[Skybird]

an extreme example: in a far away country it may be habit to walk on the street naked. That woudl not only be prohibited by law in europe (most countries, I assume), but I would take offense from somebody meeting me on teh street and being naked. That is not his private issue, but that of all people needing to deal with him.---

More realistic example: burkhas. Soince two or three years I notice that the occasion Im eet a woman on street in complete diguise, including the face, are happening more and more often. I take offense from such kind of dressing. If people talk to me, I demand the not to hide their face. It is a question or habits: we do not consider it to be polite or trustworthy to hide one's face.---

For many muslims, admitteeldy or not, wearing headscarfs is not only a cultural habit (whose basis in Quran can be questioned, but it is a politcal issue as well. It deisplays the message that one is in defense of parts of the poltiical message of Islam and intentionally tries tom provoke the order of values of the hosting nation, trying to make it back down for what reasons so ever. If that would be the case, the next stage woild begin and something else would be done to try to make it back down again. And after that again, and the next stage, and more. Toibi said i corrctly: backing up is no sign of tolerance, but of giving up, and Islam correctly perceives that as weakness. Islam NEVER has become hesitent when being dealing with a weak opponent. Weakness is a clear message to Islam to attack and push even stronger.

I do not want to need to realize half a hundred different cultures around. This is MY home, not the home of these culutres - they have their own places. I want to have the feeling of walking in my country, in my home, in my culture. I am not on holiday and far-away-travelling whne going to the supermarket. The original inhabitants of a given place and region have the right to reject foreigners from far away, you cannot burst into a foreign community and say: okay, here I am, now accept me for I want to be here, no matter if you like me. A forfegner has the right to ask for being accepted, and the community has the right to reject him, or to tell him: okay: you can stay, but you have to fulfill these and these precoditions and have to adopt to our way of living, for we are not interested in being contantly reminded of your different being. The house owner sets the rules of the house, the guest complies, or leaves. Period.---so to answer your question: no it is not enough to simply obey laws. I insist on immigrants only coming to Germany if they want to become German by heart and mind. If you wish to immigrate to the US, a state representative will ask you a lot of question during a certain interview. The demands go so far that you need to will to defend the US with a wepaon in your hand if you want to gain access, if you do not agree to that, unconditionally, you don't get over that hurdle! Even more, you are desired to coinfess that you at least believe in the one, single God, no matter how you name him! This is no exaggeration by me. They once showed a 1,5 hours docu about the immigration process and the difficulties for new arrived people in the US, and the state lawyer - I think it is lawyers doing these interviews - in depth commented on this procedure. Well, Americans have the right to raise criterions by which they select who may enter their community and who not. And I totally accept that. If one take it for granted that this questionaire is always honstely answered, is something different, of course. But doing it with an immiogrant gives him a clear message, and that is the npoint: "you either become one of us completely, with all your heart and mind, or you don't - this is no half-heartedly decision. You take ours, and give up yours, or you don't." Many countries in europe come to that, too.they declare their intention and right to ask immigrants what advanatge or potential they have to offer their newly-selected community in return for being allowed to enter. Well - what is wrong in that? When I make a party,. I declare the right zo select my guests, and leave others out, or kick them out if they do not behave and do not follow my house rules.---

You think it is only about visual superficial details: clothing, how parents deal with their children on the street, they way they behave and talk. but if they do it too differently from the native's standards - then they make themselves different from them. They raise hurders, they widen the gap, they prevent integration. ---

Read again what Tibi said about confusing tolerance with relativism, and pluralism with diversity. A community can only accept a certain degree of diversity, if there is too much diversity, the structures that define and identifiy what holds a community together brake apart. There is no such thing as unlimited tolerance - that would directly lead to the absence of any rules and laws, and the rejection of any categoeirs, for all differences get relativised. That is a state of anarchy, and no the most tolerant and reasonable survives in an anarchy - but the strongest. And exactly this is the growing and boiling problem in all juvenile subcultures in densly populated metropoles where native teenangers and teenagers from families with an non-integrated immigration background are colliding at school as well as in the general city neighbourhood. Which I know from first hand from Frankfurt and Berlinn, since due to my former profession as psychologist I still have some contacts with social workers and professionals working in that field.