If following a law slightly restricting freedom of speech - which is fully compatible with the German constitution may I add - ensures the existence of the instance, then yes, following this law is a moral good.
Besides, wrong laws should be followed, provided the law is not unjust in its very foundation (such as a law mandating the dealth penalty). That’s the Radbruch formula which is a core of German jurisprudence since WW2 which allows for prosecution of “legal” crimes and mandates disobedience of unjust laws.
This current law - or rather the interpretation of it - is objectively wrong. Its foundation - the criminalization of antisemitism and Holocaust denial - however is not unjust in its very being.
You can be assured feddit.org will never follow any “law, no matter how wrong it is” - as that would be illegal.
If following a law slightly restricting freedom of speech - which is fully compatible with the German constitution may I add - ensures the existence of the instance, then yes, following this law is a moral good.
Besides, wrong laws should be followed, provided the law is not unjust in its very foundation (such as a law mandating the dealth penalty). That’s the Radbruch formula which is a core of German jurisprudence since WW2 which allows for prosecution of “legal” crimes and mandates disobedience of unjust laws.
This current law - or rather the interpretation of it - is objectively wrong. Its foundation - the criminalization of antisemitism and Holocaust denial - however is not unjust in its very being.
You can be assured feddit.org will never follow any “law, no matter how wrong it is” - as that would be illegal.