Report: the law cracks down on Finnish politician who believes homosexual acts are sinful; she warns of 'self-censorship' among Christians

[ATraveller]

The police were investigating whether or not there hd been a crime. Your use of the words in quotation marks suggests someone had decided she was guilty.

The complainers have already deemed her guilty for an innocuous comment.
It’s a bit nitpicky. I mean, I guess I could have wrote “alleged crime” instead of “‘crime’” despite being practically the same thing in ordinary usage.

 

[MNathaniel]

The police were investigating whether or not there hd been a crime. Your use of the words in quotation marks suggests someone had decided she was guilty.

Query in the form of a thought experiment:

Suppose you were personally, sincerely, convinced of the truth of Christian ideas (whether Catholic or whatever denomination this lady belongs to). Suppose you sincerely believed that natural law sexual ethics were genuinely in the best interests of everyone, including in cases where the outcome may involve lifelong celibacy. Imagine you sincerely believed in heaven, hell, objective morality that includes natural law sexual ethics.

Do you reckon you might feel intimidated about telling the truth out loud? In public?

I’m not just asking if you think the police are likely to officially charge you with a crime yet or throw you in jail, yet (depending on country). But do you think you wouldn’t feel the water warming around you, that this is where it’s headed? Your sincerely held beliefs about what’s in the best interests of not only yourself but also for your loved ones and neighbours, characterized as “hate speech” likely to bring on serious consequences, whether related to job loss or international-news-level shaming and humiliation, or eventual detainment by police and a possible criminal record, monetary fine, or other consequence? Risks regarding custody of your children, etc?

It may start off in the courtroom of public opinion. Do you sincerely think that’s where trends suggest it will stay? If you imagine already being a Christian who feels morally obligated to speak (what you believe to be) the truth in love, in certain places in the world today… can you imagine your way to seeing some of the otherwise invisible intimidations that already loom large in the lives of many Christians who feel it’s just a ticking time clock until someone (whether employer, neighbours, or jury) decides to punish them for what they have no choice but to confess?

I’m honestly not trying to catastrophize; there’s an obvious difference between the life-and-death persecution of Christians in certain areas of Africa and the Middle East, and the overt oppression of Chinese Christians, and the situation faced by Christians in the affluent West. And I’m not suggesting that other groups in the West don’t know the experience from history and might think “Haha it’s your turn”, etc. All I’m asking is whether you can imagine your way to seeing why Christians in the West are so often already effectively ‘secret’ Christians, watching their words, identifying each other only after months of casual acquaintance and noticing giveaway silences during certain conversations, etc. It’s not as simple as saying “Well are you in jail yet?” Although obviously I appreciate that most of us are not yet (though I know of someone who is, would rather not localize myself that much though).

 

[FiveLinden]

Query in the form of a thought experiment:

I like thought experiments. This one is interesting. It is difficult to respond to on CAF because of the limitations on what one may say about the Catholic faith (not objecting to these limitations, just noting they are there and that I try to keep to the rules).

Do you reckon you might feel intimidated about telling the truth out loud? In public?

Absolutely. As an atheist, even though I live in a largely non-religious society, I constantly have to be careful about what I say. I do not want religious people to have the same problem. I accept that as ‘my’ ideas gain dominance in western societies Christians may feel oppressed.

I try to actively support believers in the exercise of their beliefs. For example I have given employees time off to go to Mass. In fact I have insisted they go. I have supported funding for employees doing theology degrees.

So yes, I get the concern. But why don’t we all agree to support religious and non-religious freedom and the exclusion of religious and non0religious belief from the public sphere (law, rights etc). Then we can argue on CAF to out heart’s content!

 

[MNathaniel]

As an atheist, even though I live in a largely non-religious society, I constantly have to be careful about what I say.

That’s an interesting perspective! Back before I was Christian I never felt intimidated to talk loudly about my views. But maybe we have different contexts (and also I was a brash youth). Definitely my experience though has been that only as a Christian have I felt the need to hush. Though I was never an atheist. But Wiccan/neopagan.

I guess (again, our local contexts may be different) I just knew growing up that society had made a space for me to ‘defy’ Christianity, and even when framing myself as a minority (eg ‘Burning Times’ malarkey, and the reality that I didn’t have peers who shared my specific thoughts), I never actually felt anything but superior to Christians, and safe from them. Even when in the room with them, I knew they’d have to fall silent if I framed things a certain way. I knew the larger society would be ‘on my side’ and that everyone considered the Christians the bad guys.

Again though, context. I’ve never lived (eg) in the American Bible Belt. I can imagine the situation being different for (eg) an atheist raised in a fundamentally religious family entrenched in a community of believers, or working for a religious employer who turns the tables like an uno reverse card of my personal experience.

Fair enough that you feel unable to say something due to forum rules (I’m not sure which they are, but I apologize for tempting you to break them; it wasn’t my intent).

PS thank you from a distance for giving your employees permission to go to Mass. That’s a beautiful thing.

why don’t we all agree to support religious and non-religious freedom and the exclusion of religious and non-religious belief from the public sphere (law, rights etc)

Depends for me on where that line is drawn, honestly.

I do get the problem. It’s why I typically try to stay out of the political side of things because politics and the law are about controlling others, whereas my preference is to pay attention to how I can control myself. By default my attitude toward politics (especially as someone who has genuinely been on opposite sides of the same debates over the years) is to support the most neutral space possible that allows everyone to shape their own individual life as they choose.

At the same time, it seems to me that sincere Christians and sincere atheists (and sincere others) still run into major problems that from each of our perspectives it makes sense that we struggle with. Where do we draw the line if we think human rights are already inherent to preborn persons? Where do we draw the line if we think it’s child abuse for parents to teach their SSA children that same-sex romantic activity is a sin? When one side thinks the other is murdering children, and one side thinks the other is brainwashing/traumatizing children, I think we all seem to struggle with deciding to step back, even in the name of compromise.

Anyway, tangent. I don’t want to derail thread. Thanks for the brief chat.

 

[Rau]

I found a quick Google of ‘Finland’ and ‘incitement’ made it clear: ‘to hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation’.

So, you need to Google, and found something that connected incitement and Finland to hatred and sexual orientation? For real?

Is it the case then that in Finland, to hold and express a view about what is immoral - is generally illegal?

 

[BornInMarch]

What do you mean by “discriminate” though? If you’re talking about businesses refusing to service LGBT people then the law should prevent that, but if you’re talking about individuals making hateful statements then I can’t condone the law standing in their way. Simply put, free speech only works if people are allowed to say things that are unpopular.

My stance on Speech is that it should only be banned if it reveals sensitive information about a private individual (“Here is so-and-so’s PIN number”), if it’s harassment against an individual (following someone around and screaming in his face), or if it’s a call to break other laws (“Go to so-and-so’s house and kill him”).

 

[fide]

For instance? where do you see the signs of this coming?

I see it blended in with its parent ideology, growing world-wide, which has such names as progressivism/socialism/communism/— all the “Big Brother is Watching You” philosophies of government, all the variations (or stages of development) of Augustine’s “earthly city” which is ever at war with the holy City of God. All forms of godless attempts at organizing a society have to fall back to “might makes right”, including the “might” that comes from the favored opinions of the “mighty” - and thus the weapon of “political correctness”. It works where there is no God, and thus no fear of God and His Truth. In such darkness, people seek affirmation and approval from one another, lacking the Rock of divine Truth to stand on.

Don’t you see it?

 

[Kaninchen]

Apparently, the Finnish Constitution contains this:

“No one shall, without an acceptable reason, be treated differently from other persons on the ground of sex, age, origin, language, religion, conviction, opinion, health, disability or other reason that concerns his or her person”.

Perhaps somebody who speaks Finnish might be able to explain whether Päivi Räsänen’s actions have contravened/may have contravened this Article?

 

[Nepperhan]

The politician posted on social media criticising her church, the state church, for participation in Pride. That was her “crime”.

That’s not America, now, is it?

 

[Nepperhan]

I see it blended in with its parent ideology, growing world-wide, which has such names as progressivism/socialism/communism/— all the “Big Brother is Watching You” philosophies of government, all the variations (or stages of development) of Augustine’s “earthly city” which is ever at war with the holy City of God.

“Socialism” is an allegation by conservatives for political purposes. It is not a movement gaining in America.

I live in the US. Can you bring the discussion as to here?

 

[ATraveller]

That’s not America, now, is it?

Of course not. My response was directed at your criticism of her. You wrote:

if you want to discriminate against someone because your religion bans homosexual acts or interracial marriage, that is something different.

She expressed her opposition to her church in participating in Pride. That’s now worthy of prosecution?

 

[ATraveller]

Perhaps somebody who speaks Finnish might be able to explain whether Päivi Räsänen’s actions have contravened/may have contravened this Article?

The police found nothing criminal but the Prosecutor General reopened it. That should say something about those going after her for a post that is far from advocating violence or even repealing gay “marriage”. At this point, they should just call for banning the Bible and the Koran if they feel that’s how the constitution should be read.
At the same time, I guess she and other Christians should flood the Prosecutor General’s office with criminal complaints every time someone calls them stupid in believing fairy tales and the like online.

 

[ATraveller]

It’s not just her (the Christian Democrat politician) but also a free church that’s being harassed by those using the state to do it:

The Evangelical Lutheran Mission Diocese of Finland ( Suomen evankelisluterilainen Lähetyshiippakunta – ELMDF) has announced that their Dean, Rev. Dr. Juhana Pohjola, was summoned for questioning at the Helsinki Police Department on February 11, 2020.

The interrogation lasted five hours. He has been declared suspected of “ethnic agitation.”

The ELMDF is under investigation by Finland’s Prosecutor General for the publication of a bookletupholding historic Christian teachings on human sexuality. That booklet is “Male and Female He Created Them: Homosexual Relationships Challenge the Christian Concept of Humanity,” written by Dr. Päivi Räsänen, a Member of Parliament in Finland and former Minister of the Interior. Dr. Räsänen is also under investigation by the Prosecutor General.

The ELMDF’s booklet was published in 2004, well before the 2017 legalization of same-sex marriage in Finland. In the work, Dr. Räsänen argues that homosexual activity must be identified as sin by the Church on the basis of the teachings of Scripture.

ILC concerned over investigation of Finnish Lutherans, urges prayer - International Lutheran Council

 

[fide]

“Socialism” is an allegation by conservatives for political purposes. It is not a movement gaining in America.

I live in the US. Can you bring the discussion as to here?

I live in America. The movement that is growing, and dangerously so, is presently called “progressivism.” All of the various names (progressivism/socialism/communism/— all the “Big Brother is Watching You” philosophies of government) are really irrelevant, and are mere steps in the same ultimate direction. The goal is dictatorship - absolute rule over the “deplorables” by the elite. The goal is power; the elite are obsessed with the lust of control ; they rule - they are “destined” to rule - because they love to rule, to control, to have power. They are indifferent to the economics involved, and the name of the style of governing - all such categories and ideologies are transitory; the end alone is clear: rule over all, whatever it takes. Bloody or not, elected or not, by assisination or by fraud, by law or by anarchy - all irrelevant - whatever it takes.

Why? Ask satan. He is the spirit behind it. If you ask him, expect him to lie. He will.

 

[JMMJ]

That is a very black and white, all or nothing view. I live in the US and I see nothing of the kind. I travel, too, and haven’t seen it in other areas of the country.

Weird. I guess it matters what lenses we choose to put in our glasses.

 

[Kaninchen]

At this point, they should just call for banning the Bible and the Koran if they feel that’s how the constitution should be read.

Nothing like a little exaggeration to make a point!

 

[ATraveller]

Nothing like a little exaggeration to make a point!

Well she did quote the Bible. That was part of the “criminal” post. Why not just go for the source of her “criminal” act -I mean alleged crime that was not criminal according to the police after hours of interrogation but not the Prosecutor General? It could save them hours of investigation in the future.

For those who don’t want to be distracted by a little exaggeration, I’ll make it easier to see the main points:

The police found nothing criminal but the Prosecutor General reopened it. That should say something about those going after her for a post that is far from advocating violence or even repealing gay “marriage”.
At the same time, using the same standard for interpreting the Finnish constitution, I guess she and other Christians should flood the Prosecutor General’s office with criminal complaints every time someone calls them stupid in believing fairy tales and the like online.

 

[adamhovey1988]

“I’m worried mainly that the mere investigation has brought about a certain kind of a climate of self-censorship among Bible-believing Christians, fear of being stigmatized, despised, or even interfered with by the police in some way if similar views are expressed,” she said.

Because of my opinions on transgenderism, I’m banned from Norway, so there is some truth to this.

 

[Kaninchen]

that was not criminal according to the police after hours of interrogation but not the Prosecutor General?

This is where your ability to understand Finnish is such an advantage. I’m stuck with the reporting efforts of what might well be the ‘usual suspects’ of immediate outrage for all I know.

 

[fide]

That is a very black and white, all or nothing view. I live in the US and I see nothing of the kind. I travel, too, and haven’t seen it in other areas of the country.

Weird. I guess it matters what lenses we choose to put in our glasses.

No, truth and falsity remain truth or falsity, no matter what lenses one chooses (interesting choice of words) to look through. Truth does not depend on our acceptance or rejection of it, neither does falsity. We can choose as we please - reality remains real, fantasy remains fantasy. Reality asks no man for permission to be reality.

God offers to share wisdom with human persons - His creation - but He entrusts us with intellect and will, and the ability to discern and choose as we will. But listen to this, in His Holy Word:

2Th 2:9 The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders,
2Th 2:10 and with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
2Th 2:11 Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false,
2Th 2:12 so that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

That is a sobering word, a warning to any who would bend truth to make the result more “pleasing”.

There is a lawless one coming - skilled in deception - targeting and misleading those who refuse to love - and seek - and live in - Truth. These will believe what is false! In all sincerity! Convinced! Embracing the Lie with all their devotion. Have you seen the films of the German crowds entranced before Hitler, hanging on his every powerful word, captive in the spell he was able to cast upon them, leading them and their nation to destruction. He is a warning - a preview - an example in one nation of what is prophesied for the world in the end times.

In the end there is black or white, yes. And that end began to come, in the beginning.