[Skybird]

I do not care whether a Sikh wants to crack his skull open, he does damage only to himself, and I leave everyone the right to commit suicide or to take risks or to do somethign that I consider to be stupid - as long as he risks only himself, nobody else, and is not going his ways at anyone other's cost. So I would object to a law saying that a Sikh with a turban may only be searched by the police if for example the head of his family agrees to it, or his father, or a priest. He is not to be searched for no reason, I mean - the purpose when you do that is of public interest, often security, or crime-related investigations. For the same reason I find it unacceptable if Sikh boys are allowed to carry a knife at school while others are not allowed that becasue they are not Sikh. The abn on knifes must be vlaid for everybody. If S'ikhs see our laws colliding with their eligon, they have to make a choice: either our laws and staying here, or their elgion and having to leave. I cannot even understand why this is even being debated! Also, a religious background shall not be a valid excuse for bending laws or amending laws, tuning them in a way religion finds agreeable. Religion has to follow the law - not the other way around. At least if the description of a "secular" state should have any meaning.

In case of the burkha issue, it also is that state authorities should not do anything that indicates agreement with or even just pragmatic tolerating of claims for possession of women by men: no matter whether it is some Imam, father, brother - and this possessing of females and them getting pushed into a state of being owned, is what burkhas are really about. In Islamic culture, women should be locked away and hidden from public life, and the burkha is the way to make them mobile by making the prison of home around them mobile as well. The prison moves with them.

As I said above, due to that article by Birgit Kelle I do no longer think we should enforce a ban of the burkha except in some circumstances, but that we should go deeper and look at what really happens wo women at home, behind locked doors, and what their role is in a clan'S understanding or the understanding of Islamic ideology and scripture. The burkha should be tolerated - but not greeted or welcomned, and we must not be forced to maintain social itneracitons with families where men hold women as lifestock, we must be allowed to ignore them without beigj called "racist" for that. But this we should tolerate in silence only as lonhg as the burkha or headscarf orf whatevber it is is worn by ADULT females - but we should ban even headscarfs worn by little girls, because it is a perversion. The covering of hair and skin is meant to not arouse "men" (if you dare to call male apes as men who already are in danger to be provoked to sexually assault a female already because they see some hair of hers...), and if we demand this even from little girls, we sexualise even the smallest of girls and agree that they are sexual objects that need to be stopped form provoking all men around. This is a perversion of the most upsetting kind. We have laws that - hopefully - protect little girls from getting raped by some pedophile dirtbag. We should not tolerate perverted means and habits that turn all reason and logic into absurdity and turn men into possible "victims" of little girls sexually provoking them. Forcing little girls already to wear a smybol of sexual - and pedophile!! - discrimination and supression of females by patriarchalic orthodoxy is not different form having them walking down the street in satin stockings, blakc negliges and silk lingerie - both ways turn them into sexual objects, both turns them into a sexual threat to adult men form which certain bigott carricatures of weak "manlings" with no power to resist their drives need to be protected.

The potential victim of abuse and supression - girls, women - get implied to be the perpetrator and the active villain committing the crime. How could it get any more absurd - and cynical?

The hypocrisy practiced by Muslim culture here, is stinking to heaven. Now the law on girls in Turkey, you have read about it in the news. Such hypocrisy stinks to heaven. A turkish newspaper today had the headline of that Sweden - a loud critic of that law - is the global capital of rape. Actually, Sweden has seen a steep climb, an explosion of rape crimes in past years indeed. What the Erdoghanistas forgot to mention is that the absolutely overwhelming majority of this exposion of rapes is beign committed by Muslim migrant men the Swedes were naive enough to let in in huge numbers over the past years. Before thy had come, rape was a crime almost unknown in Sweden, it played no significant role in past crime statistics.