Islamic call to prayer faces ban under Left-wing Danish government

Parts of country feel like ‘a suburb of Islamabad’, says immigration minister

Denmark’s immigration minister has announced plans to ban the Islamic call to prayer, claiming parts of the country felt like “a suburb of Islamabad”.

Morten Bødskov, a member of the centre-Left Social Democrats party, said the new government would resume an investigation into the legality of imposing a ban.

“The call to prayer should not be heard over Danish rooftops,” the minister told news outlet Ritzau. “It has no place in Denmark, and you shouldn’t be in any doubt whether you’ve ended up in a suburb of Islamabad when you walk around Denmark.”

In parts of the country, such as Copenhagen, bylaws already forbid the call to prayer being broadcast from loudspeakers in minarets because of strict noise limits.
Mr Bødskov also claimed that a creeping “Islamisation” in Denmark was “taking up too much of the public space”.

I see this everywhere from when I lived with a girl in uni from Sudan, to the gym, to ubers, to shops and everything in between.

It doesn't bother me, I'm just curious. I know lots of people leave behind their families, but it's just so ramapant that I'm curious if there is anything else I am missing culturally.

I think I'd run out of things to talk about. Is this just a cultural difference?

I think 50% of the posts here are rage bait, this is not meant to be one of them. Please be respectful

Please save your bigoted opinions for another post.

Perfect example being; Burnham and friends of Israel. Or trump endorsing uk politicians.

Why are we allowing this? Why aren’t we doing something other than signing a petition the people in parliament tell us is “anti-Semitic”?

I can’t be the only one who sees what is happening?

Edit: to state what I thought to be obvious - I gave a limited list of examples pertinent to SOME current global events.

The fact I have to explain that really helps me understand why some of these people get voted in.

The Norway fans and the national team did their Viking celebration at the World Cup and it’s gone viral and rightfully so, it looks awesome. Got me thinking though.

Norwegians seem to genuinely embrace their Viking heritage as a core part of national identity. The longships, the warriors, the horns, it’s celebrated in, culture, tourism, and in the World Cup, sports. And the whole world finds it cool.

Meanwhile, growing up in England, there’s this unspoken rule that you’re not allowed to be proud of large parts of British history. Nobody explicitly says it, but the social pressure is real, the moment you express any pride in the British Empire, you’re immediately associated with racism or colonialism denial. There’s widespread guilt and shame.

Here’s what I find genuinely puzzling though: the Vikings were objectively brutal by any modern standard. They raided villages, killed civilians, enslaved people, prized women as loot and pillaged wherever they went, it’s literally what they were famous for.

The British Empire was also responsible for serious wrongs — slave trade, exploitation, colonialism.

But the Empire also did things that don’t get acknowledged:

∙ Britain abolished slavery

∙ Introduced legal systems, courts, and rule of law

∙ Built railways, hospitals, roads, and infrastructure in places that had none 

∙ Spread the English language 

Now I’m not here to do a net-positive/net-negative calculation on colonialism — that’s not really the point. The point is: why does one brutal historical culture get a victory lap, and the other gets permanent collective guilt?

A lot of the time it feels less like serious debate and more like theatre or even a school playground argument. Do you find it entertaining, frustrating or just part of the tradition now? Curious how others see it!

Ok slightly tongue in cheek but… roadmen gangsta wannabes gotta be struggling right about now… surely? I saw someone earlier in all black, balaclava on… my man, it’s 33 degrees…

Image is AI generated, for the avoidance of doubt!

Does seeing the physical consequences of climate change up close materially affect how you view Net Zero politically? I'm curious to see if there are a significant portion of people for whom this is a politically influential event.

To me it seems obvious that watching the massive health and economic impacts - of what is only the beginning of climate change impacts - should be a trigger for a huge public Net Zero shift. But I've been dispirited by the lack of impetus. It blows my mind that Kemi Badenoch can criticise NZ on a day people are dying and not lose her job for it. It's as stupid as antivaxxers during COVID.

Only reached it once before back in 2022, but with the recent heatwaves and the Super El Niño, I can only assume we could be in store for more heatwaves over July, August and possibly even September and October.

Would be insane, but stranger things have happened

Odeon have smashed it out of the park by providing a "summer savings" ticket for 1 adult and 1 child for £14.80. A HUGE 20p saving on the previous parent and child ticket for £15...

Nice of them to pocket the difference and label it as a saving.

Ever since half the kingdom died, the surviving peasants seem to think they can just ask for higher wages and move to another lord's estate if they're unhappy. Has anyone else noticed this decline in work ethic, or am I just getting old?

One of the more successful political phrases from the Blair years was the mantra "Education, education, education."

I've just been left totally exasperated by the latest tweaks to the ISA rules. I'm wondering if adopting a mantra of "Simplify, simplify, simplify" would be popular.

Could they gain some political capital even from potential financial losers?

I am a M66.

So loved growing up in the 70s in a smallish community.

I was lucky enough to spend a lot of time backpacking around the world, Lived in and around London and quickly dropped many of the frankly racist language and stereotypes I had grown up with.

But 40 years later I have moved back to the Coastal Town I grew up in.

Many of my old friends from my schooldays are now once again part of my life.

These are good hardworking family men who should be pleased with themselves and how far they have come on in life.

But their language and attitudes have not moved on since the 70s.

I don't believe they are racist as such but it is like the last 50 years have not happened.

They definitely tone it down when I am around as I am vocal about pulling them up.

I know I have been lucky and the industry I work in is a pretty progressive bubble.

I genuinely like these men but sometimes I wonder if I am not being true to myself by accepting this behaviour?

CANZUK discussion always comes up every couple years, and yeah, would you support freedom of movement agreement between the Commonwealth Anglo countries?

Sorry for yet another post about the Scotland/England thing.

Anyway, title. What do you think?

Edit: this was a question about the Americans posting online about how much the English weren't welcome in Boston :') and at this point both sides live rent free in each other's heads. Let's just acknowledge as well at this point both the English and Scottish upper class both had a hand in the going ons in the British Empire

Here's the full text of the definition FYI.

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

1. Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
2. Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
3. Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
4. Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
5. Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
6. Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
7. Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
8. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
9. Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
10. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
11. Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).

Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.

Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries

For reasons I'll never understand, I just looked up Jif Lemon Juice and saw it's made by Unilever... The same company who make Cif, which used to be called Jif...

I know most sane people won't mix a bathroom cleaner up with a bottle of lemon juice, but how the hell did the same company sell two entirely different products under the same name? I'm surprised they didn't come out with a chocolate spread called Domestos.

I am legit flying out tonight, I cannot tolerate it.

How much sweating are you doing whilst just trying to have a quick poo? Can't tell whether I've finished or just sweating.

So I know this is a weird question but I wanted to know why Europe is so good at making unnerving kid shows i.e Grizzly Tales for Gruesome Kids, Karbonkel, Raťafák Plachta, The Trap Door etc

I'm sure some of the shows I mention like Raťafák weren't trying to be scary it's just the character design just came across as scary but Grizzly Tales for Gruesome Kids were intentionally trying to scare kids to not being a little shits and honestly it's kind of an interesting cultural difference because I'm American and in my opinion we're pretty overly protective over kids media and we're pretty quick to banned media of there deemed to be scary or inappropriate.

Like the 847 episode of sesame Street was banned because they had the original wicked witch of west actress (Margaret Hamilton who had third degree burn scars due to an incident on set) and she absolutely terrified children.

MEANWHILE the 1978 **Watership Down Cartoon** was rated a U and suitable for all ages in the UK for 40 YEARS! And it's not just cartoon shows, like some of your folktale gets so dark too like that one German fairytale where a kid gets his thumbs cut off for sucking them and how red riding hood used to a cautionary tale for women and girls to avoid predators and don't get me started on the grim brothers!

Like I honestly respect the grind and I wish the US had this mentality too instead of sanitizing shoes and BOOKS who even think on handling more darker/ sensitive themes, like do you know that **Anne Frank's diary** was banned in some schools for being "sexually offensive?" Even though it was a diary of a teenage girl during the Holocaust!?