If the Sejm reaches its point, priests in Poland will either go to jail – or they will submit to the rainbow lobby and censor the Scripture and Doctors of the Church, avoiding “insult” homosexuals. We gotta do everything we can to keep this from happening.
Constitution
Article 53 of the Polish Constitution gives everyone freedom of conscience and religion. This freedom is predicted to include the confession or acceptance of religion, its externalisation, including publicly, through worship, prayer, participation in and teaching spiritual rites and practices. However, the Constitution provides that freedom to express religion may be limited by law erstwhile it is essential to defend public order or morals and freedoms and the rights of others.
What does that mean? Islam can be confessed in Poland, but it cannot be called upon to execution infidels, as any muslim texts recommend. Calling for the execution of infidels would violate public order, would be contrary to morality, would strike at freedom and rights murdered by jihadists. In the case of Christianity, there is unfettered freedom to preach his teachings, as in no case do they interfere with public order, morality, or freedom and the rights of others.
Simple, clear, obvious?
Unfortunately, no.
The hatred Speech Act
Thursday, March 6, 2025 The Sejm adopted a bill on alleged hatred speech. The task assumes that peculiar legal protection would be subject to the alleged sexual orientation in Poland. Anyone who is found guilty of "sowing hatred" towards people with any alleged sexual orientation could be put in prison for 3 months to 5 years.
Article 119 of the Criminal Code, which refers to "use of force or illegal threat", would be amended. In addition, Article 257 of the Criminal Code would be amended, which refers to "insulting and violating physical integrity".
When adopting the Act on peculiar Protection due to the alleged sexual orientation, the Sejm grants specified protection not only to people with heterosexual orientation, but – which is understandable to everyone – especially people with homosexual orientation. In another words, the bill is about protecting gays, lesbians and bisexuals from violence, illegal threats, insulting and violating physical immunity.
Violence, threats of lawlessness, violations of physical integrity—clear.
An insult? What does that mean, insulting?
If a narrowing explanation were to be applied, it should be assumed that this is about dense insults or profanity against gays, lesbians and bisexuals.
If an extended explanation were used, it could besides be penalized to point to evil contained in a homosexual or bisexual way of life.
For example, the message that 2 gay men will never be real parents, due to the fact that specified parenthood is flawed, contradictory to nature, morally disgusting and disorderly, could be considered “insult”. It is hard to deny that in the perception of the average gay man, it is offensive to specify his relation in akin categories – even if in accordance with natural reason it is as appropriate.
In Poland, it seems that an extension explanation may be adopted. This is due to the fact that this explanation is adopted in another European Union countries which have adopted akin legislation. There is no reason to presume that things will be different in our country.
What does the exercise of spiritual freedom look like in the case of Christian faith?
Freedom to Confess Christian Faith
The book of Leviticus calls the 2 men "disgusting." The letter to the Romans calls specified activity “an embarrassment” and “a pervert.” 1 The letter to the Corinthians describes it as “injustice” and compares it with theft, drunkenness, or slander. 1 Timothy compares homosexual acts with slave dealing and murder. These are, of course, just a fewer examples. Much more categorical assessments of homosexual activity could be found, for example, in the writings of the Doctors of the Church.
What will the alleged gay man feel if, in public space – for example, in a sermon in a church or in a lecture on youtube – he hears that a Catholic priest describes his behaviour as grossness, perversion and shamelessness?
There is no doubt: he will feel insulted. A alleged gay man mostly believes that his sexual behaviour is morally acceptable and deserves social acceptance.
He so believes that those who criticize them as morally disgusting and worthy of social condemnation insult him.
Knowing that insulting him due to his alleged sexual orientation is prohibited, he can take the legal course.
How will the court justice the priest who called the acts of the sodomites disgusting, perverted, and shameless?
Priest before the court
The priest could point out to the court that he has a constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of religion, including its teaching, and consequently has a constitutional right to call acts of sodomic abomination, perversion and shamelessness, regardless of what this or another alleged gay man thinks about it.
However, we remember that the constitutional law of freedom of religion has its limitations. It may be restricted by law if the usage of it involves, for example, violations of public policy, morality and the freedom and rights of others.
What is the public order, morality and freedom and rights of Poles if the Sejm takes for peculiar protection the alleged sexual orientation?
It seems that since the Sejm recognises that the alleged homosexual orientation deserves peculiar legal protection, it necessarily concludes that homosexual acts are morally acceptable for the Sejm and deserve social acceptance.
It is besides clear that since the Sejm takes under peculiar protection the alleged homosexual orientation, it believes that freedom from being insulted is an component of the freedom of the alleged gay man. As a result, the alleged gay man has the right to be free from insults.
We have already established that in his perception, which has now become the perception of the Sejm, a Catholic priest calling sodomy disgustingness, shamelessness and perversion is allowed to be insulted.
It seems so legitimate to conclude that a court investigating the case of a alleged gay man insulted by a priest who declared sodomy disgusting, shameless and perverted, will admit the right of a alleged gay man, and the priest will lock up in a prison. It will become more certain there if the priest does not express regret, claiming that he has the right to call the way of life insulted as he called it.
In short, in the light of the law adopted on Thursday by the Sejm, freedom to teach Catholic religion in Poland cannot stand, unless, of course, political actors and judicial actors are consistent. Given that they can number on the support of European Union bodies in the work of consistently punishing priests and protecting gays, lesbians and bisexuals, the consequences are to be expected.
Two Ways
In the case of the entry into force of the Act adopted by the Sejm, 1 of 2 options should be expected:
– filling the prison with priests;
– the resignation by priests of calling sodomy disgusting, shameless and perverted, in favour of adopting a completely different language which in the perception of homosexuals and bisexuals would not be insulting.
In the first case, we would should be faithful to the Catholic faith, though with a sad consequence in the form of persecution of teachers of that faith.
In the second case, it would consequence in the failure of Catholic autonomy in the field of spiritual language. Since then, spiritual language would be co-formed by the aesthetic tastes of gay, lesbian and bisexual language.
The 3rd way, I think, is gone.
As no of the 2 possible paths is optimal, the law adopted by the Sejm should be prevented.
Appeal to the president – and care for the choice of his successor
The only option is the presidential act. This could be a referral to the Constitutional Court or veto.
In the first case, the thing would be removed in time, but with unclear results.
In the second thing would be solved immediately.
All possible steps must so be taken to get president Andrzej Duda to veto the bill. The most crucial function is played by bishops, who should ask the head of state. Through petitions and another forms of civilian pressure, the president should besides be asked by priests and secular Catholics.
If president Andrzej Duda, contrary to the requests, signs the bill, we will return to 1 of the 2 previously described roads.
If the president directs the bill to the Constitutional Court or veto it, we will gain a fewer months until the fresh president appears. It is to be expected that in the event of the election triumph of Rafał Trzaskowski, the bill would enter into force, and in the case of the triumph of Karol Nawrocki or Sławomir Mentzen, it would not.
For this reason, for the sake of the Church and the freedom to profess Catholic religion in Poland, it is essential to commit to the election triumph of 1 of these candidates.
How to realize this commitment, Readers know better than I do.
For their part, they can only stress how urgent this is.
Without this we will lose the freedom to confess the Catholic religion – on our own request, and that would be clearly treason.
Paweł Chmielewski
