Denmark bans niqad and burka

[Standing Wolf]

Someone about to commit a terrorist act - plant a bomb, or wear a bomb and blow himself up - is going for inconspicuous. Yes, occasionally a terrorist in the Middle East, where burkha-clad women are everywhere, might disguise himself that way, but in the Western world he's going to want to blend in until the last possible moment. This has nothing whatsoever to do with security, and everything to do with cultural and religious bigotry.

As for wanting to "liberate" women from the assumed patriarchal oppression of their husbands and other male relatives, a law like this will result in exactly one thing for women in that situation: they won't be permitted outside the home at all.

[Ethereal]

Just curious. Does anyone know of, or can anyone find, an instance of a woman in Denmark, or in any other European country, actually wearing any such face-covering garment while engaged in a terrorist act? I'm just wondering what the justification for something like this is in the minds of those proposing or supporting it. It gets pretty cold in northern Europe; will ski-masks be included in the ban? And what impact does something like this have on Halloween?

I don't know the answer. But I do know that Denmark needs to protect its culture and its democracy. Just consider the fact that the metropolitan area of Los Angeles has almost five times as many people living in it than Denmark's entire population (roughly 5.7 million). That makes Denmark's democratic and cultural character quite fragile in the grand scheme of things, so if they are overreacting to foreign influence it is understandable.

[Ethereal]

How does a Muslim woman wearing a face covering make those around her "change"?

Viewed in isolation, it isn't. Viewed in the context of the totality of Islamic culture, it is a microcosm of a cultural clash. The simple fact is that multiculturalism is a dangerous delusion that presages social instability and strife everywhere it is practiced. So it stands to reason that a war against this utopian pipe-dream will be somewhat messy.

[Ethereal]

Not a fan of this, but they've gotten screwed hard by this situation. If you're going to bring in mass Islamic immigration, its smart to create an environment that some level of cultural assimilation.

The cultural and democratic integrity of countries like Denmark is facing an existential threat. Granted, it may not be a "war" in the traditional sense of the term, but the stakes are effectively the same. If they want to survive into the future as a unique and democratic culture, then they must resist the madness of multiculturalism. So while I think we can both agree that this kind of suppression grates on our libertarian sensibilities, it is the only rational response given the circumstances. The people of Denmark must make it exceedingly clear that Denmark belongs to them.

[Ethereal]

Someone about to commit a terrorist act - plant a bomb, or wear a bomb and blow himself up - is going for inconspicuous. Yes, occasionally a terrorist in the Middle East, where burkha-clad women are everywhere, might disguise himself that way, but in the Western world he's going to want to blend in until the last possible moment. This has nothing whatsoever to do with security, and everything to do with cultural and religious bigotry.

As for wanting to "liberate" women from the assumed patriarchal oppression of their husbands and other male relatives, a law like this will result in exactly one thing for women in that situation: they won't be permitted outside the home at all.

If that is the case, then the people of Denmark need to identify any male(s) engaged in such barbarous coercion and have them thrown in prison or deported back to their barbarous homeland where such behavior is permissible. Clearly the answer is not to passively accept the presence of a hostile, alien culture in their ancestral and democratic homeland simply because multiculturalism is presently in vogue.

[Standing Wolf]

If that is the case, then the people of Denmark need to identify any male(s) engaged in such barbarous coercion and have them thrown in prison or deported back to their barbarous homeland where such behavior is permissible.

With the exception of the face covering, I can think of a culture right here in America where women are only permitted to appear in public wearing long sleeves, full-length dresses and head coverings, and are not permitted to drive or use the telephone. They're called the Old Order Amish, and most of my family on my father's side belongs to that sect. (And, yes, it's true that the men don't drive or use the telephone, either.) At any rate, it seems strange, particularly for someone who identifies as a libertarian, to suggest putting someone in prison for having and enforcing strict rules about attire in public for members of the community. I must confess that I haven't heard that sort of suggestion made in reference to any religious faith other than Islam. What sort of rules do very strict orthodox Jews have for their women - does anyone know or care?

[Peter1469]

How does a Muslim woman wearing a face covering make those around her "change"?

You should really keep up with the issue. Muslims in Europe are demanding change to suit themselves at Europe's expense.

[Peter1469]

In Europe?

We know the tactic has been used. I am not sure that Jihadists would refuse to use it in Europe. But it is still beside the point.

[Peter1469]

Someone about to commit a terrorist act - plant a bomb, or wear a bomb and blow himself up - is going for inconspicuous. Yes, occasionally a terrorist in the Middle East, where burkha-clad women are everywhere, might disguise himself that way, but in the Western world he's going to want to blend in until the last possible moment. This has nothing whatsoever to do with security, and everything to do with cultural and religious bigotry.

As for wanting to "liberate" women from the assumed patriarchal oppression of their husbands and other male relatives, a law like this will result in exactly one thing for women in that situation: they won't be permitted outside the home at all.

No it isn't. Europeans have no moral obligation to bend to the demands of foreigners.

[resister]

Not a fan of this, but they've gotten screwed hard by this situation. If you're going to bring in mass Islamic immigration, its smart to create an environment that some level of cultural assimilation.

They have zero interest in assimilation. They seek to turn America into the ME.