On 12/12/09 11:05, Darren New wrote:
> It occurred to me that one could even view some of this as a question of
> promoting the overthrow of the government. Maybe the thought is that
> Islam is fine as long as you don't suggest that Sharia law should
> replace the constitutional government currently in place. Minarets might
> be seen as more of a suggestion along those lines than mere mosques.

	Well, sure. As may the presence of Muslims. Why not just ban them? I'm 
not asking the question sarcastically. It's ludicrous to think that 
banning a structure will prevent any Sharia movement - beyond just 
giving a message that Muslims are not welcome. It's not as if Sharia 
relies on the existence of minarets.

> In any case, I can see some wisdom in restricting the freedom of speech
> of an organization devoted to the overthrow of democratic government,
> religion or not. Which is not to say all Islam is this, but certainly
> much of it is.

	Sure, but banning a piece of architecture is a disingenuous way to do 
this. They should simply just pass a law along the lines of their real 
concerns.


-- 
----> If you cut here, you'll ruin your monitor. <----

Post a reply to this message