Islamization of Europe and Policies to Prevent It, Part 6
21 Mar, 2007
Part 1: A theory of the Islamization process in European countries [07 Jan, 2007]
Part 3: Reformation of Islam and Various Law and Policy Issues [12 Jan, 2007]
Part 5: Policy Area 5: Human Rights Issues [05 Feb, 2007]
Part 6: Policy Area 6: The Policy Of Assimilation or Integration [21 Mar, 2007]
Policy Area 6: The Policy Of Assimilation or Integration
The integration or assimilation of muslim immigrants is the most important political issue in Europe during the first part of the 21st century. It overshadows all other areas including economic ones, because it concerns the survival of the Western way of life in Europe. In the first part of PA 6, the background and main reasons for the chosen policy regarding assimilation are explained. Islam as a value system and the concept of multiculturalism and its consequences are treated here. Persons only interested in the concrete policy proposal can proceed to Part 2.
Religions and Ideologies as Value Systems
All human beings are of equal value but their ideologies or opinions are not. Ideologies and religions are systems of values. They can be evaluated according to certain objective standards, and various ideologies or religions show very different values according to these standards.
The main basic documents of the various religions (the bible, quran etc) naturally play a fundamental role for their value systems. For example, new quantitative research (1) shows, that about 1/3 of the quran is directly about infidels who are then treated in a distinctly hateful manner. If verses about infidels, which are connected in a passage that contain hatred toward disbelievers, are added, the proportion increases to over 40 %. If other categories biased against the infidels (e g Judgement Day) are added, the proportion increases towards one half. If the abrogation rules regarding the quran are considered, the proportions may be significantly higher. Such characteristics make it less surprising that if islam is judged using various criteria, one finds that it violates the accepted norms of humanity like the Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations (UDHR). And of all the consequences of a culture and a religion, those regarding human rights are the most important.
In this respect, islam is clearly inferior to other common value systems by e g its refusal to recognize and follow the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This standpoint of islam regarding human rights was treated in Policy Area 1(PA 1). Human rights in the western meaning of the concept do not exist in islam; human rights are only respected if they coincide with rules according to the sharia.
All historic experience shows that mixing state power and religion is a destructive idea from the viewpoint of human rights, freedom and democracy. Islam in its political consequences violates the commonly accepted conclusions regarding how a modern, civilized and progressive society shall function. Neither can sharia rules be allowed to have any practical importance within the immigrant societies from islamic countries, because that means that a parallel society would appear. A parallel society exists besides the normal one and applies islamic rules to the behaviour of its inhabitants. It is meant to keep immigrants separate and unintegrated until the country can be taken over, and mullahs and Islamic politicians take over the power. Then sharia law will be implemented and human rights in the western sense will disappear. No country can be asked to allow and finance the destruction of its religious, cultural and political institutions, policies, habits and culture. But that is what political islam in Europe demands from the European peoples.
Just based on its stand regarding human rights, islam is an inferior political and human value system from an European political viewpoint and cannot be used as a guide regarding any political issues. This means that the Islam as a religion can never be allowed to spread its values outside the realm of religious worship by individuals. The values of political islam cannot be allowed to play any role in European countries.
Effects In Various Areas Of Human Life
The sharia deprives the female half of humanity important parts of their lives, and thus a considerable part of their possibilities to be happy in life. According to our accumulated experience regarding human nature, gender apartheid rules like those applied in e g countries where sharia laws are widely used, are totally incompatible with the concept of human happiness. That is true for women but at the same time men are deprived of natural contact with women. Just regarding a matter such as love, most marriages in some Middle East countries may be loveless because of this lack of contact. Just one consequence is arranged marriages which sometimes are just arranged rapes contributing to the fact that many muslim marriages show characteristics of hell on earth. The inequality and lack of contact between the sexes are important factors. Men are – by the artificial separation from women generally and by their superior position in the homes – sometimes emotionally damaged by the rules of the religion and will never reach their human potential in the area of emotional development.
It is one reason why some men from the Middle East – when talking about women - seem so primitive or immature to Europeans. If one adds to that the effects on a person of a dysfunctional educational system; a religion demanding blind faith and no discussions of its theses; a myriad of religious rules regarding personal behaviour which are without any rational foundation; political systems built on violence and primitive ideas; a culture abhorring foreign influences a s o, we will in the end find many persons who are mentally very different from Europeans. On the basis of various criteria, the views of some seem ancient and deformed from a Western point-of-view. That is not surprising. For the first time since the religious wars between Europeans ended in the 17th century, real religious fanaticism has again raised its head in Europe, and we meet people with attitudes who haven’t existed here for some centuries.
A beautification campaign has been going on in the West regarding islam during the last decades, and the falsifications regarding its real character and effects are numerous and huge. For example, its treatment of women is described as progressive and in the interest of women, like the treatment of christians and jews in muslim societies (dhimmitude). The meaning and significance of real, traditional islam and concepts and practices like jihad etc are concealed and denied. Historic facts are distorted. It is e g upheld that islam has earlier caused much scientific progress. But the scientific progress taking place in conquered Islamic countries during the first centuries of its existence seem to have happened despite islam, and not because of it. Many of the famous scientists are reported to have been critical of islam and resisted various parts of its doctrine. The traditions in the countries before they were conquered seem to have been fundamental for the progress that happened later after the occupation. After the real Islamic doctrine started to totally dominate the societies and then also the scientific life, little progress has been made. And during the last 500 years, Islamic countries have therefore been a desert from a scientific point-of-view.
From a wider perspective considering education, social and economic development, art etc Islamic influence seems to be a disaster. Research reports from organizations within the United Nations show that Arab countries are according to a number of criteria among the least developed in the world. Only some countries with oil – discovered by western entrepreneurs, extracted by western technology and financed by western capital – are better off regarding certain economic criteria.
Culture is the most important force regarding economic development. That is the reason why immediately the iron grip of a destructive ideology loosened up in Japan and China (militaristic nationalism based on shintoism in Japan; maoism/Marxism in China), the productive cultures of these countries used all the possibilities offered by the world to develop their economies and societies rapidly. Destructive western ideologies like fascism, nazism and socialism have been imported to the Middle East and have formed a basis for political programs in various countries there. Exactly like in Europe, such ideologies have hurt the countries in many ways including economic ones. However, islam’s paralyzing iron-grip on the cultures of Middle East countries is probably the most important reason for the lack of economic and political development in these countries.
From an empirical point of view, it seems evident that islam in the Middle East is destructive regarding economic development. More research shall be performed to analyze the various reasons for that. It also means that more of the same medicine – application of a more radical islam – will cause still more damage to the economic development of the region. If the ideology of political islam will be introduced in Europe, the same stagnation and backwardness can be expected to occur here in the various areas of the society. In my theory regarding the Islamization of Europe, I concluded that victory for political islam in certain or many European countries leads to very significant declines of the GNPs of those countries.
So the muslims who beautify different aspects of their religion have their work cut out for them. Islam is for many reasons objectively harmful to many of its followers who don´t know anything else and are prevented – in Europe by the emerging parallel societies - from knowing more. From the perspective of democracy, humanism and human rights, it is then especially important in Europe to free the shackled minds and protect the human rights of the followers of Islam by active and proactive measures. The interpretation of a religion as much more than a religion in the Western sense must specially be counteracted. Most manifestations of religious islam can be respected but not those of political islam.
Because so many muslims look at themselves as belonging to a separate collective, European countries probably also have to look at muslims in the same way regarding religion. Then r e c i p r o c i t y may be a guideline demanding that muslim countries offer Europeans and minorities exactly the same freedoms in their countries that European countries offer muslims. The application and extent of reciprocity from a European perspective shall be investigated.
Which Religion and Culture?
A relevant question is then: Aren’t there important differences between variants of the islamic religion and between national cultures? Of course there are numerous local variations regarding the religion and specially regarding cultures. Muslims have in different countries interpreted the quran in somewhat different ways. Perhaps they were politically weak in some countries and couldn’t fight and dominate the country, perhaps in combination with an old tradition to live peacefully aso.
However, the evidence seems to show that there are no important theological differences between jihadists and so-called "peaceful" or "moderate" Muslims. It may be that jihadists are just more faithful and more serious with regard to realizing islam. One religious obligation which every muslim must observe, is to realize and institute the laws of islam if he is in such political position that he has the power to do so. Some believers think that it is mandatory to work hard to realize that situation. Moderates think that if muslims are not in power, there is no special religious duty to work directly to reach it (unless a jihad has been legally proclaimed). But probably many or most moderates want the muslims to reach that kind of power so they can implement the sharia.
The traditional doctrine is the leading one in the muslim world. Local and more moderate interpretations are now retreating in many countries probably because communication and interaction is easy in the modern world, and therefore the real, traditional islam can recover the initiative again from local and earlier somewhat isolated variants of islam. The traditional faith can now control the contents of the doctrine in various countries better. Because all four schools of sunni islam agree on so many matters, this force is difficult to withstand intellectually if one is a muslim.
It has been said that islam has been hijacked by terrorists. Even if that may be the case in some instances where the terrorists really interpret the quoran in too extreme a way, it is no reason at all to conclude that the judgment is true in general. What seems to be true is instead that many - from the beginning normal, peaceful and sound - persons are hijacked by islam and transformed into fanatics and enemies of democracy, freedom and human rights. And some of these persons may for many reasons develop into terrorists. But that transformation doesn’t depend on the discovery of other tenets of islam but on psychological or sociopsychological reasons, and the individual circumstances of the person in question.
Because of the misery of their current life, an end to it and paradise may seem preferable. A person may feel a greater fear of hell than others; or for young sex-starved men, the free sex in paradise may seem more important than anything else. Or the person takes the teaching that this life is of little importance than the other more seriously and tries to reach the next faster – and dying in jihad is the sure free ticket to paradise. Or he is a strict, serious and logical person and makes reasonable conclusions on the basis of the quran, hadiths and sunnah.
In many cases, a moderate muslim evidently has the same goals as the terrorists but refuses to fight for them with a weapon in his hand and sacrifice himself in battle (until jihad has been legally proclaimed). But that is no reason to make a sharp differentiation between a moderate and an extreme muslim religion. The final goals may be very similar, or even the same. It is also always necessary to observe the possibility of taqiyya when listening to a so-called moderate. Extremists find advantages in being labelled as moderates.
Without a reformed doctrine proclaiming distinctly and unequivocally different theses which secure all human rights and eliminate the unacceptable parts of the quran, the opinions of the moderates are not specially useful as a religious basis. Opinions can be abandoned and may crumble fast if they come under serious pressure from hardliners. No policies in western countries can be based on a belief in the moderation of muslims without the existence of a clearly reformed islamic doctrine. The survival of a nation: its human rights, political system, culture and future cannot rest on such a weak hope.
Multiculturalism According to the common interpretation, multiculturalism in practice means that all cultures and religions are equal. For the reasons given above, that assertion is totally wrong. People are equal as human beings but the opinions, culture and values of people have not the same worth. Opinions and culture can generally be valued according to various criteria. Different cultures – being value systems - are therefore not equal. From a political and humanistic point–of-view, some of these systems are - just owing to their positions concerning human rights - worthless in a western democracy as value systems guiding the society regarding political issues. Regarding the effect of religions in other areas, research should – as said above - be used to show the influence and worth of them concerning, e.g., educational policy and practice, common culture, crime, social development, income equality, science, economic growth etc.
Europe is in the process of integration where many countries will melt together and become a unity in many respects. That process offers many challenges. But because the value systems in many European countries are now not so different, this integration process may be successful. It is another matter when the values of ideological systems are opposite to each other. Islam doesn’t accept that an individual leaves the religion or thinks independently about its various religious theses and publicly rejects certain ones. The basic rules of a democracy regarding a citizen’s right to form an independent opinion about the religion and being free to act on that basis, are not accepted. To apply rules and laws of X-country regarding islam as if it fundamentally – and not only during a period of weakness - tolerates dissent and other religions, is wrong. Islam does not accept a situation where it exists as a minority culture. It will always try to change that situation and become the majority culture. And when it reaches that goal, sharia will be implemented. Islam is not just another value system but a value system in total opposition to European ones. Islam is therefore a special case and must be treated in another way than other religions because of its characteristics.
Another tenet of multiculturalism is that if different cultures live together with openness and tolerance, the level of mutual understanding and acceptance will increase until all peacefully accept each others´ ideas and values (which in the beginning seemed so foreign). However, that is another false idea of multiculturalism regarding islam. One reason is that it demands a tolerance and reciprocity that islam doesn’t allow. Islam does not make compromises regarding its doctrine. When it is strong, it imposes its values by force. When it is weak, it applies taqiyya, conceals its intentions and misleads in all possible ways. And regarding the value of increasing familiarity and knowledge, it works in exact the opposite direction: the more Europeans get to know islam and sharia, the more they seem to oppose it. They can respect the purely religious part of islam but because the political part is so dominant, they evidently dislike most of the messages they hear. And in general it seems that the greater the knowledge is about islam, the greater the resistance to it. The existence of opposite value systems has that consequence. And when the knowledge of real true islam will now increase rapidly in the European parts of the populations despite the efforts of the political establishments to prevent that, this development in itself will have profound political consequences.
Other religions and cultures than islam do not create any fundamental problems in Europe. But multiculturalism is used primarily to promote islam. Because the arguments for multiculturalism are so weak, multiculturalism in Europe is preached like a religion which doesn’t allow any rational discussions of its merits. Probably some adherants also use the concept as a convenient method to force otherwise unacceptable ideas on the European societies. People who question the concept are branded - like in the Middle Ages - as heretics: as fascists, Nazis, oppressors, colonialists etc. However, the bully methods used by the Political Correctness Enforcers in the press and political life cannot hide a basic fact of reality: different cultures are of different worth.
Multiculturalism hardens the differences in society and deepens the alienation of members of the minority groups with different values. It helps different cultures to resist the pressure to reform and change objectionable and harmful theories and rules. It divides the society into opposing groups and is therefore a threat to the survival of the European nations as we know them. It prevents assimilation of immigrants into the society and simultaneously causes resentment in people who cannot apply their values in the society. They are made to feel like victims even though the European majority of citizens are the real victims. The disadvantages of multiculturalism such as it is preached and exists, clearly outweigh any possible advantages.
Among the basic reasons for the resentment of a European population against muslim immigrants is the feeling that those have entered the country under false pretences. Many immigrants evidently arrive without any intentions to integrate into the new society. Instead they join a parallel one and live their lives partly at the expense of the European majority while they wait for the demographics to give them political power in the country. Then they can force their values on the infidels. It is a kind of treachery that earlier has never existed on such a scale. To move to a society and then - when the number of people of the special faith has grown – start to complain that they are religiously offended by the basic habits and customs in that country is wrong in principle. When immigrating to X-country, they knew that X-country had a certain culture. Then to say that one is offended by the basic culture of that country is the same as saying that the “immigrant” should not have immigrated there.
The propensity to start trying to change the national culture in various – and basic – ways instead of integrating, shows the fundamental goal of the group and/ its leaders: to take over the country and its culture as soon as they are strong enough. That is the philosophy of an invading force, not of normal immigrants. It is specially serious knowing that every national culture where islam has become strong and later dominant, is obliterated and substituted by an imported islamic culture.
Multiculturalism as it is now applied is used to build parallel societies in the European countries. There the mullahs and political leaders can keep the Islamic values intact in the minds of people who shall overthrow the indigenous culture and society. Therefore they will as leaders resist all efforts to integrate. They need as many bodies with fanatical faith as possible in the coming fight. Few Europeans knew or understood that their generosity should lead to that their country would be taken away from them. Their mistake was to see immigrants as individuals in need, instead of a collective which tries to force its will on the European peoples. Islam aims to make the immigrants from various islamic countries into such a collective. The false pretences now cause an increasing resentment of political islam among the Europeans which will have significant political consequences and change Europe.
Multiculturalism causes - slowly in the beginning but gradually faster - more and more strife. So multiculturalism in combination with a growing immigrant population from Islamic countries causes a slowly increasing level of conflicts and violence in the society, and, in the end, civil war. That development and its phases are described in my theory of the islamization process in European countries. The Europeans will not accept that their countries and cultures are taken from them but will fight. If this development is not stopped by an integrated state policy just aiming at preventing islamization, we can from now on foresee an ever increasing level of conflicts and later violence in all European countries with larger immigrant populations. The process has started, and it has reached different phases in different countries.
The religiously based attacks against the culture, laws, policies and habits of X-country are all parts of an effort to weaken it in order to expand a parallel society where muslims can live according to the sharia while their strength increases. It is therefore important to protect the traditional culture and habits of X-country, and which its citizens appreciate. Special rules are necessary to protect the national culture. At the same time it is necessary to implement a fast assimilation process in the society and not accept but instead actively prevent any type of parallel society inside the borders of X-country. Any immigrant, or descendent of immigrants, who does not accept the laws and policies of X-country regarding integration or assimilation can and shall apply for special financial help to leave the country.
Every attempt to create a parallel society in order to form a force or power that in the future can subdue the European society in order to make it accept sharia rules is an extremely serious crime against a country. It can be compared to treachery during war. Important building blocks for erecting a parallel society are e g Religious Hate Crimes (RHC) and Crimes Against Integration (CAI) (see below). They are used to segregate members of a certain faith from the rest of the society, cement walls between and promote enmity between groups in the country.
2. Important Principles and Goals That Shall Be Realized in a European Country
It shall be forbidden by law to use courts upholding that one is discriminated (owing to one’s religion) by various important manifestations of the national culture of X-country like old traditions, tales, customs connected with Christmas, Midsummer, breaking-up day etc (or by the holidays in themselves). Old and common expressions of the national culture shall not be changed because of attitudes, rules and habits recently imported from abroad. That the prevailing culture in X-country has its traditional holidays is no reason that other, immigrant cultures shall have their holidays officially acknowledged. Neither shall any expenses be paid in order to promote any religious manifestations of new faiths in X-country. It is a secular country, and the public shall not pay for the practice of any religious activities. Old churches and similar objects are kept up for national cultural reasons, and not for religious ones.
It shall be forbidden to institute principles and rules from sharia law, or from any religious doctrine which in any noticeable way contradicts the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations and/or the rights of a citizen or an individual defined in the Constitution of X-country, in any public institution or organization in X-country including all tax-financed ones. That regards eg, day-care centers, schools, hospitals, sport arenas, transport facilities, courts, public administration, police and the military. All manifestations of gender apartheid like demanding female doctors for female patients, different visiting times and gender separation regarding public baths a s o are not allowed and shall immediately be terminated where they exist.
Some of the proposals to accommodate e.g., muslims may seem small but they are just the opening salvo in an attempt to institute sharia on a broad front. The small accommodations will be used to argue that by analogy other changes are justified and must be made. Every gain for sharia rules will be a reason to press on for more implementation of sharia in X-country. Many muslims look at sharia as an alternative to democracy: God, not people, shall decide. But in X-country, the people shall decide!
Even sharia rules that do not directly violate human rights must be looked upon at as a first step to increase acceptance of and to introduce sharia rules which do violate human rights. Sharia law is cruel and extremely intolerant. Tolerance towards intolerance is no virtue; it just shows a lack of ethics and/or cowardice. Nontolerance towards intolerance is the ethical position. An all-encompassing nontolerance of sharia law must therefore be the basic principle in the attempt to uphold the values of a free society. X-country is fundamentally a secular society, and new rules can also for that reason not be accepted just on religious grounds.
The language of X-country is the official language, and shall always and in all geographic areas of X-country be used in public and tax-financed institutions and organizations. The language in the schools shall always be the language of X-country except for foreign language lessons. Special permission can be given for schools using languages from EU countries. An unwillingness to learn the language of X-country is not acceptable for an immigrant.
If the forces trying to create a parallel society based on a certain religion are strong in X-country, the state must weaken these forces in all possible ways. The forces that cause the parallel society to thrive and therefore strengthen the centrifugal forces in the society, must systematically be eliminated one after the other. If e g the state finances special education in the languages of the home countries of groups that maintain a parallel society, such education shall stop until the threat has disappeared. Using a foreign language during public religious services in X-country was commented upon in PA 4. All immigration from the countries with immigrants involved in building or maintaining a parallel society can also be stopped, and immigration from other countries with no such tendencies towards separatism, can instead be increased (PA 8).
A number of crimes are defined as “religious hate crimes” (RHCs) in PA 4 and 11. Religious hate crimes in X-country may have consequences regarding integration and therefore violate the assimilation of members of a special faith into the society. Other religious rules that are connected to some type of gender apartheid and Violation of the equality between sexes (see PA 3), also often damage the integration in the society. Examples are: not letting girls have the same rights to act as boys; influencing girls to wear the veil or hijabs; forcing girls into arranged marriages; preventing girls to marry non-muslims; polygamy etc. Systematic attempts to prevent - for religious reasons -assimilation/integration of individuals into the society, are defined as “Crime(s) Against Integration (CAIs)”. These are serious crimes and shall be given priority by local law enforcement authorities.
A crime against integration may – besides a fine or prison term – lead to loss of custody of the person’s children owing to his/her antisocial actions that can influence the children in the family. It may influence behaviour in the next generation. The condition for a loss of custody is that the spouse (mother or father) applies for single custody during divorce proceedings, or during the marriage. All crimes against integration may influence the right to custody of the most guilty parent. All crimes against integration shall also be taken into consideration when giving permissions regarding residence in X-country or citizenship or cancellations of such decisions. If a CAI is committed by a parent against his/her child, damages shall also be paid to the child by the parent. Encouraging, planning and taking a more passive part in CAIs shall – like in cases of RHCs - be punishable by similar rules as those that apply to the main actor(s). Children have the same right as a parent to report RHCs or CAIs in his/her home. Property involved in a CAI may be confiscated if any sentence regarding the crime involves a prison term.
If any RHC (PA 4) or a crime according to PA 3 can be judged to be a CAI, the rules regarding custody, residence or citizenship, and confiscation of property apply also to these crimes.
To Maintain and Strengthen a Parallel Society
All efforts and attempts of any kind to build or strengthen separatism and a parallel society based on a religious doctrine, which in any noticeable way contradicts the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations and/or the rights of a citizen or an individual defined in the Constitution of X-country, are forbidden.
The actions may regard creating laws or rules only intended for the members of the special faith, and which laws etc will exist parallel to other laws and rules of X-country. A public proposal to create special sharia courts in X-country is one example of such an effort. Such laws etc shall not be allowed. Attempts to force sharia rules on the society’s institutions are made continuously by muslim organizations and representatives. They concern food (halal food), fasting, prayer, dress (gender apartheid), beards, swimming (gender apartheid), gymnastics and sports (gender apartheid), medical services (gender apartheid), in some countries even vaccinations etc. These are all CAIs if the attempts are based on a religious doctrine as defined above, unless they just regard personal private worship. However, personal worship shall not be allowed to interfere with any ordinary activities of public institutions. No special considerations regarding religion are allowed at all for children and youths under 18 years of age. No expenses shall be paid by public money in order to promote any religious manifestations of faiths in X-country.
Other such actions may regard creating or strengthening separatism and unofficial organizations, institutions, rules and policies (outside religious worship in a European sense) for members of a special faith which are intended to substitute for public institutions, rules and policies of X-country. All such efforts and attempts intended to build a parallel society are CAIs.
It is an empirical question if religious kindergartens and schools of a certain faith can be allowed. The rules formulated in Policy Areas 3, 4, 7 and 11 must be observed by any institution of this kind. False and subjective presentations of any religion are not allowed in a religious school. Schools are important for promoting integration in the society, and if a religious school weakens that effort, it shall immediately lose its right to carry out any kind of educational activities. Religious schools shall only be certified for a period of three years. A new certification depends – besides on traditional criteria - on its attempts to, and success in, promoting the important values of a democratic society and integration of the schoolchildren into the society.
However, religious schools in themselves are an objective obstacle for contacts with children of other faiths; thus they hinder integration. If the drive to create a parallel society is strong in X-country, it is necessary to forbid the religious schools which are part of such a drive. If schools of a certain faith can be judged to objectively strengthen the attempt to create a parallel society, such schools shall not be allowed.
Attempts to force sharia rules on schools are made continuously by muslim organizations and parents (see To maintain and strengthen a parallel society). Special rules – besides such ones mentioned there - may in schools regard: contact sports; the clothing of boys and girls during e g swimming; art classes; religious education; sex education; dancing etc. Attempts to change – for religious reasons – the standards of X-country regarding a child’s right to enjoy and take part in a school’s (1) activities, or (2) enjoy the supply of services in a school, are CAIs and are forbidden. They are attempts to build a parallel society and undermine the assimilation of the children into the society.
Meeting other children, enjoying their company and learning from them is an important part of growing up. Applying religious rules regarding gender apartheid and/or keeping muslim children away from non-muslim children to limit the possible influence of the latter ones, are CAIs.
Various physical and leisure activities are a part of a child’s - or youth’s - process of growing up. A systematic behaviour by (a) parent(s) to forbid – for religious reasons - common entertainment, sports, physical activities like swimming, playing or listening to western music, dancing, enjoying arts of all kinds a s o is a CAI if it is caused by a religious doctrine which in any noticeable way contradicts the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations and/or the rights of a citizen or an individual defined in the Constitution of X-country. It is also true if the parent(s) allow(s) anybody else to influence the children in that way. Parents are not allowed to hinder medical treatments which are beneficial to the children. Parents who have immigrated to a European country and belong to a religion with the characteristics stated above, cannot systematically prevent children to be like normal healthy children of X-country for no other reason than a religious doctrine.
Religious Education for Children
To let young children memorize the quran, year after year, and in a language they don’t understand, and let this be a main part of their education, constitutes an assault on the personality of a child. Just imagining the mental torture of many children and youths in the many madrasahs of Pakistan is heartbreaking. Such educational crimes are not allowed in X-country but there are variations of it. The muslim religious training is basically indoctrination, where nothing of the rational approach and sceptical method used in the schools of X-country is applied, but instead blind faith. Just learning about the Islamic concept of hell, the descriptions of that hell, and the purposeful creating of fear by the teacher for this truly awful presumed location can be an attack on the psychology of a child. The reasons for e g going to hell probably also seem totally unreasonable for normal intelligent children in X-country, muslims or non-muslims. That all nonmuslims (incl mother Theresa) regardless of the morality of their lives must be tortured and stay in hell for ever, while a sinful muslim for various reasons may go to heaven, is an unethical proposition and a shattering concept for a sensitive child.
The hatred expressed in the quran and the hadiths against all people who are not muslims may – if they are expressed to children – constitute a psychological abuse of them because it attacks people they meet in their everyday life, may feel affection for, hear about at school etc. One weakness is that islam doesn’t have a general morality but only a situational one. E g the golden rule doesn’t apply. What is right and wrong just depends on who you are and who the others are (muslim or non-muslim; man or woman; free or slave). It means that islam doesn’t have an ethics in the western sense.
The teaching about e g jihad in religious education can easily be formulated in a way that violates the human rights expressed in UDHR. The rules given in PA 4 must be observed in all religious education.
Learning contempt for the laws, customs and nonmuslim citizens of X-country; hearing that they themselves as muslims are chosen and superior to such people and will in the future dominate them (similar in certain respects to a race ideology) must leave deep uncertainty in many respects in the minds of children.
Learning children that the law of cause and effect doesn’t really exist and also that everything on earth is predetermined; that life in this world is of minor importance compared with an alleged second world with many strange characteristics; devaluing human life here and directing the energy towards another world with no connection to reality; creating deep, deep fear of an alleged hell, the horrors of which are described graphically; promoting antisocial values meaning hostility and contempt for others ie nonmuslims and many other aspects can – if the psychological pressure is high enough - be said to constitute psychological abuse of children.
It is an empirical question if a certain religious training crosses the line that should not be crossed in a European society. If the line is crossed, it is a violation of the human rights of a child. Because it is done or permitted by the parents, it is difficult to counteract. However, in the same way as parents are not allowed to e g prevent medical treatment of children, parents are not allowed to deform young human minds too cruelly. Psychological child abuse for religious reasons may demand new legal rules. At the same time the phenomenon is of importance for assimilation because the possible violations of the children are in many cases probably connected with teachings that act against assimilation into the society and are favourable towards creating a parallel society. Such CAIs shall be punished by fines or prison terms.
Wives and Women
A systematic behaviour of a husband to force his wife to follow gender apartheid rules for religious reasons is a crime against integration (CAI) and punished by a fine or a prison term. There are many variations of that behaviour: an unwillingness to let the woman in the family learn the language of the new country or get an education; forbidding her to leave the home generally, or to work outside the home because of religious rules; or forbidding her to meet muslim women without hijabs, or nonmuslim women or men; forcing her to dress according to the Islamic code despite her unwillingness to do so; forbidding her to swim in public baths; not allowing her to use contraceptives despite her wishes; not to use male doctors etc. Other Islamic rules that belong to the gender apartheid group, regard forcing the wife to have sex, beating her etc. Those are already treated in the criminal law of X-country. It is necessary now to extend the force of law to other types of behaviour. Such behaviour is a reason also for denying custody to the most guilty parent in case of divorce or during marriage, and paying damages to the least guilty parent in case of divorce. If the woman or wife asks for help from a court against such CAIs during the marriage, it shall be able to force the man to change his behaviour by sentencing him to prison or paying a fine.
A systematic behaviour of the type described above against any female relative, or female living in his home, and which a man has power over according to laws or customs from their home country, is a CAI and shall be punished in the same way.
In PA 4 it is pointed out that in X-country a woman more than 18 years old has no legal guardian. Systematic attempts by parents, relatives or others to assume the role of legal guardian for a woman above that age and force her against her will to do things according to religious rules or customs in their home country, is also a CAI. It shall be punished by a fine or a prison term.
A RHC (PA 4) or a violation of the Equality between Sexes (PA 3) concerning wives and women may have consequences regarding integration and shall then also be judged from that point of view regarding custody etc.