(November 30, 2009 at 6:17 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: It's not 'if' it's 'how much' they'll go overboard.

I'd go along with that. Watch this space.

(November 30, 2009 at 6:17 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: It's not 'if' it's 'how much' they'll go overboard.

Aye... I personally do not see how building small towers = display of religious power... it doesn't seem to follow...

I'm going to start selling flammable Swiss flags in Saudi Arabia.

I think this is a great attempt at trolling the muslim communities in Switzerland. To be fair, I never really liked the Swiss, but I always have and will remain respectful of them.

One of the big concerns I've read about that precluded this move is that Muslim communities, in light of the Muhammad cartoons and subsequent rendition of "Muslims gone wild", have shown themselves to be aloof and alien enough to demonstrate a difficulty in integrating to European culture. Seems the SVP capitalized on that fear, justified or not. The main question about assimilation has not been resolved and I doubt it will be soon. But the fear, oh the fear, remains ever so pervasive. And with each allegation, true or not, of creeping Sharia law and threats of fundamentalist riots over something as innocuous and protected as editorial cartoons only enshrines and strengthens that fear.

I'm sorry to say, but to me, the Muslim community's riots over those Danish cartoons is coming back, at least in Switzerland, to bite them in the ass most unjustly. But hey, you call down the thunder, you reap the whirlwind.

First rule of multiculturalism: To integrate some of your culture into your country, you must let go and integrate some of theirs into yours.

On the upside, assimilation of Turkish and Armenian immigrants in Germany have gone quite well. There is an abundance of cultural literature and media in Germany from the descendants of those immigrants tackling becoming 'German'. Auslaenderhasse still is a problem, but is less of an issue today.

I would have voted NO

WHY? I don't want a mosque ,with or without a minaret anywhere near where live. Those thing have loudspeakers to amplify the wailing 5 times day. If that should happen, I would sell my house to a nice Muslim family.

Nor do I want in my street or less than a 5 minute drive away: A church ,synagogue or temple,a school,a stadium,a shopping centre or fast food joint of any kind to mention a few things..

The issue for me is about noise,privacy and property values. I have little or no say in any of the things mentioned. I would gladly prevent any of them if I could,from being built "in my back yard".

If I don't want something built near me,I do not feel I can morally object it others feel the same. They are not obliged to say 'why'.


Are 56% of Swiss bigots? I don't know or care.Institutionalised bigotry of some kind exists in most countries. (Eg ban on gay marriages)

---

(November 30, 2009 at 1:08 pm)Shinylight Wrote: My opinions of the Swiss have changed forever...

From what? The people who gladly accepted deposits of GOLD TEETH by the boxful from Nazis during Ww22 and who have fought tooth and nail to avoid returning Jewish wealth to families of the victims?

(November 30, 2009 at 1:08 pm)Shinylight Wrote: I don't want a mosque ,with or without a minaret anywhere near where live. Those thing have loudspeakers to amplify the wailing 5 times day.

The noise is certainly a real issue. In Oxford (UK) there's been a big protest over a minaret in Divinity Road, for just that reason. If any of the Swiss were influenced by this kind of consideration, IMO you can't condemn them. If it was straight prejudice, I do condemn them. From the little I've been able to gather, it seems the campaign was fought mainly on prejudice.

Then pass laws about noise pollution! Why make it an attack on religious freedom if it's a problem with noise pollution?

I might not like people blasting rap music in traffic, but I'm not going to try and ban black people from driving cars because of it.

Jesus christ...

(December 1, 2009 at 12:38 pm)Meatball Wrote: Then pass laws about noise pollution! Why make it an attack on religious freedom if it's a problem with noise pollution?

I might not like people blasting rap music in traffic, but I'm not going to try and ban black people from driving cars because of it.

Jesus christ...

We already have laws about excessive noise, and a fat lot of good they do.

BUT,noise is only one aspect,I'm far more concerned about property values. (OK ,the value of MY property)

I have no doubt there are lot of Swiss bigots who relished the chance to stick it to the Muslims. However,I see the issue as a civil and social one,not one of religious freedom. I guess we may need to agree to differ.

(December 1, 2009 at 11:20 pm)padraic Wrote: We already have laws about excessive noise, and a fat lot of good they do.

BUT,noise is only one aspect,I'm far more concerned about property values. (OK ,the value of MY property)

I have no doubt there are lot of Swiss bigots who relished the chance to stick it to the Muslims. However,I see the issue as a civil and social one,not one of religious freedom. I guess we may need to agree to differ.

Padraic has a great point here, one that is somewhat hard to see. We tolerate many christian organizations and jewish ones especially because their "footprint" on a community is rather small. Small as in doesn't generate too much noise in daily operation, for the most part are not connected to extremist groups and rarely generate controversy. Compare that to an ideal mosque, which includes that incredibly loud and annoying call to prayer, bringing with it disruption to the community. Since a minarets only purpose in a mosque to sound the call to prayer, banning the call to prayer is the effective action of the Swiss referendum. But since overtly banning a critical aspect of Islam is rather difficult, even if justified, the SVP pulled a fancy stunt to get what they wanted through an alternative means.

That said, fuck that call to prayer. Tell them to get watches or cell phone texts or something.

And, on the other side of the coin....


http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/art...09-CR.html

Quote:At Cathedral of Christ the King in North Phoenix, Bishop Rick Painter prepares for his Sunday morning sermon. But there's more than just Sunday's service on his mind. That's because Painter was convicted of two misdemeanors earlier this week. His crime? The church bells that ring during the day are apparently too loud.

Painter's church moved in near Greenway and 29th Avenue last year. He says they informed neighbors they planned to play electronic bells during the day. Painter says he didn't hear from anyone until the bell system was already installed and playing. Neighbors filed noise complaints and this week, a judge found him guilty of excessive noise.

Bishop Painter will be sentenced next month. Even though Painter feels its unlikely, he could face jail time. Until sentencing, no decision will be made regarding what to do with the bells. So, they continue to ring.

Arrogant church prick thinks disturbing the peace is his right.