File:New blasphemy laws inhibit criticizing human-rights abuses, bigotry against non Muslims- ElizaSWolff.webm

English: http://DemocracyBroadcasting.com Will blasphemy laws inhibit west's security from Islamist air hijackings? Elizabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff interviewed at the American Freedom Alliance in Spring, 2019.

Who will it be, who takes on speaking out against things like Sharia? In one place, it's a retired physics professor. In another, it's an interior decorator. In Austria, the person who's become best-known is Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff.

Her father was a diplomat and she herself worked for years in foreign embassies. She got an intimate understanding of Islamic doctrines while living and working in Kuwait and Libya.

When she returned to Vienna, she decided to begin educating her fellow Austrians about the true nature of Islam and Sharia law.

Elisabeth had been giving seminars for a few years when, in 2010, she ran into legal trouble. She was charged with "inciting hated." Then at the discretion of the judge, a second charge was added: "denigration of religious beliefs of a legally recognized religion."

She had to face an expensive legal battle. Lots of legal costs: this was not something to play around with. The case came to court in 2011. The first charge (inciting hatred) was dropped and but not the second (denigration of religious beliefs of a legally recognized religion - what a crazy law!!!).

Elisabeth had a choice between prison and a fine. She chose the latter.

If she had to do it over, she would once again choose to speak out.

And she still speaks out, both as a speaker and as a civil liberties representative for Bürgerbewegung Pax Europa at meetings of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in Warsaw and Vienna. As a speaker, she's been invited to Germany, the Netherlands, France, Britain, Denmark, Canada, and the United States. Plus, she's the chapter head for ACT! for America in Austria.

She's also a mother committed to staying home with her daughter, rather than trying to juggle career and motherhood.

A question her experience raises is: how do we speak out, if we live in a country with a law against "denigration of religious beliefs of a legally recognized religion"?

(Here is the answer proposed by Conrad, anonymous Islamic scholar:

Any competent legal mind should be able to easily differentiate between religious beliefs and political beliefs, religion being those aspects enabling pious living, earning paradise and avoiding hell. Political beliefs, conversely, are beliefs affecting other people. The judge, however, should be forced to rule on those religious/political aspects that overlap, like killing non-Muslims "in Allah’s way" to earn Paradise. Does their law. like Sharia, sanction murder of non-Muslims to religion - or is murder of kafir a political crime? Does Koran 9:29 have the protection of any Western law? If memory serves, Italy now defines Islam as a political system, as most of Islamic doctrine is political - without religious protections. Don't speak of the religion, but of Islamic political doctrine.) Interview transcript: Q: What happened to you and you in your journey? A: Well, it's a journey that took ten years that began in in late 2009 it's like I said it's taken me a decade of my life fighting for free speech in Europe. I was convicted of denigration of religious teachings of a legally recognized religion in Austria which is effectively a blasphemy law for for asking a rhetorical question in a seminar that I gave back in 2008 asking what do you call the behavior of Muhammad the Prophet of Islam marrying a six-year-old and consummating the marriage when she was nine? The name girl's name was Aisha. What do you call it if not pedophilia? So it was a rhetorical question.

I was convicted of, like I said, denigration of religious teachings. I appealed and appealed and appealed all the way up to the Austrian Supreme Court. I lost all the way to the Supreme Court and after that I went to a supranational court called the European Court of Human Rights which is a sort of Supreme Court of Europe. And we lost again. I mean I lost again but when I lose everybody loses in Europe. So now we have a ruling from the European Court of Human Rights which in effect says that the Muslims right not to be offended is greater than my right to free speech.

Q: But what was it that was that you said wasn't false?

A: Well, it wasn't wasn't slander well according to Islamic law it was slander of course so it was - it's a strange situation because the Austrian legal system sort of became the arbiter for Islamic law it was a Sharia ruling in effect because you have you had the entire Islamic world rejoicing after the verdict was passed down so that's that's actually proof that it's it's Sharia law and that Sharia slander laws were upheld by the European Court and it, you know, the irony is you didn't even need any Muslim complaint about what I'd said back in two thousand eight and nine but rather you had a secular government take over and do the job and they did it very well.