4 ms·

Former minister to stand trial in Finland for tweeting verse from Bible

13 points by thinkingemote 5y ago

jleyank 5y ago
I do not care to research the specifics, but I think it's a weak, not terribly moral argument to say that slander is allowed due to "religious freedom". To me, such freedom means you can practice in peace with those in agreement with you, not act against others in some $GOD's name. If your beliefs make you think some people aren't really people, I can see that being something to invalidate serving in government or falling under hate speech/discrimination laws. Lots of bad history here...
- pas 5y ago
  Obviously. Again, obviously, through simple logic it's easy to see that anyone who believes in an afterlife that depends on the keeping of commandments during the "current life" will have wildly different priors for making decisions. (Hence the aggressive proselytizing of some sects.)
cassianoleal 5y ago
What was the tweet? I couldn't find the information in the article.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  The article doesn't quote it verbatim, but it says this about it: > On June 17, 2019, she asked in a Twitter post how the sponsorship was compatible with the Bible, linking to a photograph of a biblical passage, Romans 1:24-27, on Instagram. Here's what that passage is (I don't know if this is the same translation she linked to): > Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.
asojfdowgh 5y ago
Apparently there is 3 separate statements over a long period, one of which is a tweet? Does anyone know of the 3 and would care to translate them?
bell-cot 5y ago
tldr summary - She (the former minister) tweeted (& instagrammed) a fairly homophobic few verses from the Bible, in the context of questioning the sponsorship of an LBGT Pride event by the Finnish Lutheran Church. (Of which she is a more-conservative member. Verses were Romans 1:24-27.) That slim fact is surrounded by so much posturing, puffery, and canned quotes that most of the Roman Catholics I know are probably praying for the Lord to strike down the editor of the Catholic Herald with a column of fire from the sky. Given how much nastiness - starting with women being very much the inferior sex - you can support with short quotes from the Bible, prosecuting her for the tweets strikes me as an idiotic counter-strategy.

13 points by thinkingemote 5y ago

I do not care to research the specifics, but I think it's a weak, not terribly moral argument to say that slander is allowed due to "religious freedom". To me, such freedom means you can practice in peace with those in agreement with you, not act against others in some $GOD's name. If your beliefs make you think some people aren't really people, I can see that being something to invalidate serving in government or falling under hate speech/discrimination laws. Lots of bad history here...

pas 5y ago
Obviously. Again, obviously, through simple logic it's easy to see that anyone who believes in an afterlife that depends on the keeping of commandments during the "current life" will have wildly different priors for making decisions. (Hence the aggressive proselytizing of some sects.)

cassianoleal 5y ago

What was the tweet? I couldn't find the information in the article.

josephcsible 5y ago
The article doesn't quote it verbatim, but it says this about it: > On June 17, 2019, she asked in a Twitter post how the sponsorship was compatible with the Bible, linking to a photograph of a biblical passage, Romans 1:24-27, on Instagram. Here's what that passage is (I don't know if this is the same translation she linked to): > Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

asojfdowgh 5y ago

Apparently there is 3 separate statements over a long period, one of which is a tweet? Does anyone know of the 3 and would care to translate them?

bell-cot 5y ago

tldr summary - She (the former minister) tweeted (& instagrammed) a fairly homophobic few verses from the Bible, in the context of questioning the sponsorship of an LBGT Pride event by the Finnish Lutheran Church. (Of which she is a more-conservative member. Verses were Romans 1:24-27.) That slim fact is surrounded by so much posturing, puffery, and canned quotes that most of the Roman Catholics I know are probably praying for the Lord to strike down the editor of the Catholic Herald with a column of fire from the sky. Given how much nastiness - starting with women being very much the inferior sex - you can support with short quotes from the Bible, prosecuting her for the tweets strikes me as an idiotic counter-strategy.