 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieee org> wrote:
> 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.
If it were up to me, this kind of islam would most certainly not be welcome
here: http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp
If someone comes here, publicly threatens the hosting population with
beheadings and holocausts and demands basic freedom to be banned, in my
opinion they can go to hell, and are certainly not welcome here.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/13/09 12:16, Warp wrote:
> Neeum Zawan<m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> If it were up to me, this kind of islam would most certainly not be welcome
> here: http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp
And this has what to to do with minarets (and with Switzerland?). Sure,
the Swiss doesn't want those kinds of folks (who does?), but does anyone
think those guys are going to say, "Oh damn! Now that minarets are
banned, we can't say these things in Switzerland"?
> If someone comes here, publicly threatens the hosting population with
> beheadings and holocausts and demands basic freedom to be banned, in my
> opinion they can go to hell, and are certainly not welcome here.
Yes, but I want people to say it outright, and ultimately pass laws
that don't try to go around the issue. Passing it off as a question of
architectural integrity is a lowly act.
--
I'm! A! Graduate! Of! The! Bill! Shatner! Acting! School!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> On 12/13/09 12:16, Warp wrote:
> > Neeum Zawan<m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> >> 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.
> >
> > If it were up to me, this kind of islam would most certainly not be welcome
> > here: http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp
> And this has what to to do with minarets (and with Switzerland?).
That muslims have brought up negative sentiments on themselves by acting
like idiots. No amount of multiculturalist propaganda is going to change
that. If muslims want to to earn respect, they should stop acting like
fanatics and killing people. *Then* they might get their minarets.
If Europeans go to, for example, Africa and start acting like jerks and
killing people, can you blame the natives for growing resentment and
decline their demands? If not, then you can't blame Europeans for not
bowing to every demand that muslims make.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> And this has what to to do with minarets
Minarets are a platform (literally) to call muslims publicly to prayer and
have them join together in public. Perhaps a "quiet" religion is more
acceptable than a publicly noisy one to the general populace.
> Sure, the Swiss doesn't want those kinds of folks (who does?), but does
> anyone think those guys are going to say, "Oh damn! Now that minarets
> are banned, we can't say these things in Switzerland"?
No, but they may reach fewer ears likely to take up arms. Given the number
of people saying they're willing to murder over a page in the newspapers, I
can imagine what would happen if it *wasn't* phrased as simply about
architecture.
> Yes, but I want people to say it outright, and ultimately pass laws
> that don't try to go around the issue. Passing it off as a question of
> architectural integrity is a lowly act.
Are church bells that ring five times a day permitted? I don't know, but I
never hear church bells around here any more, and when I was young it was
once on Sunday morning at the start of christian services.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
much longer being almost empty than almost full.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> a écrit dans le message de groupe de
discussion : 4b2546a0$1@news.povray.org...
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> And this has what to to do with minarets
>
> Minarets are a platform (literally) to call muslims publicly to prayer and
> have them join together in public. Perhaps a "quiet" religion is more
> acceptable than a publicly noisy one to the general populace.
Countries like Switzerland have building codes, zoning laws etc. People
can't build tall towers in the middle of cities and start using loudspeakers
at 5am without any sort of oversight. There are 4 minarets in Switzerland
and 10-12 in France, all purely ornemental. Problems with minarets: zero.
The biggest one is actually in Paris and inaugurated in 1926 to great
fanfare. If the right-wing party behind the referendum had been talking
about actual Islam-related issues, it could have made some sense, but
talking about minarets is just nonsensical and meant to insult the local
muslims in order to win seats at their expense. It's a completely bogus
controversy fueled deliberately by off-the-shelf xenophobia. It's a frigging
shame to see that in 2009 in Europe.
G.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran wrote:
> talking about minarets is just nonsensical and meant to
> insult the local muslims in order to win seats at their expense.
No doubt. Not unlike a huge amount of American politics. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
much longer being almost empty than almost full.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran <gil### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Problems with minarets: zero.
You deliberately fail to consider the *symbological* meaning of minarets,
especially considering the teachings of islam with regard to non-islamic
people and countries.
You don't have to hear what muslim religious leaders and scholars are
teaching from "racists" and "xenophobes". You can hear it from themselves.
And it's not something which they are exclusively teaching in their own
home countries, far from here. It's something which they are teaching in
mosques right here, in Europe. Just watch that documentary about people
who actually inflitrated British mosques to see what they were preaching
there.
But of course it's so comforting to ignore such things.
> It's a completely bogus
> controversy fueled deliberately by off-the-shelf xenophobia. It's a frigging
> shame to see that in 2009 in Europe.
You, my friend, are a victim of multiculturalist propaganda. You have
swallowed hook, line and sinker.
The reason why many Europeans dislike islamic cultures is not xenophobia.
If it was xenophobia, they would dislike other foreign cultures with the
same fervor. Most of these people who dislike islamic cultures have absolutely
no problems with, for example, Chinese, Japanese, Indians or South Americans,
even though their cultures are religions are often radically different from
the European ones.
No, the reason why islamic cultures are disliked is because of how those
cultures view basic human rights, such as their attitude towards women and
sexual minorities (such as homosexuals), their attitude towards other
religions (see, for example, how many religions are allowed to be publicly
preached in the core islamic countries of middle east), and their attitude
towards the basic concept of constitutional freedom, such as depicted here:
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp
These Europeans also dislike the fact that so many muslims are offered a
place to live and work, yet these muslim start making obnoxious and
ridiculous demands instead of respecting their hosting society and culture.
For example Chinese, Japanese, Indian and South American people living
in Europe do not behave in that way nor exhibit such low views on basic
human rights in such a grand scale, which is why they are accepted. In
other words, those people respect others and know how to behave and be
a productive part of the society they are living in.
Blaming the dislike of muslims to "xenophobia" is trying to obscure the
real problems by replacing them with invented ones.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/13/09 13:55, Darren New wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> And this has what to to do with minarets
>
> Minarets are a platform (literally) to call muslims publicly to prayer
> and have them join together in public. Perhaps a "quiet" religion is
> more acceptable than a publicly noisy one to the general populace.
Except that the ones in Switzerland didn't make any such noise, from
the articles I read.
And you live in the US. Barring a small part of Michigan, have you
heard of minarets here being used this way?
And besides, the reasoning is still invalid. If noise was a concern,
just ensure that there are laws related to what kinds of noise one can make.
> No, but they may reach fewer ears likely to take up arms. Given the
> number of people saying they're willing to murder over a page in the
> newspapers, I can imagine what would happen if it *wasn't* phrased as
> simply about architecture.
I'll grant that. It has its logic, but the way I see it, by being
duplicitous they're pissing off the "moderate" majority, rather than an
"extreme" minority. I just think that the moderate ones are the ones who
are less likely to go to Switzerland, rather than the troublesome ones.
Remember, minarets are not a part of Islam (in terms of theology, etc).
Fundamentalists will have no problems moving to a place that doesn't
allow it. They will, though, have more ammunition to rouse others up
because of this.
You could see it either way.
>> Yes, but I want people to say it outright, and ultimately pass laws
>> that don't try to go around the issue. Passing it off as a question of
>> architectural integrity is a lowly act.
>
> Are church bells that ring five times a day permitted? I don't know, but
Irrelevant question, given that noise was demonstrably not an issue,
and if it were, you just need laws against public noise, as opposed to
architecture.
--
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/13/09 13:01, Warp wrote:
> That muslims have brought up negative sentiments on themselves by acting
> like idiots. No amount of multiculturalist propaganda is going to change
> that. If muslims want to to earn respect, they should stop acting like
> fanatics and killing people. *Then* they might get their minarets.
Funny that the same arguments could be used against Americans by
looking at a subset of their population.
> If Europeans go to, for example, Africa and start acting like jerks and
> killing people, can you blame the natives for growing resentment and
> decline their demands? If not, then you can't blame Europeans for not
> bowing to every demand that muslims make.
I can always blame people for misleading. No matter how much worse the
other side is.
--
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
