Minnesota Network for Progressive Action

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites

Listed on BlogShares

site search

Site Meter
  Progressive Political Blog

Progressive Politics in Minnesota, the Nation, and the World

Targeting Personal Religious Appearances

Category: Religion
Posted: 01/30/17 15:16

by Dave Mindeman

The far right politics in Europe is causing more and more discriminatory policies to be considered. Take for example, Austria:

Austria is planning to ban the Muslim face veil in public places, the centrist coalition government said today as it announced a package of policies aimed at countering the growing appeal of the far-right opposition Freedom Party (FPO).

If a Muslim woman chooses to express her faith in this way, why should there be an allowance for governmental sanction?

OK, so because a lot of people seem to take some personal offense at this visible symbol of the Islamic faith, Austria feels compelled to make a national law to ban it?

That's crazy.

That would be like a Muslim dominated country demanding that a Christian never wear a cross of any kind on their person. I would assume that a regulation like this would be offensive to evangelicals, correct? In fact, I would say that they would consider this a persecution of their faith, right?

So why should this type of persecution be tolerated against other religions. The Muslim face veil is not some kind of assault. It is not going to affect anyone else in any way.

I would hope that saner, rational people in authority would not carry this through. But then, Trump like politics are becoming the norm and so I imagine that Austria will get suckered into this. These right wing parties are using fearmongering and frankly, nonsensical ideas, to gain electoral advantage. A false advantage based on false policies.

The world is not in a good place right now and if this continues we will be headed for an even darker place in the future.

The outward trappings of any religion should be off limits to political dialogue and especially to government regulation.

We still have kind of a fence between church and state, right? Could we get Trump to build his wall there?
comments (4) permalink
01/31/17 10:55
Bill Clinton's 1995 State of the Union speech:

"All Americans, not only in the States most heavily affected but in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That's why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens. In the budget I will present to you, we will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes, to better identify illegal aliens in the workplace as recommended by the commission headed by former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan. We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it."
01/30/17 23:05
Faith is a personal matter. Unfortunately a matter if 'interpretation.'

Christians have their faith. Some believe observing Saturday is more faithful and Sunday. Some embrace the sacrifice of Christ as sufficient to change the first covenant and embrace the second. Islam has their interpreters too.

I am no expert on Sharia Law and do not pretend to comprehend the subtle complexity. But I do know that the vast majority are peaceful, kind, and beneficial neighbors and friends. But there are some who embrace a compassionate need to murder me and you. I do not understand their motives or methods. It doesn't matter. But they also demand their territory where they dominate and impose sharia law as faithful to the original teachings as they deem appropriate. We cannot coexist in the same space because their only hope is for you and me to be dead and no longer interfere with the observance of their faith.

This executive order was most certainly not the last word. It is a work in process. It appears to be based on a hope that imposing new vetting rules--or at least understanding the older rules--solves the Donald's need to stake a claim to taking action.

What we are witnessing is the Donald raising the bar on politicians that mostly talk. At least we are talking about what it means to be a nation. If there is one thing Donald is good at, it is getting the whole world to be talking about what he is saying and doing.
01/30/17 18:49
This is the current citizenship oath:

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

So what is the point of Sharia Law - that is not a governmental issue - Sharia for Muslims is like Jewish religious restrictions - or Christian Ten Commandments. Have you bought into the fear mongering?
01/30/17 17:35
Sharia Law and interpretation thereof is the demon that we (and EU) are fighting.

Your post got me to thinking about what we ask of citizens and those seeking it. My family started coming from sweden just prior to 1920. I have the papers from my maternal grandmother's eldest brother, who prepared a document on 2/1/1940 called a "Declaration of Intention" to become a citizen of these United States. In that document he had to swear:

"I will, before being admitted to ctiizenship, renounce forever all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of which I may be at the time of admission a citizen or subject; I am not an anarchist; I am not a polygamist nor a believer in the practice of polygamy; and it is my intention in good faith to become a citizen of the United States of America and to reside permanently therein..."

And presumably abide by our laws and not Sharia Law.

When did that policy change? And what pledge is demanded?



« August 2019 »
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31

Latest posts


(one year)




RSS Feeds

RSS 0.91
RSS 2.0

Powered by
Powered by SBlog
Copyright © Minnesota Network for Progressive Action. All rights reserved. Legal. Privacy Policy. Sitemap.