Are the Swedes Coming to Their Senses?

An AP report in Jerusalem Post notes:

The Swedish government and moderate Muslims on Friday sharply rejected demands by an Islamic leader to enact special laws for Muslims living in the Scandinavian country.

Mahmoud Aldebe, head of Sweden’s largest Islamic organization, SMF, said Muslims should be given time off work for Friday prayers and Islamic holidays and that imams should approve all divorces between Muslim couples.

His proposals, presented in a letter Thursday to Sweden’s parliamentary parties, were rejected as “completely unacceptable” by Sweden’s Integration Minister Jens Orback.

They also elicited a flood of criticism from moderate Muslims who said they were content with living under Swedish laws.

Previous Gates of Vienna posts on this topic are here and here.

MKSheppard posted a translation of the Swedish Muslims’ demands in their entirety on the AR15 forum. It includes the cover letter, which compares favorably with LN’s earlier translation. I have posted the entire document here. It bears close and careful scrutiny.

However, here are some choice excerpts which Dymphna has selected.

The problems that exist in regards to the Swedish religious freedom is that it is a Pietistic coloured understanding of individualised religion, that lie behind the Swedish laws regarding religious freedom, whereas for the Muslim minority it is the collective expressions of the religion that are central.

Mahmoud Aldebe, the author of these demands for Muslims, exposes here his own cultural blindness. Muslim collective religious thought does not trump individual religious expression. Sorry, Mahmoud, you can’t argue against the Enlightenment.

The Muslim minority criticises this narrow definition of religion that is the basis of the Swedish laws regarding religious freedom… we can request corrections of the Swedish family law to adapt it to Islam. It is this law that is the most important to Swedish Muslims: marriage, divorce, child protection, and raising underage children.

So far, Muslims have a great record on raising children, given the aggression of young Muslim males against Swedish women. It is the Muslim attitude (read: “contempt for”) Swedish women that needs to change.

A mosque in every city or county would have significant value to the Muslims of the country… it would greatly increase the sense of loyalty towards Sweden as your new homeland, despite being a Muslim.

A little blackmail here?

We demand special legislation in this matter that is the right to two days paid vacation in connection to the celebration of these holidays and that these two days cover the need to celebrate the holidays for Sunni and Shia Muslims and it proves that our religion and culture are accepted by the community.

Historically, the Jews in Christian countries hired “Sabbath goys” to fill in for them on their religious holidays. Muslims might consider doing the same: hire some “Friday kaffirs”. Muslims could learn a great deal from Jews in Sweden about surviving in a hostile environment.

To solve the integration problem requires a true adjustment of legislation to accommodate the Muslim demand…

No. It requires Muslim accommodation. Further, what do Muslims give back in return for the satisfaction of these demands?

Despite the fact that Islam has existed for 32 years as an organised religion in Sweden, the construction of burial grounds has been constantly hampered. Other than in the forest church yard in Stockholm there are Muslim burial grounds in 20 something countries, but that is not enough. Today there are Muslims in nearly 100 counties that lack burial grounds. The biggest general problem that Muslims encounter is that their dead are to be buried as quickly as possible, according to Islamic custom, and by a Muslim burial in their home county.

What Mr. Aldebe fails to mention is the Islamic notion of waqf. Essentially, waqf means that any real estate in which Muslims have ever been buried becomes Islamic property in perpetuity. Ask the Indians about the Taj Mahal. It’s interesting how many of these demands don’t tell the full story. They can often be defined by what they leave out.

Starting Imam education in Swedish universities and colleges is a demand from the nations Muslims and from Swedish authorities. The education can be created as part theology education, part Native Language (Arabic) education. Students can get permission to function as language and theology [religion] teachers. This education can create a natural integration of Islam in Swedish schools, and reduce the demand for private schools.

What gives Muslims the right to demand private schools? Like other sectarian groups, why don’t they build their own educational system? And why should government-run universities have to support theological education of any kind?

That the Swedish legal system is democratic and non-discriminating must in practise mean that the system should protect all people and ethnicities in the country, but this isn’t always enough as the Muslims see it. People who belong to minority groups can require special rights to be able to exist on an equal footing with the majority. The biggest problem that Muslims face is the opinions of the majority. The community is responsible [or guilty] for trying to assimilate the immigrants of the nation.

Wrong again. Inside out and backwards. Immigrants are responsible for their own assimilation. This means learn the language, learn the history, and learn the culture of your hosts. Islam badly needs to evolve a less narcissistic way of being.

Fjordman has often said that Sweden has the most advanced case of multicultural rot, and could be the first to collapse in the face of the Muslim onslaught. It seems that the Swedes may be awakening at last to the danger they face.

Ironically, some of the most commonsensical observations come from a Muslim. According to the Jerusalem Post, Haqq Kielan, head of the Swedish Islamic Society…

…called the proposals “absurd,” adding that they would lead to “a sort of Mullah-rule that people are scared of.”

“If you open the gate for separate laws for different minorities, where will it end?” he said. “We have to have one law for all citizens. That is so obvious that I don’t understand how he can come up with such an idea.”

Indeed.