We don't wear burqa:’ Germany’s minister favors introduction of ‘dominant’ culture

hashtag46

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jan 1, 2017
Posts
3,694
We do not wear burqa:’ Germany’s interior minister favors introduction of ‘dominant’ culture
https://www.rt.com/news/386680-germany-minister-dominant-culture-burqa/

The German Interior Minister has expressed support for the idea of introducing a “dominant culture” for German society that would define public life and serve as a guideline for the integration of migrants.

The minister also said that even though Germany “maintains neutrality in its overall worldview,” it is still very much under the influence of Christian culture and values. “In our land, religion is a link and not a wedge between [different parts] of society,” he said, adding, that religion “unites people not only in their beliefs but also in everyday life.”

"We offer our hand” to all those who come to Germany and have a right to stay he said, adding that those, who either do not know the German “dominant culture” or do not want to embrace it or even reject it, “would be unlikely to successfully integrate.”
 
Last edited:
"Hindrance to multiculturalism or distraction

De Maiziere’s ideas quickly provoked criticism both by those who believe that a “dominant culture” would become a source of social tension and hinder multicultural development, and those who see it as a distraction used to drum up support for de Maiziere’s Christian democratic Union (CDU) party.

The “dominant culture” would serve the purpose of limiting immigration by rejecting those who fail to integrate some critics say.
They also argue that the introduction of a set of specific values would inevitably provoke social clashes and would lead to a situation in which this ‘dominant culture’ would be perceived as something superior to other cultures, particularly those of migrants."
 
And no. This isn't a trolling or islamophobic thread.
I put both opinions side by side, hoping for a constructive debate (if anyone but my trolls bothers to post, that is)

"PUBLIC LIFE" are key words that set his speech apart both from islamophobia or those who attack Christianity's status as the mainstream western culture.
 
Remove user from ignore listMiles
This message is hidden because Miles is on your ignore list
 
The German Interior Minister has expressed support for the idea of introducing a “dominant culture” for German society that would define public life and serve as a guideline for the integration of migrants.


"Introducing?" Pretty sure this is an idea that we've seen out of Germany in the past.
 
"Introducing?" Pretty sure this is an idea that we've seen out of Germany in the past.

I'm ok with immigrants practicing Islam. It's their right to do so, and any hindrance to that encroaches on human rights.

But when a country takes you in, and there's a clash between one of your values and the values of the adoptive country (I'm talking common sense, within reason, let's not go too far)
- You should make a small compromise, not th. other way around.

I'm referring to the clash between western feminist values and the paternalistic even misogynistic practces of Islam, where women are forced to wear burkas or else. Or Sharia Laws that favour men and disregard women in case of divorce.

This stance has nothing to do with Islamophobia.
 
And most european countries are Christian, and they should continue to view themselves as such. Christian countries who offered a home to other minority groups.
Not a melting pot that will change european values.

No matter how many millions of immigrants they take in, Christianity should remain the dominant culture. It's part of their national identity.
 
Last edited:
How did they become Christian?

The idea that Europe has not long been a melting pot denies much of europes richness of culture and history.
I think that we're using the term "melting pot" with different connotations.
What I was trying to say was:

I agree that immigrants should be allowed to practice their religion. But that doesn't mean that, 50 years from now, France should be seen as an Islamic - Christian country, or a predominantly Islamic country.

A nation should hold on to it's traditions and cultural heritage.
Otherwise, we're talking about subversion.
And you don't see any country from the Middle East being asked to do the things that Europe is being asked to. On the contrary; any discussion about that would be labelled as racism or islamophobia.
 
I am just suggesting the topic is discussed with some balance and reason. My personal ideal is truly secular state with freedom and equality for ALL belief systems, including non mainstream Ones and Ines where the religion is absense of faith and some mutual respect and courtesy between groups. Rewriting history, particularly a history which is impressive enough as it is and Thrived on subversion seems rather to make a mockery of the stance you are trying to take. ( in case it's not clear I am not anti Christianity, have a great respect for many denominations and I am particularly fond of the il Papa of the current moment, he is both sincere and funny, I like him. )

I agree on the "all citizens should be treated equally and should have equal rights, regardless of religious beliefs" part as well.

But when it comes to the strictly institutional part or when one has no option other than choosing between competing values like western feminism versus the paternalistic aspect of Islam: I think that western values should prevail.

I'm critical of religious leaders who refuse to make adjustments according to the culture who was kind enough to take them in. For example, I find their insistence on Sharia Law, or mandatory hijab to be unacceptable.
Or: friends who just visitted Berlin told me that they were taken aback by the high nomber of women wearing burkas in Berlin Center City.
 
Last edited:
There is a real difference between accepting the laws and customs of the country you live in while retaining aspects of your own original identity and trying to break the laws and customs because you think you identity trumps everything else.

For example there are folk dance and singing groups for British Indians, British Germans, British Spaniards etc. They teach their younger UK-born children about the traditions of their grandparents without denying the benefits and differences that come with living in the UK.

The burqa and face veil are traditional customs that apply to a subset of muslims. They are not mandated by Islam but by local custom. Whatever the reason for wearing them they can be an affront to Western customs.

Sharia Law? It depends very much on what version and extent of Sharia is wanted. There can be Sharia based mortgages and loans that comply with UK law and Muslim practices. They don't affect anyone except the lender and borrower. Sharia applied to religious disputes about practices at a Mosque is no different from the rules that apply in Christian denominations and the varieties of the Jewish faith.

But Sharia for marriage and relationships between men and women is a very different matter. Sharia can be breaking UK law about marriage, divorce and equality.

Where traditional customs conflict with the law of the country, the law must prevail.
 
^^^Great post.
It also reflected my views but backed up by the knowledge and skills.
 
Morris dancing?

They're at it today in my town, the next town, the nearest city...

Yesterday they were at a vintage fair, a falconry display - anywhere where they get free beer for their display.

This is a local women's morris - Loose Women:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzAXMUHCIGg

May pole dancing? Yes, our local primary schools still do it and some of them perform at village fetes throughout the summer. Now the performers are more multicultural than they used to be.

It's the difference between major cities and country areas.

I remember when almost all UK women wore a headscarf whenever it was windy. Protecting hair styles when hair spray was expensive (and sticky) was normal. The extent of covering was often as much as a niqab.

At the time most UK men wore hats. I had a bowler for London and a trilby for country.
 
When did Europe become Christian ? How did it become Christian ? Do you have any comment on subversion in relation to this?

Slow, gradual, almost glacial transformation...

:eek:

Then, when they became Christians they resumed slaughtering each other until the papacy set them upon the "Holy Lands."
 
Back
Top