But won't the constitution be CHANGED when there are enough muslims in the country to change it?

It has happened in every country before that reached a muslim majority, why not here too? It WILL happen.

Posted by: Borg at February 25, 2007 9:41 AM

Could they mean Sura 67 and 69?

Posted by: non-redneck at February 25, 2007 9:54 AM

Either the journalist or the translator got it wrong, when they referred to "67th and 69th verses of Quran". SIAD wrote that, "SIAD hereby draws attention to the fact that the Koran is in violation of the Danish Constitution’s paragraphs 67 and 69".

Ofcourse, it could just be that they think the quran is the Danish constitution...

You can read SIAD's own article in english here(scroll down): http://siad.wordpress.com/

Posted by: DanishDynamite at February 25, 2007 12:54 PM

Stop Islamiseringen af Danmark is on the right path and getting close, but can and should look further into the truths of the "religion of submission":

(Koran of the Mecca period –propagation of the “religion of submission” pre violent jihad)

73:10: Listen to what they [unbelievers] say with patience, and leave them with dignity.

(Koran of the Medina period –propagation of the “religion of submission” after the adoption and by means of violent jihad)

8:12: Then your Lord spoke to His angels and said, “I will be with you. Give strength to the believers.

I will send terror into the unbelievers’ hearts, cut off their heads and even the tips of their fingers!”

Related to above and in general:

Statistical analysis has been conducted to determine what the doctrine of the “religion of submission” is really promoting.
“In Bukhari’s Hadith 97% of jihad references are about violent struggle – or warfare, 3% concern *inner struggle*”. In other words, at the same time, “jihad is 97% war and 3% inner struggle. “Those who submit” (the muslim) therefore can claim that they are being honest – with themselves as well as to “those who do not submit”- because there are two, though totally opposite, truths.

Posted by: TINBH at February 25, 2007 1:04 PM

I am an opponent of hate-speech laws because I want as broad a First Amendment as possible. However, for those countries that do have such laws, I think this development is great news. What better way to get people to look at Koranic verses?

Posted by: JSobieski at February 25, 2007 1:32 PM

...of course, one only has to listen to the QURANIC verses quoted by the terrorists after they have murdered or beheaded someone...It does not take a brain surgeon to figure out where the terrorists get their inspiration....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at February 25, 2007 1:36 PM

"...I am an opponent of hate-speech laws because I want as broad a First Amendment as possible. "

Fair enough.

But self-censorship is worse: Who in America printed the cartoons? Why does youtube take off the video's of the hate-preachers? why is everbody so squeamish in the land of the free?

You see: Germany has all these hate-speech stuff, but they still manage to have a Karneval parade ridiculing the mullah's:

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/02/20/karneval-in-germany-depicts-mullahs-as-the-assholes-they-are/

Other countries in Europe are also coming out inspite of these BS laws, even in Australia/Victoria we have a columnist who is quite outspoken and sticks it up their asses inspite of vilification laws which ahve been terribly abused (The 2 pastors of the catch the fire ministries are a case in point)

Looks like America has a long way to go. You even have censorhip on you universities!

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 25, 2007 4:19 PM

Ok, so lets say they win in censoring certain parts of Quran. Then what?

Will that make muslim hatemongers behave any different? Will it stop them from claiming the whole world and everything in it as granted to them by their moon god allah.

Will that turn them all into law abiding and upright citizens of Denmark all of a sudden?

Will that make them defend democracy, free speech, accept cartoons of mohammad as they were intended, accept apostacy from their ilk, stop forcing their women to wear a tent, be prepared to give their life in defence of Denmark even if it meant them fighting other muslims on Iraq or Afghanistan?

Will they accept Israel, will they accept a Jew as their neighbour, teacher or a friend at work?

I think we know the answers.

quaran is hatful to its core, just my censoring a few vile verses does not maketh the whole cult any different.

Posted by: Hermit at February 25, 2007 4:53 PM

What can I say, the Jihadist Imams want Canada to be an Islamic State where adulters are executed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OTfacRDBJo

Posted by: ala-sux at February 25, 2007 4:58 PM

Surahs 67 and 69 are titled 'Sovereignity' and 'Reality'. Could it be that they are just looking at the titles involved, and not reading further?

Posted by: Infidel Pride at February 26, 2007 12:14 AM

The best way to deal with the Qur'an is to ban Islam. If Muslims want to leave afterwards, then fine. Non-Muslims should not suffer because of a single intolerant religion - just ban it.

-Stefcho

Posted by: Stefcho at February 26, 2007 5:01 AM

Here's the problem with Europe and its wannabes in America in a nutshell. I say keep the Qu'ran as it is, but allow Christians to speak all they want against it, too. I can't help but notice that the prim, PeeCee Left which is so quick to shout "Hate Speech!" every time a Christian mentions Hell or the Last Judgment has always been quick to "understand" when Muslims chop off the heads of schoolgirls.

No, keep the Free Speech (and Free Exercise) clauses of the First Amendment intact. I realize that the Danes aren't under the US Constitution, but lets not take this latest thoroughly European expdient as a model. If someone calls me an ass, let me be free to call him a pig if he is one.

Posted by: Kepha at February 26, 2007 9:08 AM

'A political party called Stop Islamisation of Denmark has claimed that 67th and 69th verses of Quran are violating the Danish constitution and the mosques across the country should be closed according to the 78th article of the Danish constitution.'

this is wrong;
http://siad.wordpress.com/

2nd post there;
'SIAD hereby draws attention to the fact that the Koran is in violation of the
Danish Constitution’s paragraphs 67 and 69. SIAD further claims that mosques
should be forbidden in consonance with paragraph 78, clause 2.
SIAD also demands that all koran verses incompatible with Danish customs and
traditional values should be banned in accordance with the Danish
Constitution’s paragraphs 67 and 69, which states that “Citizens have the
right to form communities with a view to practising religion in accordance
with their faith, but on condition that nothing is taught or done that is at
odds with morality or public order”.'

so they try to use danish constitution to fight against the islamization.

also they seem to know the quran;
'The journalist asked which parts of the koran who offend the danish constitution. We answered sura 8 and 9, especially 9,5, and sura 4,34, sura 4,15, sura 33,60, sura 4,11, sura 2,282, sura 24,13, sura 9,3, sura 12,29, sura 48,17, sura 47,36, sura 76,5, sura 4,57, sura 33,27. And 33,21 who involves the hadith.'

Posted by: carn at February 26, 2007 9:20 AM

carn

That makes more sense.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at February 26, 2007 6:25 PM

Off Topic There is rvindent that was found in the H0oly Land that Jesus wasnot excute by the Roman on across and that he didnot raise from the dead 3 day later, and that his body didnot enter heaven phyicial. They found the tomd where his father and mother where bury along with Mary his wife and son of Jesus and Mary. What a real surpise it seem the New Testment are false in some detail. They needed to be edit.

Posted by: DefenderofIslam at February 26, 2007 11:11 PM

diffuser of pigslam.. trying to divert attention, are we?

Posted by: Allahfanculo at February 27, 2007 4:43 AM

"They found the tomd where his father and mother where bury along with Mary his wife and son of Jesus and Mary. What a real surpise it seem the New Testment are false in some detail. They needed to be edit."

.....Indeed, some tombs were found with the names of Jesus,Mary, and other biblical names inscribed. The tombs were discovered in 1980, and for the record, the tombs were empty.....

.....it is open to debate as to whether or not these tombs have any revelance to biblical history....and the names on the tombs were common names at the time, (not unlike Bill or Mary in todays real world)....

...of course, you are entitled to your own opinion....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at February 27, 2007 6:10 AM

Defender of Islam, the majority of Christians stopped taking the bible literally a long time ago. The findings of those tombs changes absolutely nothing, and I for one think its a remarkable and historic find if its true. You won't see Christians blowing anyone up about it. There will be no Christians burning cars or stabbing anyone over it.

However the Koran is still taken literally by muslims. Mohamed is considered the perfect man in all times and places, yet he had slaves, beheaded entire villages, waged war constantly and raped women. If someone were to find some historical evidence that portrayed Mohamed in a bad light (as if the Koran doesn't do that already) well....just look what muslims did over CARTOONS

Posted by: kelisw at March 2, 2007 2:19 PM