Åke Green cleared
Swedish pentecoastal pastor Åke Green was cleared of charges by the Swedish Supreme Court this morning of November 29, 2005.
Åke Green - also known as Ake Green och Aake Green - held a sermon in the town of Borgholm on the island of Öland in Sweden on July 20th, 2003, for which he was later indicted.
The accusation was that Åke Green's sermon constitutes hate speech against homosexuals. Sweden is in this case bound by its own laws, but has also bound itself to abide by the European Convention on Human Rights. Within the latter, article 9 refers to religious freedoms while article 10 refers to freedom of speech and expression.
I am unsure whether my English-speaking readers have even read the sermon in its entirety in English, so I will attempt to translate it. Not to worry, I am quite proficient in both languages and I have a passion for truth, accuracy and objectivity. The sermon was first transcribed from spoken Swedish, so some colloquial and spoken expressions are present in the original text, which I will also try to translate into appropriate expressions in English. Here goes nothing:
''By legalizing, well, partnerships between men and men and between woman and woman, that will create disasters, quite simply. Unmatched. We see the repercussions of this already. We see it in AIDS, spreading. Now, not everyone infected with AIDS is not homosexual, but it has started because of this once upon a time and then of course innocent people can be infected by this horrible disease without having anything to do with what is behind this, regarding homosexuality.''
''The bible here brings up and educates about these abnormities. And sexual abnormities are a deep cancerous growth on the entire societal body. The Lord knows that sexually deformed people will even rape the animals. Not even the animals go free of the human sexual needs, and the fire that is ignited in a human being. Even that, people can indulge in.''
''Pederasts(1). Even when the bible was written, the Lord knew what would happen. We have been experiencing this and experience it and we are horrified by it. And Paulus speaks in First Corithinthians one and ten about perverted people. And perverted people is a translation from the original which states 'one who lies with boys'. One who lies with boys are perverted people that the bible speaks of. Now I want to emphasize that all homosexuals are not pedophiles. And all homosexuals are not perverse. But you still open the gate to forbidden areas and let sin take root in your mind. And someone who is a pedophile today does not start out as such. No, started simply by changing their social circle. That was how it started. And to be faithful in a homosex relationship is in no way a better relationship than one where you change partners every day. It is not a better relationship. It is just as despicable in the eyes of God.''
''Of my own free will I leave purity and recieve impurity. Consciously they switched, Paulus says. Homosexuality, that is something sick. That is just a healthy and pure thought that has been switched for a tainted thought. Where a healthy heart which has been replaced for a sick heart. That is what they have done. Where a healthy body that has been laid waste to because of a switch, Paulus says... Is homosexuality something you choose, yes. You choose it. You are not born to it. You choose this, quite simply. You exchange it. It is absolutely that way because otherwise it would be treachery against mankind.''(2)
(1) Here Green uses an outdated term - "gosseskändare" - where the victim is a male child - "gosse" - and the action is said to be a desecration - "skändning". One who desecrates something is therefore a "-skändare", and that's the entire word. The choice of using such an old word is not related to any known Swedish bible translations.
(2) It is unclear whose this treachery would be, but as I do not have a continuation of this quite, I would suggest that if homosexuality is not a choice, then mankind has been betrayed by its creator.
The above quote is not the entire sermon, but it is the portion quoted in the case documents. The court has taken all this into consideration, along with the context in which it was spoken, what the apparent objective of the sermon was, and what the relevant Swedish and European articles state on the matter.
I cannot translate the entire 16-page document explaining the motivations behind the court's decision, it is just too much and too boring. Perhaps another time. However, I can outline the arguments:
No special consideration is taken to how the speech was delivered. There is no particular protection for holding a sermon from the pulpit compared to singing a song or handing out a pamplet.
Consideration was taken to Green's defense that he was paraphrasing religious text and that this is part of religious freedom.
The court acknowledges that the definition of hate speech does not change with religious context, but that special care must be taken to the possible effects of a conviction on religious freedom. In other words, while it is important to represent the letter of the law, the effects of the law must not be such that following one law constitutes a breach of another - as in acting prohibively on the freedom of religion.
No consideration was taken to whether or not Åke Green's religious convictions, arguments or source material were legitimate. It is understandable that a court cannot make legitimacy judgements on the religious beliefs of a defendant, but this also means that anyone can claim religious affiliation, and recieve the more careful judgement considerations mentioned in the previous paragraph.
Personally, I think Åke Green would have been convicted if he had not been a reverend, if he had been a plain heterosexual old man working in mechanics, speaking in a room full of colleagues.
And personally, I think that means some animals are more equal than others.
/ Per
Åke Green - also known as Ake Green och Aake Green - held a sermon in the town of Borgholm on the island of Öland in Sweden on July 20th, 2003, for which he was later indicted.
The accusation was that Åke Green's sermon constitutes hate speech against homosexuals. Sweden is in this case bound by its own laws, but has also bound itself to abide by the European Convention on Human Rights. Within the latter, article 9 refers to religious freedoms while article 10 refers to freedom of speech and expression.
I am unsure whether my English-speaking readers have even read the sermon in its entirety in English, so I will attempt to translate it. Not to worry, I am quite proficient in both languages and I have a passion for truth, accuracy and objectivity. The sermon was first transcribed from spoken Swedish, so some colloquial and spoken expressions are present in the original text, which I will also try to translate into appropriate expressions in English. Here goes nothing:
''By legalizing, well, partnerships between men and men and between woman and woman, that will create disasters, quite simply. Unmatched. We see the repercussions of this already. We see it in AIDS, spreading. Now, not everyone infected with AIDS is not homosexual, but it has started because of this once upon a time and then of course innocent people can be infected by this horrible disease without having anything to do with what is behind this, regarding homosexuality.''
''The bible here brings up and educates about these abnormities. And sexual abnormities are a deep cancerous growth on the entire societal body. The Lord knows that sexually deformed people will even rape the animals. Not even the animals go free of the human sexual needs, and the fire that is ignited in a human being. Even that, people can indulge in.''
''Pederasts(1). Even when the bible was written, the Lord knew what would happen. We have been experiencing this and experience it and we are horrified by it. And Paulus speaks in First Corithinthians one and ten about perverted people. And perverted people is a translation from the original which states 'one who lies with boys'. One who lies with boys are perverted people that the bible speaks of. Now I want to emphasize that all homosexuals are not pedophiles. And all homosexuals are not perverse. But you still open the gate to forbidden areas and let sin take root in your mind. And someone who is a pedophile today does not start out as such. No, started simply by changing their social circle. That was how it started. And to be faithful in a homosex relationship is in no way a better relationship than one where you change partners every day. It is not a better relationship. It is just as despicable in the eyes of God.''
''Of my own free will I leave purity and recieve impurity. Consciously they switched, Paulus says. Homosexuality, that is something sick. That is just a healthy and pure thought that has been switched for a tainted thought. Where a healthy heart which has been replaced for a sick heart. That is what they have done. Where a healthy body that has been laid waste to because of a switch, Paulus says... Is homosexuality something you choose, yes. You choose it. You are not born to it. You choose this, quite simply. You exchange it. It is absolutely that way because otherwise it would be treachery against mankind.''(2)
(1) Here Green uses an outdated term - "gosseskändare" - where the victim is a male child - "gosse" - and the action is said to be a desecration - "skändning". One who desecrates something is therefore a "-skändare", and that's the entire word. The choice of using such an old word is not related to any known Swedish bible translations.
(2) It is unclear whose this treachery would be, but as I do not have a continuation of this quite, I would suggest that if homosexuality is not a choice, then mankind has been betrayed by its creator.
The above quote is not the entire sermon, but it is the portion quoted in the case documents. The court has taken all this into consideration, along with the context in which it was spoken, what the apparent objective of the sermon was, and what the relevant Swedish and European articles state on the matter.
I cannot translate the entire 16-page document explaining the motivations behind the court's decision, it is just too much and too boring. Perhaps another time. However, I can outline the arguments:
No special consideration is taken to how the speech was delivered. There is no particular protection for holding a sermon from the pulpit compared to singing a song or handing out a pamplet.
Consideration was taken to Green's defense that he was paraphrasing religious text and that this is part of religious freedom.
The court acknowledges that the definition of hate speech does not change with religious context, but that special care must be taken to the possible effects of a conviction on religious freedom. In other words, while it is important to represent the letter of the law, the effects of the law must not be such that following one law constitutes a breach of another - as in acting prohibively on the freedom of religion.
No consideration was taken to whether or not Åke Green's religious convictions, arguments or source material were legitimate. It is understandable that a court cannot make legitimacy judgements on the religious beliefs of a defendant, but this also means that anyone can claim religious affiliation, and recieve the more careful judgement considerations mentioned in the previous paragraph.
Personally, I think Åke Green would have been convicted if he had not been a reverend, if he had been a plain heterosexual old man working in mechanics, speaking in a room full of colleagues.
And personally, I think that means some animals are more equal than others.
/ Per
posted by Per Edman | 12:56
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home