Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Banning of minarets in Switzerland
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
irishconvert wrote: »This guy is NOT a Muslim scholar. He is basically a renegade who teaches his own version of Islam which disagrees with the teachings of the mainstream respected scholars...
..and here we go again... he is an Imam yes? He does head a Muslim Educational Centre?I'm not sure how this question is "on this one". I'm not aware that creationists have a religious objection to not being taught creationism.
There is a distinction between "something I would like to have, because of my religion", and "something I am required to do, which is in violation of my religious principles". Its not even against Creationist principles to be taught evolution...although they may find it distasteful.
So someone who by virtue of their religious beliefs is a creationist, they should have to study evolution and in order to pass exams etc lie about what they truly believe? If creationists can do something they find distasteful why can the same not be applied to Muslims? There is no rule I am aware of forbidding Muslims from swimming
Refusing to swim is not something Muslims "have to do", neither is it a violation of Muslim religious principles to swim. 0 -
-
-
Without wanting to turn this into a debate on creationism, you're being disingenuous. To pass an exam in a scientific field, you have to show you understand what that science says. You do not, ever, have to state that you believe it to be true. This, it is enturely misleading to suggest that a creationist has to lie about their beliefs in order to learn science or pass a science exam.So someone who by virtue of their religious beliefs is a creationist, they should have to study evolution and in order to pass exams etc lie about what they truly believe?
If Muslims were only being asked to do something distasteful, I'd agree with you. They're not, however. They're being asked to do something against the principles of their religion.If creationists can do something they find distasteful why can the same not be applied to Muslims?
Might I suggest you actually find out what the objection Muslims are making regarding to swimming is before trying to argue that there's no religious issue.There is no rule I am aware of forbidding Muslims from swimming Refusing to swim is not something Muslims "have to do", neither is it a violation of Muslim religious principles to swim.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
oscarBravo wrote: »But it's not important what they think, is it?
Where did I say that?oscarBravo wrote: »What sort of national psyche is so fragile that it has to be reaffirmed by preventing people from architecturally expressing their faith?
What sort of faith is so fragile that it needs to be architecturally expressed using a surplus to requirement Arabian minaret, despite the fact that most of the Muslims in Switzerland are of Balkan origin......oscarBravo wrote: »Again, this is our standard we're setting ourselves? "It's OK, we're not torching any mosques"? No, they are simply going out of their way to discommode one group more than anyone else. But that's OK, right?
Nope. No more discommodation than was already exercised it seems. Were there any threads here about the difficulty in getting planning permission for them before this referendum came up?oscarBravo wrote: »No difference to the status quo, as long as you didn't want a minaret on your place of worship.
Forgive me if I am wrong but it seemed to me like most applications for minarets were being dismissed anyway? So yeah, no major change in the status quo.oscarBravo wrote: »But it's only Muslims who want that, and who cares about them, right?
Eh no, wrong, please don't put words in my mouth.oscarBravo wrote: »Your entire argument is predicated on the assumption that somehow there's a moral imperative to send some sort of message to Muslims, and that this referendum was somehow a Good Thing because it didn't involve any, y'know, violence or anything.
Well yeah, violence is a fairly common occurence between various groups and minorities in other countries around Europe. England..Germany....France.... or would you rather see it get to that point first and then try to do something about it? As regards a message, yes I do believe there to be a such an imperative. If only to discourage fundamentalists from making their way to Switzerland to spread hatred etc safe in the knowledge that the people or government aren't likely to do a thing to stop them.oscarBravo wrote: »Some of us remain to be convinced that there's a need to send that message in the first place.
And some of us don't.0 -
Maybe I've completely misread you, but you don't seem to be oozing concern for the views of Swiss muslims.Where did I say that?
Why is it OK to express that sort of value judgement against one, and only one, religion? Why are you happy to see a ban on minarets, but not on church steeples?What sort of faith is so fragile that it needs to be architecturally expressed using a surplus to requirement Arabian minaret, despite the fact that most of the Muslims in Switzerland are of Balkan origin......
So what exactly was the referendum required for?Nope. No more discommodation than was already exercised it seems. Were there any threads here about the difficulty in getting planning permission for them before this referendum came up?
[...]
Forgive me if I am wrong but it seemed to me like most applications for minarets were being dismissed anyway? So yeah, no major change in the status quo.
It's clear that it was, as you say, a shot across the bow. Unlike you, I don't accept that that's where it ends. What is the purpose of a shot across the bow? To make it clear that the next shot can and will be on target.
Sorry, I refuse to be complicit in your dancing around what is, at heart, an exclusionary position. You're being supportive of a point of view that says there's one religion that's not acceptable in Switzerland. I don't accept that point of view, and I'll challenge it where I see it.Eh no, wrong, please don't put words in my mouth.
I refuse to accept the inevitability of violence between cultures. I utterly reject the idea that the best way to avoid violence between cultures is to attempt to eradicate one of them, or to take any steps in that direction.Well yeah, violence is a fairly common occurence between various groups and minorities in other countries around Europe. England..Germany....France.... or would you rather see it get to that point first and then try to do something about it?
What a brilliant plan: let's alienate the moderates, in an attempt to keep the extremists out. I can't see any flaws in that approach.As regards a message, yes I do believe there to be a such an imperative. If only to discourage fundamentalists from making their way to Switzerland to spread hatred etc safe in the knowledge that the people or government aren't likely to do a thing to stop them.
You've failed to articulate your view in a way that makes any sense to me. All I can see from your posts is the view that Islam is inherently bad, and anything that keeps those nasty Muslims at bay is acceptable.And some of us don't.
Forgive me for not sharing that view.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
oscarBravo wrote: »Maybe I've completely misread you, but you don't seem to be oozing concern for the views of Swiss muslims. Why is it OK to express that sort of value judgement against one, and only one, religion? Why are you happy to see a ban on minarets, but not on church steeples? So what exactly was the referendum required for?
If the Swiss vote to ban the building of any more church steeples tomorrow I wouldn't have a problem with that. Steeples are, like minarets, a relic of past times and surplus to requirements on churches.oscarBravo wrote: »It's clear that it was, as you say, a shot across the bow. Unlike you, I don't accept that that's where it ends. What is the purpose of a shot across the bow? To make it clear that the next shot can and will be on target.
I believe this shot got the desired effect of making people take notice, don't you? Would I be in favour of more laws like this one? Maybe, maybe not depending on the law itself. Am I in favour of curtailing freedom of religion, and freedom to practice - most definitely not.oscarBravo wrote: »You're being supportive of a point of view that says there's one religion that's not acceptable in Switzerland. I don't accept that point of view, and I'll challenge it where I see it.
Not acceptable? Again this wasn't a law against Islam, or mosques, or Imams, or Muslims.oscarBravo wrote: »I refuse to accept the inevitability of violence between cultures. I utterly reject the idea that the best way to avoid violence between cultures is to attempt to eradicate one of them, or to take any steps in that direction.
Violence between cultures is inevitable as long as there is no compromise and no assimilation and no people immersing themselves into the culture of the land they live in.oscarBravo wrote: »What a brilliant plan: let's alienate the moderates, in an attempt to keep the extremists out. I can't see any flaws in that approach. You've failed to articulate your view in a way that makes any sense to me. All I can see from your posts is the view that Islam is inherently bad, and anything that keeps those nasty Muslims at bay is acceptable.Forgive me for not sharing that view.
I take offence at that. I haven't for a second claimed Islam to be "inherently bad", quite the opposite in fact.At best, you're showing that its possible to ask bad questions in a science exam.
At worst, you're showing that creationists are incapable of understanding the concept of context.
...in that case you're doing the very same for Muslims.
You have addressed the issue for religious schools. What about secular schools? Should Muslim students who attend secular schools still get different treatment regarding prayer time etc?Again, let me suggest that you should find out the details of the issue before attempting to argue about it. You're making incorrect assumptions about what the issue is, and consequently reaching invalid and irrelevant conclusions about the implications.
So go on enlighten me..what is the issue? I mean it's not the actual swimming, and apparently not the dress code etc. 0
Advertisement