How do you identify and define hate speech?
Someone is offended.
One, of course, has to wonder whether the Danes enforce this law no matter who the victim group is and who commits the transgression.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
While I much prefer the limitations placed on any attempt at such legislation by the First Amendment, and often appreciate Justice Scalia's pointed legal opinions in this area of jurisprudence, it may be worth noting one reason that European nations adopted such ill-conceived laws.
The Churban Europa, sometimes carelessly referred to as a "Holocaust" (the word means a burnt offering to the Lord, not ethnic cleansing), took place in Europe. Many of the survivors came here, to America, but the dead lie in Europe. Europeans, after World War II, were either bystanders, collaborators, perpetrators, or the brave souls who helped Jews (and other targets of Nazi killing) to escape.
So, European jurisprudence, unrestricted by a First Amendment, or by the generally positive history of making it real, took a dim view of any speech that even hinted at respectable consideration of Nazi ideology.
As we now see, writing broad principles into legal language can have unintended and unfortunate consequences. Those who advocate a policy of "Israel uber alles" should pause, and reflect, on the kind of general precedent they are setting, which may in the future be cited for atrocities they never contemplated.
Post a Comment