Sunday, February 05, 2006
The conscience of the queen
In a bit of either bad or exemplary timing, depending on your point of view, Queen Margrethe published her official biography yesterday. [UPDATE: Gates of Vienna points out that I missed the original date on the linked story, which is last April. Oops. Broader point holds, though. - ed.] It so happens that she actually expressed an opinion about Islam:
[I]n overtly political passages from an official biography published yesterday Queen Margrethe makes comments certain to complicate her nation's relationship with Muslims.
She said: "We are being challenged by Islam these years - globally as well as locally. It is a challenge we have to take seriously. We have let this issue float about for too long because we are tolerant and lazy.
"We have to show our opposition to Islam and we have to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on us because there are some things for which we should display no tolerance."
"And when we are tolerant, we must know whether it is because of convenience or conviction."
In that last, there is an essential message worth repeating. We must know whether our tolerance is because of convenience -- code for an unwillingness to stand up -- or conviction. Most of us can say that it is the latter most of the time. There are a great many opinions in the world that do not comport with our own, but we do not carry on as though our home were in a tree every time we hear something that offends our own sensibilities because we believe that free expression is itself an important value.
Sometimes, though, people oppose the principal that defends the right of free speech -- that freedom to express oneself is the natural born right of every person. We easily and readily denounce these intolerant thugs when we know they won't actually do anything to us. On those occasions when we stay silent because we know the thugs will order our assassination or burn our embassies, we are tolerant because of convenience. The Queen is most correct when she writes that we must be able to tell the difference between these two motives.
Queen Margrethe, long may she reign.
6 Comments:
By 
John Sobieski, at
Sun Feb 05, 09:24:00 AM:
Queen Margrethe, unlike the ridiculous Prince Charles of England, loves her country and the Danish people. While Charles glorifies Islam, Queen Margrethe calls it as it is. You have to admire that.
By Grumpy Old Man, at
Sun Feb 05, 11:19:00 AM:
Let us hoist some Tuborg or Carlsberg today, in a toast to Her Majesty.
By 
, at
Sun Feb 05, 11:32:00 AM:
There's nothing intolerant about trying to protect your ass when someone is trying to kill you and/or enslave you which is the goal of Islam. The only peace that Islam wants is the peace that comes after sucessful conquest and the elimination and/or enslavement of its foes (that's all of you (us) infidels). It seems that the Queen understands this. I'm not sure of the other so-called western leaders. It's a cinch that the media doesn't get it at all or they fall under the tolerance of convenience label hopelessly wishing that all this Islamic violence is just a bad dream that will go away if it is ignored or tolerated.
By Dymphna, at
Sun Feb 05, 01:05:00 PM:
Tigerhawk--
Thanks for the heads-up on this. As Jinnderella used to say "I wuv" Queen Margrethe.
That book of hers came out last April in honor of her 65th birthday. I wrote about it then and got a knowledgeable comment with further info about her life. She's an EX-leftist -- just like a lot of bloggers, hmmm?
Anyway, I did another post today, using you in the title:
Tigerhawk Likes Queen Margrethe, Too.
I wanted to find my post about the tough immigration laws the Danish legislature passed last summer but I couldn't find it in the archives. That's worth posting on, though...I think it helped to bring on this hysteria by the Danish imams who toured the Middle East telling horror stories about the Danes because in order to get in you have to agree to learn Danish, and if you want to bring a potential spouse into Denmark from the old country, both parties must be making a certain amount of money, have marketable skills, etc.
In other words, no more child bride/slaves.
Of course it's not *really* about the 'toons. It's about the Danes new attitude....
~!D
PS I, too, am fascinated by the adroitness with which the terror masters have used a buncha pictures to create havoc (and then attempt to wreak it). I think they're going to feel some blowback from the whole thing, though.
By Fat Man, at
Sun Feb 05, 03:28:00 PM:
Language skills are necessary, but not sufficient. The rioters in France were largely second generation Muslims.
By , at
Fri Feb 10, 08:57:00 PM:
I have lived in France for quite a while and I think the U.S. coverage WAY over-emphasized the Muslim angle. The rioters were poor young men with no job prospects and they were from all the various nonwhite ethnic backgrounds that live in the poor suburbs. Those people happen to be majority Muslim, but they are not particularly Muslim; they feel French and angry not to have a future. Don't confuse angry jobless youths who are ethnically North African, but culturally pretty French, with Islamists from the Middle East who want to convert Western Europe. The French don't--those are two separate problems. I hope we can keep them separate, because the first is a lot easier to solve than the second.
