This week-end the Swiss people have voted to decide whether Muslim minarets should be banned in this country or not.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8384835.stm

Quote: The proposal is backed by the Swiss People's Party (SVP), the largest party in parliament, which claims minarets are a sign of Islamisation. Opponents say a ban would discriminate, and that the campaign has stirred hatred. The government opposes a ban.

First results show that the ban will be accepted by a majority of voters (about 55-60%).

What do you think? Is this entire thing discriminating, or will it set an example for other European countries? What surprises me are the positive reactions coming from other countries. Did Switzerland just break a taboo, or will we be treated as if we were *the* discriminating country?

For the record, I voted blank - I have weighed the pros and cons, and couldn't decide which were more important. On one side, I'm all for religious freedom. On the other side, I'm afraid that a minaret would also attract the Muezzin, singing his call to prayer, which is something I'd rather not hear.

France did it with veils, so it's a little unsurprising. I don't see why people have such a problem about it - there are no churches in the Middle East (or at least in the strictly muslim countries) and they have no problem with it.

Personally, although I'm not Swiss, I back this idea. I'm all for new culture and all that, but there's got to be a limit somewhere on preserving your own countries culture and religion.

Quoting Ajd1992 (Reply 1): but there's got to be a limit somewhere on preserving your own countries culture and religion.

I'd go along with that.

I don't understand the need for a minaret anyway as they don't use them anymore to call people to prayer.It's just a symbol.I'm sure not every church has a bell tower.

The final results are out: 58% have voted to ban the minarets.

Source (German)

What strikes me is that almost everyone (90%) of the people I know says they voted against the initiative (ie. they voted against the ban), but yet 58% voted for the ban according to official results (even 68% in the area where I live). This either means people don't have the guts to express their opinion in public, or that I know an unrepresentative statistics sample of people.

The only thing that surprised me was that the vote turned out to be so clear. I was expecting a much closer decision.

Quoting ManuCH (Thread starter): Is this entire thing discriminating

Nope. IMO it would have been discriminatory if they had banned the practicing of Islam. They've been practicing their religion without any problems for a long time now, why the sudden need of minarets?

Quoting ManuCH (Thread starter): or will it set an example for other European countries?

Not only Europe, but most likely all across the Western World

Quoting ManuCH (Thread starter): What surprises me are the positive reactions coming from other countries. Did Switzerland just break a taboo, or will we be treated as if we were *the* discriminating country?

IMO, Swiss voters just showed some balls today. They said what other's wouldn't have dared to mention in other countries out of fear to being labled a "racist" or whatever term opponents come up with these days. Will the country be in the global spotlight due to this issue? Perhaps in the short term, but in the long run, absolutely not. In a six months time, no one will be talking about the result of today's vote.

in the end today's decision just fortifies the message, that if you come to this country, you will have to adapt and not the other way around. Tolerence can only go so far. Don't like it, get out!

Quoting ManuCH (Reply 3): What strikes me is that almost everyone (90%) of the people I know says they voted against the initiative (ie. they voted against the ban), but yet 58% voted for the ban according to official results (even 68% in the area where I live).

Quoting ManuCH (Reply 3): This either means people don't have the guts to express their opinion in public

  

It's exactly that, many people don't have the guts to voice their REAL opinion out loud.

This is about a ban of high visibility symbols of a religion alien to a christian-orientated part of the world. What comes after the erection of minarets, Muezzins at loudspeakers shouting out Allahu Akhbar? This is not about a ban against mosques as such or even against Islam. Its not Anti-Islam, its pro Christian Europe. In this sense I´m ok with the vote. Otherwise I would say lets build a gothic cathedral in Tehran for a change.

I would personally allow few mosques (with minaretes) in cities like Zurich, Geneva or Basel while no for smallew towns and villages.
What is the law for other European countries?

Good for the Swiss people. I am glad that they stood up for their rights. Anyone who has ever lived near a minaret knows how annoying it is to hear the call to prayer five times a day. It all comes down to the fact that the minarets are disturbing the peace, not that Islam is a bad religion.

Quoting ManuCH (Thread starter): Did Switzerland just break a taboo, or will we be treated as if we were *the* discriminating country?

If the ban is indeed adopted, the culturally suicidal multikulti lefties (always ready to bent backward to blank check accomodate whatever ridiculous minority demand pops up yet unwilling to agree that certain things are part of country's and in a broader sense European identity and certain are simply not) will villify Switzerland, no doubt about that.
Anyway, congratulations to Switzerland for standing up for its own identity.

Quoting Ajd1992 (Reply 1): I don't see why people have such a problem about it - there are no churches in the Middle East (or at least in the strictly muslim countries) and they have no problem with it.

The significant difference is that the Swiss ban in question is on minarets, not mosques as such.
If we ignore the religious aspect which makes the issue so sensitive, I don't see anything wrong about allowing place of worship (there are several hundreds of them in Switzerland alone according to the news) yet preventing the skylines of European cities to be polluted with culturally and architecturally inferior objects.

Quoting Babybus (Reply 2): It's just a symbol.I'm sure not every church has a bell tower.

And if it does they do not ring all the time anymore since there is no need for it, as people in 21st century tend to have their own watches. Analogically there is no need for muezzin to scream all over the city 5 times a day.

Quoting ManuCH (Thread starter): First results show that the ban will be accepted by a majority of voters (about 55-60%). What do you think? Is this entire thing discriminating, or will it set an example for other European countries? What surprises me are the positive reactions coming from other countries. Did Switzerland just break a taboo, or will we be treated as if we were *the* discriminating country?

Today I am ashamed of being Swiss. Minaret construction is already heavily controlled here in switz. This initiative was launched by populaist èpartires who love to play of people's fera. Its a whole fake debat as they think its the way to spo Switzerland from Islamisation. They say that without minarets we will stop swiss parents from marrying their daughters with a man of their choice or will prevent Swiss women from having to wear the burka.

Quoting ManuCH (Thread starter): On the other side, I'm afraid that a minaret would also attract the Muezzin, singing his call to prayer, which is something I'd rather not hear.

Its already forbidden and happend no where in Switzerland where Minarets exist

Quoting AlexEU (Reply 7): I would personally allow few mosques (with minaretes) in cities like Zurich, Geneva or Basel while no for smallew towns and villages.

There are already mosques in all of these cities. Just without minarets.

Even without today's voting minarets would not have been possible in Switzerland because the local construction laws would not allow them (noise, too high altitude, does not fit in the local picture etc.). In fact nothing changes with this "official ban".

Quoting AviationMaster (Reply 4): in the end today's decision just fortifies the message, that if you come to this country, you will have to adapt and not the other way around. Tolerance can only go so far. Don't like it, get out!

Well said AM, well said! Congratulations to the Swiss people for showing some balls!!! I wish more countries, including my own, would do the same!

Manu, with respect, I have to disagree with you, no, it is not discrimination. They are free to practice their religion. If they want their minarets, then they are free to go to back to their home country or to another Muslim country!

Just my   

Well done Switzerland. There is a limit to how much tolerant you can be to other religions especially when the other religions do not reciprocate? When will they build a church in Saudi Arabia? Why are the few churches in the UAE not allowed to show a cross on top of the building? Why can't non-muslims enter Mecca?

Am I the only one who is bothered by the fact that referenda are held on issues that affect minority rights?

The tyranny of the majority, how sad, and scary, it is.

Quoting Fridgmus (Reply 12): They are free to practice their religion. If they want their minarets, then they are free to go to back to their home country or to another Muslim country! Just my

I totally agree . Places to practıce theır relıgıon YES . Changıng the demography and landscape NO.

Mınarets are fıne ın countrıes where the majorıty of that country are Muslım but ın UK Ireland Swıtzerland etc... Chrıstıanıty rules.

I dont have anythıng agaınst them Im ın Istanbul now and they are nıce here and they fıt but not ın Western Europe.

Quoting Squared (Reply 14):

Read this news this morning and felt really good about being a Canadian. Such a law could never pass out here.

Quoting Emirates773er (Reply 16): Read this news this morning and felt really good about being a Canadian. Such a law could never pass out here.

Don't be so sure. BTW, it is not a law, but rather a constitutional amendment. If Canada had,

- The same high percentage of foreign born population (app. 30%)
- A similar rapid increase in the Muslim population including a vocal (admittedly small) radical faction
- The same type of direct democracy allowing 100K citizens to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot

the outcome could be quite similar.

Regards
HAJ

Quoting RJAF (Reply 13): When will they build a church in Saudi Arabia? Why are the few churches in the UAE not allowed to show a cross on top of the building? Why can't non-muslims enter Mecca?

Thus Europeans must ban minarets? I thought the we, here in Europe, must show how freedom should look like instead of of lowering ourselves to the same level of freedom in the UAE or Saudi Arabia.

Well I wonder how the Arab world will react. There is a reason why Swiss businesses (the banking industry especially) didn´t want a YES vote.

As a Muslim this does not bother me, as long as there is somewhere i could pray having a Minaret or not are the same.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 9): yet preventing the skylines of European cities to be polluted with culturally and architecturally inferior objects.

Well this a matter of taste i could say the same thing about church's. Some of the Minaret and church bell tower are a piece of art.

I download prayer times on my laptop while traveling, have it set with the country i am in, hear the call for prayer in the privacy of my room, very easy.

Quoting Fridgmus (Reply 12): Manu, with respect, I have to disagree with you, no, it is not discrimination.

I never said that it's discrimination. I actually asked for opinions:

Quoting ManuCH (Thread starter): What do you think? Is this entire thing discriminating, or will it set an example for other European countries?

In my opinion it isn't discriminating, but some people say so. That's what the discussion is about  

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 8): am glad that they stood up for their rights. Anyone who has ever lived near a minaret knows how annoying it is to hear the call to prayer five times a day. I

So is it because of the noise? or because of the structure itself? or because of what it represents?

Cant the noise issue be controlled via some kind of anti-noise law instead? hmm i wonder if that could mean the end of ringing bells from churches too?

Quoting Squared (Reply 14): The tyranny of the majority, how sad, and scary, it is.

How can the majority of a democracy be tyrant ...   Good on for Switzerland for actually voting and raising their voice to defend Swiss culture and way of life. Not like Canada where one culture has to constantly bend over backwards to accomodate another.

Quoting Emirates773er (Reply 16): Read this news this morning and felt really good about being a Canadian. Such a law could never pass out here.

Unfourtnatly, they'd probably tear down the church next to the Minaret as well.

Personally, it wouldn't bother me one bit that we had Minarets in Canada, or any other religious symbols but what does bother me is the way Canada has evovled in that certain religious/cultural groups that come in and ask to have their rights/freedoms respected now demand that other religous/cultural groups limit their rights/freedoms contained in their own four walls.

[Edited 2009-11-29 12:18:24]

panem et circenses

filler.

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 21): Cant the noise issue be controlled via some kind of anti-noise law instead? hmm i wonder if that could mean the end of ringing bells from churches too?

Precisely. Here in the US, there are many mosques with minarets, but no call to prayers (muezzin) are made just as no ringing bells from churches are made. The minaret is just built as part of the architecture of the building and in some cases is no more than a couple meters higher than the building.

I don't believe in any religion anymore, but I am disappointed with this move by Switzerland. I have no problem with banning the call-to-prayer (muezzin) as part of anti-noise ordinances, but why should an architectural component of a building be banned? If height restrictions as part of zoning prevent the construction of a minaret, then that is a different story. But as I said, a minaret can be incorporated as just a very short tower protruding just a few meters above the building and could be done so as to not exceed the height restrictions in the area. The mosque could be built as a 1-story building, with a minaret protruding another story, thus making the entire mosque only 2-stories tall.

Quoting OA260 (Reply 15): Mınarets are fıne ın countrıes where the majorıty of that country are Muslım but ın UK Ireland Swıtzerland etc... Chrıstıanıty rules.

Christianity rules in Europe??? I thought Europe now has a strict separation of church and state after much of Europe was ruled by the Pope for hundreds of years?

Quoting BA (Reply 24): I have no problem with banning the call-to-prayer (muezzin) as part of anti-noise ordinances,

Few months ago even here in the Kingdom there was a law regulating the volume of the muezzin.

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 21): Cant the noise issue be controlled via some kind of anti-noise law instead? hmm i wonder if that could mean the end of ringing bells from churches too?

I would favor an anti-noise law over an outright ban. I doubt anyone would want to hear bells or Muezzins at 0600.

Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 22): How can the majority of a democracy be tyrant ... Good on for Switzerland for actually voting and raising their voice to defend Swiss culture and way of life. Not like Canada where one culture has to constantly bend over backwards to accomodate another.

I tend to agree with you there. Things have gotten way out of hand in this country.

Interesting result, I wonder how this all plays out... panem et circenses? Maybe. Though I am skeptical of labeling culture as a political sideshow.

asturias

A disappointing move. If the Swiss want to combat radical Islam then don't make specific laws against them! That's just incensing the radicals. Then again this is the country that banned women from voting until 1971. Sometimes you do have to wonder about how wise direct democracy is

Quoting TheCol (Reply 27): I would favor an anti-noise law over an outright ban. I doubt anyone would want to hear bells or Muezzins at 0600.

The problem in general is that people accept the ringing of bells when a church calls to mass (especially since this usually doesn't happen in the early hours in the morning), but a muezzin and a minaret at 0500 is simply a different thing.

Quoting AviationMaster (Reply 29): Is it only the Swiss? I'd love to see the fallout of such a vote in fellow European countries like Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, UK, Italy, etc.. I'm sure the outcome would be quite "surprising".

For starters, the Multi-Kulti faction in Germany (and there are quite a lot of them in parliament, despite the majority of people demanding that immigrants integrate themselves into society) would not allow it. I personally would not want to have a minaret in my neighbourhood either, but I'd also hate to hear the ringing bells on Sunday. Personally, I've never heard a minaret in the morning when I was in Hamburg (perhaps because the nearest mosque was in St. Pauli, near the Schanzenviertel), but I'd still be very annoyed to hear one if I was trying to sleep enough so I can be well rested for the next work day.

That being said, there are other ways to force people to integrate themselves. I'm not saying they should convert to Christianism or something, but we need to make it very clear to immigrants that, while the country offers freedom of religion to everyone, either they integrate themselves into society (e.g. by giving their women the full freedoms of the country and by learning the language), or they leave the country, simple as that. Multi-Kulti should not be at the expense of the native culture of the country people immigrate to. There are other and better ways to be multicultural.

Like I said in another thread about an Italian town kicking immigrants out at Christmas time, it seems there is a deep seeded xenophobia in significant segments of Europe. IT's unfortunate but these kind of news reinforce my thoughts on this. I'm pretty confident a vote like this would never pass in Argentina. Muslims, Jews and Christians coexist here like perhaps nowhere else on Earth.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 31): Quoting TheCol (Reply 27): I would favor an anti-noise law over an outright ban. I doubt anyone would want to hear bells or Muezzins at 0600. The problem in general is that people accept the ringing of bells when a church calls to mass (especially since this usually doesn't happen in the early hours in the morning), but a muezzin and a minaret at 0500 is simply a different thing.

An atheist´s point of view:
Tell that to our Catholic village parish. Due me working shift, I often have problems when transitting within a few days from 12 hour nightshift to 12 hour dayshift and the last thing I want is some bl**dy church bells to wake me up at 4 am. But, since the village is very Catholic I know haven´t got a chance to change this.
Similarly in CGN there used to be three churches (Catholic and Lutheran) within my neighbourhood and every sunday morning they making an awfull racket with their bells.
I don´t mind minaretts AND church steeples, as long as they keep quiet, but IMO if they ban minaretts they´ll have to ban church steeples as well. Like it or not, Islam is now a mainstream religion in western Europe.
If we don´t like it, we shouldn´t have recruited all the "guest workers" to do our dirty work after WW2.

Jan

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 33): If we don´t like it, we shouldn´t have recruited all the "guest workers" to do our dirty work after WW2.

My father was an Italian guest worker recruited by Lufthansa Technik, and he adapted himself to German society. After a few years, he got a residence permit with a green card, and in 1980 he got the German citizenship. The problem isn't necessarily the guest workers who came after WWII, it's for me more about those who immigrate to Germany in this day and age (give or take 20-30 years or so).

Quoting Derico (Reply 32): Like I said in another thread about an Italian town kicking immigrants out at Christmas time, it seems there is a deep seeded xenophobia in significant segments of Europe. IT's unfortunate but these kind of news reinforce my thoughts on this.

What an Italian town does is not representative of all Europe. Our concern is that many Muslim immigrants refuse to integrate themselves into our society. We're not telling them to give up Islam or their traditions, all we want is that they respect our rule of law, learn our respective languages (e.g. if they live in Germany, they must learn German, if they live in Denmark, they must learn Danish, if they live in the Netherlands, they must learn Dutch, etc.) and give their women also the liberties that our society offers. If they don't integrate themselves, then the Muslim people in Europe will only continue to isolate themselves and further damage their reputation, plus people will still be dumb enough to commit "honour killings", thinking that Europe accepts Sharia Law.

This is NOT xenophobia, it's about the willingness of people to integrate themselves and become people who make a positive difference. We cannot accept people who continue to disrespect our laws, traditions and don't even learn the language of the country they live in, because freedom of religion does not mean that they can do whatever the hell they want in our country, while honest citizens (regardless of culture and religion) get punished for the same things.

If someone immigrates to Argentina, you would want them to integrate themselves into Argentinian society as well, don't you?

Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 22): How can the majority of a democracy be tyrant ... Good on for Switzerland for actually voting and raising their voice to defend Swiss culture and way of life. Not like Canada where one culture has to constantly bend over backwards to accomodate another.

The majority of a democracy can indeed by tyrannical, when it tramples on the rights of minority groups. Alexis de Tocqueville noted the so-called "Tyranny of the Majority" in his book Democracy in America, and these side effects of democracy are not just limited to the USA.

The point being, is that often the majority gets so swept in furor, that it is willing to hurt individual rights in a bid to serve the "common good." It's why liberal democracies, for the most part, are not complete, unfettered democracies. The judiciary steps in, and keeps check on any excesses (or tyranny, if you will) of the majority--at least when the majority decides that it should infringe on rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Of course, I know almost nothing about the Swiss Constitution--I was merely surprised that referenda are permitted to be held on issues that seem to adversely impact a minority group.

As for Canada, I think many have moved beyond the idea that there is a homogeneous Canadian identity rooted in British, or European cultural traditions. Rather, Canadian identity is increasingly rooted in civic values such as individual rights enshrined in our Charter and multiculturalism. In that view, reasonable accommodation of other cultures that fit within that civic framework, is an inherent aspect of Canadian "culture".

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 33): I don´t mind minaretts AND church steeples, as long as they keep quiet, but IMO if they ban minaretts they´ll have to ban church steeples as well.

Precisely. And to expand this further, what about Hindu temples, Bahai house of worships, and other religious buildings? Many have some form of towering structure incorporated in them and other various religious symbols.

Why single out mosques?

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 35): Our concern is that many Muslim immigrants refuse to integrate themselves into our society.

I am all for immigrants integrating and assimilating in the Western societies that they immigrated to, but how do minarets prevent integration? And how does banning minarets help Muslims integrate?

Quoting 1stfl94 (Reply 30): If the Swiss want to combat radical Islam then don't make specific laws against them! That's just incensing the radicals.

Let's appease them instead. Let's pretend culture doesn't matter for us, just for them. Let's all live together as equals until everyone is separate and unequal.

Quoting Derico (Reply 32): it seems there is a deep seeded xenophobia in significant segments of Europe.

This is best responded with this:

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 35): This is NOT xenophobia, it's about the willingness of people to integrate themselves and become people who make a positive difference. We cannot accept people who continue to disrespect our laws, traditions and don't even learn the language of the country they live in, because freedom of religion does not mean that they can do whatever the hell they want in our country, while honest citizens (regardless of culture and religion) get punished for the same things.

Well said.

Quoting BA (Reply 37): And how does banning minarets help Muslims integrate?

How does it hinder integration? The place of worship is the mosque, not the minaret.

Political correctness can be so annoying.

asturias

Quoting BA (Reply 37): And how does banning minarets help Muslims integrate?

We're not banning mosques, simple as that. They don't really need a minaret (I also suggest that you read post 25).

Quoting AviationMaster (Reply 29): Is it only the Swiss? I'd love to see the fallout of such a vote in fellow European countries like Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, UK, Italy, etc.. I'm sure the outcome would be quite "surprising".

You are right, sadly such a vote in other parts of Europe might turn out in similar manner.

What I find quite contradictory is the image Europe tries to portray of being a very open, liberal and forward thinking society but return has repeatedly acted against the religious freedoms of others - whether in clothing, display of religious signage or minarets now.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 35): This is NOT xenophobia, it's about the willingness of people to integrate themselves and become people who make a positive difference.

No I think it comes down to many simply do not like see things that are different then themselves.

Having lived for 10 some years in Europe, I continued to experience the every growing feeling that many European were deep down really fearful or resent many of these migrant groups. Did not matter of they were Turks, Arabs, Africans or what, but there seemed to be a deep down 2nd class view of these folks.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 33): but IMO if they ban minaretts they´ll have to ban church steeples as well.

   If you are going to openly ban and discriminate against one group, lets make sure we ban all future church steeples or domes also.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 33): Like it or not, Islam is now a mainstream religion in western Europe.

I dont think many people understand or willing accept this fact. Europe is no longer a pure Christian dominion.

Quoting BA (Reply 37): And how does banning minarets help Muslims integrate?

Does absolutely nothing except build an even deeper rift and make the "us versus them" seperation even clearer.

This is a completely bigoted law and shows the true tyranny of the majority.

Quoting ManuCH (Thread starter): Is this entire thing discriminating

Yes

Quoting Babybus (Reply 2): I'm sure not every church has a bell tower.

In those churches where bells are of importance, they do.

Quoting Ajd1992 (Reply 1): I'm all for new culture and all that, but there's got to be a limit somewhere on preserving your own countries culture and religion.

So, you are against separation of church and state and for a state religion.

Quoting AviationMaster (Reply 4): Not only Europe, but most likely all across the Western World

Will not happen in the US or Canada, because of far stronger constitutional protections. Would also be rather difficult to get something like this to pass constitutional muster in Germany.

Quoting NA (Reply 6): Otherwise I would say lets build a gothic cathedral in Tehran for a change.

Hmm, I guess racism doesn't allow people to use Google, and sorry if they all aren't actually in Tehran:

Quoting NA (Reply 6): Its not Anti-Islam, its pro Christian Europe. In this sense I´m ok with the vote.

So, you too have no interest in secular society or separation of church and state?

Quoting Emirates773er (Reply 16): Read this news this morning and felt really good about being a Canadian. Such a law could never pass out here.

Wouldn't happen here in the US either. On balance, we do this stuff better than the Europeans do.

Quoting BA (Reply 24): Christianity rules in Europe??? I thought Europe now has a strict separation of church and state after much of Europe was ruled by the Pope for hundreds of years?

Precisely.

Quoting TheCol (Reply 27): I would favor an anti-noise law over an outright ban. I doubt anyone would want to hear bells or Muezzins at 0600.

I don't have a problem with that, though there are some who likely want to hear one or the other either hourly (with bells) or 5 times a day.

Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 22): How can the majority of a democracy be tyrant ...

Why do you think constitutions exist in the first place?

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 31): That being said, there are other ways to force people to integrate themselves. I'm not saying they should convert to Christianism or something, but we need to make it very clear to immigrants that, while the country offers freedom of religion to everyone, either they integrate themselves into society (e.g. by giving their women the full freedoms of the country and by learning the language), or they leave the country, simple as that

Integration has nothing to do with religious conversion. Further, while you attempt to take pot shots, every Moslem I have ever met from a European country has spoken the local language. The only ones who sometimes have trouble are their older parents or grandparents who naturally have a more difficult time. As for "giving their women" freedoms, I'm not sure what sounds more sexist, the practice of not allowing women to be free in the first place or your making it sound like women are property and it being a man's responsibility to give freedom to a woman. If a woman lives in a country with freedom, then she is free to act as she wants. If it means not seeing her parents, so be it.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 34): My father was an Italian guest worker recruited by Lufthansa Technik, and he adapted himself to German society.

It is hardly the same issue to talk about a skilled airline mechanic from a bordering country and unskilled railroad laborers from a completely different place.

Quoting BA (Reply 37): I am all for immigrants integrating and assimilating in the Western societies that they immigrated to, but how do minarets prevent integration? And how does banning minarets help Muslims integrate?

It doesn't, but that never stops people from pretending this is an issue of integration and not xenophobia and racism. I think you and I can speak a lot more to the subject of integration of Moslems in a "Western" country than most of the people spouting off here.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 38): How does it hinder integration? The place of worship is the mosque, not the minaret.

Exactly, how does it hinder integration? It doesn't. It's just an architectural component.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 39): We're not banning mosques, simple as that. They don't really need a minaret (I also suggest that you read post 25).

I never said anything about banning mosques. I know Switzerland has not done this nor are there any serious proposals to do so. And what about SOBHI51's post 25?

You're right, mosques don't need minarets. In fact, a mosque could be a room in the basement of a building. But why should anyone dictate how a community should build its house of worship? As long as they aren't violating building codes or exceeding height limits in the area, why should they be prevented from incorporating a minaret in a mosque?

What about this beautiful new Buddhist temple in Switzerland. Where's the uproar over its towering structure and ornate design?



Again, all religious structures traditionally have some form of towering structure and religious symbols. Why single out mosques?

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 40): Having lived for 10 some years in Europe, I continued to experience the every growing feeling that many European were deep down really fearful or resent many of these migrant groups. Did not matter of they were Turks, Arabs, Africans or what, but there seemed to be a deep down 2nd class view of these folks.

Let me put it this way: In my experience, I felt more like a second class citizen in Costa Rica (even though I've had Costa Rican citizenship all my life) than I ever felt even before I found out that thanks to my father, I was automatically a German citizen (which was just before I hit 14). Here in Costa Rica, as soon as they find out that you're not Costa Rican, either they give you this weird look, or they simply try to rip you off.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 41): As for "giving their women" freedoms, I'm not sure what sounds more sexist, the practice of not allowing women to be free in the first place or your making it sound like women are property and it being a man's responsibility to give freedom to a woman. If a woman lives in a country with freedom, then she is free to act as she wants. If it means not seeing her parents, so be it.

For me, a woman has to have the right to choose. How many Muslim women have died in Germany because of those "honour killings", just because they tried to live a Western lifestile in a Western country, and their relatives thought that this would bring shame to their family?

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 43): How many Muslim women have died in Germany because of those "honour killings",

Don't know. How many?

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 43): For me, a woman has to have the right to choose.

We agree. That has nothing to do with integration and everything to do with self-determination.

Quoting BA (Reply 42): And what about SOBHI51's post 25?

I think he meant posting 19

Quoting N1120A (Reply 44): Don't know. How many?

That was a rhetorical question.  

Quoting SOBHI51 (Reply 45): I think he meant posting 19

Yes, that's the one I meant.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 44): We agree. That has nothing to do with integration and everything to do with self-determination.

It does have in part something to do with integration because sometimes, conservative families immigrating will rarely, if ever, drop the tradition of seeing a girl/woman as a subject of their whim (almost like a property). I recall this case once in Canada, where I believe the father killed his daughter in an "honour killing", because her habit of clothing lightly and not wearing the vail had disgraced the family.

[Edited 2009-11-29 17:08:42]

Quoting BA (Reply 24): I am disappointed with this move by Switzerland. I have no problem with banning the call-to-prayer (muezzin) as part of anti-noise ordinances, but why should an architectural component of a building be banned?

   Minarets can be very elegant architectural pieces that, in my opinion, look very nice. If you want to put a height restriction on religious buildings, or implement noise ordinances, fine. But banning architecture is ridiculous.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 31): The problem in general is that people accept the ringing of bells when a church calls to mass (especially since this usually doesn't happen in the early hours in the morning), but a muezzin and a minaret at 0500 is simply a different thing.

If people are okay with church bells at 0800, they should also be okay with a muezzin at 0800. If you're going to stop a muezzin at 0500, then you should also stop church bells at 0500. Noise laws are fine, but they need to affect everyone equally, not single out one particular group.

This vote is very disappointing.

-Mir

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 46): That was a rhetorical question.

You need to back up a bare statement like that. I seriously doubt that a country like Germany, that has massive numbers of both religious and secular Moslems, has truly huge numbers of "honor" killings.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 46): I recall this case once in Canada, where I believe the father killed his daughter in an "honour killing", because her habit of clothing lightly and not wearing the vail had disgraced the family.

And he went to jail. Still, how often does this really happen, in Western countries?

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 46): It does have in part something to do with integration because sometimes, conservative families immigrating will rarely, if ever, drop the tradition of seeing a girl/woman as a subject of their whim (almost like a property).

Yet the way you phrased it, you treated women the same way...as property. That a woman desires to cave to peer-pressure is a sign of integration, though it can also be seen as a sign of an erosion of the importance of family. It is a slippery slope. The reality is that women should be allowed to do what they want, and should be able to accept the consequence of losing their relationship with family who are unable to cope with that.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 35): This is NOT xenophobia.

Sure it is. Just look at a post like this:

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 9): culturally...inferior

Shines right through.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 35): it's about the willingness of people to integrate themselves and become people who make a positive difference.

As many others have said, why does singling out one religion architecturally help people integrate?

There is a simple way to help people integrate. Make rules (about architecture, skylines, zoning, noise pollution, and apply them, rather than singling out one architectural feature). As others have also said, since zoning laws more or less already ruled out most minarets, then this gratuitous regulation smacks of nothing more than a populist pissing contest.

Sorry but there has been a rash of xenophobic populist feeling in Switzerland for a long time--consider the way the anti-Schengen campaigns were run in Switzerland. Not everyone who voted for this is "racist" of course. But the driving force is fear and xenophobia among people who feel really strongly. That I'd lay a lot of money on.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 23): panem et circenses

        
Best short summary here!

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 33): An atheist´s point of view: Tell that to our Catholic village parish. Due me working shift, I often have problems when transitting within a few days from 12 hour nightshift to 12 hour dayshift and the last thing I want is some bl**dy church bells to wake me up at 4 am. But, since the village is very Catholic I know haven´t got a chance to change this. Similarly in CGN there used to be three churches (Catholic and Lutheran) within my neighbourhood and every sunday morning they making an awfull racket with their bells. I don´t mind minaretts AND church steeples, as long as they keep quiet, but IMO if they ban minaretts they´ll have to ban church steeples as well. Like it or not, Islam is now a mainstream religion in western Europe. If we don´t like it, we shouldn´t have recruited all the "guest workers" to do our dirty work after WW2.

And best long summary here. By the way, when I was visiting a friend in Italy the bloody church bells behind her apartment started at 5am and it was insane. Same one time when I was in the Swiss Alps. I don't want to be awakened by either church bells or a muezzin. But whatever noise laws apply to one should apply to the other. And the bell towers sure were pretty. So this purely visual element and the noise element are different in any case.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 49): Sure it is. Just look at a post like this:

You'd have to be blinded with political correctness to truly believe some cultures are not inferior to others.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 49): As many others have said, why does singling out one religion architecturally help people integrate?

How does it hinder integration? Furthermore, how do concessions to local culture help integration. It damn well wouldn't help an American to integrate in France if all he did was watch CNN, eat at Burger King and drive a Hummer. It wouldn't help importing Joel Osteen to París for the Americans.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 49): consider the way the anti-Schengen campaigns

perhaps you'd want to add the anti-EEA and anti-EU campaigns there as well? Explain how the vehemently anti-Schengen UK is xenophobic and racist while it bends over backwards to accommodate every thinkable and unthinkable minority?

Quoting N229NW (Reply 49): Best short summary here!

Only problem is, that it could be applied to any popular political decision. Which are half of politics in general.

Bottom line is this: the Swiss decided in a direct democratic vote that this is how it shall be. No minarets.

Tough cookie.

asturias

Quoting Asturias (Reply 50): You'd have to be blinded with political correctness to truly believe some cultures are not inferior to others.

Not really. Each culture has its pluses and minuses, and each person has their opinion about which one suits them best.