Ramadan arrived last week. This month-long test for the Muslim faithful is not just a time of deprivation. It is a time of coming together, of being with friends, of remembering what is really important.

The spiritual aim of fasting in Ramadan is to surrender to a higher authority – i.e. Allah. By abstaining from food and drink during sunlit hours, by overcoming the desire to quench our thirst, to quiet our hunger, a person becomes more aware of those around them. They remember those who cannot quench their thirst with clean water, who have no hope of a delicious meal in the evening. The devout Muslim thinks of others and does whatever they can to alleviate suffering around them.

Another aspect of fasting is that during the month of Ramadan the Muslim believer should remember that God is all around, that they are indeed standing right in front of God. This means that the devout Muslim should refrain from anger, from talking about people behind their back, that they should be more gracious to others; in short, during the fast a Muslim does whatever they can to be a better member of society.

The month of Ramadan is a month of self-control. This self-control is automatically accompanied by sympathy for others, with a desire to help alleviate suffering, with an awareness of our fellow human beings. The physical fast is symbolic of the spiritual efforts to become a better person.

Yet if you ask Inger Støjberg, a minister in the Danish government, Ramadan is a month that poses a danger to the Danish people.

Ms. Støjberg wrote: "I want to call on Muslims to take leave from work during the month of Ramadan to avoid negative consequences for the rest of Danish society."

Ms. Støjberg is concerned that someone who has not eaten or drunk during the long 18.5 hour fast might have problems giving their entire attention to the task at hand. In particular, Støjberg is concerned about bus drivers and hospital workers.

The response to Ms. Støjberg's concern was almost immediate. A major Danish bus company, Arriva, replied that there had never been any accidents involving drivers who were fasting. Their spokeswoman said "So de facto it's not a problem for us." The leader of a Danish transport union, Jan Villadsen, expressed concern that the minister was trying to create a problem that in reality did not exist.

Denmark's Muslim Union posted a message on social media thanking Ms. Støjberg for her concern, but pointed out that Muslims were adults who were perfectly capable of looking after themselves and society, "even when we fast."

Ms. Støjberg is no stranger to controversy. Perhaps it is for this reason that a fellow Danish politician, Jacob Jensen, made the suggestion that politicians should really be concerned with trying to solve real problems, rather than creating problems where none exist.

Some of the controversies that Ms. Støjberg has created include stating that "a significant proportion of refugees" cheat and lie.

Another incident, reported in this paper, concerned Ms. Støjberg's car hitting a refugee when trying to make a quick egress from a refugee center. The report, from November last year, reads:

"…Minister Inger Støjberg attended a meeting on refugees where she was protested by individuals trying to communicate the difficulties they faced to a senior government official. Unhappy with the reaction, she abruptly left the event and ran over a refugee with her car, who was trying to stop her from leaving. The images were haunting. You would think that running over a Danish citizen with a car in Denmark would be the subject of a judicial investigation. In this particular case, however, no legal action was taken against the minister because the incident involved a refugee and not a Danish citizen.

Ms. Støjberg has one of the infamous Danish cartoons of Prophet Muhammad as her screen saver.

Well, every country has parliamentarians, even ministers, who embarrass them from time to time, who make outrageous statements that make the nation cringe. There are many, many Danish citizens who do not agree with Ms. Støjberg, who cringe when she speaks.

Yet, Ms. Støjberg is not just any member of parliament, nor any minister. Ms. Støjberg is the minister for immigration. She is the face of the warm and welcoming arms of Denmark to the rest of the world.

Ms. Støjberg has determined that on her watch Danish arms be neither warm nor welcoming. Under the careful guidance of this minister, Denmark has introduced more than 50 amendments increasing immigration restrictions.

One of the most controversial things Denmark has done under Ms. Støjberg's guidance is to introduce a measure to make sure asylum seekers make a contribution to their new homeland.

Two years ago, it was decided that refugees should pay for their board and lodging. Of course, the Human Rights Declaration says that all people have the right to seek asylum. It doesn't say anything about this asylum being provided without charge, or that once finding asylum the refugee should not pull their weight. People fleeing war, bombs, destruction should of course have the presence of mind to take valuables that will help pay their way. Naturally.

And if the refugee should flee without great wads of cash? What happens then? The Danish government thought about this, and came up with a solution. In 2016 a law was passed that allows Danish authorities to search the refugees' belongings. Any valuables or cash can be confiscated as payment for their care. Despite the outcry that confiscating valuables of refugees crossing the border was reminiscent of what the Nazis did to Jewish families in World War II merely led to an alteration in the law. The law is still in force today.

Ms. Støjberg's system is working. In 2015 there had been a rise in asylum seekers. But since Ms. Støjberg entered the office, there has been a dramatic fall in the numbers of refugees. Figures published by Politiken newspaper demonstrate that in 2014 70 percent of new citizenship was given to people from Muslim majority countries. Now, that figure is 21 percent. That is a 50 percent reduction. This is a great success and Ms. Støjberg deserves to be proud.

Inger Støjberg has been quoted as saying that there is "simply no reason" to take in any Syrian refugees and that Denmark will not be part of any European plan to settle in the few refugees that have made it to the union.

Today, Denmark is probably the last place any refugee would choose to seek asylum in. In case asylum seekers are unaware that their valuables will be taken away from them to pay for their stay, advertisements have been taken out in newspapers to discourage them from coming.

The newspaper advertisements, designed to deter asylum seekers, appeared in four Lebanese newspapers. The advertisements stated that there would be cuts in provisions to refugees; social assistance was to be reduced by 50 percent.

Of course, every country has the right to close its borders and keep out asylum seekers. Asylum seekers only have the right to seek asylum. Is it not ridiculous to state that all people have the right to seek asylum? This is as natural a right as the right to breathe, to think, etc. No piece of paper should grant us the right to seek to live in safety.

European countries (one of which is Denmark) have committed to helping refugees and asylum seekers. However, like so many other countries, Denmark has decided to pick and choose who it will let in.

Ms. Støjberg doesn't want Muslims in the country. She has made this clear. And all of her immigration regulations help to underline this desire.

It might seem like this is a paranoid statement. Surely, Ms. Støjberg is trying to keep out refugees in general, not Muslims specifically. She doesn't target Muslims.

But if you look at the top 10 countries from which refugees are seeking asylum, Støjberg's intentions become a bit clearer.

It is a well-known fact that the greatest number of refugees today come from Syria. Other countries from which people are fleeing are Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, Iraq, Eritrea and Pakistan.

If you don't take Muslims in, there are not many people you do take in.

In Denmark, the minister for immigration is anti-Muslim. This does not reflect the general Danish attitude. But unfortunately, Ms. Støjberg is in control of immigration policy. And there can be no doubt in anyone's mind that she is against Muslims. At a time when the majority of refugees, be they from the Middle East, Central or North Africa or Myanmar, are Muslims, such an attitude does not coexist well with an image of a forward, progressive, democratic nation. When a country like Turkey, a country that is facing a great deal of challenges, can take in 3 million refugees, the stance of the Danish minister of immigration is even more telling.

There is no question that Turkey benefits from the skills and knowledge that the Syrians have brought to the country. After only six years, the Syrians are becoming part of the nation, and this is making Turkey a better place to be. Surely this is the message that Denmark should be listening to.