From Reuters:
A German court on Thursday convicted a businessman of insulting Islam by printing the word “Koran” on toilet paper and offering it to mosques.
The 61-year-old man, identified only as Manfred van H., was given a one-year jail sentence, suspended for five years, and ordered to complete 300 hours of community service, a district court in the western German town of Luedinghausen ruled.
The conviction comes after a Danish newspaper printed cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammad — sparking violent protests around the world from Muslims who saw the images as sacrilegious and an attack on their beliefs.
Manfred van H. printed out sheets of toilet paper bearing the word “Koran” shortly after a group of Muslims carried out a series of bomb attacks in London in July 2005. He sent the paper to German television stations, magazines and some 15 mosques.
Prosecutors said that in an accompanying letter Manfred van H. called Islam’s holy book a “cookbook for terrorists.” He also offered his toilet paper for sale on the Internet at a price of 4 euros ($4.76) per roll, saying the proceeds would go toward a “memorial to all the victims of Islamic terrorism.”
The maximum sentence for insulting religious beliefs under the German criminal code is three years in prison.
While this may not be happening in America, it is happening in a Western nation where they are supposed to value freedom of speech and tolerance. While I believe Manfred’s actions were foolish, being jailed for them is just plain scary. More and more we are seeing people being censured in Western countries from criticizing other religions (besides Christianity of course, which is always fair game) or homosexuality. I fear for the future of the freedom of speech, and the freedom of expression. The new religion in town is pluralism, whose moral code is relativism, and whose only law is the acceptance of every view as equally valid.
Thinking to Believe 
February 27, 2006 at 6:40 pm
Recently, we have seen that a simple cartoon depiction can cause violent protests around the world.
I believe freedom of speech is important, but not at any cost.
There are certain limits that must be set on free speech. The German businessman put the security of fellow citizens at risk. We don’t have to agree with every viewpoint, yet we should bear the consequences for our speech. Specifically, when our speech incites violence, ethnic hatred, and puts the security of others in jeopardy.
LikeLike
March 2, 2006 at 1:38 pm
This is a big topic, and one I cannot handle adequately in a small post, but something seems wrong when we cannot say something distasteful to a group of people without them becoming violent against us. Christians have put up with distateful things being said about us and done against us for years, and yet we don’t respond in violence. I think part of this is due to the difference between Western values influenced by Christianity, and Eastern values influenced by Islam.
Free speech is free speech, even if we don’t like it. Of course free speech does not “free” us from the consequences of our speech, but we have the liberty to “explore” those consequences nontheless. If those who don’t like our speech resort to physical abuse we ought to be questioning their moral integrity; even more so if they physically abuse those other than the one who made the speech (like the Muslims are doing worldwide because of the Danish cartoons).
I agree that we need to be responsible with our speech, and I agree that this German was foolish to do what he did, but I would fight for his right to do so anyway because I treasure freedom from government censure more than I treasure responsibility of speech.
LikeLike
March 13, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Jason’s reply,
“I agree that we need to be responsible with our speech, and I agree that this German was foolish to do what he did, but I would fight for his right to do so anyway because I treasure freedom from government censure more than I treasure responsibility of speech.”
The physical safety of a countries citizens is more important than free speech. The government didn’t censure the German man before he said it. We did have access to his expressions. They did hold him accountable for making inflammatory statements. I disagree with speech that is likely to incite violence among another countries citizens or endanger citizens from your own country. I think it’s immoral to endanger someone else’s safety so we may have freedom of speech. He wants to endanger himself, let him speak freely.
That would be similar to a prison guard making insults to a group of prisoners that followed a specific religion. He endangers himself, other prison guards, and other prisoners.
LikeLike