Secular figures - NOT religious figures. If you need to learn about the law ask a lawyer or a policeman.
~:smoking:
Printable View
Secular figures - NOT religious figures. If you need to learn about the law ask a lawyer or a policeman.
~:smoking:
If muslims place their faith higher than the law, I think it can be productive if imams tell them that is wrong and that their faith gives no justification for breaking the law in the country where they are living.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Interesting discussion. Fragony, you seem to spark any number of these.
Taking this to a larger level:
Does the inability to enforce the law effectively using their own resources invalidate the authority of a governing body?
Should the authority of a secular state supercede the authority of a religious belief system?
Good questions.
I would suggest that authority exists to the extent that those under that authority -- whether through coercion, persuasion, or choice -- agree to accept that authority. Less than a millenia ago, most Europeans were willing to accept that the authority of the Holy Father (even in secular matters) exceeded that of their own "sovereign" leaders. A leader excommunicated by the Pope faced a palpable diminishment of his authority. That situation no longer obtains.
Political authority derived from a secular state is no different -- in practice -- than authority derived from religious belief. If the audience is willing to accord you that authority, then the power is yours to wield.
Another thought is that policing isn't really about the law, per se, but about enforcing order. Police have, throughout history, used third parties as a means of persuasion etc. -- as a tool to maintain order. I am not sure whether this augments or undercuts their authority. An interesting point to ponder.
So to ponder your point in a different context , if there was a strike and the strikers were breaking some laws , if the police went along with a union leader to attempt getting the strikers to stop breaking the law would they be undercutting their authority ?Quote:
Another thought is that policing isn't really about the law, per se, but about enforcing order. Police have, throughout history, used third parties as a means of persuasion etc. -- as a tool to maintain order. I am not sure whether this augments or undercuts their authority. An interesting point to ponder.
How about if they went along with some parents whose kids were breaking the law ? .....what about if they went along with community leaders ? ....the local priest ?
the only difference would appear to be that Frag would object if the union representative , community leaders , parents or priest happened to be Muslims .
I am not too proud just admit that that is true, but that has everything to do with the nature of the islam we have in europe.
Well it would be very funny if you tried to deny it.Quote:
I am not too proud just admit that that is true
Immans are welcome to do that in mosques. They have no place on the streets with the civic police.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
Does every group that states they value someone other than the police get special treatment? No. So why should they? If they don't like it, leave. If they continue to break the law incarcerate them. Same rules as for everyone else.
~:smoking:
The problem with that assertion Rory is that other groups do , so your arguement falls flat on its face .Quote:
Does every group that states they value someone other than the police get special treatment? No. So why should they?
As far as I am aware, the police don't have any one else except police performing their rounds.
If you would like to provide examples of where there are Anglican vicars doing the rounds or the odd Rabbi I'd like to hear of it.
Else your comment is sadly lacking substance.
~:smoking:
well I don't know about Anglicans , but would Methodists from Darlington be sufficient substance for ya ?:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
As far as I am aware, the police don't have any one else except police performing their rounds.
If you would like to provide examples of where there are Anglican vicars doing the rounds or the odd Rabbi I'd like to hear of it.
Else your comment is sadly lacking substance.
If these joint Polizei-Imam patrols were using truncheons to whack women who failed to wear a burqua, that would be a whole different thing.
But that isn't what's happening there, right? Rather, the police are using a local resource to reinforce their law-and-order mission.
The only down-side I see is the possibility of dimishing the Imams' esteem in the eyes of local muslim youth, they becoming the equivalent of "Uncle Tom" 's for working with the infidels.
Oh yes. In a democracy those that represent us are getting a mandate to rule, and the first priotity of the state they are supposed to govern is protecting national borders and safety, that is the most basic reason for them to exist. If they insist one being nothing more then an administrator, they should leave protection open to privitisation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Ah, I need to cash in my two cents to this hot topic. Nice read everyone, thanks.
Well it is quite weird for the police to operate with imams to shape up the order in areas more potent of public order violations. I can see how some of you look at it. "An imam? WTF ?"
Since the focus point is the concerns over it, not the benefits, I think I'd better use my first cent on that.
As KukriKhan-sensei pointed out, there is a possibility of imams losing their prestige and value in the local muslim youth's eyes, in case some law they find frank needs to be imposed. Also such coordination is always under the threat from terrorist de-stabilizator factors. "Someone" will constantly be trying to convince that "Imams are working for the infidels".
Another potential problem, which I find more probable is the imams' intentions.The government should find the best way possible to assure the good will of the imams they are working with; such imams should agree on the fact that they will be under surveilance to make sure the cooperation is not working for someone/something else rather than the muslim folk and the european folk they are trying to integrate, with the least damage possible.
Also there are some concerns on the European side of this. As every police is a human being as well, some of them will see this project from Fragon-ic eyes for sure, and such personal failures at compromisation may go popular or rise as a general disturbance among the policemen, dragging such enforcement to be modified or get completely overridden.
Government, putting such social project into action, has another job at nullifying or decreasing the Germans' reaction to ensure this new law's success.
On the bright side, where I'll be out of my cents after, such cooperation may be dramatically useful since the BIG problem is that Muslims and European non-Muslims are definitely failing at understanding each other (Charicatures of Muhammed was a great example to prove that, provided not being not the only one).
So, the integration of a religiously-oriented society into a democracy-oriented society (which obviously and contradictively drags the religion's influence to minimum/personal) needs to be treated somehow and such mutual attempts at compromisations had better be experienced rather than putting up back at the shelf, provided the threats being closely examined as the cooperation proceeds.
Now that is how I like to disagree with people, great post.
How would you feel if Irish police were accompanied by Roman Catholic priests with the task of pointing out your religious duties to you, Mr Tribesman? A ridiculous proposition, I hear you say. And how right you are. I'm with Fragony and Panzer. I will go wash my mouth now. :sweatdrop:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
So basically shooting, stabbing and beating them is a lot less ridiculous and generally to be preferred? :sweatdrop:
In Western Australia this has been happening for years and years. No outcry here.
"Misunderstandings can all too easily arise in cross cultural settings. Police Liaison Officers foster positive relationships between the Police Service and communities."
Okay, I think I need to step in here. Adrian, did you even check what the Imam's are doing? They aren't going around telling women to wear veils or telling men to grow their beards or whatever. They're basically saying to the Islamic youth in Germany "Follow German law. Following it doesn't make you an infidel. It won't send you to hell, etc..." That's not quite what you're insinuating, so you're whole point is essentially null and void. Please make a better argument that doesn't reek of Islamophobia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian II
Also, in the beginning of this, Fragony questioned the purpose of this, saying they shouldn't need to do this. Does that ultimately matter? This is better than doing nothing about the apparent situation. Now, please correct me here if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm not. The people are there, they're rightful citizens, and deporting them is a grave violation of their rights, and it would be based purely on their religion. Now, I was under the impression that the west was supposed to be tolerant, no? Now, if they're breaking laws, then indeed they should be punished, just like any other citizen. Last I checked, Germany doesn't deport people to another country they've never been to for theft or vandalism, assault, or even murder.
As has been noted, I don't think the partnership is to enforce religious laws, but to engage disaffected youth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian II
That happened all the time in Ireland, and still does so quite frequently here in my backwater. The Gardaí will often bring along a priest to help deal with young people - not to tell them that by kissing that convent girl they are going to Hell (well, maybe, depending on the priest) but as a recognised moral authority not seen as "the enemy" - a characterisation of formal police authority not uncommon among youths.
Certainly during the Troubles in the North, we (the policing authorities as the Army) would engage the services of divines from both sides to help "interpret" a law.
The Police also engage a range of secular support personnel to help with particular groups. Do we have a problem with a key worker from a housing charity coming along to help with a homeless chap in danger of breaking the law? Or is it just religious workers?
Finally, when I ran my training business in the UK which taught citizenship and English to refugees and migrants under the New Deal, we had a fairly large Muslim contingent in several offices. We would often bring in imams from different sects to guide on how to reconcile faith with law. Most often, it was to over-rule objections that a devout person couldn't get a job or attend training because of prayer needs. That would always be slapped down by the imam as the Koran clearly allows a fellow to skip prayers while engaged on important business - and the truly devout would catch up on his prayers later.
I really don't see the problem here. If the police were enforcing the veil, for example, by direction of an imam, I'd be seething too, but that's not what is happening as far as I can see. If we want people to integrate, we need go-betweens (social, cultural as well as religious) that will help with cultural "translation", rather than leave them to the tender mercies of the extremists from both sides.
I would have no problem with it at all Adrian . Two posters have already written why it would not be a problem .Quote:
How would you feel if Irish police were accompanied by Roman Catholic priests with the task of pointing out your religious duties to you, Mr Tribesman?
Anyway , think about what you quoted ~;)
For a criminal the the police should be the enemy, easy as that. No moral authority required.
Yet problems arise when ordinary people see the police as the enemy , easy as that .:idea2:Quote:
For a criminal the the police should be the enemy, easy as that.
Agreed, so they better start treating everybody in the same way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Frag, the purpose of most law enforcement here is not to punish people but to make them good members of society again. And despite some scary stories where it failed, it seems to work in many cases as well. Without morals and a perspective for a better life, this is hardly achievable. If you want a police state where everybody is punished harshly for not following the law, you can try certain disctatorships around the world and enjoy their "low" crimerates. :sweatdrop:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
The degree of punishment is not the issue here. You don't stop for a red light because it is the right thing to do, moral authority has nothing to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Do Europeans(Germans to be precise) want the state reinforcing the belief that muslim authority is higher than that of the state?... that the law should be followed only if approved by imams?
To increase stability now, are they sacrificing authority later?
And for every imam supporting this, how many are saying sharia is the only law?
This is not Northern Ireland or a labor strike and it is certainly relevant to take into consideration the unique position of the muslim community in Europe and who they see as authority figures.
I still say heads need to be bashed to show these people from the outset that, in Europe, muslims, Christians and atheists alike do not get special treatment under the law and there are consequences to breaking said law despite what the local imam says. You cannot beat your wife at your whim, you cannot kill your daughter for being raped, and violence toward police will get at least the same in return.
Then again, I might be predisposed to wanting certain heads bashed... :smash:
That's the part I didn't want to touch here because I wanted to keep it to the diffusion of authority as something damaging enough by itselve, but yeah. This gives those imams a lot of power, kindly granted by the authority. One very very dangerous leap of faith of people looking no further then today.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
keep....agreeing.....with....PanzerJager...there must be something wrong with me...Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
*runs out the house looking for a doctor*
but yeah...no special treatment...you respect the legal authority in a country..fine...you don´t....well that´s what the nightsticks are for.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
So what. In Western Australia the liaison officers get paid about 80% of what a Police Constable does. While a senior liaison officer gets paid on par with a PC.
So here we pay for the community liaisons. The imans seem to be providing a free service.
Engage them as believers, not as citizens. There's the rub, my friend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
Engaging disaffected youth from a religious point of view is fine, but not through, or parallel to, the police. Public officials should address citizens as such, not as believers. Any confusion in this area should be avoided. It leads to skewed perceptions and abuse.
The whole notion of automatically addressing people from Turkish or Maghreb descent as muslims is an aberration. The underlying message is that Islam is somehow (part of) their unalienable identity, which is dangerous nonsense.Religious workers? You mean preachers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
There is an essential difference between a secular housing charity and a mosque. One is a public service and as such ideologically neutral, the other is an immediate exponent of a particular ideology.
So yes, I take exception to the imams in this role, just as I would take exception if police brought along a Communist to address these youth as proletarians and read them the Marxist Levites.
On the other hand I don't object at all to imams and other authority figures in muslim communities becoming more active in guiding (and containing) unruly youth of muslim descent in European countries. This seems to be a trend and I applaud it, as long as it doesn't lead to the skewed perceptions I mentioned above.
One skewed perception, for instance, has it that muslim communities are primarily responsible for the (mis)behaviour of their youth, as if all problems relating to their young can somehow be traced to them and to their culture of origin. In reality most of these problems arise, I think, as the result of a clash between that culture and the modern western environment in which the youth grow up. In short: they are our juvenile delinquents, not theirs, and muslim parents and leaders shouldn't be made to feel uniquely responsible for them.Another skewed perception of the kind I mean. So yeah, I have to check my blood pressure just like Ronin, for I think the Panzerman is right on the mark on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager