When Free Speech Is Prosecuted: Päivi Räsänen’s Case Explained for Americans

In Finland, a big uproar has arisen over Member of Parliament Päivi Räsänen’s (Christian Democrat) brief visit to the U.S. Congress, where she spoke about the attempts to restrict her freedom of speech. For this reason, it is worth reflecting on what happened in this blog as well. So let us start from the beginning.

It all began when Päivi Räsänen happened to write the words “a disorder of psychosexual development,” by which she meant a person’s sexual orientation toward their own sex. The Finnish prosecution service seized on this, interpreting the words as incitement against a group of people.

However, it is a biological fact that the sexuality of organisms has evolved precisely so that their genes can mix, that is, recombine, in their offspring. For this reason, sexuality is naturally directed toward the opposite sex, although behaviors related to one’s own sex are also common in nature.

In this sense, homosexuality—especially as the primary mode of sexual behavior—is indeed a kind of developmental disorder. However, that does not make a person better or worse than others, nor has Räsänen claimed so.

* * *

I do not know whether what I have written above has been understood in the district court and the court of appeal, but in any case it is right that they acquitted Räsänen of the charges. It seems clear, however, that the prosecutor has not understood the matter any better either before bringing the charges or after the court decisions, but is continuing the process to the Supreme Court while also continuing to violate Räsänen’s freedom of speech.

Thus, Päivi Räsänen and Finland have undoubtedly gained a bad international reputation among people who consider freedom of speech to be an important value. Such people are found especially in the United States, but of course also elsewhere, including Finland.

* * *

The case in question actually resembles a situation in which a woman living in a violent relationship goes public to tell about her husband’s actions, after which his relatives criticize her for sullying the honor of her family and spouse. In this analogy, “violent relationship” = “demands to ban freedom of speech,” “woman” = “Räsänen,” “man” = “the prosecutor,” “relatives” = “the media criticizing Räsänen.”

I do not believe that any reasonable person would think, in the above analogy, that the woman is the one sullying anyone’s honor. Nevertheless, the Finnish journalistic community has no difficulty accusing Räsänen of damaging our country’s reputation when she speaks in the United States about the continued attempts to restrict her freedom of speech.

I can only guess at the reasons for this, but I suspect that it has to do with a wokist worldview that has taken root in our journalistic community, which prevents our journalists from logical thinking, especially when a Christian worldview and a value-liberal worldview are in opposition. This view of mine is supported, among other things, by recent research findings.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Predictions Based on the Opinion Polls in the UK
Jesuit Morality in Crime Reporting on Immigrants
On Freedom, Debate, and the Murder of Charlie Kirk

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Onko Päivi Räsänen Suomen maineen likaaja?

An Unexpected Endorsement of Professor’s Views

I have occasionally observed (example, another, third) that the greatest problem of the Palestinians in the Holy Land has been their historical aspiration to first annihilate the Jews who settled there, as well as their inability to accept the facts that have taken place. In practice, the reason for their misery therefore lies with their leaders and the terrorist organizations—foremost among them Hamas—whose actions have prevented, and continue to prevent, the emergence of a peaceful solution in Gaza and the achievement of peace throughout the region.

That is why it was interesting to note that Mosab Hassan Yousef, the son of Hamas’s founder Hassan Yousef, has stated that Gaza no longer exists, and that the thanks for this go to Hamas, which has used residential buildings in the area as ammunition depots. He has also called Hamas a cult of death and described how the terrorists even use their own children as human shields.

It is good to see that my view on the causes of Palestinian suffering received support from such an unexpected source. However, it is not surprising, because when recognizing the facts and thinking logically, it is self-evident—something that can only be overlooked by an observer’s inability to free themselves from their own prejudices.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Cost of the East Jerusalem Attack for Palestinians — and Its Echo Worldwide
Abu Obaida’s Death Brings Palestine One Step Closer to Peace
Will Gaza Get a Ceasefire, or Will Hamas Hold On to Its Terrorist Capabilities?

During the Eurovision song spectacle, the incompetence of EU officials was revealed

During the Eurovision spectacle, the confrontation between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip has escalated to a new phase. This means that the terrorists' last stronghold is becoming the target of an Israeli attack, and therefore the army of the Jewish state has ordered civilians to evacuate from the eastern Ramallah area.

There seem to be three reasons for this. Firstly, to prevent civilian casualties, and secondly, to prevent them from being used as human shields by terrorists. Thirdly, reducing the population may facilitate the discovery of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

All of this is happening despite the disapproval of Israel's evacuation orders by Charles Michel, the Belgian chairman of the European Council. So, would he, as a high-ranking EU official sometimes referred to as the EU president, think it better if Palestinian terrorists were given the opportunity to use human shields, thereby increasing the number of civilian casualties in the Gaza conflict? Or should the hostages captured by Hamas be left in their hands?

According to Michel, "all efforts must continue to achieve a sustainable ceasefire agreement. The EU is committed to a just and comprehensive peace based on a two-state solution."

This repeats the mantra that only complicates the situation in the Holy Land, as not all Palestinians accept a two-state solution, nor will Israelis sit idly by in the face of continued rocket attacks and other acts of terror. Therefore, to solve the Palestinian problem, creative thinking is needed instead of incessantly advocating for a two-state solution, as I provided an example last Christmas.

It would also be good if the President of the European Council had heard of Finland´s former President Juho Kusti Paasikivi and understood that acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom.

In the short term, this would mean following the example of US President Joe Biden. That is, understanding that a ceasefire would begin tomorrow if Hamas released the hostages. According to Biden: "Israel said it's up to Hamas, if they wanted to do it, we could end it tomorrow. And the ceasefire would begin tomorrow".

This (too) raised the question of how the European Union chooses its high-ranking officials. Apparently, not based on logical reasoning or strong understanding.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Christmas gift to the Holy Land
Palestinian responsibility
Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!