Germany: "Christian symbols do not belong in state schools…"

Wake up call in Germany?  An update from  Sinister Minister

Deutsche Welle

Comments spark criticism from conservatives

Oezkan’s comments have ruffled feathers in her own conservative party.

Lower Saxony state premier, Christian Wulff, distanced himself from the designated minister’s remarks

“Christian symbols, above all the crucifix in schools, are welcomed by the state government in Lower Saxony in keeping with the practice of tolerant education on the basis of Christian values,” Wulff told news agency dpa.

Wulff says the cross and the CDU are ‘inseparable’

Ayguel Oezkan, the designated social minister in Lower Saxony who is set to be Germany’s first Muslim minister of Turkish origin, has caused controversy uproar by calling for a ban on crucifixes in state schools.

Oezkan does not want to be regarded as “a token immigrant”

“Schools should be neutral places where children can decide their religious orientation on their own…”

Ever heard of an Islamic country where children can decide their religious orientation on their own…?

Oezkan is “looking for impact”

Strangely, the debate is now concentrated on crucifixes. Her demands for Turkish judges and for recognition of  papers from Turkish diploma mills are even more worrisome….

Oezkan has singled out the need for Germany to establish proper recognition of university degrees earned abroad.

“It can go on no longer that well-educated and able citizens are forced to drive taxis when they arrive in Germany,” Oezkan said.

Stefan Mueller, CDU commissioner for integration, was openly critical.

“[Oezkan’s remarks] are as absurd as they are appalling,” Mueller said in a statement. “Politicians who want to ban the cross in state  schools should think twice about whether representing a Christian party is the right choice. The crucifix is the foundation of our identity, culture, and values,” he added.

“The crucifix is the foundation of our identity, culture, and values,” very well, but not for the soldiers of Allah who are religiously obliged to remove the lot. Oezkan also opposes Merkels offer of a “Privileged Partnership” with Turkey and insists that only full EU membership will do.

Too late. Oezkan already has the camel nose in the tent. The Socialists will be  happy  to have her if the conservatives kick her out. Oezkan just has to cross over…..

6 thoughts on “Germany: "Christian symbols do not belong in state schools…"”

  1. “… a ban on crucifixes in state schools …”

    But would these same schools “think it best” to serve only halal food sacrificed to allah “so that everyone can eat”?

    I wonder what a search on “halal food german schools” might find?

    Brussels Journal –

    [The relentlessness with which the German authorities consistently clamp down on Baptists who want to raise their children according to their own Christian beliefs, contrasts strongly with the leniency of the same authorities towards Muslims. While forcing 8-year olds to attend plays such as “My Body Belongs to Me” can only be considered a fairly recent “tradition” of the Germans, eating sausages and other types of pork definitely is an old German tradition. Nevertheless, in the past years, several public German schools have removed the traditional pork dishes from their menus. Last year the Käthe-Kollwitz-Schule in Minden announced that it was introducing halal food for everyone “to ensure that also Muslim children can have lunch at school.” Though the measure was clearly taken with regard to “the religious convictions of a minority” and went against the “contradictory tradition of a differently inclined majority,” the German authorities did not clamp down on the school, nor on the parents who had been demanding halal lunches for their kids.]


  2. Ever heard of an Islamic country where children can decide their religious orientation on their own…?

    Test: Do you have the same religion as your parents?
    Score “O” points if you do and have never doubted or questioned its teachings. Score a “2” for any other answer.
    This is an example of dogmatism, the blind acceptance of received ideas. Religion itself is not the issue here; rather, it’s acceptance without question is the important matter. To adhee unflinchingly to childhood beliefs on any subject, to shut your mind to new ideas, or even to other old ideas, is death to the intellect. Besides, religions should have nothing to hide. They ought to encourage doubts and questions so that they can lay them to rest and reinforce faith.
    (from “Brain Building” by Marilyn vos Savant)

  3. I agree Al-Kidya, and it is always surprising to me that muslim “intellects” simply will not, or cannot, justify their rather inane statements. To learn one needs to talk. To open ones mind one needs to talk and hear other viewpoints. This in true in the physical sciences, in the arts, and also in religion. Which came first – man or G_d. Acceptance of either of these points is a matter of faith as neither can be proved – at least within our limited intellect. So regardless of where a person stands, the logical conclusion is to accept the choice that the person made as being a valid personal choice. It seems to me that islamists are not capable of understanding this simple fact and that alone speaks for their intellects. If one understands that the concept of absolute proof is logically flawed (here I am perhaps unwisely extrapolating the work of a brilliant mathematician Gödel ) within the systems within which we build proofs (the keyword is ABSOLUTE), then one realizes that one has no solid ground to state absolute certainly with regards to religion and matters of faith. If you understand this then you will realize that acceptance of G_d is not a contradiction, as the choice is framed within the limitations of your own understanding and limits of intellect – it is not an absolute quantity so that no one has the right to impose their choice on another.

Comments are closed.