To find the ongoing coverage about Mila on Jihad Watch, see HERE.
Finally, Mila’s case has attracted attention from French President Emmanuel Macron who weighed in with the obvious, declaring that “blasphemy is no crime” in France.
Westerners need to freeze-frame that statement. Unless Sharia has taken over, criticizing Islam is perfectly acceptable in Western countries, as is insulting Islam. Neither are illegal. Christianity is routinely mocked in France and all over the West without the “offender” having to go into hiding. Islam should be no different; neither should any other religion or doctrine.
Macron went on:
“In this debate we have lost sight of the fact that Mila is an adolescent. We owe her protection at school, in her daily life, in her movements,” Macron said in an interview with Le Dauphiné Libéré newspaper.
The president added that in finding a new school for Mila, “the state has fulfilled its responsibilities” and that children needed to be “better protected” against “new forms of hatred and harassment online that can be destructive”.
“That necessity is separate from the criticism of religion. The law is clear: we have the right to blaspheme, to criticise, to caricature religions. The republican order is not a moral order … what is outlawed is to incite hatred and attack dignity,” Macron added.
On the other side (of his mouth), Macron recently stated that “those convicted of ‘hate speech’ should be banned from all social media for life.” The French leader has been battling for votes, caught between his globalist instincts and the rising “populist” movement.
“Blasphemy ‘is no crime’, says Macron amid French girl’s anti-Islam row,” by Kim Willsher, Guardian, February 12, 2020:
Emmanuel Macron has waded into a row over a schoolgirl whose attack on Islam has divided France, insisting that blasphemy is “no crime”.
The French president defended the teenager, named only as Mila, who received death threats and was forced out of her school after filming an anti-religious diatribe on social media.
Macron’s intervention comes after his justice minister, Nicole Belloubet, was criticised for claiming Mila’s attack on religion was “an attack on freedom of conscience” while saying the death threats were “unacceptable”.
The case has sparked a furious public debate in France, a strictly secular republic with a large Muslim population. The education authorities have since found another school for the teenager.
“In this debate we have lost sight of the fact that Mila is an adolescent. We owe her protection at school, in her daily life, in her movements,” Macron said in an interview with Le Dauphiné Libéré newspaper.
The president added that in finding a new school for Mila, “the state has fulfilled its responsibilities” and that children needed to be “better protected” against “new forms of hatred and harassment online that can be destructive”.
“That necessity is separate from the criticism of religion. The law is clear: we have the right to blaspheme, to criticise, to caricature religions. The republican order is not a moral order … what is outlawed is to incite hatred and attack dignity,” Macron added….
Charles says
Occasionally Macron seems to grow a spine.
revereridesagain says
Even a stopped clock…
mortimer says
Wha’ happened? Macron said something that is literally true without slip-sliding!
‘BLASPHEMY IS NOT ILLEGAL IN FRANCE’. He has thus admitted that blaspheming Islam is legal in France. In fact, France is historically one of the most blasphemous countries in the world.
France has a powerful tradition of anti-clericalism that many churchmen have denounced as blasphemous. Indeed, French anti-clericalists have often been outright, even vicious blasphemers.
Sun says
Macron promises a lot. Unfortunately, he mostly fails to turn his words into action.
Peter says
Why is criticism of Islam even deemed “blasphemy”? How absurd.
Criticism of Islam, given the inherently violent and predatory INFIDELPHOBIC core tenets of that totalitarian ideological belief system, is well merited. Islam is unhealthy for most of humanity, including its adherents.
Criticism of Islam, its tenets, and the nasty behaviors of its “believers” is rational, logical, and reasonable. Muslims give us daily evidence for that.
James Lincoln says
Peter says,
“Criticism of Islam, its tenets, and the nasty behaviors of its “believers” is rational, logical, and reasonable.”
Yes it is. Anyone who disagrees with this either:
Knows the truth about islam – but is purposely trying to deceive. Think “imams in mosques.”
Has not conducted “due diligence” regarding islam using factual, evidence-based logic. They accept at face value the propaganda promoted by leftists and muslims. Think the “intellectually lazy” population, leftists, etc.
somehistory says
You are right. What he should have said…if he had the courage…is To criticize islam is not a crime and will not be punished as a crime.
Carol the 1st says
Usage of “blaspheme” gave immediate offense as it seemed to lend some mysterious sleight-of-hand “authority” to the ROP and its “official” version of the godhead. Thanks but no thanks.
Beneath the Veil of Consciousness says
The innocents in France are being threatened and persecuted at this intensity with a seven percent muslim population. What can be expected at fourteen percent? The Jews leaving France in response to muslim oppression and persecution is the canary in the coal mine.Time for France to decide what is best for itself and their loyal citizenry.
Rarely says
How can I blaspheme a religion I don’t believe in in? e.g. it may be blasphemy for a Christian to deny that Jesus is the Son of God but for a Buddhist to do so is obvious simply because he isn’t a Christian in the first place.
Duh. Obviously non-muslims don’t believe mohammed was a prophet but to say so is blasphemy? Give me a break. If a person simply says: “I am a Christian” is he automatically being blasphemous in the view of all other religions? Apparently so in 2020 politically correct speech.
revereridesagain says
Exactly. Every person is atheist with regard to about 4,000 religions in whose gods they do not believe. Those of us who are atheist across the board merely add one more.
The standard of prohibited speech should not be: “what is outlawed is to incite hatred and attack dignity”, but “what is outlawed is to directly incite violence and attack one’s right not to be subject to it”. You cannot outlaw an emotion, and one’s dignity is one’s own responsibility. “Sticks and stones” will break bones. “Names” will merely hurt feelings, and one is free to walk away.
Carol the 1st says
Good points.
Kenek says
“If a person simply says: “I am a Christian” is he automatically being blasphemous”
yes, according to a moslem. this is the reason you pay “protection money” . It works just like mafia protection money, and your your legs will be broken if you do not pay the jizya. Onlt People of the Book can pay it, all others must covert to islam or DIE.
gravenimage says
Grimly true, Kenek.
No Muzzies Here says
I would like to believe what he says. France should have learned her lesson after the terror attacks, but it didn’t. In his quest to boost his political career in the EU, Macron is abandoning France to her new overlords.
Michael Copeland says
President Hollande, after the Charlie Hebdo murders, did NOT say
“This is a date that will live in infamy…..”
He said
“This has nothing to do with Islam….”
The French leadership have a steep Learning Curve to climb, if they will only do so.
Bob Thompson says
“The French leadership have a steep Learning Curve to climb, if they will only do so.”
You and I can and must change that.
You might ask, “HOW???”
By flooding the internet with REAL reasons for opposing Islam.
There are some non Muslims who are truly uninformed of what is so bad about Islam or increased Muslim populations.
And there are other kafirs or kuffar who take advantage of nationwide level of ignorance by pretending they are unaware of the dangers of Islamization and so they are able to take the easy out…they yield to even the smallest levels of suggested intimidation.
If we give everyone lots of solid reasons to use when criticizing Islam, we can close the door they use to evade accountability for their words and actions.
Here are some good, defensible reasons to oppose Islamization.
Child marriage
Wife beating
Polygamy
Child abuse
Jihad
Killing those who are not Muslim (Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Apostates and etc.)
Dualistic ethics
Niqab
Bill Warner PhD: Hate Can Be a Virtue
https://youtu.be/4R0ua6c4O14
Hate Can Be a Virtue
Progressives talk a lot about the evil of hate. We are told that if we object to Sharia law and jihad, then we are intolerant haters. But what about hating harms people?
I hate wife-beating, yet the Sharia, Koran and Sunna support it.
I am intolerant of child abuse, including child marriage, but the Sunna and Sharia support it.
I hate the jihadist killings of Christians, Jews, Buddhists and apostates.
I am intolerant of religious leaders, such as the Pope and Dai Lama, who will not condemn the jihadic killing of their groups.
I hate dualistic ethics, which lack integrity.
I am intolerant of face coverings, since it cuts off open communication.
As a society, we have lost the ability to become morally outraged and are incapable of anger about the Islamic harm of innocents. I hate that.
Rufolino says
You omitted from your list the barbaric Islamic death sentence on homosexuals.
I’m certainly not accusing you, but it would seem some Christians might silently sympathise with it.
Something close to anti-gay hatred occasionally appears on these pages.
gravenimage says
Important list, Bob and Rufolino.
Janice Mermikli says
What he should have said is “This has everything to do with Islam”, but no mainstream politician – not only in France but anywhere else in the Western world – would be courageous enough to say that.
Bob Thompson says
Only an informed populace can make it safe for politicians to go out on a limb to speak out against Islamization.
Even brave and brilliant Stephen Miller in the White House has had to lie low to let the storm of false accusations of racism blow over from his statements to protect America from invaders of all types.
An informed populace will be equipped with good defensible reasons that anyone and everyone can grab and use to shield themselves in debate and do battle against charges of racism, to stand up to the threat of Islamization.
When we oppose Islam by calling it a cult, that doesnt impress the ignorant apologists.
When we oppose Islam by calling Muslims goat herders, that only makes the know nothing Liberals believe we are bigots.
When we cite the Islamic custom of polygamy, we are getting closer to reasons that can help move a debate, but only if we follow that up with what that means. More Muslim wives mean more Muslim children to increase the drain on our entitlements system, if they are receiving benefits from the taxpayers. But it also means, more new potential Jihadis.
One of the good defensible reasons I use is that Islam does not believe in equality as we all do in America,
Iranian, Amir Taheri elaborates here:
Amir Taheri: “Islam Is Incompatible With Democracy”
Lest us return to the issue of equality.
The idea is unacceptable to Islam.
For the non-believer cannot be the equal of the believer.
Even among the believers only those who subscribe to the three so-called Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam ( Ahl el-Kitab) are regarded as fully human.
Here is the hierarchy of human worth in Islam:
At the summit are free male Muslims
Next come Muslim male slaves
Then come free Muslim women
Next come Muslim slave women.
Then come free Jewish and /or Christian men
Then come slave Jewish and/or Christian men
Then come slave Jewish and/or Christian women.
Each category has rights that must be respected.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1138942/posts
The fact that Islam doesnt believe in equality is a fact that few low information Islam apologists know and it will be a point that no one can easily counter.
These are the kinds of good solid reasons we should use to oppose Islam in debate. When enough of us do this enough, then politicians will be able to stand up to the intimidation of Islamists and their apologists.
Hawkeye says
We don’t have to say nice things about Islam if we don’t want to ,I don’t see anyone saying anything about the terrorists beheading the Coptic Christians 5 years ago today, so shut your fat greasy sharia law face
mortimer says
The devil is in the details. French courts will not be able to claim that the vicious anti-clericalism of the past is not blasphemous … but does French anti-clericalism ‘ATTACK DIGNITY’ and does it ‘INCITE HATRED’ ???
It most certainly does, but the French have no problem if someone attacks the dignity of Roman Catholics or their clergy.
MORE LEFTARDED DOUBLE STANDARDS. Selective outrage.
Ren says
“blasphemy is no crime
Islamophobia is no crime neither.
mortimer says
Response to Ren: bigotry of any kind is unbecoming.
Carol the 1st says
Bigotry would be something based upon unreasonable and invalid dislike or hatred. If one’s feelings are based on healthy aversions then the emotion is there to serve valid functions as might serve to promote and protect healthy and realistic objectives. One person’s “bigotry” might be another’s “wisdom”. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
For an example, I’m amazed to see numerous videos lately wherein nasty or stupid-faced idiots are telling us not to become RACIST toward the Chinese now that we all have the Coronavirus. It’s like they’re living in a different world of their own projection! This won’t stop me, however, from crossing to the other side of the street if I see some poor, nice Chinese person coughing away.
gravenimage says
Mortimer, how is opposing the horrors of Islam “bigoted”? It seems like a reasonable response to me. This is like saying that opposing Nazism is bigoted.
Bob Thompson says
Yeppers.
Even when we have come to recognize the threat of Islam, it takes months or longer, to re-examine all of the preconceived ideas programmed into us by an unenlightened culture and any more recent PC imprinting
.
I hope this comment of mine doesn’t exhaust the last reply prompt.
underbed cat says
Criminalizing speech that is factual true about the doctrine of Islam should not be a crime. That is what sharia intends when it claims hate speech or apostasy laws, the results are dangerous for the speaker even if a factual description or criticism of the doctrine spoken and unintentionally gives protection for evil by silencing information of a speaker or a writer to expose a misinformation campaign that Islam is just a religion that is peaceful and not a hostile movement to attempt to create a counterstate government. Sharia laws should not apply unless it is the legal laws of country, and should never be allowed to overlay in a country that has it’s own laws and Constitution. France has let the virus in as many countries have and now the after affects are seeding. Best to outlaw it completely since it will grow to a hostile takeover if not removed. The difficulty is how to remove once it deceives a government thru misidentification.
Gork says
The speech doesn’t have to be factual. She can state her own distaste for the religion if she wants to. It can even be wrong. The wrongness is in the assumption that her speech is hate speech and that it must be banned.
Even the expression of hatred is not unwarranted. And if there are people who are so easily incited to violence because someone mocks their beliefs, then THEY are the intolerant ones. Let’s be clear about who the offender is in this situation.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Gork.
David says
Is quoting the Koran hate speech?
Carol the 1st says
It depends. If you quote with mindlessness it will serve Islam, and thus be deemed sublimely submissive by muslims. However, if someone quotes with mindfulness then it won’t serve Islam but will instead encourage fear and loathing among dirty Kafirs. It all depends on context you see.
Carol the 1st says
I just spotted this from the Nostra Aetate (via a carpediadem post):
“3. The Church regards with esteem also the MOSLEMS. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(5) who has spoken to men; THEY TAKE PAINS TO SUBMIT WHOLEHEARTEDLY TO EVEN HIS INSCRUTABLE DECREES, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God…”
So this really lets Islam “off the hook” and supports that mindlessness is one of the highest virtues in Catholicism as well as in Islam and we are thus on the road to peaceful coexistence and harmony. Do bring on the hummus sammiches!
gravenimage says
Carol agree with your post of Feb 18, 2020 at 4:12 pm.
James Lincoln says
I remember a couple of years ago when Macron wanted to “reform islam.”
Good luck with that one. I have included a link to the “Gatestone Institute” regarding this initiative:
“Macron Vows to Reform Islam in France”
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11893/france-islam-reform
mortimer says
Yes, ever since Macron hoped to reform Islam, I also wonder if he has learned something. I wonder if he has yet discovered that Islam’s exegesis department closed its gate in 1111AD ???
Stieve says
Read the weasel words from Macron carefully. Mila is an adolescent. Therefore, being immature, she may not have known her statements were vile, disgusting and insulting. Being merely a child you separate her from the bullies.
But, by implication, if Mila were an adult, then any and all hate and vitriol would be deserved. And by extension, as an adult she should understand that her life is forfeit. The state will not help.
The state has done it’s job, they moved Mila to a new school, so clearly she is safe. Nobody will ever find her, or even bother to look.
Any further incidents in this matter will necessarily be the fault of Mila, and therefore well deserved.
Of course the state will respond with more blasphemy laws to help prevent the tragic fate that beset Mila …
Bob Thompson says
“How Obama Embraces Islam’s Sharia Agenda”
by Andrew C. McCarthy
“While Americans focus on terrorism, a more insidious Islamist threat lurks. It is the agenda of sharia, Islam’s authoritarian legal system.
The global Islamist movement aims, in the words of the Muslim Brotherhood, to destroy the West by sabotaging it from within.
It’s principle strategy is not mass murder but the exploitation of Western freedoms and the insinuation of sharia principles into Western legal systems.
Because those principles are hostile to our core liberties, sharia’s advance gradually undermines our culture.”
###
“It is commonplace to snicker at the thought that America could be “conquered” by Islam.
And if we were talking about conquest by al Qaeda or some invading jihadist army, derision would be a justifiable response.
But our challenge is sabotage from within: a civilization no longer sure its values are worth defending, steadily abraded by a civilization certain that Allah intends for it to prevail.
As we snicker, we might bear in mind that they used to snicker in Europe, too.”
Rufolino says
Brilliant quote, Bob.
Bob Thompson says
Thanks.
And in the response where you brought up my failure to mention the persecution of Gays as a good solid reason for opposing Islam, it is a surprise to me that I didnt mention it as I always usually do. In my own defense, I will simply attribute it to being in the non thinking mode as I transcribed the reasons, in order, that my online mentor (Dr. Bill Warner) mentioned in the video I posted.
But I accept responsibility for the omission.
Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
🙂
gravenimage says
+1
somehistory says
Jesus Christ spoke of “blasphemy” and made clear just which one was the “unforgivable sin.”
Even then, He did not instruct His followers, His disciples or those who “put faith in (Him)” because of the written Word inscribed by some of those men of long ago, to take Justice into their own hands and punish the one blaspheming.
Blasphemy is speaking against God, His Son and/or His Holy Spirit.
The evil raper of children, mass murderer and thief of the desert in Africa is not, and was not, God. Nor was he even a prophet of God. It is impossible to blaspheme such a one. And to speak the Truth about such an evil creature should be applauded, not condemned.
gravenimage says
France: Macron says “blasphemy is no crime” in case of teen forced into hiding after “Islamophobic” posts
……………….
Surprisingly, a half-way decent statement from Macron.
Paul says
Somebody should inform Macron that the European Court of Human Rights has already decided in the famous case of E.S. vs. Austria that blasphemy is indeed a crime.
Bob Thompson says
“How Obama Embraces Islam’s Sharia Agenda”
by Andrew C. McCarthy
“While Americans focus on terrorism, a more insidious Islamist threat lurks. It is the agenda of sharia, Islam’s authoritarian legal system.
The global Islamist movement aims, in the words of the Muslim Brotherhood, to destroy the West by sabotaging it from within.
It’s principle strategy is not mass murder but the exploitation of Western freedoms and the insinuation of sharia principles into Western legal systems.
Because those principles are hostile to our core liberties, sharia’s advance gradually undermines our culture.”
###
“It is commonplace to snicker at the thought that America could be “conquered” by Islam.
And if we were talking about conquest by al Qaeda or some invading jihadist army, derision would be a justifiable response.
But our challenge is sabotage from within: a civilization no longer sure its values are worth defending, steadily abraded by a civilization certain that Allah intends for it to prevail.
As we snicker, we might bear in mind that they used to snicker in Europe, too.”
jca reid says
Macron simply trying to save his political neck. He’s actively endorsed the ‘Eurabia Project’, along with Merkel et al, from the getgo. As far as I’m concerned for him, the French can forcibly drag him out of Office & to the Guillotine for a Public Execution, along with the rest of these Apologists.
Carol the 1st says
Sounds a mite hateful, but enjoyable nonetheless!
Hilda K Abel says
His actions must match his words.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Hilda.
Bob Thompson says
Dittos to you and Hilda.
🙂