"(2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons, and in the right to personal honor."
So it sounds like their constitution is pretty standard on this point: You have an absolute, indelible right to freedom of speech (unless we decide it's bad speech).
Fundamentally speaking, this whole conflict is a conflict of two fundamental rights in the German constitution: Freedom of Speech (or Arts) and Human Dignity. The relevant laws can be traced back to those two rights.
Which is functionally identical to 'you don't have freedom of speech and can only say what we allow'.
The constitutional court interprets all basic rights as broad, and all restrictions which are allowed need be as small as possible while still keeping the intent of the constitution. Interpreting the constitution is not an easy task and takes a lot of practice.
Which is why marital rape was legal until 1997 /s
>The constitutional court interprets all basic rights as broad, and all restrictions which are allowed need be as small as possible while still keeping the intent of the constitution.
Not really. Otherwise marijuana would be legal, the paragraph making incest illegal would have been abolished in 2008, the paragraph criminalizing gay sex would never have existed etc.
P.S: What's with the seemingly random "You're submitting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks" message?
Obviously there have been and still are some interpretations which are outlandish. But this is what you get as soon as you start dealing with humans. Overall, I firmly believe that the constitution even with its flaws is a powerful document protecting the people.