I thought Switzerland was supposed to be this secular and neutral country, what happened?

[DarkThinker]

Link
Muslim community is not that of a bad reputation in Switzerland, why are they being harassed like that? I understand that it's a direct democracy and that if this is voted on Muslims are required to comply and I am for them complying of course. But why are the politicians doing this really?? How is it that if minarets are constructed that means that Islam rules over Switzerland? They already have locations in Switzerland that have minarets how did that create a problem to others? And let's keep in mind, no calls for prayer are sounded from them as that is not allowed there.

IMO, these politicians have an agenda in mind, they want to crack down on Muslims, make them feel subjugated and forced to keep a low profile so that they feel humiliated, then they crack down on them some more, up until some start leaving to other places and the hot headed ones start trouble, and then the politicians will say "AHA we told ya!"

What a shame TBH, legal maybe but in a modern and civilized country like Switzerland I didn't see this coming at all.

 

[Infohawk]

Switzerland's actions are completely justifiable.

I wish the West would have a more balanced approach to Islam. On the one hand, you have people that seem to say, "if muslims want to do it in our countries, let them do it in our countries." Then you have the people that say we need to Crusade against muslims by attacking their countries randomly (Iraq). A more reasonable response is to let muslims stay where they are and leave them alone there. But there's no good reason why Europe has to open its arms to accept a foreign religion and a foreign culture.

Switzerland IS being secular. I'm not sure what you think secular means. Secular doesn't mean impartial and it doesn't mean multicultural.

Furthermore, modern and civilized countries have the tendency to purge themselves of religious nonsense, whether it be Islam or Christianity.

 

[CanOWorms]

Uh oh, you're going to be accused of being racist against Europeans for criticizing a European country.

Your article states what happened.

Members of the right-wing Swiss People's Party, currently the largest party in the Swiss parliament, have launched a campaign to have the building of minarets banned.

This far-right political party dominates politics in Switzerland. Their campaign slogans include "The Swiss are becoming Negores," pictures of immigrants feasting upon the blood of white children, posters with statements of "Our Dear Foreigners" with immigrants behind bars, etc.

Similar things are happening elsewhere in Europe. Where have you been? Living in a cave?

 

[Jaskalas]

They claim the minaret is not necessary for worship, but is rather a symbol of Islamic law, and as such incompatible with Switzerland's legal system.

That?s it? I don?t see the problem with this- the Swiss are doing less than I would. It?s their country, they can do as they see fit to their own land. Immigrants and foreign opinion need not impose upon them in how they make Islam conform.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Switzerland's actions are completely justifiable.

I wish the West would have a more balanced approach to Islam. On the one hand, you have people that seem to say, "if muslims want to do it in our countries, let them do it in our countries." Then you have the people that say we need to Crusade against muslims by attacking their countries randomly (Iraq). A more reasonable response is to let muslims stay where they are and leave them alone there. But there's no good reason why Europe has to open its arms to accept a foreign religion and a foreign culture.

Switzerland IS being secular. I'm not sure what you think secular means. Secular doesn't mean impartial and it doesn't mean multicultural.

Furthermore, modern and civilized countries have the tendency to purge themselves of religious nonsense, whether it be Islam or Christianity.

Well I don't know, that's a pretty fundamental tenet of Western style democracy. As long as you aren't breaking any other laws of the land, who gives a damn what your religion is? The reason banning Islam makes sense to some people is that they've bought into the rhetoric that all of Islam is violent and fascist. Otherwise it would just make sense to outlaw the criminal behavior, which every single western democracy had already done hundreds of years ago. The rest of it is the fearful mob mentality that has led to such great things in the past...it's good to see that some things never change. :roll:

 

[Jaskalas]

Rainsford, should the Swiss draw a few cartoons? If you want to mention mob mentality, you should apply that shoe to the correct foot. :|

 

[babylon5]

Danish Cartoon + Van Gogh Murder created bad PR for their religion in Europe.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: DarkThinker
Link
Muslim community is not that of a bad reputation in Switzerland, why are they being harassed like that? I understand that it's a direct democracy and that if this is voted on Muslims are required to comply and I am for them complying of course. But why are the politicians doing this really?? How is it that if minarets are constructed that means that Islam rules over Switzerland? They already have locations in Switzerland that have minarets how did that create a problem to others? And let's keep in mind, no calls for prayer are sounded from them as that is not allowed there.

IMO, these politicians have an agenda in mind, they want to crack down on Muslims, make them feel subjugated and forced to keep a low profile so that they feel humiliated, then they crack down on them some more, up until some start leaving to other places and the hot headed ones start trouble, and then the politicians will say "AHA we told ya!"

What a shame TBH, legal maybe but in a modern and civilized country like Switzerland I didn't see this coming at all.

They are indeed both secular and neutral. But they have, like Japan, an open policy of maintaining a homogeneous and closed society, making in fact Switzerland one of the two or three hardest countries to immigrate to.

Moreover their immigration policy is integration, not multiculturalism. Immigrants are expected to hit the land running and immediately become Swiss in culture and customs.

Obviously this model cannot work unless you keep immigration to very low levels, and only accept immigrants from countries with a similar culture.

It is obviously a very dumb policy, and one that is very likely to fail.

 

[dahunan]

they should probably open their borders to all the lowest economic class people who neighbor them like America does

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: DarkThinker
Link
Muslim community is not that of a bad reputation in Switzerland, why are they being harassed like that? I understand that it's a direct democracy and that if this is voted on Muslims are required to comply and I am for them complying of course. But why are the politicians doing this really?? How is it that if minarets are constructed that means that Islam rules over Switzerland? They already have locations in Switzerland that have minarets how did that create a problem to others? And let's keep in mind, no calls for prayer are sounded from them as that is not allowed there.

IMO, these politicians have an agenda in mind, they want to crack down on Muslims, make them feel subjugated and forced to keep a low profile so that they feel humiliated, then they crack down on them some more, up until some start leaving to other places and the hot headed ones start trouble, and then the politicians will say "AHA we told ya!"

What a shame TBH, legal maybe but in a modern and civilized country like Switzerland I didn't see this coming at all.

This just further proves that European "liberalism" only extends to their fellow Europeans. Europe as a melting pot is a oxymoron when you think about it.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

It's always a few million bad apples that ruin it for everyone else...

 

[DaveSimmons]

Perhaps they've read about Muslims trying to get sharia law adopted in Canada. Or the Muslims in America wanting to drive cabs and work as grocery clerks but then impose their dietary laws on customers (no transporting wine in cabs, no pork in your shopping cart).

I can understand not wanting to allow a sometimes intolerant and militant religion free reign in your country, knowing its members will attempt to undermine your own freedoms because they "offend Islam."

Note that I don't agree with fundamentalst Christians doing so either, such as pharmacists deciding that emergency contraceptives offend God so women who need them can just go try finding another store.

 

[chcarnage]

The BBC is a bit late, the collection of signatures for the no minarets initiative has begun three months ago. Will the initiators collect the required 100'000 signatures? Probably yes. Will the people vote for or against the initiative? Probably against, the multiculturalists on the left and the liberals from center and right outnumber the voters of the conservative right. I hate how the BBC and other international media talk about the "largest party in the Swiss parliament" and never mention that they got 26.7% of the votes, something not self-explaining for readers from the UK, US or Australia.

The two parties behind the no minarets initiative represent 28% of the electorate and they're doing this to massage the anti-immigration reflex of their voters. Of course it would be a coup if the initiative came through but this is so unlikely that it can't be the main reason for their effort.

The muslims of Switzerland on the other hand lack public relation efforts, they are not well-organised and it's only natural of their neighbors to wonder who needs a minaret for what, because until recently there weren't many applications for building some.

I for one agree agree with a letter to the editor that I've recently read: We shouldn't care about minarets, but about what the muslims preach inside the mosques.


While it is true that it is expected that immigrants adapt to national customs, it's not a monoculture here... People immigrate because they are skilled workers, married to a Swiss, or refugees with a residence permit... For the remote possibility that somebody buys CanOWorms' lies: No, the Swiss People's Party doesn't "dominate" Swiss politics, he made up two of their alleged campaign sujets and deliberately misinterpreted the third. I've explained it to him in the past but it was a waste of letters.

 

[Dashel]

Originally posted by: babylon5
Danish Cartoon + Van Gogh Murder created bad PR for their religion in Europe.

:thumbsup:

Among other things. If Muslims dont want to assimilate, they will be in for a hard time. Western nations generally dont accept cultures openly hostile to their own. At least, they dont if they are wise.

 

[DarkThinker]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: DarkThinker
Link
Muslim community is not that of a bad reputation in Switzerland, why are they being harassed like that? I understand that it's a direct democracy and that if this is voted on Muslims are required to comply and I am for them complying of course. But why are the politicians doing this really?? How is it that if minarets are constructed that means that Islam rules over Switzerland? They already have locations in Switzerland that have minarets how did that create a problem to others? And let's keep in mind, no calls for prayer are sounded from them as that is not allowed there.

IMO, these politicians have an agenda in mind, they want to crack down on Muslims, make them feel subjugated and forced to keep a low profile so that they feel humiliated, then they crack down on them some more, up until some start leaving to other places and the hot headed ones start trouble, and then the politicians will say "AHA we told ya!"

What a shame TBH, legal maybe but in a modern and civilized country like Switzerland I didn't see this coming at all.

This just further proves that European "liberalism" only extends to their fellow Europeans. Europe as a melting pot is a oxymoron when you think about it.

That's what I have concluded over time. And for those of you who are saying "Hey, Switzerland is a secular country blah blah blah", well that's great and all but last time I checked, secular meant that the government didn't uphold a religious doctrine nor identity and shall not support one religion over the other, it didn't and doesn't mean religion and it's symbolisms are abolished wherever they are found! But let's assume that the last statement is true. Then why don't I see them cracking down on churches in Switzerland, especially those with nice high bell towers?? It's hypocrisy at best.

If a Muslim/Arabic country cracked down on churches like that, all hell would break loose, debates about intolerance and so forth. But in Switzerland, this is viewed by many here as , "Meh, they are secular.".

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: chcarnage

For the remote possibility that somebody buys CanOWorms' lies: No, the Swiss People's Party doesn't "dominate" Swiss politics, he made up two of their alleged campaign sujets and deliberately misinterpreted the third. I've explained it to him in the past but it was a waste of letters.

Please stop spreading your lies. The Swiss People's Party is the most popular political party in Switzerland. They have heinous campaign slogans and posters. You only need to do a simple Google search on the quotes to find numerous articles regarding the slogans.

The Swiss People's Party is just another example of an ultra far-right party becoming the mainstream in Europe.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Perhaps they've read about Muslims trying to get sharia law adopted in Canada. Or the Muslims in America wanting to drive cabs and work as grocery clerks but then impose their dietary laws on customers (no transporting wine in cabs, no pork in your shopping cart).

I can understand not wanting to allow a sometimes intolerant and militant religion free reign in your country, knowing its members will attempt to undermine your own freedoms because they "offend Islam."

Note that I don't agree with fundamentalst Christians doing so either, such as pharmacists deciding that emergency contraceptives offend God so women who need them can just go try finding another store.

If a Muslim wants to run a grocery store or taxi service with these rules in place, good for him. I can take my money to another store/service if I want to have these things. That's how capitalism works. Same thing with the EC pill thing in pharmacies. If the company doesn't fire such employees, then you can voice your displeasure by taking your money elsewhere. You can't legislate 'tolerance', if that's what you want to call it, but you can just about ensure that 'intolerance' doesn't affect you by simply going elsewhere.

 

[slash196]

I love the BBC.

"Many Swiss think minarets have no place on their urban skylines"

*insert picture of church steeples on skyline*

 

[dahunan]

Just wait until they do the call to prayer 5 or 6 times per day or whatever it is

 

[DaveSimmons]

The problem is when people claim the right to impose their relgious laws on others while they work for someone else, not while running their own business. You can't fire them, because then you're "violating their civil rights" or "discriminating against them."

I wouldn't expect to find emergency contraceptives at Saint Mary's Pharmacy of Goodness, or a pork sandwhich at Mohammed's Halal Grocery. But for a clerk at Wal-Mart or a major grocery store chain to be allowed to refuse to sell products carried by the store because it's against their beliefs is using society's tolerance against itself.

The loudly praying activist Imams on that plane flight was another attempt to use our tolerance against us: create a disturbance, have it stopped, sue.

I have no problem at all with people practicing any religion they choose, or using any set of rules they like in their own business. I'm wary of attempts to coerce me into following their beliefs just because not doing so will offend them.

 

[bsobel]

If a Muslim wants to run a grocery store or taxi service with these rules in place, good for him. I can take my money to another store/service if I want to have these things. That's how capitalism works. Same thing with the EC pill thing in pharmacies. If the company doesn't fire such employees, then you can voice your displeasure by taking your money elsewhere. You can't legislate 'tolerance', if that's what you want to call it, but you can just about ensure that 'intolerance' doesn't affect you by simply going elsewhere.

But what happens when, say 95% of the taxi drivers are muslim and they all inforce this. How can you realistically go somewhere else?

Or what about in the EU where after two more generations of breeding (or so), muslims will become the majority in many areas, which means they will become the majority in government. This is the trend and this is what many of these countries are pushing back against.

(Not to be flame bait, but this war has been going on for over a thousand years. This is nothing new. There's a reason our own history has conflict with Islam back to te founding of our country. There is a reason the that Marine hymm mentioned 'to the shores of Tripoli", There is a reason many europeen countries fear for their existance in 50 years.... )

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Switzerland's actions are completely justifiable.

I wish the West would have a more balanced approach to Islam. On the one hand, you have people that seem to say, "if muslims want to do it in our countries, let them do it in our countries." Then you have the people that say we need to Crusade against muslims by attacking their countries randomly (Iraq). A more reasonable response is to let muslims stay where they are and leave them alone there. But there's no good reason why Europe has to open its arms to accept a foreign religion and a foreign culture.

Switzerland IS being secular. I'm not sure what you think secular means. Secular doesn't mean impartial and it doesn't mean multicultural.

Furthermore, modern and civilized countries have the tendency to purge themselves of religious nonsense, whether it be Islam or Christianity.

Favoring one religious group over another is an example of a secular government? Please expand upon this logic, I wish to hear more...

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: bsobel
But what happens when, say 95% of the taxi drivers are muslim and they all inforce this. How can you realistically go somewhere else?

What would you do if you think Intel and AMD are charging too much for their CPUs? Suck it up and pay it or develop your own company that sells CPUs for cheaper.

Or what about in the EU where after two more generations of breeding (or so), muslims will become the majority in many areas, which means they will become the majority in government. This is the trend and this is what many of these countries are pushing back against.

So they're trying to keep Muslims out of power even when they're the majority? Why is that a meritorious goal? There are a couple legitimate approaches that they could take, including:
1. increasing the birth rate of the non-Muslim population (effectively preventing Muslims from becoming the majority)
2. legislate a maximum number of offspring per household (decreasing the rate of Muslim population growth)

Whether either of these is ethical is certainly debatable, but I don't see how anyone could argue that keeping Muslims out of power simply because they are Muslims is a laudable solution.

 

[DarkThinker]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: bsobel
But what happens when, say 95% of the taxi drivers are muslim and they all inforce this. How can you realistically go somewhere else?

What would you do if you think Intel and AMD are charging too much for their CPUs? Suck it up and pay it or develop your own company that sells CPUs for cheaper.

Or what about in the EU where after two more generations of breeding (or so), muslims will become the majority in many areas, which means they will become the majority in government. This is the trend and this is what many of these countries are pushing back against.

So they're trying to keep Muslims out of power even when they're the majority? Why is that a meritorious goal? There are a couple legitimate approaches that they could take, including:
1. increasing the birth rate of the non-Muslim population (effectively preventing Muslims from becoming the majority)
2. legislate a maximum number of offspring per household (decreasing the rate of Muslim population growth)

Whether either of these is ethical is certainly debatable, but I don't see how anyone could argue that keeping Muslims out of power simply because they are Muslims is a laudable solution.

I doubt many here would be able to decrypt what you posted, as it was encrypted with reason!

 

[bsobel]

What would you do if you think Intel and AMD are charging too much for their CPUs? Suck it up and pay it or develop your own company that sells CPUs for cheaper.

What is Intel and AMD decided that if you eat pork you can't have a CPU and there realistically isn't any way to start a compeition. Should that be allowed?

Whether either of these is ethical is certainly debatable, but I don't see how anyone could argue that keeping Muslims out of power simply because they are Muslims is a laudable solution.

In that case I'd suggest a math class and eat any bacon you might want to now why you still can Many people do feel it's laudable, and the reason is not because of the race of the new majority, its the clear direction and rules of law that majority would enact on those today who enjoy various freedoms.

I presume, from your post, that if muslims became a majority in the US *and* voted to enact various islamic laws, you are ok with that?