Austria Begins Closing Mosques and Deporting Imams

by cofty 69 Replies latest social current

• 

  cofty

  Austria, a member of the EU since 1995, is a country of 8.8 million people with a Muslim population of around 600,000 mostly Turkish immigrants. In 2015 it passed an 'Islam Law' prohibiting foreign funding of religious groups and creating a duty for Muslim organisations to have 'a positive fundamental view towards state and society'.

  Many mosques in Austria have continued to receive money from Turkish Muslim organisations so the new right-wing government have decided to enforce the law. Seven mosques have been identified for closure and 60 imams are to be either deported or refused visas. Vice Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache told a news conference: “This is just the beginning.”

  The Austrian coalition government came to power following Europe's immigration crisis.

  Reuters article here...
• 

  jws

  Must have a positive fundamental view towards state and society.

  While I don't want a group that's eventually going to stir up acts of violence, isn't that much of religion? The Witnesses aren't positive towards state and society. Most religions decry the bad state of society.

  If they're kicking out the Imans, they better kick out the elders too.
• 

  cofty

  The Witnesses aren't positive towards state and society.

  To be fair they encourage their members to fully cooperate with the governments of the countries in which they live and wait on god to intervene. Radical imams are the exact opposite of that.
  
  
• 

  jws

  To be fair they encourage their members to fully cooperate with the governments of the countries in which they live and wait on god to intervene. Radical imams are the exact opposite of that.

  Like Malawi
• 

  cofty

  Red herring
• 

  _Morpheus

  Even in malawi they didnt encourage insurrection. It was essentially a small tax they objected to because of the way it was framed. Thats hell and gone from what the islamists encourage, you know flying planes into buildings and blowing ones self up in a public place, but if you want to draw and equivalency go ahead.
• 

  jws

  That may be so. But not as cofty worded it. You have to be positive to state and society. It doesn't say anything about promoting violence. The witnesses are not positive to state and society. And, even for concessions they make (like having you register for the draft), IF there ever was a draft, they'd demand you disobey the government and refuse to serve.
  
  So they're not exactly encouraging their members to FULLY cooperate with the governments.

  If Austria wants to further elaborate on what merits expulsion, they can. But as stated by Cofty, being positive to state and society is a statement that could apply to a lot of churches. Especially society. Because many of them decry society in general in favor of following their religion.

  And that's not an OR. It's an AND. State AND society. So if you're not positive to both, they should be kicked out.
• 

  humbled

  From the Reuters article:

  Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan’s spokesman said the new policy was part of an “Islamophobic, racist and discriminatory wave” in Austria. “The Austrian government’s ideologically charged practices are in violation of universal legal principles, social integration policies, minority rights and the ethics of co-existence,” Ibrahim Kalin tweeted.

  As far as I can see Austria is implementing a policy that protects order. The heart of the Turkish complaint that “universal legal principles, social integration policies, minority rights and the ethics of co-existence” are being violated . This statement is gaslighting. Those are precisely the things lost in countries that host imams who isolate their communities and accept Islamist state funding

  edit: The law is three years old? They (imams)have had time to think about it.
• 

  cofty

  not as cofty worded it - jws

  I didn't word it - Austrian law worded it.

  The test for 'a positive fundamental view towards state and society' is any threat to public order or security. JWs have never endangered public order or security. Phrases cannot be plucked from laws without context.

  ---

  4. Precedence of national law
  This is true for all Religious Societies. Teachings, institutions and customs are not allowed to contradict statutory rules. The Religious Society must have a positive basic attitude towards society and the state. The recognition can also be revoked, especially if the Religious Society does not have a positive basic attitude towards the state and society (any more), respectively public order and security would be endangered.

  ---

  8. Regulation on the interdiction of foreign financing
  The “ongoing operation” of a religious society must be financed inland (a one-time contribution of foreign origin, like an inheritance is generally not prohibited, but the administration of such an estate must be executed inland)
  

  Summary of 'Islam Law' here...
• 

  jws

  You didn't say that the test for a positive view was not being a threat in your original post. NOW, you're saying that the test for a positive view (or not) is a threat. All you said originally was that a religion has a positive view.

  The Jehovah's Witnesses have neither. I don't see them as a threat either. But you have to keep walking back and qualifying your original post to qualify and make that point. Because your original post was unclear and would have condemned JWs.
  
  Not to mention that I'll bet some of their funding comes from New York. And has that outside funding aspect too.