I completely support this move by the Austrian government to close a bunch of Turkish-funded mosques and expel the associated Imam's for teaching radicalism. Unfortunately, we can expect a bomb, shooting, or vehicle crowd plow as a result. But this is the kind of step the Euros need to take before this stuff becomes so embedded in their countries that the cannot break free from it.
posted by Dr Winston O'BoogieI completely support this move by the Austrian government to close a bunch of Turkish-funded mosques and expel the associated Imam's for teaching radicalism. Unfortunately, we can expect a bomb, shooting, or vehicle crowd plow as a result. But this is the kind of step the Euros need to take before this stuff becomes so embedded in their countries that the cannot break free from it.
Would you endorse the United States making a similar move?
posted by wkfanWould you endorse the United States making a similar move?
In a heartbeat if the research was done and they were deemed radical.
I got a big problem with this for one reason: The Government is determining what is radical for a religion.
Sure, maybe these mosques are linked to Turkey and they are spreading violence, but where is the line the Government accepts as being a moderate to being a radical?
How would that apply over here? You telling me the US Government will determine what is radical for a religion? Would that apply to other religions as well? Will there be a Government code you have to follow to not be considered radical? Nah, that is a bridge too far.
You can have religious freedom as long as it abides by the law of the land. You have to assimilate if you want to be here
posted by SpockYou can have religious freedom as long as it abides by the law of the land. You have to assimilate if you want to be here
What's that mean?
If you are stirring up violence ok, I get it, shut ya down. But, if you just disagree with some policies of the government, is that ok for the government to then shut down a place of worship?
posted by ptown_trojans_1I got a big problem with this for one reason: The Government is determining what is radical for a religion.
Sure, maybe these mosques are linked to Turkey and they are spreading violence, but where is the line the Government accepts as being a moderate to being a radical?
How would that apply over here? You telling me the US Government will determine what is radical for a religion? Would that apply to other religions as well? Will there be a Government code you have to follow to not be considered radical? Nah, that is a bridge too far.
I don't know if this would fly in the US. Don't forget that Europeans generally have a different view of what their government can and cannot do when compared to us. I am not sure where you draw the line. If the rule was you have to respect the country like the one in Austria says, you could potentially throw out a guy like Obama's Chicago preacher. I am just not sure. However I do know that lots of Muslims get radicalized in Europe. Perhaps they see this as an emergency situation where typical rules don't apply.
posted by ptown_trojans_1What's that mean?
If you are stirring up violence ok, I get it, shut ya down. But, if you just disagree with some policies of the government, is that ok for the government to then shut down a place of worship?
Or storm in gun blazing and light women and children on fire.
Europe is dealing with sections of people who have never stepped foot in a predominately Islam worshipping country (Iran, Pakistan, etc., are mostly middle class, whose parents/grandparents were refugees, mostly young men. In London, for example and other areas in the UK the inmates are running the asylum. UK officials know where "danger" mosques are, know where the muslim grooming gangs are and turn a blind eye because they do not want to be seen as bigots. They couldn't be labeled as racists because Islam isn't a race, but they sure could be called white supremecists, bigots, Islamophobes (as opposed to Christianophobes, Hindiophobes, Judeophobes or Buddistophobes I guess lol). They have been, and will keep doing, trying the appeasement route and hope that their cowardly benevolence will win out. These European governments (led by the EU for the most part) flood their countries with migrants, refugees being the smallest number, and hope that these people will assimilate and adopt European values. Most do not and only wish to dominate and segregate and have no interest in western values. The UK has gone to the extreme of jailing people for speaking out about these practices; they will arrest their own citizens and then dig up whatever they can to put them away for a while (shut them up). They've done this a few times already with Tommy Robinson; the first time they did this he was stabbed and had all of his teeth knocked out while in prison, by extremists in prison. Really scary stuff happening over there.
These sections/groups/mosques are openly supportive of terrorism, train on gun usage, murder, segregation, discrimination, etc. You can see a snippet of an expose that exposes some of these teachings here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbMrPeSYpJU . Think living a life out in Leviticus. Think WBC teaching violence instead of just protesting.
I continue to believe in one of the most important rights of the US, that of freedom of religion. However, when communities such as the outliers we're talking about in this thread, I can't blame a country for dispatching them out of their borders. Should they just imprison them?
We have to keep in mind that these just aren't disagreements in religion or ideas. These are groups that are largely funded by other countries, teach violence. What do you do with them? Just let them go like the UK does? Ignore them?
posted by ptown_trojans_1I got a big problem with this for one reason: The Government is determining what is radical for a religion.
Sure, maybe these mosques are linked to Turkey and they are spreading violence, but where is the line the Government accepts as being a moderate to being a radical?
How would that apply over here? You telling me the US Government will determine what is radical for a religion? Would that apply to other religions as well? Will there be a Government code you have to follow to not be considered radical? Nah, that is a bridge too far.
I agree with this. It's not freedom of religion as long as you agree with the government. It's not freedom of speech as long as you agree with the government. These rights are protected for exactly this reason.
That doesn't mean they can't prosecute individuals for breaking the law. But I do have a problem with the idea of the government stepping in and closing a religious institution.
The Religion of Peace