Denmark passes law banning " garments that cover the face"

[dellme]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

 I mentioned it before-I'm not naive to the Islamic immigration to Denmark and Europe in general. Like  I mentioned,  I've read several books about it.  

Yes, I know that Mohammed is the most popular name in the UK, and probably in several other European countries. 

This law is geared towards Islam, but it raises all sorts of uncomfortable questions about freedom of religion. 

The other awkward thing to think about is why Denmark is anti Islam. It's because Islam is contradictory to the social values that 70% of residents in Denmark believe. What's awkward about that? Because Mormonism is also contradictory to the social values that 70% of residents in Denmark believe. So it starts with Islam, than it makes it easier and easier to make other governmental rules about other religions. 

Well first off freedom of religion has become quite the misnomer over time. In contrast to the US, European countries do not believe in freedom of speech and if you don't believe in freedom of speech you can't believe in freedom of religion.

Even in the US, the history of the US is 100% Christian, each of the individual colonies was FOUNDED on religion-the only one that wasn't was Pennsylvania-ever other single state has it's own state religion.  Baptists in the south, Congregationalists in the North, etc.  The first amendment was to the Establishment of a federal religion and official oaths and tests of religion for office it also included the freedom to SAY what you want to say.  This was later expanded to the state level-but make no mistake upon founding of the US religion was HIGHLY integrated into the government.

That's great, but freedom of religion is only protected in so far as people believe it is protected-the Constitution won't do one dang thing to protect freedom of speech or religion unless the majority of people believe in freedom of religion or speech.  In the US this is seen time and time and time again as the Supreme Court has made decisions only later to reverse themselves over and over again. Slavery is a prime example, FDR's federal programs in the 1930s is another one. SSM is another one.  As soon as you get a significant amount of people who do not believe in freedom of speech (FS), they will elect politicians who don't believe in FS, who will put in place judges who don't believe in FS, who will eventually overturn or create new judicial proceedings against FS.

This is why immigration and immigration policy is so critical to the vitality of a nation. What are the belief structures of the individuals who are immigrating to your country? If the fundamental belief structure of those immigrants is AGAINST say Freedom of Speech, then by immigrating a bunch of people with that belief system-you are literally killing your own culture.

It's why up until the 1970s the US immigration policy favored heavily European nations b/c those immigrants came from a Christian background.  There is such a fundamental difference between freedom of speech and immigrants from Muslim countries that it can't be reconciled without giving up freedom of speech.

It's very hard for most Westerners to understand today b/c our own faith systems are so completely destroyed, we are extremely secular.  What happens when you have a very devoted (and I think that's great they are so devoted) culture worm it's way into a decaying culture . . .one is going to overthrow the other. If you immigrate 30% of the middle east into your country and the people aren't assimilated, you will become like the middle east.

And right now, Muslims in the EU are not assimilating-they are developing their own pockets of sub-culture.  If they assimilated, great-but they aren't, hence laws like this.

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, dellme said:

I don't know why it has become so taboo to be against Muslims.
...
I honestly fall to understand why this is so bad-

Oh cool - if you'd like to gain a little bit of understanding, here are some resources from Dr. Dan Peterson, who teaches Islamic studies at BYU:

“Are Mormons more like Christians than like Muslims?” (Part 1 - all 5 parts are worth reading)

Wisdom from the first Islamic caliph

A battlefield report from Paris, “third-world hellhole”

Another dishonest bit of anti-Islamic propaganda

There are many more.  Since you are expressing such a lack of understanding here, I can wholeheartedly recommend you spend a bunch of time on his website until you replace this lack of knowledge, with sufficient information on which you feel confident to base an opinion. 

[Sunday21]

@NeuroTypical How did you access part 2 of Peterson’s Are Mormon more like?

[NeuroTypical]

25 minutes ago, dellme said:

Maybe Dan Peterson should stop carrying water for liberals and softies who simply refuse to acknowledge the reality of the world.

Heh.  Well, enjoy that perspective about Dr. P, and good talking to you.  Have an enjoyable weekend!

[NeuroTypical]

53 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

@NeuroTypical How did you access part 2 of Peterson’s Are Mormon more like?

Here's the full series:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-more-like-christians-than-like-muslims-part-1.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-closer-to-muslims-or-christians-part-2.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-closer-to-muslims-or-christians-part-3.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-closer-to-muslims-or-christians-part-4.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-closer-to-muslims-or-christians-part-5.html

 

Edited June 1, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[dellme]

1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

Heh.  Well, enjoy that perspective about Dr. P, and good talking to you.  Have an enjoyable weekend!

That's it?  You can't deal with an argument and the proof from news articles about the massive problem, so you stick your head in the sand and just say goodbye?

Okaay then . . . that's fine, leave it to the strong who actually want to protect heritage and the traditions of western culture to defend it for you.  That's totally cool.

[NeuroTypical]

Dude - think carefully about the forum rules before you post further.  Especially #3 and #4.

Quote

3. Personal attacks, name calling, flaming, and judgments against other members will not be tolerated.

4. No bickering and nit-picking toward others. Realize that sometimes it is very difficult to be able to express how one feels through written words. Please be courteous and ask for a further explanation, rather then trying to attack and find holes in someone else's post.

 

[dellme]

Just now, NeuroTypical said:

Here's the full series:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-more-like-christians-than-like-muslims-part-1.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-closer-to-muslims-or-christians-part-2.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-closer-to-muslims-or-christians-part-3.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-closer-to-muslims-or-christians-part-4.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/05/are-mormons-closer-to-muslims-or-christians-part-5.html

 

Okay, I can not take this man seriously if he won't even GO INTO THE MUSLIM NEIGHBORHOODS in Paris.  

A typical academic, talk about things in academia and ignore the real-world . . .no thanks.  I don't even know what the guys viewpoint is, but CLEARLY Mormons are closer to Christians b/c we are CHRISTIANS!!!  To claim otherwise is utterly stupid and to completely misrepresent both Christianity, Muslims and LDS.

[NeuroTypical]

2 minutes ago, dellme said:

Okay, I can not take this man seriously if...
...
I don't even know what the guys viewpoint is, but CLEARLY Mormons are closer to Christians b/c we are CHRISTIANS!!!  To claim otherwise is utterly stupid and to completely misrepresent both Christianity, Muslims and LDS.

No really, you should read those links.  I mean, you keep saying things like "I can't see how" and "I don't understand why" and "I don't know the guy's viewpoint", but these problems are all easily remedied, and yet you decline.  

Trying to help you out here - Dr. P's 5 part series is all the reasons why the answer to the question is "no".  If you had spent 30 seconds reading the first link before you posted...

[dellme]

Just now, NeuroTypical said:

Dude - think carefully about the forum rules before you post further.  Especially #3 and #4.

 

Personal attack?  Because I said you stick your head in the sand?  You want to engage but not engage. You don't address any of the articles, you want to ignore the proof of what is going on in Europe-that is by definition sticking your head in the sand-that's not a personal attack that's a figure of speech.

I have not in any way shape or form called you a name and I'm not nit-picking.

You are certainly fine to call me out if you think I cross the line; but the hypocrisy is quite astounding b/c if I have just now crossed the line, then oh boy oh boy there is quite a LOT of #3 and #4 that goes on here on this forum that never gets called out.

I get it my viewpoint is unorthodox . . .but IF the US imports a significant amount of Muslims, give it 10-15 years-you'll be saying hmm, that guy was right you know.

[Guest MormonGator]

@NeuroTypical-I didn't read the links to be upfront. 

I think it's easy to see the comparisons in Islam and Mormonism. After all, they were both founded by prophets, they both place great importance in a single book which they consider scripture....there are other similarities. 

Granted, there are differences too, but there are some obvious similarities. 

[dellme]

1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

No really, you should read those links.  I mean, you keep saying things like "I can't see how" and "I don't understand why" and "I don't know the guy's viewpoint", but these problems are all easily remedied, and yet you decline.  

Trying to help you out here - Dr. P's 5 part series is all the reasons why the answer to the question is "no".  If you had spent 30 seconds reading the first link before you posted...

Again I'm not going to read an academic's papers when he so CLEARLY get's wrong Paris.  Did he go to Chapelle-Pajol district?

No he did not.  I don't hold weight to ANY of his articles if the FIRST article I read talks about how Paris is just fine and there are no problems, when I have an article written in French, explaining yes, yes there are problems.

No IF he went to Chapelle-Pajol and did research and said, well you know the French article is really off-base, then I could say okay at least he is serious about research.  But he didn't, which plainly tells me HE IS NOT SERIOUS about really figuring out this issue, all he is serious about is political correctness and carry water. And therefore I'm not going to waste my time, reading his academic trash-when he clearly didn't even address correctly Paris.

[dellme]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

@NeuroTypical-I didn't read the links to be upfront. 

I think it's easy to see the comparisons in Islam and Mormonism. After all, they were both founded by prophets, they both place great importance in a single book which they consider scripture....there are other similarities. 

Granted, there are differences too, but there are some obvious similarities. 

Yes Muslim, Mormons, Christians all claim Prophets, all claim a higher power God, but that's about where it ends.  Muslims have the Five Pillars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Pillars_of_Islam

We don't have 5 pillars, we have the 10 Commandments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments

Seriously, the fundamental basis of Judeo Christian belief is the 10 Commandments, which Muslim don't have!

Sure there are similarities in things like Charity and Prayer, etc. 

But fundamentally the highest values of Christianity are found in the 10 Commandments, the highest values of Islam is find in the 5 pillars.  How anyone can claim Mormons are closer to Muslims than Christians, when the underlying value structure of what we hold most dear is totally different, is beyond me.

Are there similarities? Of course, all religions have similarities among them that should be self-evident. But there are way, way more differences than there are similarities.

Right, there is a difference in teachings and what is valued, b/c not all teachings have the same value. And the underlying basis of LDS belief is based upon the 10 Commandments, not the 5 Pillars.  We have more in similar to Jews than with Muslims.

[Sunday21]

We have had an influx of Muslims into our town. My bishop is in education. When I last went for a temple recommend interview he told me how happy he was to have Muslim students in his school. He said that he could feel the spirit when he talked to them. I was surprised but I thought about it and I feel the same! I also feel the spirit around Muslim young people. My doctor is a Muslim and I get a similar vibe from him. I have not yet read the Peterson articles but perhaps devout people give off a similar vibe?

I can understand why European’s want to reduce the immigration of refugees. These countries are small and they feel over whelmed. My own country is a long way from anywhere and bitterly cold most everywhere. The climate discourages most refugees. At the moment we have many Haitian immigrants. 

After frightening one of my neighbors, I was very careful to call out in a friendly voice if I ever covered my face. I always uncovered my face as quickly as possible. I do not wish to scare anyone (any more than my face already does naturally , 👹)

Edited June 1, 2018 by Sunday21

[lostinwater]

29 minutes ago, dellme said:

Yes Muslim, Mormons, Christians all claim Prophets, all claim a higher power God, but that's about where it ends.  Muslims have the Five Pillars.

To be fair, the Crusades and Jihad are slightly similar as well (both of which i condemn).  Actually, both have occurred about 1000-1200 years into each religion's history.  And there is enough blood and questionable sexual practices sloshing around in our Old Testament to give the Quran a run for it's money.

Though @dellme - to clarify - you aren't saying that just because we may not be entirely similar, that this is justification for not wanting to protect their rights - including the right to cover their face and such out of (seemingly wrong) religious motivations, are you?  i think maybe that's what people are getting a little up in arms about.

And believe me, i, like you, am deeply troubled by what feels like a propensity towards extremism and violence in Islam.  Hardly the majority, but it seems the soil for radicals is a bit more fertile with Islam than with the other major religions.  Though trying to be objective, i suspect a lot of what we attribute to Islam is more a result of the society than it is because of the religion - hard to separate the two, i guess.

Anyways, not trying to pick a fight.  Welcome your thoughts.

[dellme]

8 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

We have had an influx of Muslims into our town. My bishop is in education. When I last went for a temple recommend interview he told me how happy he was to have Muslim students in his school. He said that he could feel the spirit when he talked to them. I was surprised but I thought about it and I feel the same! I also feel the spirit around Muslim young people. My doctor is a Muslim and I get a similar vibe from him. I have not yet read the Peterson articles but perhaps devout people give off a similar vibe?

That's great, what percentage are Muslim? 1%, 2%, 10%?  It's all great to be egalitarian when those who are very different than you comprise a relatively small part of the population.  When the scales start to get a little more even, then it don't look so good.

When the percentage of the Muslim population was a couple of percent in the EU no big deal, now that they have 5,6,7,8%-yeah it's a big deal.

So sure, low Muslim population percentage-wise isn't going to be a problem, but if it climbs to a significant percentage, yeah it will be a big deal.

[dellme]

22 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

Though @dellme - to clarify - you aren't saying that just because we may not be entirely similar, that this is justification for not wanting to protect their rights - including the right to cover their face and such out of (seemingly wrong) religious motivations, are you?  i think maybe that's what people are getting a little up in arms about.

And believe me, i, like you, am deeply troubled by what feels like a propensity towards extremism and violence in Islam.  Hardly the majority, but it seems the soil for radicals is a bit more fertile with Islam than with the other major religions.  Though trying to be objective, i suspect a lot of what we attribute to Islam is more a result of the society than it is because of the religion - hard to separate the two, i guess.

Anyways, not trying to pick a fight.  Welcome your thoughts.

No, I understand.  I'm not trying to picks fights either, just trying to wake people up.  So I totally agree with wanting to protect people's rights and I do not in general like a law like this.

However, one of the things that is deeply concerning is the religious idea within Islam that a woman who is not fully covered is sexually available.  Denmark banned the burqa and the nigab NOT the hijab. Which means that Islamic woman can still wear religious clothing, just not full cloak as seen in countries like Egypt, Afghanistan, etc.

In countries like Denmark and the EU, white, western, non Islamic women are having serious problems as Islamic men think they can take advantage of them b/c they aren't fully cloaked like their Islamic women.  As seen in the uk article linked, these people think they can take advantage of women b/c they aren't fully cloaked, but they don't take advantage of their own women b/c their Muslim and they are fully cloaked.

So what do you do as a country when you have this massive problem, i.e. the native women of your country are being raped and pillaged by immigrants?  (Sidenote: hmm, isn't that what conquering invaders used to do to women in the old days-rape and pillage??) Well, a smart country would stop the immigration from those nations (which Denmark can't do b/c it is part of the EU), and then severely punish anyone who commits said crime.  So closing your borders is off the table, so what do you do?

You ban the burqa and nigab to do 2 things, one make it clear that your country will not tolerate this barbarian activity and is not friendly to it and then you do it to also level the playing field so to speak. If it's your belief you can rape western women b/c they don't wear the burga and the nigab, you make is so no one does.

Like I said before, it's survival.

The thing is most people think that "racism or xenophobia", etc. come about b/c someone doesn't believe or look like you do-at that's totally false.  It comes about b/c people ACT differently.  And Muslims as a group when they have political power act differently than non-Muslims.

Out of all religions, you'd think Mormons would get this the best-but unfortunately we have some sort of persecution complex that won't allow us to see the world as it really is.  For LDS, moving out west was the BEST thing to happen, it provided a secluded area where we could practice without any intrusion from the outside and it worked pretty well. The reason why LDS aren't persecuted nearly as much now as before is b/c as a religion we've assimilated into the broader culture-we are still different but by and large we look like, act like, a significant portion of the rest of the population.  Even our beliefs have changed in order to assimilate into the broader culture.

Edited June 1, 2018 by dellme

[lostinwater]

1 minute ago, dellme said:

No, I understand.  I'm not trying to picks fights either, just trying to wake people up.  So I totally agree with wanting to protect people's rights and I do not in general like a law like this.

However, one of the things that is deeply concerning is the religious idea within Islam that a woman who is not fully covered is sexually available.  Denmark banned the burqa and the nigab NOT the hijab. Which means that Islamic woman can still wear religious clothing, just not full cloak as seen in countries like Egypt, Afghanistan, etc.

 In countries like Denmark and the EU, white, western, non Islamic women are having serious problems as Islamic men think they can take advantage of them b/c they aren't fully cloaked like their Islamic women.  As seen in the uk article linked, these people think they can take advantage of women b/c they aren't fully cloaked, but they don't take advantage of their own women b/c their Muslim and they are fully cloaked.

 So what do you do as a country when you have this massive problem, i.e. the native women of your country are being raped and pillaged by immigrants?  (Sidenote: hmm, isn't that what conquering invaders used to do to women in the old days-rape and pillage??) Well, a smart country would stop the immigration from those nations (which Denmark can't do b/c it is part of the EU), and then severely punish anyone who commits said crime.  So closing your borders is off the table, so what do you do?

 You ban the burqa and nigab to do 2 things, one make it clear that your country will not tolerate this barbarian activity and is not friendly to it and then you do it to also level the playing field so to speak. If it's your belief you can rape western women b/c they don't wear the burga and the nigab, you make is so no one does.

Like I said before, it's survival.

 The thing is most people think that "racism or xenophobia", etc. come about b/c someone doesn't believe or look like you do-at that's totally false.  It comes about b/c people ACT differently.  And Muslims as a group when they have political power act differently than non-Muslims.

Thank-you, Sir!

Very good insights.  i didn't know about the difference in clothing.  And the point about Denmark's participation in the EU making things more complicated is a very good one.   

Honestly, i don't know how far one can safely take concepts like self-preservation for application in societies at large.  Or the extent to which one can make sweeping generalizations about the nature of just about anything - especially about a religion as ubiquitous as Islam is.  i tend to think it isn't very far.  But i'll admit, i have very little skin in the game here, and my views probably reflect this and could use some adjustment.

Any (audio) books you can recommend that present some of your viewpoints?  i need to expose myself to a lot more points of view on this.

[Sunday21]

38 minutes ago, dellme said:

That's great, what percentage are Muslim? 1%, 2%, 10%?  It's all great to be egalitarian when those who are very different than you comprise a relatively small part of the population.  When the scales start to get a little more even, then it don't look so good.

When the percentage of the Muslim population was a couple of percent in the EU no big deal, now that they have 5,6,7,8%-yeah it's a big deal.

So sure, low Muslim population percentage-wise isn't going to be a problem, but if it climbs to a significant percentage, yeah it will be a big deal.

Well what are our choices? Canada’s birth rate is below replacement so we need more people. Where are we to get these people? For the record, Muslims are about 3% of the pop. 2 nd largest religion.

https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&channel=iphone_bm&source=hp&ei=GsQRW_DIIYrejwSpw6m4Dg&q=statistics+canada+muslim+population&oq=percentage+muslim+canada&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-hp.1.1.0i22i30l5.3572.14940..17332...0....140.2548.10j14......0....1.......3..0j5j41j0i131j33i22i29i30.Hzc62Srnq9k%3D

[Just_A_Guy]

29 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

Well what are our choices? Canada’s birth rate is below replacement so we need more people. 

To do what?

[Sunday21]

6 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

To do what?

Populate the country. Like most oecd countries the birth rate is declining. We are below replacement. We need people.

We need people. Muslims wish to come. Win-Win.

Edited June 1, 2018 by Sunday21

[Just_A_Guy]

2 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

Populate the country..

Why?

 Like most oecd countries the birth rate is declining.

So?

[Guest MormonGator]

14 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

To do what?

Nationalized healthcare ain't free pal. 

[Just_A_Guy]

18 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Nationalized healthcare ain't free pal. 

So . . . We need new victims for our state-run pyramid marketing schemes?  

[Sunday21]

Also pensions not free. When we pay into the government pension, the money is not put into a bank vault for each individuals retirement. The so called pension money flows into general revenue and is immediately spent. Working people support retired people so we need more working people. I am grateful for immigrants. Immigrants pay for social programs. They make the country more interesting to live in, expand the fund of ideas, and increase general welfare. We accept refugees but we have a point system for general immigration. This system allocates more points for youth (under 26 years I think) and for education, having a job offer etc. Thus immigration helps us to have a more educated workforce with education that we did not pay for. Immigration allows us to obtain skills that are in short supply.

Edited June 1, 2018 by Sunday21