Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-30-2009, 09:00 PM   #316
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,292
The Swissers have spoken. Lets see who runs the country now, the people or the people next door. I expect the Saudis to retaliate by saying no Christian church steeples or Bhuddist shrines. Oh wait, they already do that. My bad. As a foot note I don't think minarets or the lack of preclude practising religion. That's just me again.

Nothing like the 6AM call to prayer and Swiss cow bells eh? I do recall our athiest friends here wanting the church bell soundings to stop too, whoda thunk it?

I would say if you need a minaret, go where the minarets are. That ain't hard stuff.


SURPRISE RESULT: Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey said she was shocked, while Justice Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf said it would affect exports and tourism

REUTERS, GENEVA, SWITZERLAND
Tuesday, Dec 01, 2009, Page 6
Switzerland voted to ban the construction of new minarets on Sunday, a surprise result certain to embarrass the neutral government and which the justice minister said could affect Swiss exports and tourism.

The Swiss news agency ATS and other media said about 57.5 percent of voters and all but four of the 26 cantons approved the proposal in the nationwide referendum, which was backed by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party (SVP).

The government and parliament had rejected the initiative as violating the Constitution, freedom of religion and the country’s cherished tradition of tolerance. The government had said a ban could “serve the interests of extremist circles.”

The government, however, said it would respect the people’s decision and building new minarets would no longer be allowed.

“Muslims in Switzerland are able to practice their religion alone or in community with others and live according to their beliefs just as before,” it said in a statement.

German daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung called the result a “disaster,” noting that Switzerland was the only country in Europe to have such a building ban and that it violated the Swiss Constitution and the European Human Rights convention.

“It won’t take long before those affected will take this to the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, where an embarrassing condemnation looms,” the paper said in an editorial that appeared yesterday.

Swiss Justice Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf said the outcome of the vote reflected a fear of Islamic fundamentalism, but the ban was “not a feasible means of countering extremist tendencies.”

“I am assuming our trade relations with other countries will become more difficult,” she told a news conference in Berne. “We’ll see the consequences in the export sector and possibly in the area of tourism. In recent years, we’ve seen particular growth [in tourism] from Gulf states, it helped us a lot, and how that develops we’ll have to see.”

The Alpine country of nearly 7 million is home to more than 300,000 Muslims, mainly from Bosnia, Kosovo and Turkey.

A group of politicians from the SVP, the country’s biggest party, and the conservative Federal Democratic Union gathered enough signatures to force the referendum on the initiative which opposes the “Islamization of Switzerland.”

Its campaign poster showed the Swiss flag covered in missile-like minarets and the portrait of a woman covered with a black chador and veil associated with strict Islam.

Four mosques of Switzerland’s estimated 130 to 160 Muslim cultural and prayer centers have minarets. The call to prayer is banned in the country.

Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey said she was shocked and deeply regretted the outcome, which had to be seen in the context of globalization and economic crises.

“Fears and anxieties were played on,” she told reporters.

Swiss ambassadors in Muslim countries would work to explain that the vote was a result of Switzerland’s democracy and its foreign policy of promoting dialogue would not change, she said.

Muslim community groups in Switzerland voiced dismay.

“The most painful thing for us is not the ban on minarets, but the symbol sent by this vote. Muslims do not feel accepted as a religious community,” said Farhad Afshar, president of the Coordination of Islamic Organizations in Switzerland.

>>>> Gee muslim guys, build a Hindu shrine in Saudi Arabia then maybe you would have a point.

11-30-2009, 10:45 PM   #317
Senior Member
deadprez's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 113
QuoteOriginally posted by Phil1 Quote
No minarets in Switzerland? How shameful. Let's count all the christian churches and synagogues in Saudi Arabia again please.

How many Temples, Synagogues or mosques exist in Vatican city ???
11-30-2009, 10:48 PM   #318
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by Phil1 Quote
“The most painful thing for us is not the ban on minarets, but the symbol sent by this vote. Muslims do not feel accepted as a religious community,” said Farhad Afshar, president of the Coordination of Islamic Organizations in Switzerland.
>>>> Gee muslim guys, build a Hindu shrine in Saudi Arabia then maybe you would have a point.
Gee, Christian guys. let *me* pray in my own home in America, and maybe *you'd* have a point.

Or not need one.

I mean, if the idea there's Muslms out there scares you, you can tell em what I tell the both of youse all the time.

I don't believe you. (Not gonna start to, either.)

Let's get on with life, OK?

Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 11-30-2009 at 11:07 PM.
11-30-2009, 11:18 PM   #319
Veteran Member
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,294
It's been building for decades....and it feeds into our tribal primitive instincts. "You can't speak badly about my religion or it's OK for me to be violent".....it's on all sides and not just one religion.

Someone gains from this spiral (or at least they think they do). People are easily manipulated....and you need to take a step back to see where this is going and who is trying to gain. If it's allowed to fester, it's going to get ugly.

Best thing for Europe would be to sit down and create a bill of human rights. There, they can decide what is OK for the Koran, woman's rights, Bible, etc. Balance public freedom with respect and find something that is reasonable. After that, if someone tries to whip up the masses into a frenzy..then it's much harder to get the mainstream from all sides to buy in.

12-01-2009, 05:20 AM   #320
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northern Sweden
Posts: 48
I actually think the outcome for such a vote would be similar in Sweden, even though our politicians does their best to condemn the vote of the Swiss people or anyone saying anything hinting criticism against Islam as being not political correct.

This strife of being political correct by politicians and the media actually makes the situation worse. Since ordinary people are getting sick and tired of the situation where more immigrants than successfully can be integrated in our society is allowed to stay here. Some of these immigrants, though a minority, have no interest in adapting themselves to Swedish society and often flat out despise our way of life. So the common folk are asking themselves, if the Muslims can’t bend their ways to fit our society why should we adapt to them?

When the mainstream political parties don’t want to touch this subject it increases the popularity of more extreme and hostile flat out racist parties, which I is a very scary development which I entirely blame our gutless politicians’ for.

Shaping society after ancient religious writings is something utterly absurd that belongs to the medival ages in my book no matter what religion it is.

Last edited by Smirf; 12-01-2009 at 05:26 AM.
12-01-2009, 06:42 AM   #321
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 15,903
I was listening to an interview on CBC last night on my way back to work. I don't know who was being interviewed, other than he was a Swiss government representative.
What he said was that at the moment there are only 3 minarets (I don't know if he meant in all of Switzerland or just his city), but that there were numerous mosques.
It seems that minaret and mosque are not necessarily the same thing, and building mosques is not something they want to prevent.
He seemed to think that what was happening in Switzerland was the development of "parallel cultures" within the country, especially in the Muslim community, and that the government wanted to discourage that.
I can see his point in that it is probably in everyone's best interest if there is a level of cultural integration (the melting pot theory of the USA vs the cultural mosaic of Canada for example), though I don't know if this is the right way to go about it, since the optic is one of racism and religious intolerance.
12-01-2009, 08:50 AM   #322
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
I was listening to an interview on CBC last night on my way back to work. I don't know who was being interviewed, other than he was a Swiss government representative.
What he said was that at the moment there are only 3 minarets (I don't know if he meant in all of Switzerland or just his city), but that there were numerous mosques.
It seems that minaret and mosque are not necessarily the same thing, and building mosques is not something they want to prevent.
He seemed to think that what was happening in Switzerland was the development of "parallel cultures" within the country, especially in the Muslim community, and that the government wanted to discourage that.
I can see his point in that it is probably in everyone's best interest if there is a level of cultural integration (the melting pot theory of the USA vs the cultural mosaic of Canada for example), though I don't know if this is the right way to go about it, since the optic is one of racism and religious intolerance.
Democratic "rights" allow you to choose your leaders, not tell them how to do their job. Constitutional "rights" enable you to practice your religion and interests as long as they dont harm others.

Mixing the two up can be perilous. Politicians can be pretty dumb at times but the machinery and an awareness of consequences keeps them in check somewhat.

Changing a constitution is most countries is incredibly difficult and so it should be. Its the one thing that prevents politicians using fear to wind up the mob and exert "tyranny by majority" to remove peoples rights.

The poor Swiss government are now having to make the best out of a bad job by explaining to a sceptical world that the majority of swiss are not islamophobic. At least in Canada, the US and the UK there is only a vague suspicion that that may true, but little damning evidence to back it up.

I am not sure whether a melting pot or cultural mosiac or multiculturalism or whatever euphemism you wish use for "enforced tolerance" actually works, but you can keep the lid on the pot more or less as long as you can maintain a semblance of normality and harmony while "media managing" the brushfires. When the veneer is stripped away or when fear is used to manipulate the population then it is unlikely any good will emerge.


Last edited by *isteve; 12-01-2009 at 08:58 AM.
12-01-2009, 09:57 AM   #323
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,292
'How many Temples, Synagogues or mosques exist in Vatican city ???'

Not a really great argument. Vatican city is so small, at approximately 44 hectares (110 acres) (0.44 km2), and with a population of just over 800, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area.[5][12][13]. I guess a good half is open to all in St Peters Square. You remember the Pope shooter don't you?

The Pope was shot and critically wounded by Mehmet Ali Ağca, a trained sniper from Turkey, while he was entering the square. The Pope was struck 4 times, and suffered severe blood loss. Just guessing here but I think he was a devout Episcopalian. Some one correct me if I am wrong.
12-01-2009, 11:00 AM   #324
Veteran Member
keyser's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Tsawwassen, BC
Posts: 376
I agree with the sentiment of some in this group. If you don't like a country, its people or what it stands for... don't move there.

I know people see my profile and think 'Canadian', but I'm not a citizen of this country I live in. I may grouch about the approximation of my culture over here, or the fact that some thoughts or notions feel quite foreign to me. Still, I'm now a Hockey fan, ate poutine less than 3 days ago and see the Moose as a truely nobel animal!

If I wasn't prepared to make that leap into another culture, on another continent. I would have stayed at home.

I accept that for 1st generation immigrants, there will always be ties to the old life (I, myself, have an accent). But they owe it to their children to adapt to the new culture. It annoys me when people born in a country can't communicate with people outside the 'ghetto' they live in.

My point is, the Swiss people are still a coherent group and they have decided that overblown stuctures like this are more devisive than inclusive. The people have spoken and that is real democracy. This is not intollerance, and for the Swiss politicians to be painting it this way is more worrying than the vote itself.
12-01-2009, 02:09 PM   #325
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by keyser Quote

My point is, the Swiss people are still a coherent group and they have decided that overblown stuctures like this are more devisive than inclusive. The people have spoken and that is real democracy. This is not intollerance, and for the Swiss politicians to be painting it this way is more worrying than the vote itself.
Thats just it - it is NOT real democracy, its fear mongering for political aims. Right now Muslims are a minority that people are irrationally scared of. If the general public could vote on every issue going do you think ANY country would have a bill of rights or freedom of religion or ANYTHING guaranteeing minority rights?

On some issues we are all minorities.
12-01-2009, 02:48 PM   #326
Senior Member
deadprez's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 113
QuoteOriginally posted by Phil1 Quote
'How many Temples, Synagogues or mosques exist in Vatican city ???'

Not a really great argument. Vatican city is so small, at approximately 44 hectares (110 acres) (0.44 km2), and with a population of just over 800, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area.[5][12][13]. I guess a good half is open to all in St Peters Square. You remember the Pope shooter don't you?
It's not the size of the country its the significance that I was going after.

All religious denominations exist in 99% of Muslim majority countries but to want to build a church in the holly of hollies is ludicrous.

Guess what i was saying is would it not be offensive to roman Catholics to request that a temple of another faith be built in Vatican city?

Everybody has there "Mecca" !

Just a thought.
12-01-2009, 02:57 PM   #327
Veteran Member
keyser's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Tsawwassen, BC
Posts: 376
QuoteOriginally posted by *isteve Quote
Thats just it - it is NOT real democracy, its fear mongering for political aims. Right now Muslims are a minority that people are irrationally scared of. If the general public could vote on every issue going do you think ANY country would have a bill of rights or freedom of religion or ANYTHING guaranteeing minority rights?
There was a popular vote with a definitive result. That's democracy in it's very purest form!

The accusation is that the media influenced the result, but that is the real flaw in democratic elections. The popular guy or the popular idea always wins.

Your insinuation is that people are too irrational, ill informed or just plain stupid to make a decision. My counter to that in the absence of a fairer system of govenment (Communism?), majority rules is still the way to go.
12-01-2009, 04:05 PM   #328
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,292
'Your insinuation is that people are too irrational, ill informed or just plain stupid to make a decision. My counter to that in the absence of a fairer system of govenment (Communism?), majority rules is still the way to go.'

Exactly!! If you can't keep your goats in a third floor apartment by all means move to a farm.
12-01-2009, 04:50 PM   #329
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by keyser Quote
There was a popular vote with a definitive result. That's democracy in it's very purest form!

The accusation is that the media influenced the result, but that is the real flaw in democratic elections. The popular guy or the popular idea always wins.

Your insinuation is that people are too irrational, ill informed or just plain stupid to make a decision. My counter to that in the absence of a fairer system of govenment (Communism?), majority rules is still the way to go.
There are many Democratic systems but nearly all those is the west are constitutional. This means that the system is bound by a set of laws that guarantees rights for ALL citizens, NOT JUST THE MAJORITY.

In countries like the US and Canada where the population is made up of many immigrants from many countries, the majority agreed those rules precisely because EVERY citizen is part of a minority group. They realised they need protecting sometimes.

If your version of democracy is merely "majority rule" then ask yourself if all of YOUR views would be "acceptable" by the majority of people where you live.

And for your information, I believe the public barely well informed enough to pick the best leaders at any given time, but certainly NOT well informed enough to vote on every policy decision they make.
12-01-2009, 06:04 PM   #330
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,292
I think you are overplaying the point. Minarets are a structure not a ban on a mosque or the ability to worship whatever. Most every place has CC&Rs on many things. Is it an infringement of 'your democracy' that you can't build an airport in a residential zone? How about if you worship spacemen and you expect them to land there any day? If the Swissers vote for no red buildings, that's the way it is until it is changed. Not a big deal and it happens everywhere. It appears that the social reingineers in far away places are the ones going sideways.

The French said no muslim scarves on women.

Mexico says the RC clergy cannot ware frocks and collars in public.

The religious nudists can't practise downtown. (I don't like that one.)

Oh well.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
minarets, switzerland
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Still no K-5 in Europe? quarc Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 151 11-10-2010 07:32 AM
Going to Europe with an MX, help! marianozz Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras 24 03-16-2010 06:43 AM
Hello from Croatia (europe) hrvoje_fila Welcomes and Introductions 3 09-18-2009 01:35 PM
K-7 not in Europe? StigVidar Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 07-14-2009 02:18 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:33 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top