http://www.blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?m ... mID=181537

And let the rants of artistic freedom (and justifibly so) begin.

Forgive me if I've misread this, but it appears he's only been formally accused, rather than being condemned as guilty.

^
That seems to be correct, though apparently if he is found guilty he could face up to two years in jail. So, potentially serious, but I'd say he'll squeeze by. Still, this is of course stupid and doesn't make Poland look very good, especially since the incident happened two and a half years ago.

This is serious as once again freedom seems to be restricted in Poland. Hopefully Nergal will not be imprisoned, being a bank manager he could steal millions and he wouldn’t go to prison, but that’s not the case and democracy isn’t equal for all, thought theoretically it should be. Let’s see what happens

In many cases, Poland is for all intents and purposes a theocracy these days. However I think this is just another example of the Church trying to have its way in a very public fashion. The fact that Nergal took part in a reality show in Poland and that his music continues to be appreciated by Polish audiences, religious and non-religious alike, seems to indicate that religion is not where the Polish media's head is at right now, despite the Church's grabs for attention. So, hopefully, Nergal will not be found guilty.

Hopefully he'll get jailtime for his unnecessary and insolent attention seeking.

He seems to have so many things going wrong for him. I mean his health was a big issue for like a year and now he's getting arrested for this?

Attention seeking or not, I support any public acts that condemn Christianity. Good for him. And if he gets jail time, it kinda proves his point.

Edited the OP because it was completely contradictory with the article.

With such a name, who would have thought it was a catholic association... and I love the "privately run" part.

It seems strange that Nergal's only been accused/charged with that now when the event occured 2 and a half years ago. That being said, I hope that Nergal won't go to jail for something that counts as freedom of expression

You're an enemy of metal and maybe also a fascist.

2 and a half years ago? this happened in 2007...

I tried searching a Polish bill of rights on google, the most recent I found was something from 1573. This case is a good example of why every country should have a bill of rights that includes freedom of speech and expression.

I really hope he doesn't go to jail for this, this whole thing just emphasizes what's wrong with organized religion and makes those of us non crazy Christians look bad. While I don't agree with what he said or did he still has free speech and freedom of expression just like the rest of us, just because he says something offensive doesn't mean he isn't allowed to say it or maybe you aren't in Poland.

At least he didn't come on stage with a giant swastika tattoo...

Oh wait. Taake already did that.

What the fuck? This is bullshit.

It isn't too clear what just happened, from a legal standpoint. If I understood correctly the contradictory news, then the Supreme Court specifically ruled that what Nergal specifically did at that specific show aeons ago could be classified as a crime... and yet, a new trial has to take place now, to determine whether he is guilty or not of that specific crime that was just invented over what he specifically did?



What the fuck, again?

That was awesome.

This was 5 years ago. Wow, why revisit so long after?

I know, seriously. However, as outdated as it is, the statement about the Church murdering tons of people is actually kind of true --- there was that masterful display of precisely what you're not supposed to do, commonly known as the Crusades. Nothing shares the love of God like brutally massacring the innocent.

Eh, the fact that the article mentions 1 judge who was sane enough to know he isn't guilty of anything gives me some hope that Poland's legal system isn't completely fucked and that he'll find another judge who'll just dismiss it. And honestly, if he's found guilty and imprisoned there would be so much negative publicity and backlash from so many people around the world that the government will probably just let him go so the rest of the world doesn't look at them like a third world country. I'm really not worried.

Nergal should be seen as an enemy by the religion he is crudely attacking if they have a backbone.

Behemoth is some of the most thematically and stylistically fascistic metal music you can get, btw.

This looks like a weird, faulty translation from Blabbermouth. If a court ruled he committed a crime, wouldn't it mean he is guilty? Doesn't make sense to me.

Anyways... I think pulling cheap stunts like tearing bibles is cliched and just attention-seeking more appropriate for Madonna, Sinead O'connor and other dweebs who try hard to "act rebellious" in order to attract publicity. "Oh my God, you tore a bible, you're such a rebel!". I mean, come on...

Having said that, it is sad when the state dictates what you can or cannot express. If this dude can go to jail for such actions, this is awful. THAT would be the real crime here.

Freedom of speech ≠ freedom to insult anything

Insulting religion or an institution such as catholic church is a little different thing than insulting a person or a certain group of people but yeah I kind of understand why it is illegal. Personally I wouldn't mind too much if it was legal for anyone to insult or bash against anything but even so I understand why there are laws against it. However I'm strongly against any serious punishments from this kind of crime. If anything it should be a small fine or something rather than a prison sentence.

While I would tend to agree with you on this there is just one big problem with this whole thing, it was at a concert. I'm not defending
Behemoth here personally I don't care for them or their 'Christians to the lions' mentality but it isn't like Nergal was standing on the street corner it was at his show. If you go and see a band like Behemoth you know what you're getting yourself into, this would be like going and seeing a movie then deciding you didn't like the content and getting all up in arms over it. My point being while free speech gives you the right to say what ever the hell you want it does have limitations when you start infringing on others right not to hear what you have to say just not when you knowingly pay to hear said persons opinions.

Blabbermouth writers are dyslexic.

As I understand it the Supreme Court, which is the highest court of appeal in Poland, made some kind of judgment or authoritative statement clarifying the law on offending religious sensibilities, and now Nergal's case is going back to the district court to decide his guilt in light of those resolutions. It doesn't make too much sense to me, but it's the Polish legal system so I guess it doesn't have to. Perhaps the appeal was specifically in relation to the theoretical status of the crime of offending religious sensibilities rather than Nergal's specific case and the question of his guilt.

This article is slightly clearer: http://www.thenews.pl/1/9/Artykul/11687 ... bletearing

That's a good point. There is a discussion worth having in should we have a right to express all kind of selfish, controversial or antisocial feelings and opinions through art including live performances. The problem is that it might be hard to draw a line between what is acceptable in these "private" events and what is not. For example there is a law against incitement to ethnic or racial hatredlike in number of countries but when does a simple RAC/neo-nazi show cross the line?

Um, yes, actually.


Then you don't understand what free speech is.

Apparently, this poster also doesn't understand what the word "group" means.

Anyway, I love free speech debates online. They always go the exact same way. Lotta folks reveal that they love freedom of speech, but only if it's the freedom to say what they themselves choose and the freedom to shut those with opposing views up by crying foul play. The rest are made up of a small minority of people who say the same thing but differently, and the other few who actually understand what freedom of speech means. And freedom of speech, when applied in the legal system, means exactly what I described in that third sentence. It's a great notion, but becomes quickly abused when applied in real-life. True freedom of speech exists only in a world (or just nation) of real equality, which will never happen.

Without going deep into why the bible has its inherent meaning and significance, and notwithstanding the fact that I'm pretty much anti-religious to begin with, I do have to state a simple fact. The bible is a book!

With that being said a person tore a book in public, which in this case gains an artistic significance because it's a band member affiliated with a way of thinking that goes against what's written in that specific book, and its actual significance. So, is the guy being blasphemous or taking a stand against something he opposes, or even more is he just doing an act? Is he hurting susceptibilities on the Christian side or is he doing an artistic feat that melds with the content of the show and the band's message?

Or is he just tearing a book? If I own a book why can't I tear it anywhere I want to since the book is my property? Think about that for a second.

Now, people on each end of the barricade will see each extreme that they defend and that's perfectly fine, and more so humane. Now what's not fine and what's not reasonable is for a secular state with an instituted legal system that's supposed to be separated from church to hunt down someone on accounts of "religious blasphemy". What is this, the Dark Ages??? Poland is part of the European Union and yet it has sectarian laws? Oh right, the majority of the EU countries' population is Christian. Now I get it!

There's something really wrong when freedom of speech is choked like this, a bit more of strangling and it may actually die.

I'm sure he'll be fine. I wouldn't exactly tear up over this.

If I ever visit Poland... I will take a Bible, preferably the exact kind of version Nergal tore up, and rip it to shreds and dump it on the front door of the Polish Supreme Court. I will then proceed to hold both of my middle fingers up and yell the F word at them. Then I'll probably awkwardly walk away as people stare at me and hop on the next train to Germany.

A country which cares about someone tearing some random book to pieces in the middle of a musical spectacle should revise its priorities. And to that guy who said Nergal should recevie jail time for acting in an insulting way and whatnot; are you a fascist or something? Just asking.

Well I didn't phrase that very well. What I mean is that in my mind it's not the same thing to insult an instution or a belief even if it insults the people who stand behind it than it is to insult directly those people and especially if it includes incitement to harm them.

Oh, you rebel, you. That'll show them bastards who's boss!!!

Another crazy crazy country!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20143558

Why should it necessarily be done through a Bill of Rights? If the right does not exist in the country a Bill of Rights would not include it; similarly if it does exist in the country it could be adequately upheld through legislation and political accountability. Kind of a diversion from the conversation but it just strikes me that this is full of not-necessarily-valid assumptions.

This is really really sad to be honest...

Alright, here's my basic impression: it seems most of the pillars of the modern polish state date back to the polish-lithuanian republic which was largely ruled by nobles up until the 1791 contitution, but all of the more 'radical' provisions like gauranteeing civil liberties to religious minorities (orthodox, protestant) were opposed by a coalition of nobles. Then russia and prussia got involved and basically dismembered the republic by force. Fast forward to the modern constitution which states:


Criminal Code of Poland

Article 196 makes anyone found guilty of intentionally offending religious feelings through public calumny of an object or place of worship liable to a fine, a restriction of liberty, or to imprisonment for a maximum of two years.[2]

Article 256 makes anyone found guilty of promoting a fascist or other totalitarian system of state or of inciting hatred based on national, ethnic, racial, or religious differences, or for reason of the lack of any religious denomination, liable to a fine, a restriction of liberty, or to imprisonment for a maximum of two years.[2]

Article 257 makes anyone found guilty of publicly insulting a group or a particular person because of national, ethnic, racial, or religious affiliation or because of the lack of any religious denomination liable to a fine, a restriction of liberty, or to imprisonment for a maximum of three years.[2]
Broadcasting Act (29 December 1992)

Article 18, paragraph 2 states that programmes or other broadcasts shall respect the religious beliefs of the public and respect especially the Christian system of values.[2] - (wikipedia )

So I guess legally negral has no legal legs to stand on. My impression of poland seems to be a profoundly religious democracy scarred by a history of oppression; hence it seems the government is pretty sensitive to any 'hate speech' or 'dangerous political opinions'. Looking at it from an American's perspective I really don't see a ton of difference between these laws and the legislative agenda of powerful groups inside the US.

The PC crowd seems to espouse similar ideas, no matter how much conservatives would like to paint it as persecution against christians but the religious right here is really the other side of the coin and the only side that matters; the PC people don't seem to have any real clout or money behind them and no real ideology or agenda other than 'try not to offend people'. The religious right however, under the guise of claiming 'persecution' and that the US is a 'christian nation' seems essentially to be pushing for these kinds of laws anyway. The systematic dismemberment of abortion services and clinics seems to compare well to the very harsh religiously inspired abortion laws in poland, of which there was an incident involving a pregnant raped 14 year old harassed by pro life groups from getting an abortion causing her to get one illegally.

I guess the main difference here is that the religious right is pushing for a state that is legally enforcing the mores of christianity, rather than culturally and socially doing so in the past; hence their biggest goal is to deny separation of church and state exists, even for good reasons. In poland, there is no conflict as not offending religious groups is directly written into the legal code and a huge historical influence from the catholic church. Religious fanatics tend to be pretty similar, no matter where they come from. It seems many don't truly understand what freedom of expression and free speech means; evidenced by the uproar of the 'victory' mosque near ground zero (religious freedom for christians, not anyone else ). What these concepts really mean, is that if there was a church that worshipped hitler and called the holocaust a righteous punishment of god against the evil jews, that church would be allowed to be built right next to the holocaust museum no matter how many people it pissed off.