Pastor gets prison for sermon (Sentenced to month in jail for offending homosexuals)

Do you agree with the Pastor?

  • I don't agree with the Pastor, but he should have a right to say what he wants

    Votes: 29 58.0%
  • I agree with the sentence. Haters needs to be locked away

    Votes: 21 42.0%

  • Total voters
    50

Joey_Ramone

Warlord
Joined
May 20, 2004
Messages
229
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39328

A Swedish court has sentenced Ake Green, a pastor belonging to the Pentecostal movement, to a month in prison, under a law against incitement, after he was found guilty of having offended homosexuals in a sermon, according to Ecumenical News International.

Green had described homosexuality as "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society" in a 2003 sermon.

Soren Andersson, the president of the Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender rights, said on hearing Green's jail sentence that religious freedom could never be used as a reason to offend people.

This is unbelievable. I wonder where they'll stop with this hate speech stuff. I think the US is the only country where free speech is allowed.
 
Joey, if he had said in the sermon that blacks were "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society", in a church here in the U.S., he probably would have been charged with hate speech.
 
He should have the right to say what he wants, and my opinion of homosexuals is irrelevant in this respect.
 
But he didn't say a single thing on blacks. He commented on a different matter.

Rather than avoiding the issue, one is of the view that the sentence was incorrect in principle; there was no actual incitement to any action, merely a characterization.
Those of the charismatic bent do tend to accentuate the brimstone and flourish in the phrase, but he was not charged with offensive rhetoric, baleful metaphors or unnecessary repetition. 'Twas more newspeak than hate speech.

One is not of the opinion that the pulpit should be sacrosanct in the eyes of the law, but this is but another reminder of the tender mercies of injustice.
 
I of course disagree with him, but he should be allowed to speak his mind and say this.

Now if he starts encouraging killing gays (or anything else against their rights), that should be stopped; after all, if any of his followers kill a gay guy he'd be an accessory before the fact.
 
Dumb pothead said:
Joey, if he had said in the sermon that blacks were "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society", in a church here in the U.S., he probably would have been charged with hate speech.

First of all, that's not true. "Christian Identity" is a religion that teaches that blacks are inferior and Jews are the spawn of Satan and they've never been arrested for what they say.

Second of all, there is nothing in the Bible that says "though shall not be black". It's been a while since I've been to Church, but homosexuality is condemned in the Bible.
 
Yeah youre right Joey, I forgot about the yahoos down South. He probably wouldnt have been arrested here. I couldnt care less what the bible says, it has no bearing on whether its wrong or right for him to say things like that. Maybe a good solution would be not to arrest him, but instead to revoke the churchs tax exempt status if they dont fire him.
 
He didn't say gays were an abomination, so the poll is flawed. From the quote, I can't see where he is inciting hatred against homosexuals. Offensive, maybe. If a scientist had said it was abnormal and destructive to society (in the sense that heterosexuals are required to continue the species), then he would have been right, chided for stating a truism and not jailed.

Say, is this pastor's sentence longer then the man's who murdered Lindh, since his sentence has been thrown out. Where I come from murder is more offensive. Heck, it's obscene.
 
Despite what Mr Andersson might wish for, the law in question does not ban offending people; it bans incitement to action towards a group, and threats against a group. It seems clear that he did not incite, and it's hard to see who he threatened - I do not imagine there were any homosexuals in his audience. So, from the legal POV, it's hard to see why he was found guilty.

This was low-level court; an appeal seems not unlikely.

As for my own opinion, he should not be sent to prison. Getting depicted as a medieval bigot in the media seems about right.
 
Stile, if it isnt inciting hatred when a pastor in Europe says that gays are a horrible cancerous tumor on society, then it isnt either when Ayatollahs and Imams in the Arab world say the same things about Jews and Americans.
 
Stile said:
Say, is this pastor's sentence longer then the man's who murdered Lindh, since his sentence has been thrown out. Where I come from murder is more offensive. Heck, it's obscene.
Mijailovic was found to be mentally ill, and went to a closed mental hospital. They can keep him there indefinitely, without any further legal proceedings.
 
Dumb pothead said:
Stile, if it isnt inciting hatred when a pastor in Europe says that gays are a horrible cancerous tumor on society, then it isnt either when Ayatollahs and Imams in the Arab world say the same things about Jews and Americans.
He didn't say gays were a tumor. He said homosexuality was a tumor. If one is to accept homosexuality as a choice, then certainly one can recommend against making that choice since the logical progression of everyone making that choice is extinction. I don't necessarily want to defend this guy. I don't know what his intentions were and I can't tell someone not to get offended even at the silliest of statements. Using your analogy, would you get offended if an Imam extorted his followers not to apply for American citizenship or to convert to Judaism, because he thought doing so was harmful to society?

@ The Last Conformist: So perhaps the pastor wouldn't want to trade situations. I guess I could have chose a different example (and I don't mean to pick on the Swedes), but it's frustrating to not see your own judgement of the severity of crimes reflected in sentencing. Personally, I think offending someone would not result in jail time, but maybe only result in a civil suit. My sister-in-law was arrested the other day for driving with an expired license. That's heavy handed in my book. (A fine would have been more appropriate. She was definitely negligent.)
 
The Last Conformist said:
@CS: We'll get you jailed for hate speech against Jihadis.

They better fling 80% of the Western world in jail also, then!

:)
 
I agree with the sentence, there is nothing wrong with lesbians. I know a couple of lesbians who got married. They are both great people and keep the details of their lives to themselves if you know what I mean. These people have the right to choose and if the pastor wishes to deny the inevitable of some people’s paths then so be it. However I’m sure he will be able to discuss this sooner than later with some of the inmates he will be sharing with, and maybe even come out with a new perspective on his release:lol:

Regards,

Jugulator
 
The Last Conformist said:
@CS: We'll get you jailed for hate speech against Jihadis.

Sweden had better get ready to invade Scotland if they want to topple my regime!

As Jugs stated: I am not alone there!
 
Stupid Sentence. He can't be jailed for what he said. If anyone wants to listen to him after that, it's their problem. As someone said, the media making him out as a bigot is the just punishment.
 
Stile said:
If one is to accept homosexuality as a choice
Which is not true... (not that it's relevant)
 
Top Bottom