Denmark’s Minister of Integration, Berthe Ronn Hornbech urged her fellow members of parliament to rethink the entire issue of whether Muslim women can wear the headscarf in certain areas of society such as the courtroom. “The headscarf has turned into an antagonistic picture in the debate. A debate that has turned not only against Muslims, but against all believers.” Ms. Hornbech, a member of the Liberal Party, fears discriminating against Muslim women will result in many talented females opting out of important roles in Danish society.
Inger Stojberg, another member of the Liberal Party, said the party has been discussing this issue without coming to a resolution of which way they will decide. “Personally,” said Stojberg, “I do not think religious symbols belong in the courtroom.” There is considerable evidence that Hornbech’s views may not necessarily reflect those of most Danish people.
The world is confronting a devastating food crisis, energy costs keep rising, millions of children throughout the planet are working or lack access to a school, but the people of Denmark have undoubtedly identified a major concern facing humanity– the headscarf! A large majority of Danish people indicated they oppose allowing a female Danish judge to wear a headscarf. The Danish govlernment is taking action to halt a recent decision by the Court Administration which said it was OK for a female judge to have her head covered with a headscarf. Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen made known his strong oppositon to the ruling. Justice Minister Lene Esperson said: “Citizens are very conscious that a court of law shuld be impartial. The people won’t accept that political conviction or religion is allowed to reign over a place dedicated to strict, neutral decision making.”
Poll results indicated among those aged 18-25 nearly 75% said it made no difference to them what was on the head of a judge while only 16% of those over 65 had similar feelings.
There is an assumption that wearing a headscarf is a political statement which indicates strong bias on the part of a Muslim female judge. Unless, the case involved wearing a headscarf, what exactly is the poltical statement made by wearing a headscarf? One can assume many Danish judges wear a cross or a star under their shirt or blouse. Does the cross or star reflect a bias that would play out against a defendant?
It is time for European society to cease engaging in much ado about nothing and cease creating these storms in a teacup issues.
P.S. Out of curiosity, exactly how many Danish judges are female Muslims who wear a headscarf? Just asking.
A Danish TV documentary aired on Wednesday night has created a storm of protest from Danish government officials and the general public. “The CIA’s Danish Connection” alleges flights operated by the American Central Intelligence Agency used Greenland airports as key refueling points when transporting terrorism suspects without seeking permission from the Danish government. According to the program, at least one of the flights was piloted by an individual who was connected to the kidnappig of a German citizen. The German, Khaled al-Masri, has charged he was kidnapped in 2004 by CIA agents and held for five months in a US operated prison in Afghanistan.
The CIA has left the Danish government holding the proverbial bag. Danish officials have repeatedly told members of parliament that no American flights involved in the rendition of alleged terrorists ever passed through Danish territory. After viewing the documentary, Foreign Minister Per Stig Mailer commented: “This is evidence that I haven’t seen before. The evidence shows that the US has used civillian aircraft for government flights.”
The Danish government issued a statement to the nation: “There should be no doubt about what the govenment’s position. We do not see lightly on illegal transports. The govenment is categorically opposed to actions that violate the detained’s rights– including illegal prisoner transports.”
Riht wing American pundits undoubtedly will begin their mantra about the “ticking bomb” which necessitated lying to the Danes. It is pleasant seeing a government when confronted with evidence accepting responsibility and pledging the mistake will not be repeated.