Posted on 01/13/2005 10:33:34 AM PST by NYer
WASHINGTON, January 12, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty submitted an amicus (friend of the court) brief yesterday with the Swedish Supreme Court calling for the Court to reverse the conviction of a pastor prosecuted for presenting Christan teaching on homosexuality from the pulpit.
Pastor Ake Green was sentenced to one month in jail for a sermon he preached to his congregation in 2003 on Biblical texts addressing homosexuality. The sermon was later printed in a local newspaper and Green was prosecuted on the basis that his sermon offended Sweden's homosexual community.
The Becket Fund, a nonpartisan, interfaith, public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religious traditions, is a Non-Governmental Organization in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations.
The Becket Fund submitted the brief to inform the Gotta Supreme Court of Sweden's obligations to guarantee each of its citizens the religious liberty, freedom of expression, and equal protection of the laws secured by Articles 18, 19, and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR"), to which Sweden is a signatory.
Article 18 provides, "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching."
As The Becket Fund's brief notes, "Article 18 provides that it is not the role of a government composed of men to declare what is orthodoxy by punishing those who publicly teach one religious view of what is right, even if that view may offend others."
Article 19 states, "Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds . . ." And Article 26 prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion "or other opinion."
"Should this Court uphold Pastor Green's conviction-which was based solely upon the expression of his religious beliefs in a sermon preached to his congregation-Sweden will be in violation of all three of these bedrock principles of international human rights law," the brief declared.
"Pastor Green's case is a wake-up call that we must be vigilant not to let that happen here," declared Becket Fund Director of Litigation Derek Gaubatz. "Free religious expression is a fundamental human right. People around the world have always looked to their religious leaders for moral guidance, and those leaders must be allowed to provide it free of state censorship.
See the amicus brief in full:
http://www.becketfund.org/pdfs/333_36.pdf
Ping!
So when are Liberals and their ilk going to be arrested for "offending" us?
One month? They ought to read some of my posts!
What about the muslims praying to allah to kill the Jews and Christians seventeen times a day at their five prayer calls. Isn't that "hate speech"? I asked this of Gov Arnold when he signed the hate speech law, but received no response.
Never. They are the enlightened ones. We are the intolerent and narrow minded ones. They know better so they are not wrong.
Right.
Hey does this mean that I can have anyone that offends me prosecuted? They don't have enough prisons in the world.
Just is just the beginning. People have warned this was coming and now it's heard. Australia, Canada and Philadelphia! So let's just sit back and do nothing and let judges rule the world.
US Constitution seems to protect it if a case can be made that calls to murder are a part of the Muslim religion. I'll let the Muslims decide what is and what isn't a part of Islam.
Calls for sexual morals, -- the subject of this thread, -- are surely a part of Christianity.
Historically, calls for just war have been made by Christians. Pope Urban II and his call for the Crusade comes to mind.
I think that generally a concurrent use of the public square by incompatible religions is a problem, and the US Constitution should have made a distinction between Christianity as a dominant religion and minority religions. Of course, mass immigration from culturally incompatible lands was not foreseen by the founding fathers.
Correction-- US Constitution as interpreted by the corrupt and Ignorant would seem to protect Muslims if
their claims could be proven a part of their religion.
Problem is there is ample evidence that supports the idea
that the founders interpreted "religion" as defined by
Webster in his An American Dictionary of the English Language ,1828 to mean ,primarily,Christian religion.
It's a good thing if the founders said "religion" and meant "Christianity"; my point is that even if they didn't, they should have. Minority religions may be tolerated but they do not have a claim on the public square in the same way as the dominant religion has.
There, now you sound like a Traditional Catholic. :^)
No, I have a problem with your correction. It is not the Constitution's job to define true religion. It is the Constitution's job to recognize the country's tradition and culture.
DO agree with your response to my correction .But disagree
with your comments about the Constitution having the "job" to recognize,(bad choice of words--) as written document the Constitution is a product of the Tradition and culture
hence my post that "religion " was understood as defined
by Webster. It cannot assume human attributes as taking on "jobs" nor "recognition" It can only reflect the
traditions and culture at the time when written.
OK.
Not just the Catholics. Put this Protestant in that corner as well. Christianity is the only true religion.
How do you put a line through a word? [Seem to have missed that one at FR's HTML kindergarten]
Blessings -- B A
One that was missed from yesterday.
If you want on/off the list let me and little jeremiah know.
This is simply out of control liberalism followed to its "final solution".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.