Switzerland bans (new) minarets

For stuff that is general.
Post Reply

Switzerland bans (new) minarets

I would vote to ban new minarets
3
38%
It is religious persecution to ban minarets, and therefor is wrong
5
63%
 
Total votes: 8
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54582
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:
Contact GORDON

Post by GORDON »

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng....9&ty=st

The article actually seems to present both sides of the argument, but the line that sums up the issue is
Supporters of a ban argued minarets are a symbol of an Islamic claim to power.


They are worried about growing muslim communities, and their bringing Sharia Law with them.

How would you vote? No wishy washy "I am torn" option. Make a decision.

edit - For those who don't know, a minaret is that missile-looking thing that usually come in pairs, facing Mecca, at mosques.



Edited By GORDON on 1259513275
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Top
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 54006
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Post by TheCatt »

I have no problem with people building things.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Top
TPRJones
Posts: 13418
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 2:05 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:
Contact TPRJones

Post by TPRJones »

I disagree with the basis you have given for the position, but I ignore your inflammatory wording and vote Nay to the ban nonetheless.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
Top
Malcolm
Posts: 32040
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 1:04 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Post by Malcolm »

Whew. The world of Swiss architecture is safe. Anybody else feel better?

& no, this is a bullshit law. If they think banning building a particular structure is going to stop or stem ANYTHING, they're fucking morons.
"The Islamic religion is intolerant, but we do not want to limit freedom of religion, we want to outlaw the political symbol,"

Perfect example of a fucking moron. Intolerant? You've got to be shitting me. Coming from a dude whose country has interesting ties to Nazis & their sympathizers. It's even more unbelievable coming from a dude that up till about 150 years ago, lived in a country where there was open hatred & political warfare between Catholics & Protestants.

If the Swiss outlawed crucifixes on buildings, the pope & every bishop having to do w\ that country would be claiming religious persecution.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Top
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54582
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:
Contact GORDON

Post by GORDON »

That brings to mind an interesting dilemma... what happens if you have a completely free, democratic society, and a group begins to rise to power that publicly states they wish to curtail freedom and liberty, in an extreme fashion? Do you let the voting public vote themselves out of freedom? In our government, if they could get the executive and legislative branches, would a legacy supreme court be able to do anything about, say, removing the franchise for women, and stating that Sharia is LAW?

Are we free to end freedom?

And yes, I already realize we have curtailed some freedoms, but I am talking drastic measures, like those the fundie muslims would impose on the world (or fundie christians, for that matter).



Edited By GORDON on 1259530050
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Top
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54582
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:
Contact GORDON

Post by GORDON »

Malcolm wrote:If the Swiss outlawed crucifixes on buildings, the pope & every bishop having to do w\ that country would be claiming religious persecution.
Not sayiing it is right, but there are countries that have restricted rights for catholics and christians and any other non-muslim.

Germany has banned Nazi imagery in order to..... officially say they no longer hate jews, I guess. Is this any different? Is Switzerland saying that they are rejecting radical views of islam? I don't personally know what their local muslim scene is like, but if they were the equivalent of the crips of bloods, I could see wanting to restrict the imagery.

BUt really, I don't completely agree with anything I just postulated, so don't jump on me too hard. Just making conversation.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Top
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 54006
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Post by TheCatt »

I don't agree with the nazi ban either. So who were the two to vote for the ban?
It's not me, it's someone else.
Top
Malcolm
Posts: 32040
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 1:04 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Post by Malcolm »

Are we free to end freedom?

Absolutely. Otherwise, your means to guarantee or freedom become forceful & tend to stomp on the ultimate individual right to say, "Fuck it all."
Germany has banned Nazi imagery in order to..... officially say they no longer hate jews, I guess.

Another of many stupid European laws. They trying to pretend it didn't happen? If you'd not like a repeat of that, then your best bet is to expose the bullshit in the ideology, not sweep it under the rug & pretend "out of sight, out of mind" is an viable principle.
Is this any different?

Yes. The anti-Nazi sentiment in Germany looks like it comes from a tremendous sense of national guilt. They're quite aware they let the psycho minority run wild & unchecked & the rest of the civilized world is going to remember that till at least the last Holocaust survivor dies. Banning architecture is ... I'm not sure what the fuck they're hoping to accomplish. Cut the foreplay & just boot them out of your country like you obviously want to. The dickhead I quoted is under some delusion that by hiding behind legal technicalities, he can somehow mask his open bias against a particular religion. I suppose since the Swiss don't actually go to war w\ anyone anymore, the strongest response they have is to combat inanimate objects.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Top
TPRJones
Posts: 13418
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 2:05 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:
Contact TPRJones

Post by TPRJones »

GORDON wrote:Are we free to end freedom?
Are we? Obviously, look around you. Should we be? Absolutely not.

I have never cared much for majority rule. The majority are often short-sighted idiots. America II should be designed to be as impervious to this sort of mess as possible. It should require nothing short of a violent revolution to curtail the freedoms of the citizenry.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
Top
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54582
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:
Contact GORDON

Post by GORDON »

Here's a question:

What kind or religion needs a particular "building" in order to be practiced?
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Top
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 54006
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Post by TheCatt »

All of them?
It's not me, it's someone else.
Top
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54582
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:
Contact GORDON

Post by GORDON »

Oh?
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Top
TPRJones
Posts: 13418
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 2:05 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:
Contact TPRJones

Post by TPRJones »

Spirituality is internal and requires no buildings. Religion is external and requires fancy buildings as an expression of political and social power.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
Top
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54582
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:
Contact GORDON

Post by GORDON »

TPRJones wrote:Spirituality is internal and requires no buildings. Religion is external and requires fancy buildings as an expression of political and social power.
So banning a certain architectural style does not persecute a religion, unless that religion has a political or social agenda?

And if a society is free to restrict freedom, are they free to restrict.... undesirables from making political statements or shows of power?
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Top
Malcolm
Posts: 32040
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 1:04 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Post by Malcolm »

What kind or religion needs a particular "building" in order to be practiced?

Technically speaking none, unless it involves worshiping a building.
So banning a certain architectural style does not persecute a religion, unless that religion has a political or social agenda?

First off, you find me a religion that doesn't have a political or social agenda. & yes, it does. Technically religious don't need icons or symbols to get along. But if you banned images of the Cross of the Star of David, you are indeed persecuting Christians or Jews.
And if a society is free to restrict freedom, are they free to restrict.... undesirables from making political statements or shows of power?

Absolutely. But it makes that state look hypocritical & brainless, especially considering that shoving Jews into ovens & mass graves wasn't enough to make them move. & most certainly they're not free from the criticism, constructive or otherwise, their decisions invite.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Top
thibodeaux
Posts: 8056
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:32 pm

Post by thibodeaux »

Just because I'm mean, here's the Tu Quoque argument.
Top
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54582
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:
Contact GORDON

Post by GORDON »

One of the comments on that page was, "The US should limit the amount of mosques in the US as there are christian churches in Indonesia and Saudi Arabia."

Have been driving a lot this week, and have been paying attention:

Passed many churches, and at least half had no religious symbols or imagery on their buildings at all. The other half had small crosses of the cross/flame thing the methodists use. They must not be very good at worshiping their gods, or something.

Have passed 2 mosques, and I was able to see their minarets from miles away.

On a side note, I don't see what is wrong with a population using a peaceful vote to say "I don't think that fits in with our culture." They don't want the problems of forced marriages, honor killings, etc.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Top
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 54006
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Post by TheCatt »

Banning the buildings doesn't stop the culture.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Top
Malcolm
Posts: 32040
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 1:04 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Post by Malcolm »

GORDON wrote:They don't want the problems of forced marriages, honor killings, etc.
Those all involve people. Buildings are made from concrete, metal, & wood.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Top
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54582
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:
Contact GORDON

Post by GORDON »

And that is what I have been saying from the beginning, and now everyone is on board: banning a building does not persecute a religion.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Top
Post Reply

Return to “General Stuff”