It appears to be from the Danes themselves.
Danish magazine for lawyers: Free speech is only democratic as long as it does not provoke violent people
By Nicolai Sennels, Jihadwatch, June 20, 2014
Recently the UK Law Society introduced a guide to sharia law. And in Denmark, law professor Trine Baumbach attacks the freedom of speech in the latest issue of Juristen (The Lawyer). Via 10news.dk, translated from Uriasposten:
Freedom of expression can be seen as an expression of democracy — but only to the extent that free speech is used for the benefit of a democratic society and its citizens. … Freedom of expression is one of the foundations of democratic societies, but only to the extent that freedom of expression is not misused to violate the rights of others or used in a way that society risks being plunged into social unrest and civil peace being threatened.
Of course. We “like” free speech until free speech conflicts with something else that is politically incorrect or sensitive or impolitic or requires courage, which is something Lefitsts clearly do not possess.
In other words: when there is pushback — in this case, something involving Islam and Sharia Law — “freedom of speech” is merely an old, volatile and hackneyed phrase. And one that must be kicked to the curb. There can be no courage in the face is Islam vs Westernized Nations. The West must inherently lose, according to the GOWPs of the West. The Guiilty Overeducated White People.
But I say this:
There must be a REASON that our Founding Fathers decided to place freedom of speech on “front street” in terms of our Bill of Rights, which states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I don’t suppose there can be a more clear and simple delineation of a basic freedom than the First Amendment.
But here’s the “rub.” There will be greater conflicts when so-called “free speech” comes into conflict with “tolerance” and “cultural acceptance.”
What happens when you place Sharia objections of free speech under the guise of “tolerance,” then?
I submit: you lose your free speech.
As Pamela Geller clearly states and I obviously embrace, it is a characteristic of religious barbarians vs the common sensical.
When you embrace the consideration of Sharia Law as opposed to actual western rules of law, you ask for “civilizational suicide.”
“The political function of ‘the right of free speech’ is to protect dissenters and unpopular minorities from forcible suppression.”
Pamela Geller writes:
Abridging this most crucial freedom so as not to offend savages is civilizational suicide. It is the death knell for the modern enlightenment.
I couldn’t agree more.
Guess what, Denmark? You’re about to LOSE your country. Get prepared.