Pastor Latzel and the limits of freedom of speech

[mikkel_the_dane]

It is a very delicate situation. I really empathize with those people. That's the reason why so many LGBTs lose the faith, quit the Church.
And they are so right, I mean...they should not listen to religions, they should follow their own hearts.
But...this thread is about political implications of freedom of speech.
I think a state cannot prevent a priest from expressing their own opinion.

I don't think that. Because it is not private. It is about God's Law and that priest didn't think it was private, but rather public.

Here is how it works. I in the name of God condemn you to Hell. That is not private.

 

[Stevicus]

In that case, because the banking and financial elites are above the law. Like Louis XV

The consequences of monarchism are noted throughout history, yet it astonishes me that so many of us fail to learn from history.

A famous example from history would be the Russian monarchy. They imposed censorship and had laws restricting speech, apparently believing that it would somehow keep the people under control. But what they forgot about is that they still have to feed the people and give them some sort of viable existence. But they refused to do that, and look what happened to them.

It was similar in Germany prior to the rise of Hitler. Their economy was a mess, with hunger and privation, where people had to bring wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread. Those are the things that make or break the societal order.

Hate speech has no power over a happy populace.

But if national leaders embrace a policy which causes widespread unhappiness and misery, then they can try banning hate speech until the cows come home, and it won't do a darn bit of good.

 

[Estro Felino]

I don't think that. Because it is not private. It is about God's Law and that priest didn't think it was private, but rather public.

Here is how it works. I in the name of God condemn you to Hell. That is not private.

That seminar was supposed to remain private

 

[Heyo]

I have read the actual speech.
The context is exclusively religious. Otherworldly context.
diese Verbrecher... he does not mean "criminals" he means "trespassers, transgressors" because the context is that of those who break God's law.

@Heyo
Correct me if I am wrong

"Criminal" is the correct translation for "Verbrecher". It would be an justiciable insult if falsely directed at a person. It has the connotation of someone breaking secular law because someone breaking divine law is a sinner.

 

[Heyo]

Well, sure, we Americans did that (with a wee bit of help from the Russians and Brits). We also invaded Italy, too. But did our influence take any hold? Did the Germans stop being Nazis only because the Allies told them to? Or was it their own idea?

Hard to say. We are good at what we do and currently we are doing democracy. But we are also good at following orders.
Btw: Our cowardly politicians decided to keep the Grundgesetz the Allies gave us instead of having a vote, so, in a way, we are still following your command. (Only that we are now better at it than you.)

 

[Estro Felino]

"Criminal" is the correct translation for "Verbrecher". It would be an justiciable insult if falsely directed at a person. It has the connotation of someone breaking secular law because someone breaking divine law is a sinner.

Okay, thanks. But how would you translate the word "transgressor" which is used in the Bible, and within the context of commandments?
Example. Luke 22 37

 

[Heyo]

Any bigtime televangelists?

Televangelist? What is that?

 

[Stevicus]

Hard to say. We are good at what we do and currently we are doing democracy. But we are also good at following orders.
Btw: Our cowardly politicians decided to keep the Grundgesetz the Allies gave us instead of having a vote, so, in a way, we are still following your command. (Only that we are now better at it than you.)

Americans sometimes balk at following orders. Probably goes back to our frontier/cowboy background, where we can be rather ornery and disobedient. The local churches probably had greater hold over their hearts and minds than the local courthouses, although a few hanging judges could keep them in line.

 

[Heyo]

Okay, thanks. But how would you translate the word "transgressor" which is used in the Bible, and within the context of commandments?

"Übeltäter" (evildoer, wrongdoer) is the word used by Luther.

 

[Stevicus]

Televangelist? What is that?

Someone like this guy:

Robert Tilton. He was one of my favorites.

Then there was Jimmy Swaggart.

 

[Estro Felino]

"Übeltäter" (evildoer, wrongdoer) is the word used by Luther.

I checked, by the way. In the Gospels the word Verbrecher is used to mean those who break God's law.
What translates transgressor.

 

[Heyo]

Someone like this guy:

Robert Tilton. He was one of my favorites.

Then there was Jimmy Swaggart.

I know what a televangelist is but most Germans don't and we have no word for it. So, what I wanted to say is: they don't exist here.

 

[Estro Felino]

I guess I am sounding like Latzel's attorney. But really guys...he did not mean to harm people. His was also a political statement.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That seminar was supposed to remain private

It is not private. He involved the most public figure he could, God. He made a public claim not limited to the group of people around him.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Personally, I believe that if you hate something, you should not hide behind your religion as an excuse.

That a million times over.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster's existence.
So I would not care less about the Flying Spaghetti Monster's threats

Bullying people and then saying "but you don't even believe that" doesn't change the fact the "go to hell" is bullying someone. That's why it matters.

 

[Twilight Hue]

In America, I believe the standard used is the "clear and present danger" standard. Unless one is directly advocating or encouraging violence or other lawlessness, then I think it would generally be allowed.

For example, if he was overtly calling on his congregation "Let's go out and kill homosexuals," that would probably be actionable. But anything short of that, like saying there's a "homo-lobby," that doesn't seem to cross the threshold.

It would have to be something obvious and blatant, not subtle things which could be interpreted in various ways.

I agree with that. Calling for people to be killed or other call of violence or mayhem , I can see where justifications can be applied for enforcement.

Anything else , including vile tripe should be protected as free speech.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Televangelist? What is that?

I envy you in your ignorance.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think a state cannot prevent a priest from expressing their own opinion.

Is this because you think the state shouldn't prevent anyone from expressing their opinion, or is it because you think priests should have special exemptions from general law?

 

[Estro Felino]

Is this because you think the state shouldn't prevent anyone from expressing their opinion, or is it because you think priests should have special exemptions from general law?

The first one of course. I have the same freedom of speech as priests, in my own country.
Unlimited freedom of speech.