It seemed that the mainstream media in Denmark would not release our press release. But one newspaper has just defied the fear(!) and made an article (in Danish) at Politiken.
We have sent it to Al Jazeera, and we will try to get in touch with the foreign media. Maybe they are not so reluctant as the Danish, who definitely are afraid of making another Muhammed crisis.
The Danish party, SIAD, demands parts of the Koran be forbidden in Denmark in accordance with the Danish Constitution. SIAD hereby draws attention to the fact that the Koran is in violation of the Danish Constitution’s paragraphs 67 and 69. SIAD further claims that mosques should be forbidden in consonance with paragraph 78, clause 2.
SIAD also demands that all Koran verses incompatible with Danish customs and traditional values should be banned in accordance with the Danish Constitution’s paragraphs 67 and 69, which state that “Citizens have the right to form communities with a view to practising religion in accordance with their faith, but on condition that nothing is taught or done that is at odds with morality or public order”.
Paragraph 69 explains this injunction in more detail. “The status of religious communities outside the Danish Folkekirke shall be specified by law”.
We also demand that the Minister of Justice apply paragraph 78, clause 2 of the Danish constitution, which states that “societies using violence or seeking to achieve their ends with violence, fomentation of violence or other unlawful pressure on those of a different opinion, shall by dissolved by law”.
According to paragraph 78 clause 2 this automatically includes every mosque in so far as those parts of the Koran in inciting to violence, murder or threats to people of different opinions are read out there. SIAD has previously demanded a prohibition of the Koran in 2005, but this time we demand it in accordance with the Danish Constitution [The Grundlov], which the minister of justice has sworn to uphold.
It’s an interesting way of tackling the Islamification problem. But what effect is it likely to have?
I asked Kepiblanc, our regular Danish reader and commenter, for his take on SIAD’s initiative. Here’s what he said:
- - - - - - - - - -
The relevant part of the Danish constitution says :
Section 78 [Freedom of Association]
(1) The citizens shall be entitled without previous permission to form associations for any lawful purpose. (2) Associations employing violence, or aiming at attaining their object by violence, by instigation to violence, or by similar punishable influence on people of other views, shall be dissolved by judgment.
Personally, I thinks it’s quite funny, but a stunt nevertheless. The Constitution is violated on a daily basis and nobody takes it seriously aside from the fact that people can take a day off on June 5. every year.
- The King has the executive power (ha)
- Private property is sacrosanct (tax?, expropriation?)
- Sovereignty cannot be delegated (EU?)
- ‘My home is my castle’ (113 laws with exceptions)
And so on ad infinitum…
I don’t think SIAD even expects an answer. But taken literally it’s 100% relevant.
This is something that other countries might want to consider, maybe even the USA. Does the religion clause of the First Amendment trump laws against incitement? Has anybody ever tried to find out?
It’s worth looking into.
Hat tip: LN, via email.