To anyone who may doubt my assertions: Take your dog with you and go for a walk on Grønland in Oslo. Then you will see that people cross to the other side of the street to avoid you.

This is an opinion piece and expresses the author’s opinions.

I have had enough of Muslim special demands. And this concerns neither “racism” nor “hatred”, no matter how many times AUF leader Gaute Skjervø repeats it.

Recently I have caused furore in the Norwegian press after I stated clearly and unequivocally that I believe Norwegian dog ownership shall take precedence over Muslim special demands. Now the allegations of racism, hatred and more besides are pouring in. Especially from AUF leader Gaute Skjervø.

But feel free to strip away all the rhetoric and proceed to the substance of the matter: Islam has a relationship to dogs that is incompatible with Western culture.

In Norway, blind people have been refused taxis because the driver is Muslim and regards dogs as impure.

NRK documented in 2022 that 6 out of 10 guide-dog users in Oslo and Viken have been rejected by taxi drivers. Blind Inger Stokke was refused a taxi from Kirkeristen in Oslo – the driver refused even after other drivers told him that it was unlawful. The Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud (Likestillingsombudet) has established that it is not objectively justified to refuse a guide dog on religious grounds.

Blind Norwegians are discriminated against. Not by me. By Islamic practice in Norway.

Does Gaute Skjervø consider it “racist” to point this out?

It is no coincidence that this concerns dogs

It is fundamental in Islamic doctrine that dogs are impure. In the hadiths this is crystal clear. In response to a question from a 10-year-old, Muslim scholars on IslamQA.no answer as follows:

“The animal that is kept must not be a dog, because Islam has forbidden keeping dogs except guard dogs and hunting dogs. This has been explained in the answer to question no. 69777. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: ‘The angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog.’ [Narrated by al-Bukhari (3225) and Muslim (2106)]”

In Sahih Muslim 1570a the Prophet Muhammad ordered the killing of dogs and sent men to all corners of Medina to carry out the order. In Sahih Muslim 1572 it is related that they “even killed the dog that accompanied a woman from the desert”. Pitch-black dogs were always to be killed, for they were “devils”. The angel Gabriel refused to visit Muhammad because there was a puppy under his bed. Thereafter Muhammad ordered a broad campaign of killing dogs.

Whoever keeps a dog that is not used for hunting or herding, according to the hadith, loses good deeds for each day. If a dog drinks from a vessel, it must be washed seven times, including once with sand.

This is the theological foundation for what is occurring throughout the Muslim world – and in Norwegian taxis. It is not “racist” to know this. It is the unvarnished truth.

See what is happening in the world

In Iran, dog walking is now prohibited in at least 18 cities. Ayatollah Khamenei has called dog ownership “reprehensible”. In 2021, 75 Iranian parliamentarians proposed making the purchase and ownership of pets – including dogs and cats – unlawful. The penalty: three months’ imprisonment.

In Saudi Arabia, the religious police have previously prohibited the sale of dogs and cats as “Western influence”. The list of prohibited dog breeds is so long that in practice it is almost a total ban.

Hamas prohibited dog walking in public areas in Gaza in 2017, allegedly to “protect women and children”. Dog owners were forced to keep their dogs on rooftops in 40-degree heat.

And in New York, the activist Nerdeen Kiswani – co-founder of Within Our Lifetime and adviser to the Muslim mayor – stated that “NYC is on its way to Islam” and that dogs are “impure” and should not be kept indoors.

The American congressman Randy Fine responded that the choice between dogs and Muslim demands was not difficult. I agreed. And now the Norwegian press is up in arms.

In Wales there have been proposals for dog-free zones as part of an “anti-racist” campaign. In Canada, Muslims have asked neighbours to show consideration and not to walk their dogs around Muslims.

For anyone who may be in doubt, it suffices to take one’s dog and stroll on Grønland in Oslo. There you will obtain the answer. They are willing to cross to the other side of the street to avoid the dog.

Skjervø’s method

The AUF leader employs a well-known manoeuvre. He spent the weekend with families from Utøya, and in that context he attacks me. The message is clear: Criticism of Islam leads to terror. He who criticises Islamic special demands is aligned with mass murderers.

It is a monstrous connection. And it is deliberate.

Skjervø calls what I am doing “normalisation of racism” and “extreme xenophobia”. He believes Document contributes to “division and hostility”.

No, Skjervø. What creates division is an ideology that demands that the blind shall not be allowed to take a taxi with their guide dog. What creates hostility are demands that an entire country’s dog culture shall yield to foreign religious rules.

It is also exceedingly outrageous of you to use a terrorist attack that was abhorrent, and which all reasonable people take with the utmost seriousness, as a kind of shield to avoid debate about Islam.

To those who have deliberately misunderstood me

Of course I do not compare Muslims with dogs. You know that very well. If I had to choose between saving a human being – regardless of religion – or a dog from a fire, I would of course save the human being.

But that is not what this concerns.

I say: Muslim special demands shall not take precedence over Norwegian dog culture. Not in taxis. Not in parks. Not in neighbourhoods. Not anywhere.

Dog ownership is part of Norwegian culture and everyday life. Over 500,000 dogs live in Norwegian homes. They are family members, working dogs, guide dogs for the blind, therapy dogs for the sick. And they were here long before the demands for sharia adaptation.

If Muslim faith communities wish to remove this concern of ours, they are free to go out publicly and say: “Yes, we believe dogs are impure, but we have deep respect for Norwegian culture and will therefore of course not advance such demands.” But that is never going to happen.

I am crystal clear

Immigration to Norway means adaptation to Norway. Not the reverse. The day we begin to adapt Norwegian law, Norwegian parks and Norwegian taxis to Islamic theology, we shall have lost something we will never regain.

I will not place Muslim special demands above our dogs. And especially not above my delightful golden retriever Fritz, who has just turned ten months old. He shall be allowed to run freely in Norway for the rest of his life. I promise him that.

Gaute Skjervø may call me whatever he wishes. He may say “racist” a hundred times more. That does not alter the facts. And it will not make me keep quiet.