The European Court of Human Rights straight-up called a "right of others to have their religious feelings protected." Just like what are you doinghttps://twitter.com/AmarAmarasingam/status/1055522513042714625 …
Show this thread
I am genuinely entranced by the hoop-jumping required to justify fining a woman €480 for implying Muhammed was a pedophile just because he had sex with a childpic.twitter.com/gseRjEvQfM
-
-
Am I missing something here? Because it sure seems like the court is saying that taking a child bride doesn't imply pedophilic tendencies unless followed up by... divorce? abandonment?... when the child turns 18. Which would be work-of-art level stupid.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is nuts
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
How is everyone ignoring the fact that current laws and ethical settings may not have been the same a millenium and some ago? I mean it's well known that historically there have been 14 year old warriors, even younger kings and emperors, but marriage stands out?
-
We condemn people today for holding slaves 300 years ago, not unreasonably, even though it was a norm to accept that back then.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Unless 'religious worship' is a term of art in this particular legal tradition that means something different than how the dictionary defines it, it sounds like the court doesn't understand how Islam works. Extra pathetic when they work so hard to justify a terrible decision.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.