From The Washington Post, Feb. 12:
A Swedish appeals court on Friday overturned the conviction of a Pentecostal pastor found guilty of violating the country’s hate-speech law.
The court ruled that the Rev. Ake Green had a right to preach "the Bible’s categorical condemnation of homosexual relations as a sin," even if that position was "alien to most citizens" and if Green’s views could be "strongly questioned," according to news-service translations of the court’s ruling. The appeals court ruled that Sweden’s law was never intended to stifle open discussion of homosexuality or restrict a pastor’s right to preach.
But, contrary to claims of the religious right, Bible preaching is not what got Green in trouble with the law.
Green was prosecuted because of a sermon that labeled homosexuality "a deep cancerous tumor in the entire society" and equated it with pedophilia.
According to the Post, the case began in June 2003 at Green’s small church.
"Our country is facing a disaster of great proportions," he said in the sermon, equating homosexuality with pedophilia and bestiality. He warned that "sexually twisted people will rape animals."
Green was convicted and sentenced to 30 days in prison, but remained free pending appeal. He was the first person in Sweden convicted of agitating against homosexuals since the law was extended to gays and lesbians in 2002. He was also the first preacher in Sweden convicted for hate speech for remarks made from the pulpit.
Gay rights activists in Sweden may appeal, arguing (in part) that Green’s speech would be illegal if directed at Jews, for whom the hate-speech laws were originally written.
The Swedish court ruling may represent both a victory for free speech — and a defeat for civility.
I have to say that this case does disturb me from a free speech issue. While I found the content of his sermon to be completely slanderous and vile, it does not seem much more extreme than the language we permit at KKK rallies or even at Rev. Phelps’s public events. I don’t know what Sweden’s freedom of speech rights are, but if this man had been arrested in the United States I would be horrified. This anti-gay bigot was speaking in the confines of a private church building. Barring him giving people orders to shoot or otherwise harm gay people, he should be free to speak freely. The logic that his unsavory language must be restricted because it harms society, or segments of our society, could easily be reversed to cause the banning of pro-gay speech in a country that is on the verge of theocracy (see the United States of America). I know it sounds silly, but pro-gay people should support this guy’s right to free speech because in the end it could be beneficial to their own right to free speech. Similarly, the hate crimes statute being warped into limiting speech in private settings could easily be seen as an example of why the hate crimes statute is overly abused and shouldn’t exist at all. Legislating this kind of language away moves it underground, not eliminates it. Instead we should seek to provide the rational counterpart to this guy’s warped message so that truly open minded people will see these groups as the quacks that they are.
Government control of speech, especially for highminded reasons, really irks my American genes. I am a gay man and I am deeply suspicious of the whole panoply of supposedly protective laws of late about hate speech and hate crimes.
Let the Rev say all he wants, short of inciting his congregation directly to do physical harm. And let the government stay out of my mouth, as well as my bedroom.