« The Muslim Brotherhood's War On The West: 1 of 4 |
| The Muslim Brotherhood's War On The West: 2 of 4 »
June 6, 2007
Denmark: Muslim Headscarf May Be Worn By Judges
An article appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten yesterday. Our Danish correspondent and contributor Wiking has kindly provided a translation, abridged in parts, of this article.
*******
It is not required of a female judge, neither that she shakes hands with her male colleagues, nor that she shows her hair, says the president of the Danish Supreme Court. The Danish PM, Mr. Fogh Rasmussen agrees that our open mindedness should include women with head scarves.
It would be beneficial for the integration and for society in general, if more immigrants become judges and barristers. This includes believing Muslim women, who wear the headscarf for religious reasons. Such is the assertion of the president of the Danish Supreme Court, Mr. Torben Melchior.
"We need them as judges and barristers. It would benefit integration and our legal system. Judges and lawyers must be recruited from the population as a whole, in order to assure that all backgrounds and points of view are represented."
His statement chimes with the theme for yesterday's celebration of Constitution Day, when PM Fogh Rasmussen appealed to the Danes to show greater open mindedness, and to tolerate the head scarf.
Mr. Melchior does not see the head scarf as a violation of the current dress code for judges, nor does he perceive it as problematic if a female judge refuses to shake hands with her colleagues.
"It is irrelevant if a judge refuses to shake hands for religious reason, like it is irrelevant wether she is read haired or not. If a woman has the required qualifications, such a refusal should not disqualify her from exercising her authority as a judge," says Torben Melchior.
The question whether the woman wearing the head scarf is opressed or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is if she is qualified to do the job, according to Mr. Melchior
Wiking
Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at June 6, 2007 9:53 AM
Comments
This comment by the president of the Supreme Court was totally uncalled for and has stirred some controversy in this country.
If we open up for "alternative" dress in court, we will find ourselves on a slippery slope and forced to accept other kinds of political and religious manifestations as well. Will an emblem of a political party be acceptable? Is the star of David ok? Can we accept a burning cross on the lapel, or a KKK hood? What is wrong with a swastika, etc.
That kind of courts are totally unacceptable in a democracy.
Posted by: Wiking ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.westernresistance.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at June 7, 2007 1:59 AM
Do you notice that Muslims are more assertive in Europe when it comes to practicising their religious culture, than in America. This is because America holds assertive secularist values and most of Europe does not. Ataturk knew how important it was to keep religion out of the institutions of Turkey. Europe is too complacent on this!
Posted by: keypointist at June 7, 2007 8:38 AM
Dear Wiking,
As I read a little Danish, I also read this article :
http://jp.dk/indland/indland_politik/article961333.ece
but I don't understand all in Danish.
What are your personnal guessings that, after the parliamentary elections, the headscarf might be allowed/banned in courts and/or in the Danish administration ?
Thanks.
Posted by: Spipou at June 7, 2007 7:02 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)