Støjberg was trying to rescue Muslim child abuse victims from the perpetrators of their abuse, that is, from those men who are deemed to be their “husbands” according to Islamic culture and laws which are incompatible with Western laws and values. Westerners have not been flooding to Islamic countries and demanding to live by democratic laws. One can only imagine what the consequences of that would be. Yet the reverse is taken for granted. Respect for Western laws which protect the rights of all should be expected from immigrants to the West.

Western countries were once bastions of human rights, but with creeping Sharia, an incursion into the West has created one law for infidels, another for Muslims.

When Western women find themselves in abusive relationships, they are encouraged to leave. When Muslim women are in abusive relationships, including child brides, it’s called “diversity.” The real belief of “progressives” is that abuse of women is ok for “those people,” but not for Western women.

Men marrying children is child abuse. Victims have no say, given the threat of consequences, and are in need of advocacy and protection.

So instead of protecting these victims of child marriage, Denmark chose instead to punish Støjberg, who said she did “the only political and humane thing to combat forced child marriages.”

To think that there are those who deny a clash of civilizations between free societies those that subscribe to Islamic law.

You’d think that the issue of ‘child brides’ was something on which every Western government could agree: a cruel, unjust practice which discriminates horribly against women, which effectively legitimises child sexual abuse, and which has no place in Western culture.

But the Danish parliament would beg to differ.  This week it begins the impeachment of former Immigration Minister Inger Støjberg who, it claims, violated the European Convention on Human Rights by separating asylum-seeking couples where one partner (always, inevitably, the girl) was under 18 years old.

Støjberg’s order, issued when she was Immigration Minister in 2016, was a principled decision designed to protect girls below the age of consent. It was reported at the time the underage girls all claimed that they had entered into their marriages voluntarily. But given the nature of arranged marriages, they could hardly have said otherwise — and anyway, why should Danish taxpayers be expected to fund bedrooms for migrant males to sleep with their underage brides?

A total of 23 couples were separated as a result of the order, before the policy was halted.

When in February the Danish parliament voted to impeach Støjberg, she said that she had done the “only political and humane thing” to combat forced child marriages:

“Imagine arriving in a country like Denmark, a country of equality, as a young girl victim of a forced marriage, and you discover that instead of giving you the possibility to break free of your forced marriage, the state forces you to stay together in an asylum reception centre.”

But the Danish parliament appeared to be less interested in ensuring equality before the law or in protecting children than it was in appeasing local clerics such as Imam Oussama El-Saadi of the Aarhus mosque.

Even though such impeachments are extremely rare in Denmark (there have only been five cases since 1849), parliament voted overwhelmingly in favour. There are 179 members of parliament in Denmark and 139 voted to impeach, which perhaps gives an indication of how insufferably woke (or cowardly) that institution now is….