The seeds of George W. Bush goes on: Although the Texans long been an ex-president and memoir-writer, but many small-Dschordsch Dabbeljuhs shall continue his work.
us versus them, freedom against slavery, civilization against barbarism, modernity against the Middle Ages, the Christian West against the Muslim world: Those were the front lines, as she announced George Bush in the aftermath of 9 / 11 on the smoking ruins of the Twin Towers . Flight, this dichotomous image of the enemy found in the reports of countless "embedded correspondents", but also in many products of Hollywood again - not to mention TV shows such as up to 24 different movies, not to mention crude concoctions that circulate on the Internet. Muslims, more so the Arabs replaced the evil Russians - and the fear of them as was the way to around the globe.
is now this fear so irrational they may be, by right-wing populists in different countries successfully plowed - whether Pro Cologne, HC Strache, Geert Wilders, the SVP or the Sweden Democrats is always in front of the expansive, aggressive Islam and its very reproductive Warned believers (also Sarrazin and his concern for the self-abolition Germany are missing here), which attaches to the storming of the Christian West. Use is made between secular, moderate Muslims and dyed in the wool, violent Islamists is no difference. All they are considered enemies of the freedoms of the West, all migrate in the same drawer - the general suspicion celebrates revival. Only logical that some commentary only by Islamists and write no more of Muslims.
If the right-wing populists could provide at least behind the European Convention on Human Rights as a securitization of the freedoms of the West, was their argument far more stringent. But they do not, because the convention provides no discrimination on the basis of faith: man is not seen as an individual of his belief protected by these rights. Instead, the right-wing populist embitter the lives of the Muslims in the West - and in the name of this goal are ready to dispose of the essential foundations for precisely this enlightened West. As there would be: The secular, neutral in religious matters of law, freedom of worship and the prohibition of discrimination.
The reference to a Christian guiding culture to the Islam faith to be isolated as the lack of freedom - just: were the freedoms of the West not fought, but against the church, in the course of Renaissance and Enlightenment. While the Church (and its allied government) wanted to brave sheep and subjects. Even in the 50 years under fed religious intolerance against deviant lifestyles in the countries of Europe was widespread, as they are now accusing countries with a Muslim majority. A lotter-like in the eyes of creditors Strictly lifestyle could also lead time in Switzerland to a generic welfare imprisonment - or even a forced sterilization. Beautiful, European freedom as well, that we left the Middle Ages for so long behind us!
who rants of a Christian dominant culture, is the same (in) brain child as an Islamist - because he is not the primacy of the state and the laws for religion accepted. And because you want to give this slogan went against the spirit of non-discrimination to the Christian faith in a privileged position. What is even more wrong than the religiously fragmented Christendom now offer only a minority has to be loud Volkszähllung in size with the all unbelievers at approximately the same level. In the case of the minaret ban this pretentious thinking has already taken hold in de constitution of Switzerland. At the same time is constantly on the part of right-wing populists pointed out that Muslims not be integrated into our culture.
The need to respond: Religion is a strictly private matter, so this must be in the secular rule of law really. This is a lesson from centuries during which, the people were cut because of religious cults in Europe, the skull. Therefore, any unequal treatment of one group or another to be avoided - neither favoritism nor discrimination lie in it. And so long is a community of faith is no danger to public order, one has to grant it the freedom it deserves.
Because religion has to be a strictly private matter, is my attitude to word Shariah clear: introduction of the same is not an option because it would no longer apply one law for all inhabitants of the secular law. At the same time is also a headscarf or Burkaverbot of the question because it would unilaterally directed against a faith community laws - the device that conflicts with the non-discrimination and freedom of worship.
I watch a large-scale test-Christian religious circles, is a renewed meddling in public life. These range from resistance to day schools on the demand for equal treatment of creationism in schools (Ever the difference between belief and knowledge is one?) Or funds for private schools to free religious moralizing posters in public places, warn in yellow letters on a blue background from sin and purgatory and praise Christ as the only way out. Also, the campaign promised to the minaret initiative have Free Churches on the part of the proponents excelled.
play as radical Christians, often even free churches, the radical minority of Muslims the ball. Thus, two radical swing minorities against each other up - and take the vast majority of moderates hostage in this struggle.
's high time to give the moderates against tax.
that dialogue is taking off again.
That the Joint is made of the differences.
0 comments:
Post a Comment