Finland's courts crack down on hate speech and inciting hatred

[ghost]

@pmaitra Sir,

largely disagree. Homosexuality is not natural. It is unnatural. The comparison is not natural vs artificial. The comparison is natural vs unnatural.

It is natural,"natural" is something you are born with.Like I have posted animals are also Homosexual.You never become homosexual you always realize your homosexuality.Maybe it is not the common norm of nature,but still you cant deny it is part of nature.

@jouni, a child must be raised by a male and female, because, the male and the female side imparts two different and complementary traits and training to the growing child; and so that that they raise the child with dedication, it is necessary to increase their stakes in the raising the child, and one way to raise the stakes is to ensure that the child is raised by its biological parents.

Studies have shown that most studies conclude what the sponsor of the study wants it the conclude. Studies that say it is natural are either politically motivated, or performed under monetary incentive or political duress.

If you don't like homosexual stay away from them,but do not ridicule them.What will you do if you have a homosexual child?kill him!cause there is no treatment in this world that can change it.

Bring on all the name of famous Homosexual people parents,they will be all normal straight couple.Whether homosexual will be good parent or not,that is debatable.I think it is better than being raised orphan.See what is the best option for them ,and to me being raised by a homosexual couple in a home is much better than being raised in orphanage.

 

[Singh]

Snakes have been reported with limbs. Aberration of nature.

Which is again natural.

Siamese twins for eg - aberration of nature.

 

[pmaitra]

@ghost Sir, do you believe in form-follows-function?

If you take a large enough sample from nature, you will find outliers. You cannot equate the outlier with the vast majority of conforming examples.

Natural is anything that conforms to the "order of nature," as envisaged by Article 370.

I don't think it is possible to prosecute anyone if two consenting adults do something in private. Making a public spectacle of it is what I find reprehensible. Also, people do "realize" once they are motivated at a young impressionable age by the poachers. Hormonal imbalance may play a part.

Bottom line is, in India, such ideas do not sell and are seen as moral corruption and threat to our societal structure. This feeling cuts across religious lines.

Which is again natural.

Siamese twins for eg - aberration of nature.

No it is not. You are equating an outlier with the conforming examples.

 

[Singh]

@ghost Sir, do you believe in form-follows-function?

If you take a large enough sample from nature, you will find outliers. You cannot equate the outlier with the vast majority of conforming examples.

Nevertheless outliers do exist naturally.

=

Natural is anything that conforms to the "order of nature," as envisaged by Article 370.

I don't think it is possible to prosecute anyone if two consenting adults do something in private. Making a public spectacle of it is what I find reprehensible. Also, people do "realize" once they are motivated at a young impressionable age by the poachers. Hormonal imbalance may play a part.

Bottom line is, in India, such ideas do not sell and are seen as moral corruption and threat to our societal structure. This feeling cuts across religious lines.

That would be Section 377 of the IPC, Article 370 of the Constitution is the J&K thingy.

Section 377 is a British era law.

As per Section 377 female homosexual intercourse is legal. Its only sodomy and I believe oral sex that is illegal.

However, Delhi HC had overruled this archaic law but the SC ruled that this law should be done away with by the Parliament.

In anycase no Delhite will be prosecuted as per this Section because Delhi HC has already ruled that this law violates the fundamental tenets of the constitution and rights of the citizenry.

 

[jouni]

If you celebrate Christmas in India, here is a great gift for your friends. Finnish textile firm just launched Tom of Finland collection bed linen.

 

[pmaitra]

Many people are confused about what is "natural." Just because something grows or has life, does not make it natural.

A natural process is as important as a natural result. This natural process may be interrupted by, (1) an aberration, (2) deliberate intervention. To affect change by aberration of human intervention, is evolution by artificial selection. Of course, evolution is moot in homosexuals, as they cannot reproduce.

Here are examples of evolution by artificial selection:

Source: Artificial selection

Homosexuality - a Natural Occurence in Conflict with Nature
Homosexuality is a sexual variation that is occurring naturally, yet is against nature. "Occurring naturally, yet being against nature" here means that it manifests itself through a natural process but cannot serve the law of natural reproduction. It is therefore against nature, or rather, a naturally occurring sexual variation that is against nature. Homosexuality is a variation rooted in genetics, and for this reason it is considered natural. But due to the inability to reproduce, it is categorized as being against nature; hence, homosexuality is called a naturally occurring sexual variation that is against nature.

This is an official and authorised translation of a FIGU publication.
Source: The Future Of Mankind - A Billy Meier Wiki - Homosexuality - What is its Cause?

I think this puts it very clearly.

 

[pmaitra]

Nevertheless outliers do exist naturally.

Outliers exist "naturally" in exceptional cases. They are true for a minority of cases, and false for a overwhelming majority of cases.

So, it is not nevertheless. It is the norm that is closer to the truth, not the exception.

 

[pmaitra]

@Singh, yes, you are right. My mistake - it is Article 377.

However, Delhi HC had overruled this archaic law but the SC ruled that this law should be done away with by the Parliament.

You know that is not true right?

SC never ruled that it "should" be done away with.

SC said if it has to be done away it, it should be done by the Parliament, and cannot be done by the court.

There is a difference there.

 

[rock127]

If you celebrate Christmas in India, here is a great gift for your friends. Finnish textile firm just launched Tom of Finland collection bed linen.

I guess this might be considered a good flavor for the special "hunger" in Finland and might be a national pride BUT keep it in your own place.Keep your personal tastes to yourself and don't ENFORCE it on others. :thumb:

We do celebrate Christmas but not by these things.

 

[pmaitra]

I guess this might be considered a good flavor for the special "hunger" in Finland and might be a national pride BUT keep it in your own place.Keep your personal tastes to yourself and don't ENFORCE it on others. :thumb:

We do celebrate Christmas but not by these things.

The joke is on @jouni.

Christianity is against homosexuality.

 

[ghost]

@pmaitra Sir,

do you believe in form-follows-function?

If you take a large enough sample from nature, you will find outliers. You cannot equate the outlier with the vast majority of conforming examples.

Natural is anything that conforms to the "order of nature," as envisaged by Article 370.

Yes, I believe in form follow function,to straight it is some other form ,to homosexual and bi sexual it is other form.Just because your natural inclination is toward one form,you can't contradict others natural inclination toward other form.When being straight you are attracted ,turned on by a "particular form" ,you are not following anyone instructions,it's your natural feeling which comes from within.So why others should be instructed to which form they should be attracted to,it's all natural.To a homosexual the feeling will be natural,from within .What if you go to a place where homosexual are in majority and they tell you that your inclination is wrong,can you change your natural inclination after this?no!Humans are not big enough to decide what is part of nature and what not,hence I condemn such article defining nature.

I don't think it is possible to prosecute anyone if two consenting adults do something in private. Making a public spectacle of it is what I find reprehensible. Also, people do "realize" once they are motivated at a young impressionable age by the poachers. Hormonal imbalance may play a part.

Bottom line is, in India, such ideas do not sell and are seen as moral corruption and threat to our societal structure. This feeling cuts across religious lines.

I am not talking about public display of love,but social acceptance of such people.The right to marriage.I again repeat they are not made but are born homosexual,then why punish them for something of which they have no control.Denying homosexual basic rights to live with dignity is against humanity.

No it is not. You are equating an outlier with the conforming examples.

You can't deny even after being outlier,they are part of nature ,they do exist and will continue to exist.Better we accept the truth and drop the false charade of "morality" as there is nothing immoral for two consenting adults to have feeling for each other.Let's end this debate here.I wish all homosexual to move to Finland ,if they want to live "normal and natural" life as it will be "unnatural " to live a life which is against your own nature in India.

 

[Singh]

@Singh, yes, you are right. My mistake - it is Article 377.

You know that is not true right?

SC never ruled that it "should" be done away with.

SC said if it has to be done away it, it should be done by the Parliament, and cannot be done by the court.

There is a difference there.

SC ruled that its the prerogative of the Parliament if it wishes to do away with this law or not.

But Delhi HC will not prosecute based on this law.

As an example its something similar to what happens in USA, there are a lot of many old archaic laws but they aren't acted upon.
Dumb Laws, Stupid Laws: We have weird laws, strange laws, and just plain crazy laws!

 

[jouni]

Ok, maybe handmade Marttiini knife is more your thing for Christmas gift.

 

[pmaitra]

SC ruled that its the prerogative of the Parliament if it wishes to do away with this law or not.

That is correct.

But Delhi HC will not prosecute based on this law.

As an example its something similar to what happens in USA, there are a lot of many old archaic laws but they aren't acted upon.
Dumb Laws, Stupid Laws: We have weird laws, strange laws, and just plain crazy laws!

"Dumb Laws, Stupid Laws" may apply to the examples, but how are they related to Article 377?

The Parliament hasn't removed Article 377. Guess why? No parliamentarian wants to become unpopular among the Indian public.

 

[Singh]

Outliers exist "naturally" in exceptional cases. They are true for a minority of cases, and false for a overwhelming majority of cases.

So, it is not nevertheless. It is the norm that is closer to the truth, not the exception.

"Abberation of nature" is no reason to discriminate against anyone.

And what happens between two consenting individuals is of no business to the state (obvioulsy there are some caveats)

Here is the Delhi HC judgement

"The two judge bench went on to hold that:
" If there is one constitutional tenet that can be said to be underlying theme of the Indian Constitution, it is that of 'inclusiveness'. This Court believes that Indian Constitution reflects this value deeply ingrained in Indian society, nurtured over several generations. The inclusiveness that Indian society traditionally displayed, literally in every aspect of life, is manifest in recognising a role in society for everyone. Those perceived by the majority as "deviants' or 'different' are not on that score excluded or ostracised.

Where society can display inclusiveness and understanding, such persons can be assured of a life of dignity and non-discrimination. This was the 'spirit behind the Resolution' of which Nehru spoke so passionately. In our view, Indian Constitutional law does not permit the statutory criminal law to be held captive by the popular misconceptions of who the LGBTs are. It cannot be forgotten that discrimination is antithesis of equality and that it is the recognition of equality which will foster the dignity of every individual.[23]"

What a beautiful judgement.

 

[jouni]

--------erased

 

[Singh]

That is correct.

"Dumb Laws, Stupid Laws" may apply to the examples, but how are they related to Article 377?

The Parliament hasn't removed Article 377. Guess why? No parliamentarian wants to become unpopular among the Indian public.

Delhi HC believes section 377 is a violation of Constiutional values and individual rights and they will always rule in favour of the accused in this case. Parliamentarians may or mayn't change the law, the precedent has been set in Delhi HC.

There are many cases in which legislatures are loathe to change the laws, but the Courts are quite proactive and if they believe the laws are incompatible in today's time then they are done away with.

 

[pmaitra]

What if you go to a place where homosexual are in majority and they tell you that your inclination is wrong,can you change your natural inclination after this?no!Humans are not big enough to decide what is part of nature and what not,hence I condemn such article defining nature.

No one is advocating discrimination based on sexual orientation. What I am saying is, what the article is saying. Homosexuality is against the order of nature.

I am not talking about public display of love,but social acceptance of such people.The right to marriage.I again repeat they are not made but are born homosexual,then why punish them for something of which they have no control.Denying homosexual basic rights to live with dignity is against humanity.

I don't think your assumption that they are not made is correct. There is a lot of brainwashing and propaganda that is going on.

I do not exclude hormonal imbalance, but that is certainly not the only cause.

 

[pmaitra]

"Abberation of nature" is no reason to discriminate against anyone.

That is a strawman.

 

[jouni]

@ghost, do not bother. Some people are also born less sensitive to issues concerning heart and conscience.