Are you aware of the 'no true Scotsman' fallacy? Plenty of countries claim to be democracies and to uphold freedom of speech. But there is no country I'm aware of where one can say anything, anywhere without facing consequences. In a democracy, the restrictions are those which are deemed necessary to protect other important rights (from the reputation of someone accused but not convicted of a crime, to the ability of residents to sleep without noisy music next door). Various democracies feel the need for different trade-offs. Some societies go so far that people claim they're no longer democracies.
§ 166 StGB criminalizes speech which demeanssays in German:
Wer öffentlich oder durch Verbreiten eines Inhalts (§ 11 Absatz 3) den Inhalt des religiösen oder weltanschaulichen Bekenntnisses anderer in einer Weise beschimpft, die geeignet ist, den öffentlichen Frieden zu stören, wird mit Freiheitsstrafe bis zu drei Jahren oder mit Geldstrafe bestraft.
Cutting out some irrelevant bits this translates as:
Whoever publically demeans the content of a religious view in a way that will disturb public peace can be punished.
So this only applies for actions against a religion in a way "liable to disturb public peace." It is also forbidden to interrupt religious services or burial servicesgeneral like burning their religous books but not speech against say specific actions of an individual.
