patrick.net

rando says

Every competing form of pleasure is a threat to the religion, and therefore religions seek to ban them. Islam is just far more extreme than any other religion in its intolerance of competing pleasures, so they ban even harmless pleasures like music.

They have no problems with the pleasures from sex slaves. Oh wait, that's just Islamic.

Germany has legal FKKs, a.k.a. brothels, so fuck Sharia or Puritan laws!

They start by patrolling, then they will intimidate then use force and coerce. Just watch it unfold.

We are renouncing civilization in the name of tolerance.

Dan8267 says

They start by patrolling, then they will intimidate then use force and coerce. Just watch it unfolding.

Hare Krishna may be annoying but I doubt their agenda including instituting theocracy, shutting down free speech, women equality, and reverting to medieval Arab sadism as a guideline for civil code.

"They start by patrolling, then they will intimidate then use force and coerce. Just watch it unfold.
We are renouncing civilization in the name of tolerance."

When they use force and coerce, then they can be arrested.

"Hare Krishna may be annoying but I doubt their agenda including instituting theocracy, shutting down free speech, women equality, and reverting to medieval Arab sadism as a guideline for civil code."

Should the laws be different for groups you don't agree with? One set for peaceful folks, and a different set for folks you deem "non-peaceful'?

joeyjojojunior says

Should the laws be different for groups you don't agree with? One set for peaceful folks, and a different set for folks you deem "non-peaceful'?

Great, than you agree that Muslims can not have more than one wife and reside in the West. If it's forbidden everybody, including Mormons, it must be forbidden Muslims, as well, right?

You wouldn't want two standards of justice. One law for All.

"Great, than you agree that Muslims can not have more than one wife and reside in the West. If it's forbidden everybody, including Mormons, it must be forbidden Muslims, as well, right?"

Of course--if it's the law, it applies to everyone.

Thunderlips is Tovbot2 says

I think the beef is with their orange vests emblazoned "Sharia Police", and accosting people, they were imitating "real" Police, which can and should be a crime.

Agreed, if that is what they were doing. The court seems to think otherwise though and without being familiar with the case and evidence, I can't say either way.

Thunderlips is Tovbot2 says

Great, than you agree that Muslims can not have more than one wife and reside in the West. If it's forbidden everybody, including Mormons, it must be forbidden Muslims, as well, right?

You can have as many "wives" as you want, but only one is legally recognized. There's no law prohibiting you from living with multiple women and having sex with them all. You can even call each your wife as long as only one, the same one, is listed on legal documents. In the west, we call this an open marriage, or at least half open.

Dan8267 says

You can have as many "wives" as you want, but only one is legally recognized. There's no law prohibiting you from living with multiple women and having sex with them all. You can even call each your wife as long as only one, the same one, is listed on legal documents. In the west, we call this an open marriage, or at least half open.

Here's the problem: Many Muslims in the UK are listed as dads of multiple women's (other wives) kids. Who pays for the child support and welfare, since many don't have jobs?

joeyjojojunior says

Should the laws be different for groups you don't agree with? One set for peaceful folks, and a different set for folks you deem "non-peaceful'?

They are not peaceful, or if they are, it is only to the extent that they aren't in sufficient force to win a confrontation.
Just look at the Islam party in Belgium: they already stated that they want to create an Islamic state in Belgium. It is their stated goal.
i.e. Their stated goal is to fundamentally reject all values and institutions that make western civilization possible.
They use the freedom YOU grant them to reject western freedom in general for everyone.
And they reproduce faster than non-Muslims.
And they are a cult. They spread those beliefs. In fact these patrols represent an obvious attempt at proselytizing.

Thunderlips is Tovbot2 says

Here's the problem: Many Muslims in the UK are listed as dads of multiple women's (other wives) kids. Who pays for the child support and welfare, since many don't have jobs?

That's not a problem with polygamy. It's a problem with letting people have children without being financially secure first. The problem occurs with both monogamy and with non-married polygamy. Hell, many African Americans have the exact same circumstances. How many kids don't even know who their father is?

We really need to license parenthood. Yes, such power is ripe for abuse, but it could be done right and if it's not done abuse is rampant in other areas.

You can't prevent people from having children without some sort of severe abuse. Look at China 1 child policy.

"Here's the problem: Many Muslims in the UK are listed as dads of multiple women's (other wives) kids. Who pays for the child support and welfare, since many don't have jobs?"

That's not really a problem unique to Muslims. Jerry Springer has made a career out of it in the US.

Dan8267 says

We really need to license parenthood. Yes, such power is ripe for abuse, but it could be done right and if it's not done abuse is rampant in other areas.

Agreed. And you should pay $10,000 down to have more than one child (whether male or female). And the state should pay for vasectomies and hysterectomies, including as a penalty for having more than one child you can't support.

Obligations are two-way streets, too many are like "Muh Religion!" or "Muh Human Rights!"
joeyjojojunior says

That's not really a problem unique to Muslims. Jerry Springer has made a career out of it in the US.

Even so, should Muslims be legally allowed have more than one wife but not non-Muslims? Yes or No?

"They are not peaceful, or if they are, it is only to the extent that they aren't in sufficient force to win a confrontation."

Many aren't, but you still can't arrest them until they commit a crime. That's a basic right.

"Even so, should Muslims be legally allowed have more than one wife but not non-Muslims? Yes or No?"

I answered that already. Of course not. But a wife and a baby mama aren't the same thing.

Refusal to Assimilate in action

This is the gratitude America gets for sharing our great country with people who have no respect for it. #StandUp #NationalAnthem pic.twitter.com/jlLwVZEYGC

— Steve Hirsch (@Stevenwhirsch99) December 7, 2016

Where are all the children, old, and women refugees if they are fleeing war and disaster? Overwhelmingly young men, including "teens' who are really 5 years older than they claim. Just lose the passport after you cross into Germany and you're all set. "I'm only 16" (Ha, infidel, I am 23, but this will make my application faster and more likely to be approved).

Thunderlips is Tovbot2 says

And you should pay $10,000 down to have more than one child (whether male or female).

Way more than that. Each child should require a non-returnable prepayment of $304,480. This pays for all socialized costs of children including education costs up to and including college degrees, parks, all safety and protection services, food stamps, basic clothing, day care, and medical care. You should also be 100% debt free.

This would have many benefits.
1. Paying for all the extra services the state provides for children.
2. Eliminating deficits.
3. Reducing other taxes.
4. Eliminating childhood poverty by assuring critical expenses are paid.
5. Discouraging overpopulation.

And, of course, apply this same exact financial criteria for all immigrants, legal or not. I suspect we'd solve many problems at once.

As a side benefit, this would force women to choose good mates that are willing and able to financially support children. Encouraging non-productive people to reproduce is never a good thing. You reap what you sow.

Thunderlips is Tovbot2 says

Overwhelmingly young men, including "teens' who are really 5 years older than they claim.

First clue...

How about mandatory sterilization for all refugees? Bet they'd reconsider settling in a place that offered that sort of bargain.

rando says

Islam claims freedom of speech and freedom of religion for itself, and then explicitly and violently denies those rights to everyone else.

-- Just like modern lefitists.

Heraclitusstudent says

They are not peaceful, or if they are, it is only to the extent that they aren't in sufficient force to win a confrontation.

Just look at the Islam party in Belgium: they already stated that they want to create an Islamic state in Belgium. It is their stated goal.

i.e. Their stated goal is to fundamentally reject all values and institutions that make western civilization possible.

They use the freedom YOU grant them to reject western freedom in general for everyone.

And they reproduce faster than non-Muslims.

And they are a cult. They spread those beliefs. In fact these patrols represent an obvious attempt at proselytizing.

They are using the freedoms granted by democracy, to destroy democracy.
We need to step back and curtail some of the freedoms until the threat is gone.

What's the problem?
america allows retard Ds & Rs to roam freely
& even vote for some of the worst nominees
which is leading to the destruction of the u.s.

700-800 u.s. military bases globally, political parties of PEACE.
How many innocents have been killed by D & R military adventures?
america is FOF (Full Of Fools).

Damn violent Muslims!

HEY YOU says

Damn violent Muslims!

Only part of your comment that actually makes sense.

Germany would definitely not allow private patrols from political parties (think: brownshirt nazis of the 1930s)), so why would they allow religious patrols?

And is it not illegal to claim to be POLICE or POLIZEI?

"And is it not illegal to claim to be POLICE or POLIZEI?"

I agree--that would seem to be against the law.

Anyone who believes in Shariah is by definition rejecting the core European values and institutions.
If immigrants, they should be immediately cast back into the dusty shit holes from whence they crawled.

HEY YOU says

What's the problem?

america allows retard Ds & Rs to roam freely

& even vote for some of the worst nominees

which is leading to the destruction of the u.s.

700-800 u.s. military bases globally, political parties of PEACE.

How many innocents have been killed by D & R military adventures?

america is FOF (Full Of Fools).

Lol, "destruction of the u.s." seems to mean repeated stock market records since Trump's election. If that's "destruction", sounds good!

And those global military bases? Trump wants to reduce their number. Unlike warmonger HIllary.

Dan8267 says

Each child should require a non-returnable prepayment of $304,480. This pays for all socialized costs of children including education costs up to and including college degrees, parks, all safety and protection services, food stamps, basic clothing, day care, and medical care.

You can look at these socialized costs as partial(!) repayment from society to the parents who raise the children, for their efforts and expenses. Or you think the parents should bear the whole burden for an activity that benefits society (as well as them, of course)?

joeyjojojunior says

"They are not peaceful, or if they are, it is only to the extent that they aren't in sufficient force to win a confrontation."

Many aren't, but you still can't arrest them until they commit a crime. That's a basic right.

Right. But you can refuse them to immigrate. Immigration is not a basic right. Problem avoided.

Dan8267 says

dress up in silly outfits and tried to....

recruit people to Islam. The Islamic State is currently waging war against the west. For males, the uniform consists primarily of a beard and something to indicate they're working for Islam, e.g. lethal weapons (to "kill the disbelievers wherever you find them") or in this instance "SHARIA POLICE" vests. They are advocating killing you, and the violent overthrow of "man-made law" to replace it with Sharia, which is charlatan-made law. They are recruiting others to enable them to achieve their avowed goal. They appear to be committing multiple crimes, and demonstrating why importing Islam into the west is a dreadful mistake.

If you focus too narrowly on the individual actions without regard to the larger whole, then you miss the point. Consider a bank robbery in which someone gets killed. In American law since the founding of the republic, and in British law before then, the conspirators have all committed felony murder. That includes the lookout who stood outside to warn of approaching police, and in modern times the driver of the getaway car. If you focus only on the driver, he didn't even go in the bank, at most all he did was park illegally and then maybe exceed the speed limit. That isn't the point. The point is, he enabled a team effort that got someone killed, knowing that was a foreseeable result.

It's the same with the San Bernardino convert who bought assault weapons for the jihadis. He might not have known the specific target, but that isn't the point. He knew he was arming jihadis to kill people in the name of Islam, which they did. It was foreseeable from the time he gave weapons to the jihadis that the jihadis would use them in jihad.

Islam runs directly contrary to western law. These "SHARIA POLICE" are trying not only to break one or two particular laws (don't rob banks and kill people), but to overthrow western law in general. It is suicidally shortsighted to focus only on the actions of the scouts and recruiters while ignoring the larger teams that they're working for. The German court appears to have insisted on seeing Islam only as a religion or fashion statement, rather than an inherently violent, global totalitarian faction.

Rin says

Germany has legal FKKs, a.k.a. brothels, so fuck Sharia or Puritan laws!

That will be a fighting point in the future. One day you will hear about sharia gangs jumping people outside of said brothels....give in 10-20 years

They should be given money to leave if uninterested in assimilation (many are not)

FP says

You can look at these socialized costs as partial(!) repayment from society to the parents who raise the children, for their efforts and expenses. Or you think the parents should bear the whole burden for an activity that benefits society (as well as them, of course)?

Dan doesn't see other peoples kids as beneficial to society in anyway, but rather a burden

Quigley says

How about mandatory sterilization for all refugees? Bet they'd reconsider settling in a place that offered that sort of bargain.

But then there are people that believe that we should all be licensed to have kids simply to justify unbridled immigration of deplorables to United States and Europe

FP says

You can look at these socialized costs as partial(!) repayment from society to the parents who raise the children, for their efforts and expenses.

OK, but then I get to choose if I want to pay for your services as a parent to your offspring. I choose not to. I don't want you to reproduce in the first place. Now if you want to raise my children, I'm ok with small payments for that.

You getting your genetic code in the next generation does not benefit me. So why would I buy that?

MMR says

Dan doesn't see other peoples kids as beneficial to society in anyway, but rather a burden

Throughout history damn few people are responsible for most advancements. All people are responsible for consumption and pollution. I see no benefits in increasing the population or even maintaining the existing population. So why would we provide financial incentives to do so?

Sure, have children if you want to and can afford them, but the costs of children should be borne -- no pun intended -- by the parents.

Incentivize things that benefit society, not cost society. If anything, we should incentivize childlessness.

Best solution...Send the refugees back to their home towns to rebuild.

Thunderlips is Tovbot2 says

The ruling, which effectively legitimizes Sharia law in Germany, is one of a growing number of instances in which German courts are — wittingly or unwittingly — promoting the establishment of a parallel Islamic legal system in the country.

Are we really discussing the OP as if it were factual news? Read that line. (shaking head) Fucking crazy.

The islamaphobic brigade is peddling the strong stuff now. Just a few years ago Germany was allowing child marriages, if memory serves.

The superiority of the non-mainstream media is becoming very evident. (snicker)

Strategist says

Best solution...Send the refugees back to their home towns to rebuild.

I hope one day someone forces you into a bombed out war zone to "rebuild".

Rew says

Are we really discussing the OP as if it were factual news?

I do always check first, and found several channels reporting the same photo, really across the spectrum from Guardian to DW to Breitbart, which has the full video that the photo comes from. Gatestone Institute and others have the article.

Rew says

I hope one day someone forces you into a bombed out war zone to "rebuild".

And there you reveal your hateful nature. Remember it was your party that bombed out the war zone and financed Sunni militias to force refugees out of it and into NATO countries. (Notice the Saudis don't take them.) You expose yourself as a hateful fool when you wish ill upon people and claim to be bombing people in order to save them.

The problem of Sharia patrols has been reported across the Islamic world from Bangladesh (where they murder bloggers in broad daylight with impunity) to now Germany and Denmark and recently London. I hope it doesn't happen to you, but if you really want that experience there are already too many other countries you could move to.