|
most people here who post the PC shit here doesn't understand the situation
Islam isn't a tolerant thing at all. It is highly aggressive in spreading, they don't assimilate to the local customs.
Look at Netherlands, in Rotterdam (I think, am I right?) for example they apply saria to courts and theaters, they have people get seated by their gender. Muslim lawyers don't stand up when judges come in, because Quran says every man is equal.
Also, a lot of you, mainly posters from USA think that banning something like that can't be in a liberal country, but of course it can, liberalism supports different views till those don't mean threat to others, also it doesn't mean that people has no right to protest against stuff they think is being harmful.
You can't be tolerant to ideas which aren't tolerant to others.
I think many W-European countries have this problem right now.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
Wow at the racism.
Maybe discrimination will change things since comprehension and integration failed.
has this ever worked in history to make positive change?
|
I don't think we need to respect a religion where a large majority subscribe to the tenets of misogyny and xenophobia. Do you?
Hypocritical double standards are the modus operandi: the same clerics who denounce short skirts and uncovered hair as immoral take multiple wives, the youngest of whom was 13 (this happened in Indonesia)
|
On November 30 2009 15:22 L wrote:Show nested quote +Imo religious people should not be exempt from laws just because of their religion. Pretty sure no one's got an issue with a noise regulation law. The law as its been presented, however, clearly discriminates against a single religion. If the law was "all jews go to concentration camps", jews, muslims, buddists and whatever could all obey the law, but it would be clear that the law is inherently discriminatory. Interpretation of whether or not the law is 'reasonable' as you called it is not a simple task in most cases (despite the fact that I just made an obviously unreasonable law), and the judgement's scope might not want to strike the entire law down for a variety of reasons.
Way to miss the point and put words in my mouth. I wasn't talking about this particular law which is as you say pretty clearly targeted at one group which I mocked in my 2nd paragraph.
When is a minaret a minaret? I don't know the actual text of the law but I don't think it's going to work as they intended, I doubt they can word said law in a way that can pass all the human rights laws and treaties Switzerland has chosen to follow and stop the construction of minarets and only minarets. If everyone else can make/have minaret-like structures it's just not going to get past anti-discrimination laws already in place.
And wow, Waxangel's post makes it pretty clear that this law has zero practical value, it's just some politicians trying to score points, especially since I don't think this law is going to prevent the construction of any minarets anyway.
However, some people in this thread were arguing that outlawing something that is part of a religion is always religious persecution which is what I responded too in my previous post from the 3rd paragraph onwards. This particular law is pretty retarded, but I don't agree with the argument that religious people should get to do (illegal) things because of their freedom of religious expression, it's not even a strawman, some posters literally said this. Religious freedom is not (should not be) a get-out-of-jail-free card.
It should be pretty clear from my post that I was not talking about this specific law but already established laws some religious people try to get around by saying their rights of religious freedom would be violated otherwise. Religious people should have the same rights as non-religious people not more or less depending on their denomination and/or what their scripture says.
An example of special rules in action was a German judge denying a speedy divorce request to a muslim woman who was being abused by her husband because the Koran allows "a husband to beat his wife", religious discrimination and pretty poor judgment in general. (link) The man got a pass for beating his wife while the wife was forced to stay married to him, only because they were of a particular faith. There are also some politicians who think muslims should be able to have their own shariah courts, nevermind that a lot of these laws do violate equal treatment rights as well as other basic human rights.
I only have muslim examples above but just about every religious group has members trying to get special rights for their particular group or get the government to enforce their religious laws on their own group and/or everyone else using whatever leverage they can find through the courts and politics.
It doesn't help that many European countries have laws that give (some) religious people special rights, they generally don't have an establishment clause in their constitution like the US.
In the Netherlands we have a party called the SGP+ Show Spoiler +(Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij; Reformed Political Party, reformed=calvinist)
So called 'Conservative' christians in the US would love to have special rights like this. You can't really blame muslims for wanting in on them either. But no, they really want to keep their special rules.
|
On November 30 2009 19:43 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2009 19:33 Velr wrote:
We wanted them as cheap labour force (thats diffrent from most of the Muslims that integrated in to the US). Now we have them and can't just send them back.
It's our own fault, not the Moslems or anyone elses, now we have to deal with it but obviously just disciriminating them is the easyer way. Yeah, we discriminate them so brutally that they can't even change the official school. Oh wait, no it's not, they can take the girls out of swimming classes they can take them out of gym classes they dont have to visit religious classes (this makes sense). As already said, this minaret initiative is populistic sign to address all these issues. But obviously its easier to call it discrimination and stamp it as right wing idioticy as always and just refuse to see the obvious problems. The politicians clearly have failed in this case. They thought: "Oh, this is gonna fail anyway let's just ignore it". P.S. it's not just cheap labor force. You just blind out the asylum situation. Read this white paper about muslims in Switzerland then you will know how the muslim part grew. http://www.ekm.admin.ch/de/dokumentation/doku/mat_muslime_d.pdf
you didn't vote, how dare you complain about the results...
people like you make me sick, more than any hardcore rightwinged or islamistic or whatever radical... at least they take their opportunity to vote (if they have it) and express their opinion, you don't vote so you'll never have an official opinion and every radical will laugh about you...
|
On November 30 2009 21:48 Radfield wrote:Wow at the racism. Show nested quote +Maybe discrimination will change things since comprehension and integration failed. has this ever worked in history to make positive change?
I'm sorry to offend you but you are stupid to say that and you have no idea about what's going on. They really deserve to be discriminated since muslim immigrants don't even grasp nor appreciate the concept that freedom should be a right for everyone. It should be obvious in 21th century, and everyone should really fight for it to be. European politicians can do nothing about them because stupid people like you like to scream at racism even if the same people they are trying to defend are destroying their country.
|
United States44031 Posts
On November 30 2009 22:04 iG.ClouD wrote:
They really deserve to be discriminated
the concept that freedom should be a right for everyone.
Well played.
|
Read the whole post instead of what you want, thanks.
|
On November 30 2009 22:03 ZorAptoR wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2009 19:43 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:On November 30 2009 19:33 Velr wrote:
We wanted them as cheap labour force (thats diffrent from most of the Muslims that integrated in to the US). Now we have them and can't just send them back.
It's our own fault, not the Moslems or anyone elses, now we have to deal with it but obviously just disciriminating them is the easyer way. Yeah, we discriminate them so brutally that they can't even change the official school. Oh wait, no it's not, they can take the girls out of swimming classes they can take them out of gym classes they dont have to visit religious classes (this makes sense). As already said, this minaret initiative is populistic sign to address all these issues. But obviously its easier to call it discrimination and stamp it as right wing idioticy as always and just refuse to see the obvious problems. The politicians clearly have failed in this case. They thought: "Oh, this is gonna fail anyway let's just ignore it". P.S. it's not just cheap labor force. You just blind out the asylum situation. Read this white paper about muslims in Switzerland then you will know how the muslim part grew. http://www.ekm.admin.ch/de/dokumentation/doku/mat_muslime_d.pdf you didn't vote, how dare you complain about the results... people like you make me sick, more than any hardcore rightwinged or islamistic or whatever radical... at least they take their opportunity to vote (if they have it) and express their opinion, you don't vote so you'll never have an official opinion and every radical will laugh about you...
do I complain about the results? I complain about how this was handled, please read better next time.
oh, I make you sick because I don't vote for shit I shouldn't vote at all? Guess what, if I don't know shit about a case I don't crack my mouth about it. If I don't vote but talk to 10 ppl and convince them of my view on the shit, I made 10 votes not only 1 but yeah, morrons like you wont get that huh?
Yeah, blame me for my unwill to judge whether a muslim in bern may build a minaret or not, it is soo relevant to me as I never visit this shitplace anyway. As I already explained, not voting is a clear silent protest which is just ignored by politicians. The ppl not voting are declared lazy assholes who are not taking part in the system. Do you want that only the loud crying assholes control the flow of a country?
|
Power to the People!
Referendums are democratic. Maybe there is a case to be made that direct democracy is inferior to a republic. But republics are still, fundamentally, democratic.
So I can see how you can be morally opposed to the ban but I don't see how you can be *politically* opposed to it unless you advocate some form of politics that is undemocratic. And as we all know, undemocratic politics is evil politics.
|
Hitler was democratically elected too.
|
We of course got to stop Muslims from getting missile turrets up, just like we should stop scientology from producing movies starring tom cruise o_O
|
On November 30 2009 08:08 keepITup wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2009 08:08 pubbanana wrote:On November 30 2009 08:02 FragKrag wrote:
Saturnize I don't think there is a single country in Europe where the majority has no religious beliefs
maybe, just maybe the Netherlands, but I think even that is a long shot. Sweden is 85% atheist. ..really? that's kind of cool
quoted from wikipedia about sweden : "At least 45% and up to 85% of the population can be classified as atheist or agnostic"
|
Some of the posters in this thread scare the crap out of me.
In 1955 Martin Niemoller wrote:
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me. This.
On November 30 2009 08:05 Slow Motion wrote:
As an atheist, I wouldn't mind if everyone chose to be not religious. However, in this case the majority chose to ban the expression of religion in architecture for a minority. Religion is an idea, and we shouldn't ban ideas or the free expression of ideas Also, this.
|
On November 30 2009 22:31 Boblion wrote:
Hitler was democratically elected too.
And? If not democratic vote, how do you determine your leaders? Just whoever is strongest?
And if you place a constitution on what your leaders can and can't do, what makes that constitution a "good" thing if not the consent of the governed -- that is, a democratic mandate?
|
The problem with Islam in the West is how many people take the Qu'ran and Islamic code so seriously. It's weird. When I went to Turkey (west coast), I was surprised by how relaxed they were with religion. After Attaturk, their national hero, trimmed the power of Islam in the 30's, he moved this 99% Muslim country in a positive step towards rationality.
I'm against this vote by the Swiss. But I don't want to be identified with the hurt feelings brigade. I know PC warriors like Kwark would be against something like banning the wearing of burkas at work; even though that's one of the key things the Turkish national hero did, and he is widely respected and adored for it in Turkey. (Even though atm the work he did is being reversed by the conservative Turkish party). So I wouldn't side myself with these people who are fervently defending something which is, basically, taking orders from your imaginary friend.
I get the feeling that there is a sizeable number of Muslims in the West who are trying to search for an identity and membership to a group. They are turning to the stricter version of Islam which is far less conformist than the relaxed, West Turkish version.
Where there are many situations when it's extremely important to reign in any tribalistic, reactionary objections, such as those regularly raised in our papers (the Sun, Daily Express, Daily Mail); there are situations when government needs to stand up against religion. This is not one of them, but our countries should be extraditing extremist preachers, and coming down very hard on people who abuse their wives in the name of the Qu'ran etc.
Because, let's face it, have you ever actually listened to Qu'ranic scholars debate the book? In my humble opinion, it's a complete fucking joke. It's like a bunch of nerds arguing about the rules of Magic: The Gathering. Except the ramifications of what they say mean that a million muslim men might go home and beat up their wife. Don't get me wrong, I think the same thing about Christianity. Bombing abortion clinics is fucking retarded. The Westborough Baptist Church is completely fucking retarded. Religion is a dangerous, stone-age relic that should be personalised as much as possible, and exiled from the stage of public discourse.
Religion SHOULD be sidelined, as much as possible, and all actual power taken away from it in all positions, and any government money should be withheld from religion; BUT arbitrary things like banning minarets will do far more bad than good. It will incite tribal conflict, and I don't mean guns but I mean an 'us and them' mentality. We should make rational objections, based on clear violations of human rights. The right to not see a big tower or hear the call to prayer is pretty minor.
We should look to Attaturk and the Turks for an example of how to make a secular state and deal with religion properly, not random right-wing parties that are just hitting back on a quid pro quo, reactionist mentality.
-HamerD
|
On November 30 2009 22:31 Boblion wrote:
Hitler was democratically elected too.
ppl were not allowed to vote for somthing else than the NSDAP, very shitty line you drop there.
|
We should look to Attaturk and the Turks for an example of how to make a secular state and deal with religion properly, not random right-wing parties that are just hitting back on a quid pro quo, reactionist mentality.
You might want to take a look at the christians and their problems/discrimination in turkye before you talk up its management of religion...
|
Dude the difference from the turkish situation is that they are immigrants. Immigrants don't represent a country or a culture, an huge mass of immigrants often represents the worst of it. You have to deal with troubles the right way, and the only way to convince a kid who refuses to listen to what you say is to put him in a forceful situation. For the ones who can adapt they should live in europe happily, for the ones who don't and keep that retarded religious anti social attitude we should really make them understand they are out of place. I don't see any better solution, but please to the guys screaming at racism and bringing up nazism (rofl) tell us how you would solve the problem.
|
On November 30 2009 11:03 Gnosis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2009 10:14 InToTheWannaB wrote:
I'm shocked so many people in this thread seem to believe this is ok. How can anyone be ok with a law the clearly persecutes a religious group? I understand not be a fan of a religion, but no one gets to decide whats right for other people. You can't make it hard for them to practice there beliefs because you dislike them. I thought all western nations had adopted religious freedom long ago. Have you lived in Africa, or the Middle East? Would you like to hear Islamic broadcasts 5 times a day, broadcast through loud speakers? Are you speaking out of ignorance, or do you know something of the reality of minarets? They want to practice their religion, they can practice it privately. I don't need to hear their prayers when I'm walking home at 5PM.
Then why the fuck I have to listen the church's campanas few times a day, isn't that the same thing?
And the ppl here are being really ignorant. Some of them don't want mulims in their country coz originally it was a christian country. That's actually the result of globalization which was started by your ancestors, so you should blame them.
Then i hear people talking how islam is full of violence and then i find this:
+ Show Spoiler +"And if any of the unbelievers seeks your protection, then you may protect him so that he may hear the words of God, then let him off to reach his sanctuary. This (kindness) should be done because they are a people who do not know (the beauty of Islam)." [Quran 9:6]
"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors." [Quran 2:190]
"God does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. God loves just dealers. [Quran 60:8]
"But if the enemy incline towards peace, thou shall also incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all there is)." [ Quran 8:61]
I shall explain one thing regarding the verses of Quran. You should consider them in their context. Guess why in some parts of Quran there is a call to war? Coz in the early days muslims were persecuted just for being part of islam, and it was call to arms against those who persecuted them. Not to mention that it is forbidden in Islam to shed blood. It is permissible only when others first attack Islam. So it's only a defensive measure. And even during the war it is forbidden to kill women (and rape and anything else), to kill children, to kill old ppl, to destroy the nature or other people's sanctuaries and buildings. So Islam is in fact a peaceful religion, it's just that the Western media doesn't represent it like that. And yes suicide bombers also ruin the image (did i mention that suicide is forbidden in Islam?). DragoonPK actually said the truth and i don't wonder about that because he lives in Bahrain it seems.
This issue isn't easy and if you want to talk about it you must have some arguments first and not behave like a caveman, which KwarK is doing consistently. You can't say i heard this and that because it is obvious that if you are living in a western country that the media will show you how primitive muslims are and how civilised the west is. You have to listen to both sides and I actually do that. Go watch some Al Jazeera and then watch some BBC you'll see the difference.
And about the muslims not assimilating into other cultures I have to say that yes it's theirs fault. The biggest muslim religious leaders also say that they should assimilate, but also never forget who they are. So if you think that assimilating into another culture is getting drunk and singing together or forgetting about your religion and becoming atheist, a muslim who actually cares about his religion will never do it.
Minarets, mosques, hijaab, beards is all part of their culture and religion and you can't really expect them to disband. Although the majority of western ppl declares themselves as Catholics they do it just because their mother or father was Catholic. Nowadays its harder and harder to find them because they are Catholics on paper but atheists by what they do.
I might have mispelled Catholics and Christianity. I meant Catholics in all of the cases
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
