Dutch ruling says Koran-based homophobia is acceptable

Dutch ruling says Koran-based homophobia is acceptable

Fury has erupted in Holland after a government-backed anti-discrimination watchdog – MiND – ruled that it was perfectly OK for Muslims to send gay people death threats.

According to this report, the taxpayer-funded hotline said it would not pursue a criminal complaint over horrific messages from radical Islamists because the Koran says gay people can be killed.

The shocking decision came to light when a member of the public complained about death threats posted to an online forum which called for homosexuals to be:

Burned, decapitated and slaughtered.

Dutch MPs this reacted with horror to ruling, demanding an immediate inquiry into the remarks and calling for the hotline to be stripped of public funding.

MiND said that, while homophobic abuse was usually a crime, it was justifiable if you were Muslim due to laws on freedom of religious expression.

It argued that the Koran says it is acceptable to kill people for being homosexual, and so death threats towards gay people from Muslims could not be discriminatory.

In a “jaw-dropping” email explaining why they could not take up the complaint, MiND wrote:

The remarks must be seen in the context of religious beliefs in Islam, which juridically takes away the insulting character.

It concluded that the remarks were made in “the context of a public debate about how to interpret the Quran” and added that:

Some Muslims understand from the Quran that gays should be killed … In the context of religious expression that exists in the Netherlands there is a large degree of freedom of expression. In addition, the expressions are used in the context of the public debate (how to interpret the Koran), which also removes the offending character.

The death threats had been made in the comments section beneath an article about a Dutch-Moroccan gay society, which had been posted to an online platform for Holland’s large Moroccan community.

The revelation that they were so easily brushed aside by the anti-discrimination hotline will fuel an intense debate in the Netherlands over freedom of expression.

Two right-wing MPs, Joram van Klaveren and Louis Bontes, have now announced their intention to bring up the incident in the Dutch parliament by asking questions of the Justice Minister.

The pair argued that public prosecutors must be permitted to take up cases of homophobic abuse, especially where it concerns threats of violence, no matter who is making the discriminatory remarks.

Van Klaveren will ask:

Do you share our disgust at the fact that this explicitly states that inciting violence is not a problem if it comes from the Islamic belief?

A spokesman for the MiND hotline admitted that after “further research” of the issue it had concluded that the complaint had been “unjustly assessed”.

He added that when the complaint involved calling for violence against a particular group, the beliefs of the person making the threats should not matter.

Editor’s note: Abdullah Hakim Quick, featured in the intro photo, is currently senior lecturer with the Islamic Institute of Toronto and the outreach coordinator with the Canadian Council of Imams. In “recognition of the contribution he has made to Canada”, Quick received the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal.

10 responses to “Dutch ruling says Koran-based homophobia is acceptable”

  1. Bill Bonk says:

    This encapsulates perfectly the abomination that is religion. That one bunch of arsewipes (used in the case of muslims) can be awarded ligitimacy for the murder of people who by their very nature are different.

    And in the Netherlands … unbelievable.

  2. barriejohn says:

    This is the equivalent of America’s “Religious Exemptions”, and it stinks. It just means that you can be a bigot as long as you state that your bigotry has a “religious” basis, and who is the authority where books like the Bible and the Koran (let alone all the “hadiths”) are concerned? The Far Right has been rejected in Austria today, but dangerous times lie ahead for minorities, and it is particularly shocking to see this sort of thing in the Netherlands.

  3. The_Countess says:

    MiND already apologized and admitted their mistake 2 days before this was posted.

    and ‘dutch ruling’ make it sound it was a court case or something.
    i’d have hoped a site like freethinker would have been above click bait headlines.

  4. 1859 says:

    So let me get this straight: I can say anything I like – I can incite any group to go and murder any other group because they are in some way different; I can call for the wholesale slaughter of black children because they smell; I can call for the death of any Polish person with blue eyes because they have the eyes of a demon – I can do all this, so long as I say it is written in my ‘holy’ book? Because to quote bits from my ‘holy’ book is an example of my freedom of expression? OK. Got it. Now if I can freely incite gay people to be decapitated (because that’s what my ‘holy’ book tells me), then I must extend that same right to anyone who criticises, or takes the piss out of my ‘holy’ book? Yes? I mean you can’t have an ‘extensive freedom of expression’ for one group without other groups having the same ‘extensive freedom of expression’? Right?

    Is there such a thing as a one-sided freedom of expression?

  5. The Prophet Mohammed is a homosexual, and should be tossed off (from a high place).

  6. Walter says:

    Yes, there is a one sided freedom of expression. It is a self endowed islamic principle that muslims can say and do what they choose but kuffars condemn themselves to death if they say or do otherwise.

  7. barriejohn says:

    Countess: Do you have a reference for your statement?

    We are NOT going to have a “reasonable accommodation” law in this country. If you had read the Daily Mail the other day you would have gained the impression that the EHRC was about to say the precise opposite!

    The report said the law “should not be changed to permit individuals to opt out of work duties, to accord with their religious or non-religious beliefs, where this has an actual or potential detrimental or discriminatory impact on others.”

  8. barriejohn says:

    DM report on 26th November (they appear to have said nothing since!):

    Hallelujah! Equalities watchdog says persecution of Christians must end

  9. John says:

    The behaviour of MiND on this issue simply reinforces the accusation that a liberal-minded elite are living inside their own “bubble” and coming out with ridiculous tripe because it is “politically correct”.
    Threats of violence and encouraging others to commit acts of violence are unlawful acts.
    MiND should have known this.
    Yes, MiND have belatedly realised how stupid they were but it is worrying that they even thought the way they did in the first place.
    All they have done is lent fuel to the fire of extreme right-wing populism.
    Hopefully, the Dutch Parliament will clarify the situation a little more clearly for MiND.

  10. Har Davids says:

    With any holy book as a fount of inspiration, you can discriminate as much as you can. And don’t forget the killing of anyone who gives you a queer look, even your own children!!!

    As a Dutchman, I can not understand what was on the minds of the morons behind this statement, and I’m not the only one.