issuevoter wrote on Jul 9
th, 2018 at 8:40am:
salad in wrote on Jul 8
th, 2018 at 6:59pm:
Denmark's extreme immigration policies include separating immigrant toddlers from their parents every week to teach them 'Danish values'
The New York Times detailed the strict laws in Denmark that single out the country’s growing non-white immigrant population.
The government designates areas populated by such immigrants as “ghetto neighbourhoods,” and requires toddlers who live in them to spend 25 hours a week learning “Danish values.”
While many immigrants see themselves as thriving, the largely homogeneous society doesn’t always think their presence is positive.
A New York Times story published Sunday profiles the strict rules immigrant children in Denmark are subject to by law. Denmark has welcomed an influx of mostly Middle-Eastern immigrants and refugees in recent years, but the society, which is 87% white, native Danes, has struggled to adapt to changing demographics.
Children born in “ghetto neighbourhoods” are mandated after their first birthdays to spend 25 hours away from their parents every week to learn “Danish values,” including instruction on
Christian holidays such as
Christmas and
Easter, as well as Danish language education. Parents who opt to keep their children at home risk losing access to government benefits.
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/denmark-strict-immigration-policies-ghetto-ne...Who remembers when the Eurocrats with their smug superiority lectured us down under about not welcoming hordes of indigestible country shoppers? It was about the time of the Tampa incident and a few years either side of that time. Can we now call out the Danes as being xenophobic? Can we highlight that they appear to be wary of vile cultures entering their country?
Can we ask them just what is wrong with hordes of muslims entering their country. The short answer is "Yes," but if you do, you are a bigot islamophobe nazi racist, who should be re-educated in progressive-humanist values, because they have everyone's best interests at heart.
No no, the short answer is yes, but if you do you're wasting your time. As we saw in the good old US of A, a president can't just give an order to stop the Muselman entering the country. Constitutional governments, you see, have things called freedom of religion. They also have clear laws and policies about government departments discriminating on the basis of religion, including immigration departments. And last, but not least, as signatories to the UN Convention on Refugees, it's illegal to reject a claim of asylum on the basis or religion.
In constitutional governments, treaty law applies to common and civil law. This means you can take a government to court if they discriminate on the basis of religion, even if you are a foreigner. We also saw this in the US of A, where district courts ruled in favour of foreign short-stay visa holders who had been detained at the airport. On appeal, the Supreme Court backed this ruling.
No one needs to be re-educated in humanist values, dear, but they should be aware that these values are enshrined in their respective constitutions. The only way any of this could change is a change to their constitution, which in constitutional governments requires a popular election.
The only constitutional government to actively discriminate on the basis of religion/race in recent times was run by the Nazi Party, and yes, they abandoned their constitution. They were quite proud of doing so. This was their platform.
So you're spot on, Issue. The short answer is "Yes," but if you do, you are a bigot islamophobe nazi racist, who should be re-educated in progressive-humanist values, because they have everyone's best interests at heart.
Try taking freedom of religion out of your constitution by putting it to a popular vote. Alternatively, stage a revolutionary coup and abandon your constitution. These are your choices.
It is a jolly world, no?