57% of the Swiss voters have voted in favour of banning the construction of minarettes in Switzerland. The whole debacle started when the Swiss People's Party filed a petition demanding a referendum to decide on the matter. According to them the building of minarettes symbolizes a claim to political and religious power by the Islamic minority. About 400 000 of the country's 7.5 million citizens are muslims and about 1/8 of them are practising muslims.

So what do you people think about the matter? It makes me a bit nervous for the future of human rights, but I can really understand that the Europeans are getting sick of Asian minorities changing their societies and raising the poverty and unemployment, and therefore also the crime-rate, level.

Well I think this is just lame. I assume Switzerland is a land with freedom of religion and banning the building of what basically is a church is kind of pissing on it. We have the same deal in the Denmark. The "youth" part of Danish People's Party put of posters saying we should stop the constuction of a minaret. They even said they recieved money from the terror state of Iran, which is just lying.

i.e Intolerante people are intolerante....

We had a similar thing near me; the BNP (read: the racist idiot party) began a campaign to prevent a minarette construction. In truth I think its a little silly; assuming they're constructed properly, they can often be beautiful buildings and in time may be visited like a cathedral is today. Surely as much as a symbol of the Muslim populace its also a symbol of demonstrating co-inhabitation with other religions? But i'm not really one to speak on the matter. Being atheist and having spent three years living in a city with more Muslim than Christian citizens has probably swayed my opinion

On the one hand, I agree with you guys. I'm probably one of the most liberal people hereabouts and shudder at the though of one group being excluded from their right to religious practice. But the thing is, a line must must be drawn somewhere. It probably sounds a bit biased, but there have to be limits to how immigrants can change a society. When I was in Germany, a guy told me a town near them (can't remember the name, but it's in former East-Germany) now has a 50% Turkish population. In the bloody centre of Europe. These areas are also more prone to high crime rates and poverty. And in Cologne, they now want to build a Mosque that will be competeing with the Kölner Dom for the position of most imposing building in the skylight. Maybe that's religious tolerance, but maybe it really is going a little too far.

I have mixed feelings on the issue. As a libertarian and someone who supports civil rights, I feel that the government should not be allowed to interfere in religious matters, and in fact ought to protect the rights of the minority against "the tyranny of the majority" as John Stuart Mill describes it.
On the other hand, minarets are used for calling Muslims to prayer, which if done publicly may be a disturbance along the lines of 'noise pollution' to non-Muslims, especially if done after sundown. If the minarets not used for this religious purpose, however, then they are not fulfilling a religious purpose, so it could be argued that their construction would not be protected under freedom of religion.
I guess the sensible thing would be for the Muslim communities of Europe to do without minarets on their mosques if they wish to avoid further antagonizing the Europeans in whose country they're living. After all, it's not like they're not being allowed to build mosques where they can worship, and building minarets seems to me a bit like flaunting their faith, and nobody likes being proselytized.

Christoff Odendaal wrote:

On the one hand, I agree with you guys. I'm probably one of the most liberal people hereabouts and shudder at the though of one group being excluded from their right to religious practice. But the thing is, a line must must be drawn somewhere. It probably sounds a bit biased, but there have to be limits to how immigrants can change a society. When I was in Germany, a guy told me a town near them (can't remember the name, but it's in former East-Germany) now has a 50% Turkish population. In the bloody centre of Europe. These areas are also more prone to high crime rates and poverty. And in Cologne, they now want to build a Mosque that will be competeing with the Kölner Dom for the position of most imposing building in the skylight. Maybe that's religious tolerance, but maybe it really is going a little too far.

It's kinda funny that Berlin now has the 2nd largest Turkish population of any city in the world (only Istanbul has a larger population of Turks).

And building a mosque larger than the Koelner Dom is just a slap in the face to non-Muslim Germans.

I too am split on this. While I have no problem with people practicing whichever religion they want, it's somewhat sad to know that years down the road, every city will lose its uniqueness.

Maybe I'm going a bit far and it may not get as melded together as I think, but it seems as though every culture is bleeding over into every other culture and slowly taking away an areas unique qualities.

I can see both sides. But I am more on the side of the country. I live in Los Angeles which other than New York is on of the biggest melting pots of a city that exist. There are parts of town where finding something in english is almost impossible. Where speaking english is met with not understanding and questions as to wether you speak their language. There are store fronts written entirely in some Asian language. That to me screams if you can't read you don't belong. Now some might say that America did it for years to those who were not white. While there is no doubt about this. Two wrongs don't make a right. Having places like Little Tokyo and Little Ethopia are things I don't get. You are free to have your culture and religion. But once you have entered another country you should do your best to assimilate to what is around you without making that country assimilate to you. I can see where this country could see this as a take over by outsiders. This time with chapels instead of swords and blood shed. I have a feeling though it may turn into that and the other side will never see where this country is coming from.

Well, @ Chris, what about Muslims that are already from Switzerland ? how are they immigrants or outsiders ? I dont think they should be labeled so due to embracing Islam.

On topic; I can see what people feel by not wanting to hear minarettes, but it's really not that much of a noise pollution, it's just a man calling out for praying and it usually lasts less than a minute. So, I dont think Muslims in Switzerland should be deprived of that right to hear the calling to prayer. But according to " building of minarettes symbolizes claim to political and religious power by the Islamic minority" Noise pollution isnt the problem, it's more of the Swiss government feeling the number of Muslims is increasing and that made them apparently worried ? why the hell would muslims want political and religious powers in Switzerland ? IMO that reason is bull and too biased. People just want to practice their religion, and the government thought they wanted to overule them ? I disagree with that take on things tbh.

Mostafa wrote:

On topic; I can see what people feel by not wanting to hear minarettes, but it's really not that much of a noise pollution, it's just a man calling out for praying and it usually lasts less than a minute. So, I dont think Muslims in Switzerland should be deprived of that right to hear the calling to prayer. But according to " building of minarettes symbolizes claim to political and religious power by the Islamic minority" Noise pollution isnt the problem, it's more of the Swiss government feeling the number of Muslims is increasing and that made them apparently worried ? why the hell would muslims want political and religious powers in Switzerland ? IMO that reason is bull and too biased. People just want to practice their religion, and the government thought they wanted to overule them ? I disagree with that take on things tbh.

Well, I understand where you're coming from, but it is too precarious a matter to simply say: people want to practise their religion and we should let them. It has become a cultural and political battle as much as a religious one. If you take the fact that 400 000 muslims are currently living in the country that has a population of 7.5 million. That's more than 5% of the population. In Switzerland - the dead centre of Europe. I can fully grasp why they feel a bit threatened. Look at it like this: if Cairo suddenly started overflowing with white Christian people that ring their church-bells on Sundays for all to hear; form gangs and cliques that exclude and/or even assult native Egyptians; started creating their own "areas" and Europeanizing it; and were the group who is statistically more criminally active (by far) than any other - would you not feel a bit threatened by them? It's not so much about not tolerating the Muslims as it is about fearing that they (the Swiss) are losing control over their own country. Slowly, but surely.

In any case, the majority of the Swiss population has spoken and the further construction of minarettes is now prohibited. There are already 4 in the country, but there will be no more. All we can do now is to watch and see what happens...

@ Andrew:

Had no idea that Berlin had that many Turks. It's a bit scary, really.

Interestingly enough (and I think you should read this as well, Mostafa) the ringing of the bells on minarets is already illegal in Switzerland due to air-pollution laws. So they're basically reduced to just monuments.

Christoff Odendaal wrote:

Mostafa wrote:

On topic; I can see what people feel by not wanting to hear minarettes, but it's really not that much of a noise pollution, it's just a man calling out for praying and it usually lasts less than a minute. So, I dont think Muslims in Switzerland should be deprived of that right to hear the calling to prayer. But according to " building of minarettes symbolizes claim to political and religious power by the Islamic minority" Noise pollution isnt the problem, it's more of the Swiss government feeling the number of Muslims is increasing and that made them apparently worried ? why the hell would muslims want political and religious powers in Switzerland ? IMO that reason is bull and too biased. People just want to practice their religion, and the government thought they wanted to overule them ? I disagree with that take on things tbh.

Well, I understand where you're coming from, but it is too precarious a matter to simply say: people want to practise their religion and we should let them. It has become a cultural and political battle as much as a religious one. If you take the fact that 400 000 muslims are currently living in the country that has a population of 7.5 million. That's more than 5% of the population. In Switzerland - the dead centre of Europe. I can fully grasp why they feel a bit threatened. Look at it like this: if Cairo suddenly started overflowing with white Christian people that ring their church-bells on Sundays for all to hear; form gangs and cliques that exclude and/or even assult native Egyptians; started creating their own "areas" and Europeanizing it; and were the group who is statistically more criminally active (by far) than any other - would you not feel a bit threatened by them? It's not so much about not tolerating the Muslims as it is about fearing that they (the Swiss) are losing control over their own country. Slowly, but surely.

In any case, the majority of the Swiss population has spoken and the further construction of minarettes is now prohibited. There are already 4 in the country, but there will be no more. All we can do now is to watch and see what happens...

Why ? Why has it become a battle to practice one's religion ? as long as they're not trying to force it on anyone else.. And what made you believe that Muslims in Switzerland are forming gangs and attacking anyone ? are they actually doing so or are you assuming ? and Egypt does have a good deal of Chrisitans practicing their religion freely, surely they're not as much as Muslims but they do co-exist with Muslims. Crime should be treated with the same punishment regardless of the religion, dont you think ? I dont see how people chaning their beliefs and faith is loosing control over country.. If so, then all non Muslim countries should surpress their citizens from changing their religion, and vice versa.

I heard about this yesterday and it disgusts me. That said I'm not at all surprised, Switzerland is on of the xenophobic societies on the planet. It makes me wonder why western countries are so afraid of Islam. Swiss Muslims are not trying to take over the society, and are mostly descended from Kosovo and Turkey. These people are Europeans in every sense of the word, who just happen to be Muslims. Allowing minarets to be built doesn't mean that Switzerland will suddenly become a fundamentalist Islamic country. This whole thing is nothing but xenophobia. One thing I love about living in the USA is the multi-cultural nature of the society, there are Mosques, Synagogues, and Churches in the town I live and I find that something to be admired.

Mostafa, I think you're missing the argument, which is a legitimate one that has nothing to do with religion.

Let me tell you the tale of Brussels (Belgium). It was amongst the first to practice what they preached, and held arms open wide to anyone who wanted to live there, but the people moving didn't integrate with the culture, they dominated it. They didn't learn the local language, they would instead segregate themselves into specific areas where nobody spoke anything but their native tongue. They would build mosques in place of churches, sell food from their homeland and so forth. They didn't come to Belgium because they wanted to live there, they moved because they no longer wanted to live in their own homeland. They had no intention of respecting the countries own heritage, they ignored it and brought a slice of their own homeland with them. Tensions have risen as a result, and more and more local people have left, and as a result over 1/4 of the population are Muslim, almost all of which have arrived within the past decade.

The argument isn't about denying anyone the right to choose their religion, its about refusing to integrate with society, and destroying a country's national identity as a result.

Rosalind wrote:

Mostafa, I think you're missing the argument, which is a legitimate one that has nothing to do with religion.

Let me tell you the tale of Brussels (Belgium). It was amongst the first to practice what they preached, and held arms open wide to anyone who wanted to live there, but the people moving didn't integrate with the culture, they dominated it. They didn't learn the local language, they would instead segregate themselves into specific areas where nobody spoke anything but their native tongue. They would build mosques in place of churches, sell food from their homeland and so forth. They didn't come to Belgium because they wanted to live there, they moved because they no longer wanted to live in their own homeland. They had no intention of respecting the countries own heritage, they ignored it and brought a slice of their own homeland with them. Tensions have risen as a result, and more and more local people have left, and as a result over 1/4 of the population are Muslim, almost all of which have arrived within the past decade.

The argument isn't about denying anyone the right to choose their religion, its about refusing to integrate with society, and destroying a country's national identity as a result.

I actually am noticing this has nothing to do with religion. But as Geoff said, alot of Switzerland Muslism are from the country, and I'am not aware of them or even Muslims from other cuntries trying to disrespect the country's heritage in anyway. But if that's the case, then steps should be taken indeed, keeping their own cultural identies is one thing, but dissing the country where they're currently living in is something else. Note I'am saying Dissing, I see no problem in immigrants settling there with full respect to the countrie's heritage and culture, but just choosing to maintain there's.

Mostafa wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

Mostafa, I think you're missing the argument, which is a legitimate one that has nothing to do with religion.

Let me tell you the tale of Brussels (Belgium). It was amongst the first to practice what they preached, and held arms open wide to anyone who wanted to live there, but the people moving didn't integrate with the culture, they dominated it. They didn't learn the local language, they would instead segregate themselves into specific areas where nobody spoke anything but their native tongue. They would build mosques in place of churches, sell food from their homeland and so forth. They didn't come to Belgium because they wanted to live there, they moved because they no longer wanted to live in their own homeland. They had no intention of respecting the countries own heritage, they ignored it and brought a slice of their own homeland with them. Tensions have risen as a result, and more and more local people have left, and as a result over 1/4 of the population are Muslim, almost all of which have arrived within the past decade.

The argument isn't about denying anyone the right to choose their religion, its about refusing to integrate with society, and destroying a country's national identity as a result.

I actually am noticing this has nothing to do with religion. But as Geoff said, alot of Switzerland Muslism are from the country, and I'am not aware of them or even Muslims from other cuntries trying to disrespect the country's heritage in anyway. But if that's the case, then steps should be taken indeed, keeping their own cultural identies is one thing, but dissing the country where they're currently living in is something else. Note I'am saying Dissing, I see no problem in immigrants settling there with full respect to the countrie's heritage and culture, but just choosing to maintain there's.

But its finding the cut-off point. I don't agree with forcing anyone to abandon their own beliefs, but neither do I think you should move to another country and not even expect to learn a word of the local tongue.

I surely agree, you should try to adapt yourself to that country's habits as possible, without abandoning yours nor your beliefs. Saying otherwise would be foly. But I dont think building minarttes is pissing on the country's beliefs, habits in anyway.

Why should immigrants have to adapt to a country's culture? I'm all for people not wanting to learn English when they move here. Of course this is in theory, in practical matters it only makes sense to adapt at least somewhat. But I disagree that people should be forced to adapt.

son_ov_hades wrote:

Why should immigrants have to adapt to a country's culture? I'm all for people not wanting to learn English when they move here. Of course this is in theory, in practical matters it only makes sense to adapt at least somewhat. But I disagree that people should be forced to adapt.

How about respect for that country? I speak of America of course. I mean there is a reason that you have come to America. The reason is your home country is obviously not giving you the opportunities that America, or what ever country you have chosen, is giving to you. Keep your religion. Keep your heritage. But when you become a legal citizen of another country, your country of origin is second. People unwilling to adapt but still using the country for all that it offers, are having there cake and eating also. There was a time in America's past that becoming an American and assimilating to the surroundings and speaking the language was something people were proud to do. They never forgot where they came from. But they remembered why they were afforded the freedoms to continue practicing their culture and religion. Now people don't bother to learn the language because we pander to them. Why should a DMV test be in 15 different languages? The road signs or only in one. How far would I get in many of the non-english speaking countries if I chose to live there? I would say not too far. Just show respect for the country you have chosen to reside in.

@ Mostafa: Like Bawden said, it's not so much about religion itself, but rather the principle of hundreds of thousands of immigrants that are economically and socially crippling the society. Do you know that in Switzerland you get medical aid for free? Now, with immigration, there are 400 000 more people to give free medical aid to. The same goes for other forms of social care, like providing electricity, food, water etc. And the fact that minority groups form gangs and are generally more prone to crime than others is a fact, not my opinion. But I still feel strongly that the banning of minarets is both a big mistake and an atrocious disregard of basic human rights. There has to be a better solution that this. But a whole lot of shit is going down in this regard - even the Vatican has condemned Switzerland for the decision.

@ Geoff: Why should people adapt? A heterogeneous society is just that much harder to manage and if you are willing to take the opportunities and privileges a country offers you, you must also be willing to adapt to its rules and customs. Again, I'm not saying people should give up their heritage completely but by not even learning their language you're unnecessarily complicating things for them and for yourself. I truly believe a level of conformity in necessary for a successful society. If you don't want to adapt, you must not go to a place where it will be required of you to do so.

son_ov_hades wrote:

Why should immigrants have to adapt to a country's culture? I'm all for people not wanting to learn English when they move here. Of course this is in theory, in practical matters it only makes sense to adapt at least somewhat. But I disagree that people should be forced to adapt.

Depends how you define adapt to a country's culture Geoff. The way I see it is : an American or European moving here cant walk in un-decent cloths exposing part of one's body, that's a No proplem out there but here it is, hell I hear they have an all naked day in Germany I think. It goes other way around, a Muslim cant walk around in Europe telling every girl he meets she shouldnt expose that much of her body, see my point ? But to say they should do as the country's inhabitants do is not what I meant nor believe in. I too disagree someone should be forced to adapt..

Quote :

How about respect for that country? I speak of America of course. I mean there is a reason that you have come to America. The reason is your home country is obviously not giving you the opportunities that America, or what ever country you have chosen, is giving to you. Keep your religion. Keep your heritage. But when you become a legal citizen of another country, your country of origin is second. People unwilling to adapt but still using the country for all that it offers, are having there cake and eating also. There was a time in America's past that becoming an American and assimilating to the surroundings and speaking the language was something people were proud to do. They never forgot where they came from. But they remembered why they were afforded the freedoms to continue practicing their culture and religion. Now people don't bother to learn the language because we pander to them. Why should a DMV test be in 15 different languages? The road signs or only in one. How far would I get in many of the non-english speaking countries if I chose to live there? I would say not too far. Just show respect for the country you have chosen to reside in.

Why should people have to speak English? There is no official language in this country so people can speak whatever they please. This idea of "becoming American" is very problematic. Who defines what it means to be American? How far does this go? in the past it meant not only speaking English, but also being white and Christian.

Quote :

@ Geoff: Why should people adapt? A heterogeneous society is just that much harder to manage and if you are willing to take the opportunities and privileges a country offers you, you must also be willing to adapt to its rules and customs. Again, I'm not saying people should give up their heritage completely but by not even learning their language you're unnecessarily complicating things for them and for yourself. I truly believe a level of conformity in necessary for a successful society. If you don't want to adapt, you must not go to a place where it will be required of you to do so.

I agree that a heterogeneous society is easier to manage, note that I said in all practicality at least some adaptation is logical. The issue comes from people being forced to adapt, which by it's very nature is going to dictate how people are allowed to live their lives. This is inherently wrong imo.

Quote :

Depends how you define adapt to a country's culture Geoff. The way I see it is : an American or European moving here cant walk in un-decent cloths exposing part of one's body, that's a No proplem out there but here it is, hell I hear they have an all naked day in Germany I think. It goes other way around, a Muslim cant walk around in Europe telling every girl he meets she shouldnt expose that much of her body, see my point ? But to say they should do as the country's inhabitants do is not what I meant nor believe in. I too disagree someone should be forced to adapt..

Oh I agree completely, complying with a country's laws and mores is not what I meant. I meant forcing people to adapt culturally and personally. For example, if I moved to Egypt and was forced to speak Arabic, convert to Islam, etc.

Mostafa wrote:

son_ov_hades wrote:

Why should immigrants have to adapt to a country's culture? I'm all for people not wanting to learn English when they move here. Of course this is in theory, in practical matters it only makes sense to adapt at least somewhat. But I disagree that people should be forced to adapt.

Depends how you define adapt to a country's culture Geoff. The way I see it is : an American or European moving here cant walk in un-decent cloths exposing part of one's body, that's a No proplem out there but here it is, hell I hear they have an all naked day in Germany I think. It goes other way around, a Muslim cant walk around in Europe telling every girl he meets she shouldnt expose that much of her body, see my point ? But to say they should do as the country's inhabitants do is not what I meant nor believe in. I too disagree someone should be forced to adapt..

Mostafa: Theres a few examples of mass-nudism tbh. Theres the World Naked Bike Ride (NSFW) which is spread across like, two dozen countries or something for example, and a number of smaller nudist resorts, beaches and camps. Somehow, I can't see something like this existing near you

Geoff: If I moved to Egypt I'd want to learn to speak Arabic, i'd want to learn the local customs because it would ultimately be disrespectful of me to expect others to go out of their way to accommodate me. I wouldn't be a tourist any more, I wouldn't want to stick out as an ignorant foreigner, I'd want to be a part of the country. If I didn't, why the hell would I move there? Its just a big slap in the face to turn around and point blank refuse to learn a word of the local language, learn any of the local history or customs or take any interest in my new chosen home. I'm not so insecure that I'd fear of losing my own identity, and despite it being unlikely that they'll sway my views too much that doesn't stop me from respecting theirs. I find people are far more accommodating when you demonstrate that you actually care enough to learn a few basic words, even if you're a tourist and pronounce everything horribly wrong, because it demonstrates a willing to learn and compromise.

son_ov_hades wrote:

Quote :

How about respect for that country? I speak of America of course. I mean there is a reason that you have come to America. The reason is your home country is obviously not giving you the opportunities that America, or what ever country you have chosen, is giving to you. Keep your religion. Keep your heritage. But when you become a legal citizen of another country, your country of origin is second. People unwilling to adapt but still using the country for all that it offers, are having there cake and eating also. There was a time in America's past that becoming an American and assimilating to the surroundings and speaking the language was something people were proud to do. They never forgot where they came from. But they remembered why they were afforded the freedoms to continue practicing their culture and religion. Now people don't bother to learn the language because we pander to them. Why should a DMV test be in 15 different languages? The road signs or only in one. How far would I get in many of the non-english speaking countries if I chose to live there? I would say not too far. Just show respect for the country you have chosen to reside in.

Why should people have to speak English? There is no official language in this country so people can speak whatever they please. This idea of "becoming American" is very problematic. Who defines what it means to be American? How far does this go? in the past it meant not only speaking English, but also being white and Christian.

I think speaking the language that is predominantly used(in this case English)is all I am asking, and I don't think that is asking a lot. As I said you can keep your culture and religion. The idea of becoming American is not problematic. Simply speaking the language so that the lines of communication are better is not a bad thing and is all I am really asking. No where did I speak of only white and christian. Those that think that are of the minority(though not entirely gone unfortunately). If I moved to Mexico speaking no Spanish as I don't know the language. Could I prosper the way non english speaking Mexicans do here in America? I highly doubt it. Again there is a reason they came here, and it ain't for the weather. They coe here for opportunities their country does not afford them. I say welcome. Come in legally and learn the language. All I ask is work hard, pay your taxes, don't cause trouble, and speak the language of the land you live in to better communicate with it's citizens. This is how a nation stays strong. Not by shutting itself into separate corners where only certain people can live together. Is that any better than white only drinking fountains? Just because mistakes were made in the past does not mean we should allow anything out of guilt.