That's a bit of a oversimplification. What she was prosecuted (not convicted) on was definitely not a just a simple picture of the bible. Besides, that's only one of the charges. Other charges come from the times she implied homosexuality to be a genetic degeneration and later on called homosexuality a disorder.
Also, two years of jail is the maximum for that type of crime. IF she is found guilty, she will almost definitely get some relatively small fine.
It's understandable the christian folks want to paint this whole case as just "two years for tweeting a picture of a bible". But it's much more nuanced than that. Additionally the trial is still ongoing and it's very much unclear what the outcome will be. And this case is still handled in district court, I highly doubt it stays on that level. There's a lot of analysis and comments of the trials in the newspapers, but they are all in Finnish. I found this one in English that explains the case a bit better than "two years for tweeting a picture of the bible". https://yle.fi/news/3-12284380
> China stole every single thing it had from the US. They have developed almost zero technology. (You could very nearly say the same for Europe, though they are less socialist than China and so have developed some things on their own - barely).
What the hell are you talking about? Are you really saying all that R&D spending in other countries is going towards copy-pasting stuff made in the US?
That's a bit of a oversimplification. What she was prosecuted (not convicted) on was definitely not a just a simple picture of the bible. Besides, that's only one of the charges. Other charges come from the times she implied homosexuality to be a genetic degeneration and later on called homosexuality a disorder.
Also, two years of jail is the maximum for that type of crime. IF she is found guilty, she will almost definitely get some relatively small fine.
It's understandable the christian folks want to paint this whole case as just "two years for tweeting a picture of a bible". But it's much more nuanced than that. Additionally the trial is still ongoing and it's very much unclear what the outcome will be. And this case is still handled in district court, I highly doubt it stays on that level. There's a lot of analysis and comments of the trials in the newspapers, but they are all in Finnish. I found this one in English that explains the case a bit better than "two years for tweeting a picture of the bible". https://yle.fi/news/3-12284380