| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| Switzerland minaret ban slammed as prejudice |
| 2009-12-01 |
| [Al Arabiya Latest] Switzerland confronted an international backlash on Monday over a shock vote to ban new minarets and struggled to reassure stunned Muslims at home that they were not regarded as outcasts. The Vatican joined Muslim leaders in expressing dismay after a referendum on Sunday voted for a constitutional ban on the construction of towers attached to mosques from where the faithful are traditionally called to prayer. Some 57.5 percent of those who cast ballots supported the measure amid a high turnout by Swiss standards of 53 percent. The result flew in the face of opinion polls that had predicted a 'no' vote, and caught out government ministers who had opposed the ban alongside the bulk of Switzerland's political and religious establishment. The government rushed to assure the country's 400,000 Muslims, mainly from the Balkans and Turkey, that the outcome was not a rejection of the Muslim religion or culture. However, the result was condemned in the world's most populous Muslim nations and elsewhere in Europe as a display of intolerance. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #37 I would love to know whether church towers were also intended to dominate the emotional landscape in the same way as minarets. Not Really- because by the time we (that is, the West) stumbled out of the Dark Ages, there was a very definite cleavage between the spiritual and secular powers. Big buildings with Big Towers were (and are) political statements designed for emotional impact, but it was the Bishop's Big Church versus the King's Big Castle- not Our Minaret glaring down upon all those dhimis. (Sometimes the Big Church vs. the Big Castle could get a bit heated- Beckett vs. Henry II, for instance.) |
| Posted by: Free Radical 2009-12-01 17:43 |
| #36 Post script, minarets/snipers. Never forgotten, never forgiven. |
| Posted by: Rhodesiafever 2009-12-01 17:33 |
| #35 SPIRES, dammit. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2009-12-01 17:15 |
| #34 Yup, Church Spies are designed "To draw the eye heavenward" And if comparing them to minarets do indeed "Make Noise" (Church Bells) But the comparison ends there. No "Donkey Braying" from Church Steeples, only Bells, they sometimes have speakers that entertain folks with Christmas Carols however. I'm sure the Muzies detest those, but so far they're greatly outnumbered. Just keep in mind that Islam was invented far later than Christ, and stole much from the Christian Bible doing so. Distinctly second class copycats. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2009-12-01 17:14 |
| #33 TW, Church and ammo dump doesn't quite have the same ring as mosque/minaret sniper. |
| Posted by: Rhodesiafever 2009-12-01 17:09 |
| #32 from Wiki....As for real history, churches generally lacked towers until the 600s. That was the advent of bell towers—separate structures, inspired by military watchtowers, used to announce worship times and advertise the location of the church. They had low-pitched wood roofs. Eventually, the wood was replaced with more durable stone, which due to its roughness had to be steeper to allow rain and snow to slide off. Over the course of three or four centuries, churches became fancier, the towers were incorporated into the church building, and the roofs stretched into the decorative points of the modern steeple. ..... Ohio State University comparative studies professor Thomas Kasulis notes that towers are ubiquitous in world religions as symbols of an inspiring connection with the heavens. |
| Posted by: NoMoreBS 2009-12-01 17:05 |
| #31 All right children, that will do. If there are any architecture history buffs around, I would love to know whether church towers were also intended to dominate the emotional landscape in the same way as minarets. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-12-01 16:48 |
| #30 IMHO nothing more intolerant than death to anyone who leaves Ialam to become Methodist, Baptist or Prejudiced. |
| Posted by: Boss Snomotle8280 2009-12-01 16:42 |
| #29 'They simply don't want anything blocking their view of the chalets...' Yes, I am sure that's what it was all about. Puerile, Woozer, not adult. No wonder you were told to go learn something. BTW, CB was apologising for wasting b/w replying to you, not to you. |
| Posted by: Rhodesiafever 2009-12-01 16:06 |
| #28 Um, I don't recall apologizing to you, Woozle. I was apologizing to Fred. Like I said...no reading comprehension skills... If you want to call me a twit (or worse) on every single post you make, fine. Have at it. Just compensate Fred for the bandwidth abuse if you do. |
| Posted by: Cornsilk Blondie 2009-12-01 16:06 |
| #27 I was trying to be cute, And instead came off like a condescending twit. Just because someone doesn't share your opinion doesn't mean they are ignorant with "lots to learn". If that's your idea of an apology, it's pretty lame. As long as we're all being 'adults' here. |
| Posted by: Woozle Uneter9007 2009-12-01 15:29 |
| #26 Woozle defending architecture be like PSW defending Rhohypnol. Insane. |
| Posted by: Rhodesiafever 2009-12-01 14:55 |
| #25 Well, tw, I actually did say that back on Sunday after this vote when he/she/it asserted that minarets are just "architectural elements". I was trying to be cute, but some people apparently didn't get it. Furthermore, I stupidly thought that Woozy might have gotten the name calling out of his/her/its system at the tail end of that discussion, like most of the adults here at the 'burg would have done. Apparently not. I apologize for wasting Fred's bandwidth by even responding to what was said here. |
| Posted by: Cornsilk Blondie 2009-12-01 14:14 |
| #24 Aaaand, looking at #20 above, it's clear I missed the time she did. Never mind. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-12-01 14:08 |
| #23 Woozle, being called a twit by a complete and utter ignoramus with absolutely no reading comprehension skills is an honor. Thank you. Surely Woozle Uneter9007 meant somebody else, Cornsilk Blondie. I don't recall you ever writing anything like, "you gots lots of learning to do" |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-12-01 14:06 |
| #22 Sorry, guys, wrong answer, we'll have to run the vote again until we get the 'right' result. |
| Posted by: Rhodesiafever 2009-12-01 13:44 |
| #21 i can see why they don't want minarets. They blast that god awful call too prayer out of them Chris, it has nothing to do with that. None of the four minarets in the country 'blast that god awful call to prayer'. The Swiss are just as PC and multi-culti as they've been for decades concerning their Muslim immigrants. They simply don't want anything blocking their view of the chalets. |
| Posted by: Woozle Uneter9007 2009-12-01 13:42 |
| #20 Woozle, being called a twit by a complete and utter ignoramus with absolutely no reading comprehension skills is an honor. Thank you. You're welcome. You probably get called that often, especially after telling folks that don't share your opinion, they "gots a lot to learn". |
| Posted by: Woozle Uneter9007 2009-12-01 13:40 |
| #19 i can see why they don't want minarets. They blast that god awful call too prayer out of them |
| Posted by: chris 2009-12-01 13:28 |
| #18 Woozle, being called a twit by a complete and utter ignoramus with absolutely no reading comprehension skills is an honor. Thank you. |
| Posted by: Cornsilk Blondie 2009-12-01 12:48 |
| #17 "Yeah? And your point would be?..." |
| Posted by: mojo 2009-12-01 12:42 |
| #16 I wouldnt call the Swiss intollerant, they just dont like tall skinny architecture mucking up the view. Muzzies are still free to do their thing. just "no Minaretes" Precisely. Don't let a certain blonde twit hear you say that, though LOL. You'll be told "you gots lots of learning to do"! |
| Posted by: Woozle Uneter9007 2009-12-01 12:29 |
| #15 Don't laugh, the muslim-tranzi machine is dog-piling on Switzerland; usual suspects like the ineffable jean ziegler (big pal of K-daffy - he's the co-founder and IIRC the first reecipient of the "kadaffy human rights award", mugabe - he's been a big supporter of "land reform" in zimbobwe -, castro - he gravitates in the ignacio ramonet orbit -, high-level UN cog and despisable anti-US, anti-free-markets, anti-globo commie slime draped in his "human rights activists" white robe) have comdemned this surge of racist intolerance that spoils the country image, and is an insult to islam which is a religion of love, peace and tolerance (yeah, he actually wrote that), the EU, and the Un both are examining if/how to void that as a discriminatory law, indonesia, pakistan, iran have comdemned this (as an example of the rampant islamophobia in th eWest, of the many discriminations muslims face from those evil, racist europeans,...). On a more local level, the french MSM is in turmoil and hyperventilating about it (though, the french public actually support the ban), with some plainly ridiculous wishful thinojng ("the swiss people are revulsed by this ban"... hey, dude, they voted for it 57%, I think the "swiss people" you're talking about are the swiss leftists - note that for a journalist, leftists ARE the people, so, let's cut that guy some slack),... Anyway, all this proves that the CERN LHc REALLY was a threat to humanity. From all accounts, we've been collectively sucked into an alternate, Bizarro world, in which up is down, right is left, and the muslim world and its NGO & UN allies/proxies are attacking the oldest european republican democracy, and certainly one of the most "grass-roots", and giving it lessons about tolerance, human rights respects,... Gee, Switzerland being lectured about not totally being ok in being culturally genocided... by indonesia, pakistan, egypt... Weep, or laugh, but, at least, see the blinding, sun-like, white hot irony of this crap. WE ARE LIVING IN BIZARRO WORLD, that's for sure. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2009-12-01 12:23 |
| #14 I hear Saudi Arabia has just banned cuckoo clocks. |
| Posted by: Parabellum 2009-12-01 12:06 |
| #13 ...they've avoided conflicts for over 600 years. Well, not quite. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-12-01 11:44 |
| #12 I wouldnt call the Swiss intollerant, they just dont like tall skinny architecture mucking up the view. Muzzies are still free to do their thing. just "no Minaretes" |
| Posted by: 746 2009-12-01 11:16 |
| #11 ..'cling to their guns and religion?' This is the Swiss version. The Swiss still operate under their national militia system. Each able bodied member keeps his assigned assault rifle and somewhere around 200 rounds of ammo in the home for quick mobilization. I suspect it works better than words on a document that keep getting 'reinterpreted' in making their system somewhat honest. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-12-01 10:31 |
| #10 Their history of intollerance to this type of thing as well as foreign immigration, might help explain, at least in part, how they've avoided conflicts for over 600 years. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-12-01 10:04 |
| #9 the swiss have a history of refusing religious zealotry into their country, esp. things that have steeple like appearences. they denied the catholics that architectural motif around 1800 something, now they're denying the muslims the same basic type of architecture big whup, it's their country. they still allow freedom of religion. the rest of EU needs to get a grip. |
| Posted by: 746 2009-12-01 09:52 |
| #8 It should be emphasized that there is NO restriction on building mosques- it's the minarets that are the issue. Someone ought to ask the 'elites' why a mono-ethnic and mono-cultural people with a reputation for bloody-mindedness might reject the building of absolutely alien superstructures that clash with the local customs, heritage, and traditions... Remember when Obama put down small-town Americans who 'cling to their guns and religion?' This is the Swiss version. |
| Posted by: Free Radical 2009-12-01 09:12 |
| #7 Just try and build a Christian church in the belly of the beast... |
| Posted by: Icerigger 2009-12-01 07:58 |
| #6 Don't the stupid kuffar in Switzerland realize they are dhimmies. Everyone knows that the dhimmies should feel humiliated in the presence of the superior followers of Allan. The rules are very simple, even a knuckle-dragging kuffar should understand them. As well as paying jizya (welfare) their buildings should never be higher than that of the Followers of the Religion of Peace(tm) That the only reason they want minarets, it's just part of the natural order of things ordained by Allan. |
| Posted by: tipper 2009-12-01 06:06 |
| #5 Neither the Tranzis, nor the Muzzies, seem to be able to grasp the idea that tolerance is a two way street. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2009-12-01 05:21 |
| #4 Part of what makes the Constitution in general and the First Amendment in particular such a vital protection is so that things like this could never happen, even if people were to 'vote' for something ludicrous like this it would never be made into a law. |
| Posted by: Unusons the Bunyip2974 2009-12-01 03:29 |
| #3 It's just resisting cultural domination by outsiders. This is why they will show such hatred: first, that the Swiss are defending their own culture, and second that they are doing it with that dastardly democracy which has such a track record of making "wrong" decisions. |
| Posted by: gromky 2009-12-01 02:38 |
| #2 Perhaps the offended Muslims should vote with their feet and leave. That would show the Swiss and hopefully it might start a trend. Nobody should stay in a free western country that they find inhospitable. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2009-12-01 02:00 |
| #1 Democracy is soooo sloppy, especially when its results contradict the elites meme. |
| Posted by: Waldemar Gleamp1150 2009-12-01 01:34 |