For John, BLUF: Whixh should be controlling when it comes to social/cultural issues, the welcoming nation or the culture of the immigrants coming in? Nothing to see here; just move along.
Here is the sub-headline:
BBC: “The verdict cannot be appealed and the jail sentence is unconditional, meaning that it must be served.”
Freom Legal Insurrection, by Blogger Vijeta Uniyal, 14 December 2021, 11:30am.
Here is the lede plus one:
On Monday, Denmark’s high-power court convicted Inger Stoejberg, who served as the country’s immigration minister between 2015-19, for ordering the separation of refugees couples if the woman was under 18.Here is the really disturbing part of the story, which is why the title of this Blog:Stoejberg’s 2016 order, as she argues, was aimed at stamping out the practice of child brides who were being imported into the country in the wake of the migrant wave. “A total of 23 couples were separated, with the wives ranging in age from 15 to 17 years,” Germany’s DW News reported.
The so-called Impeachment Court, specially set up for Stoejberg’s trial, “agreed that the order had violated Danish law and the European Convention on Human Rights,” the TV network Euronews reported.It seems to me that if a nation has age restrictions on marriages they should be enforced on everyone. Otherwise they should be changed to reflect what is being allowed for some. A two tiered system is inherently unequal.
Considering that in the West young teenage bridges were accepted several centuries ago it might be the way to go, except that in our current culture education suggests that 18 is a reasonable marriage age for all. Our culture expects youth to stay in school until graduation from high school. It is a reasonable expectation for society today.
A special court for Ms Stoejberg seems fishy to me.
Hat tip to the InstaPundit.
Regards — Cliff
No comments:
Post a Comment