Latest news with #blasphemy
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
What the cluck?! 20,000 Christians condemn 'blasphemy' after cathedral art performance sees half-naked actors dance with plucked chickens in nappies
A bizarre cathedral art performance that sees scantily clad actors dance with plucked chickens in nappies has sparked outrage from Christians in Germany. The show was meant to be a solemn ceremony marking the 1250 year anniversary of Westphalia but instead turned into a shocking scandal. Although the audience reportedly enjoyed the performance, it ruffled feathers within the religious community after a video of it was shared online. More than 20,000 believers condemned the display as 'blasphemous' because it took place at the famous Paderborn Cathedral and have signed a petition demanding an apology. The clip showed semi-nude dancers performing a routine involving plucked chicken carcasses wrapped in nappies, while a song titled Meat is Meat played in the background. The petition said the show was a 'mockery of the central contents of the Christian faith' and a violation of a sacred space. The organisers point the finger directly at Archbishop Udo Markus Bentz, accusing him of failing in his duty to safeguard both the cathedral and the Church's moral authority. But Frank Tafertshofer, spokesperson for the Regional Association of Westphalia-Lippe, which was responsible for the ceremony, told BILD: 'There was applause; I heard no complaints.' The petition read: 'It is appalling that you silently witnessed this blasphemous performance instead of intervening and protecting and defending the sanctity of your cathedral. 'We therefore call on you to perform an act of repentance and atonement with the re-consecration of the Paderborn Cathedral, which was desecrated by this performance.' The diocese has since apologized: 'Both the LWL and the Metropolitan Chapter of Paderborn express their sincere regret that the performance offended religious feelings. 'In the future, there will be a modified procedure for approving events in the cathedral, which will ensure a more thorough review of the content,' it said.
The Guardian
2 days ago
- General
- The Guardian
Prosecuting man for burning Qur'an ‘reintroducing blasphemy law', court told
Prosecuting a man for burning the Qur'an is 'tantamount to reintroducing a blasphemy law' in Great Britain, a trial has heard. Hamit Coskun, 50, shouted 'fuck Islam', 'Islam is religion of terrorism' and 'Qur'an is burning' as he held aloft the burning Islamic text outside the Turkish consulate in Rutland Gardens, Knightsbridge, London, on 13 February, Westminster magistrates court heard. Coskun denies a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress', motivated by 'hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam', contrary to the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Public Order Act 1986. He also pleaded not guilty to an alternative charge of using disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress', contrary to section five of the Public Order Act 1986. At his trial on Wednesday, Katy Thorne KC, defending, said: 'The prosecution, in bringing this prosecution at all, is seeking to introduce a law unknown to this land, namely blasphemy in relation to Islam.' Blasphemy laws were abolished in England and Wales in 2008 and in Scotland in 2021. In Northern Ireland, blasphemy laws date back to the early 19th century and, while rarely used, blasphemy and blasphemous libel remain offences. Coskun, giving evidence via a Turkish interpreter, told the court that he has the 'right' to criticise Islam but said that he does not like using swear words. Thorne said that burning the Qur'an 'cannot be a criminal offence' and accused the Crown Prosecution Service of an abuse of process in its decision to bring the case against Coskun. She said in her written argument: 'To render such an act a criminal offence is tantamount to reintroducing a blasphemy law in relation to Islam, rendering the Qur'an a specially protected object in the UK, where a flag or another book would not be, and rendering trenchant or offensive criticism of Islam a criminal offence, is also akin to reinstating an offence of blasphemy. 'People must be free to exercise their religious or non-religious beliefs and to manifest those beliefs in whatever non-violent way they choose, and any curtailing by the state of that freedom must be absolutely necessary in a democratic society.' Thorne said that Coskun 'did not exhort hate' but voiced his dislike and frustration with a religion. She added: 'He expressed nothing to suggest that he was hostile to those who followed Islam. 'He did so outside the Turkish Consulate, a political institution, which provides further evidence he was not seeking to persuade others to dislike Islam, but express his personal criticism of Turkey and its stance on Islam. 'His protest was specifically political and thus, it is submitted, requires the highest protection of freedom of speech.' Prosecutor Philip McGhee said that Coskun was not being prosecuted simply for the burning of the Qur'an, but for 'disorderly conduct'. McGhee said of Thorne's argument: 'There is simply no misconduct in this case.' District Judge John McGarva ruled that there was no abuse of process and dismissed the application. McGhee added that the decision to prosecute does not affect the ability of others to criticise religion. The prosecutor had earlier said that Coskun had deliberately chosen the time and location of his demonstration. He went on: 'His actions gave rise to a very clear threat to public order and went beyond a legitimate expression of protest, crossing the line to pose a threat to public order.' Turkey-born Coskun, who is half-Kurdish and half-Armenian, travelled from his home in the Midlands on 13 February and set fire to the Qur'an at about 2pm, the court heard. Coskun had posted on social media that he was protesting against the 'Islamist government' of Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who the defendant allegedly said 'has made Turkey a base for radical Islamists and is trying to establish a sharia regime', prosecutors said. Coskun, who is an atheist, believes that he protested peacefully and burning the Qur'an amounted to freedom of expression, the court heard. Ahead of his trial, in a quote released through the Free Speech Union, he said: 'Encountering such treatment in a country like England, which I truly believed to be a place where freedom prevailed, was a real shock to me.' His legal fees are being paid for by the Free Speech Union and the National Secular Society. The Free Speech Union said it is defending him 'not because we're anti-Islam, but because we believe no one should be compelled to observe the blasphemy codes of any religion, whether Christian or Muslim'. The prosecution and defence have finished their cases, but a further hearing will take place on Thursday afternoon, with a verdict likely to come on a later date, the court heard.
Sky News
3 days ago
- General
- Sky News
Convicting man over Koran burning would reintroduce blasphemy law, court told
Convicting a man for burning the Koran would be 'tantamount to reintroducing a blasphemy law', his defence team has told a court. Hamit Coskun appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday after he allegedly shouted abusive slogans about Islam while burning the holy book outside the Turkish consulate in Knightsbridge, London, on 13 February. The 50-year-old denies a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly behaviour and an alternative charge of using disorderly behaviour "within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress". Katy Thorne, defending, said at his trial that the prosecution pursuing the case against Coskun was "seeking to introduce a law unknown to this land, namely blasphemy in relation to Islam". Blasphemy laws were abolished in England and Wales in 2008, with Scotland following suit in 2021. Ms Thorne told the court that burning the Koran "cannot be a criminal offence". "To render such an act a criminal offence is tantamount to reintroducing a blasphemy law in relation to Islam, rendering the Koran a specially protected object in the UK, where a flag or another book would not be, and rendering trenchant or offensive criticism of Islam a criminal offence, is also akin to reinstating an offence of blasphemy," she said in her written argument. "People must be free to exercise their religious or non-religious beliefs and to manifest those beliefs in whatever non-violent way they choose, and any curtailing by the state of that freedom must be absolutely necessary in a democratic society." She said Coskun "did not exhort hate" to those following Islam, but protested "outside the Turkish Consulate, a political institution, which provided further evidence he was not seeking to persuade others to dislike Islam, but express his personal criticism of Turkey and its stance on Islam". Ms Thorne added: "His protest was specifically political and thus... requires the highest protection of freedom of speech." 'Threat to public order' However, prosecutor Philip McGhee said Coskun was not charged simply for burning the Koran, but for "disorderly conduct". He said prosecuting Coskun did not impact the ability of others to criticise religion. Mr McGhee said Turkey-born Coskun, who is half Kurdish and half Armenian, had deliberately chosen the time and location of his protest, travelling from his home in the Midlands to the consulate to set alight the Koran at around 2pm. "His actions gave rise to a very clear threat to public order and went beyond a legitimate expression of protest, crossing the line to pose a threat to public order," Mr McGhee said. Coskun, an atheist, had said on social media he was demonstrating against the "Islamist government" of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who he said had "made Turkey a base for radical Islamists and is trying to establish a sharia regime", prosecutors said. The defendant's legal fees are being paid for by the Free Speech Union (FSU) and the National Secular Society (NSS). The FSU said it was defending Coskun "not because we're anti-Islam, but because we believe no one should be compelled to observe the blasphemy codes of any religion, whether Christian or Muslim". Stephen Evans, chief executive of the NSS, added: "A successful prosecution in this case could represent the effective criminalisation of damaging a Koran in public, edging us dangerously close to a prohibition on blasphemy." The trial, which is expected to last a day, continues.
Telegraph
3 days ago
- General
- Telegraph
Prosecuting man who burned Koran is attempt to revive blasphemy laws, court hears
Ms Thorne argued that the prosecution criminalised any public burning of a religious book and 'undermined the criminal justice system'. 'It is effectively chilling the right of citizens to criticise religion,' she said. Blasphemy laws were abolished in England and Wales in 2008 and in Scotland in 2021. Ms Thorne said in her written argument: 'To render such an act a criminal offence is tantamount to reintroducing a blasphemy law in relation to Islam, rendering the Koran a specially protected object in the UK, where a flag or another book would not be, and rendering trenchant or offensive criticism of Islam a criminal offence, is also akin to reinstating an offence of blasphemy. 'People must be free to exercise their religious or non-religious beliefs and to manifest those beliefs in whatever non-violent way they choose, and any curtailing by the state of that freedom must be absolutely necessary in a democratic society.' Lawyers for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) insisted that Mr Coskun was not being prosecuted for setting fire to the Koran. Philip McGhee, for the CPS, said: 'He is being prosecuted for his disorderly behaviour in public.' He said there was 'simply no misconduct in this case', adding: 'Nothing about the prosecution of this defendant for his words and actions has any impact on the ability of anyone to make any trenchant criticism of a religion.' John McGarva, deputy district judge, refused Ms Thorne's application and said that 'this case was not an abuse of process'. 'This is not an attempt to bring back old blasphemy laws or a wider blasphemy law related to Islam,' he said. Mr Coskun, wearing a white striped shirt and a grey jumper, sat outside the dock in courtroom nine, following proceedings intently via a Turkish translator. Packed with supporters The public gallery was packed with supporters. The Free Speech Union has taken up Mr Coskun's case and has paid for a security team, as well as half of his legal fees. The National Secular Society is paying for the other half. The court heard Mr Coskun's action was a protest against Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the president of Turkey, whom the former believes has made the country a 'base for radical Islamists and is trying to establish a sharia regime'. Prosecutors said Mr Coskun, who is an atheist, travelled to the Turkish Consulate in Knightsbridge in February from his home in the Midlands with a lighter and copy of the Koran. Once at the embassy, he set fire to the holy book, and, while holding it aloft, began shouting 'Islam is a religion of terrorism'. As he did so, a man from a neighbouring building came out to ask him why he was doing it. 'Terrorist,' replied Mr Coskun. The man responded: 'You're a f---ing idiot', adding: 'I'm going to f---ing kill you now.' He then disappeared back inside, came out and began attacking Mr Coskun who was punched and pushed to the ground and then kicked. The man then spat on Mr Coskun before picking up the smouldering copy of the Koran and shouting at him 'Burning the Koran? It's my religion! You don't burn the Koran.' A man filming the incident interjected: 'He just has.' His attacker has subsequently pleaded guilty to assault. 'Democratic right to protest' Police were called to the scene and, via a telephone interpreter, Mr Coskun told them: 'I have been exercising my democratic right to protest by setting fire to the Koran.' As officers spoke to him, Mr Coskun repeatedly said 'f--- Islam', the court heard. Mr Coskun suffered an injury to his hand in the attack and was taken to hospital before being arrested later that day. When interviewed under caution, he again said he had been exercising his right to protest as he believed the Koran was 'inciting people' to commit terrorism. The trial, expected to last one day, continues.
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- General
- Daily Mail
Britain risks 'reintroducing a blasphemy law' by prosecuting man, 50, who allegedly shouted 'f*** Islam' as he burned Koran outside Turkish consulate, court hears
The prosecution of a man who allegedly burned a Koran outside the Turkish consulate in London risks 'reintroducing a blasphemy law' in the UK, a court heard today. Hamit Coskun, 50, allegedly shouted 'f*** Islam', 'Islam is religion of terrorism' and Koran is burning' as he held the flaming Muslim holy book aloft in Rutland Gardens, Knightsbridge, on February 13. He pleaded not guilty to a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly behaviour motivated by 'hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam' and also denied an alternative charge of using disorderly behaviour. Turkey-born Coskun, who is half Kurdish and half Armenian, appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court today for his trial wearing a charcoal hoodie, dark trousers and white trainers. He travelled from his home in the Midlands on February 13 and set fire to the Koran at around 2pm, the court heard. He allegedly shouted 'f*** Islam', 'Islam is religion of terrorism' and Koran is burning' as he held the flaming Muslim holy book aloft in Rutland Gardens, Knightsbridge, on February 13. Coskun had posted on social media that he was protesting against the 'Islamist government' of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan who the defendant allegedly said 'has made Turkey a base for radical Islamists and is trying to establish a sharia regime'. Katy Thorne KC, defending, said: 'The prosecution, in bringing this prosecution at all, is seeking to introduce a law unknown to this land, namely blasphemy in relation to Islam.' Blasphemy laws were abolished in England and Wales in 2008 and in Scotland in 2021. Ms Thorne said that burning the Koran 'cannot be a criminal offence' and accused the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) of an abuse of process in its decision to bring the case against Coskun. She said in her written argument: 'To render such an act a criminal offence is tantamount to reintroducing a blasphemy law in relation to Islam, rendering the Koran a specially protected object in the UK, where a flag or another book would not be, and rendering trenchant or offensive criticism of Islam a criminal offence, is also akin to reinstating an offence of blasphemy. 'People must be free to exercise their religious or non-religious beliefs and to manifest those beliefs in whatever non-violent way they choose, and any curtailing by the state of that freedom must be absolutely necessary in a democratic society.' Ms Thorne said that Coskun 'did not exhort hate' but voiced his dislike and frustration with a religion. She added: 'He expressed nothing to suggest that he was hostile to those who followed Islam. 'He did so outside the Turkish Consulate, a political institution, which provides further evidence he was not seeking to persuade others to dislike Islam, but express his personal criticism of Turkey and its stance on Islam. 'His protest was specifically political and thus, it is submitted, requires the highest protection of freedom of speech.' Prosecutor Philip McGhee said that Coskun was not being prosecuted simply for the burning of the Koran, but for 'disorderly conduct'. Mr McGhee said of Ms Thorne's argument: 'There is simply no misconduct in this case.' District Judge John McGarva ruled that there was no abuse of process and dismissed the application. Mr McGhee added that the decision to prosecute does not affect the ability of others to criticise religion. The prosecutor had earlier said that Coskun had deliberately chosen the time and location of his demonstration. 'His actions gave rise to a very clear threat to public order and went beyond a legitimate expression of protest, crossing the line to pose a threat to public order,' he told the court. But Coskun, who is an atheist, believes that he protested peacefully and burning the amounted to freedom of expression. Ahead of his trial, in a quote released through the Free Speech Union, he said: 'Encountering such treatment in a country like England, which I truly believed to be a place where freedom prevailed, was a real shock to me.' His legal fees are being paid for by the Free Speech Union and the National Secular Society (NSS). The Free Speech Union said it is defending him 'not because we're anti-Islam, but because we believe no one should be compelled to observe the blasphemy codes of any religion, whether Christian or Muslim'. It said Coskun is an asylum seeker who fled Turkey, having been a political prisoner for almost a decade, who 'thought he was coming to a democratic country where he would be free to peacefully protest about a particular religion'. Lord Young of Acton, general secretary of the organisation, added: 'The rights to peaceful protest and freedom of expression are sacrosanct and should not be disregarded because of fears about inflaming community tensions in a multicultural society.' Stephen Evans, chief executive of the NSS said: 'A successful prosecution in this case could represent the effective criminalisation of damaging a Koran in public, edging us dangerously close to a prohibition on blasphemy. 'The case also highlights the alarming use of public order laws to curtail our collective right to protest and free speech based on the subjective reactions of others. 'Establishing a right not to be offended threatens the very foundation of free expression.' A spokesperson for Humanists UK said that a successful prosecution would 'effectively resurrect the crime of blasphemy in England and Wales - 17 years after its abolition'. They added: 'This reintroduction of blasphemy by the back door would have profound consequences, not only for free expression in the UK but for the safety and wellbeing of hundreds of thousands of so-called 'apostates' in the UK and their right to freedom of thought and conscience.' The trial, which is due to last one-day, continues.
