The Swiss get it..

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • JcJ

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 19, 2008
    1,606
    36
    Swiss vote to ban new minarets

    GENEVA — Swiss voters approved a move to ban the construction of minarets in a Sunday vote on a right-wing initiative that labeled the mosque towers as symbols of militant Islam, projections by a widely respected polling institute showed.

    The projections based on partial returns say Swiss swung from only 37 percent supporting the proposal a week ago to 59 percent in the actual voting.
    Claude Longchamp, leader of the widely respected gfs.bern polling institute, said the projection contracted by state-owned DRS television forecasts approval of the initiative by more than half the country's 26 cantons, meaning it will become a constitutional amendment.
    The nationalist Swiss People's Party describes minarets, the distinctive spires used in most countries for calls to prayer, as symbols of rising Muslim political and religious power that could eventually turn Switzerland into an Islamic nation.
    Muslims make up about 6 percent of Switzerland's 7.5 million people. Many Swiss Muslims are refugees from the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s. Fewer than 13 percent practice their religion, the government says, and Swiss mosques do not broadcast the call to prayer outside their buildings.
    "Forced marriages and other things like cemeteries separating the pure and impure -- we don't have that in Switzerland, and we do not want to introduce it" said Ulrich Schlueer, co-president of the Initiative Committee to ban minarets.
    The move by the People's Party, the country's largest party in terms of popular support and membership in parliament, is part of a broader European backlash against a growing Muslim population. It has stirred fears of violent reactions in Muslim countries and an economically disastrous boycott by wealthy Muslims who bank, shop and vacation in Switzerland.
    Taner Hatipoglu, president of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Zurich, said, "The initiators have achieved something everyone wanted to prevent, and that is to influence and change the relations to Muslims and their social integration in a negative way."
    Hatipoglu said if in the long term the anti-Islam atmosphere continues, "Muslims indeed will not feel safe anymore."
    The seven-member Cabinet that heads the Swiss government has spoken out strongly against the initiative, and local officials and rights defenders objected to campaign posters showing minarets rising like missiles from the Swiss flag next to a fully veiled woman.
    The People's Party has campaigned mainly unsuccessfully in previous years against immigrants with campaign posters showing white sheep kicking a black sheep off the Swiss flag and another with brown hands grabbing eagerly for Swiss passports.
    The four minarets already attached to mosques in the country are not affected by the initiative.
    Geneva's main mosque was vandalized Thursday when someone threw a pot of pink paint at the entrance. Earlier this month, a vehicle with a loudspeaker drove through the area imitating a muezzin's call to prayer, and vandals damaged a mosaic when they threw cobblestones at the building.




    http://content.usatoday.net/dist/custom/gci/InsidePage.aspx?cId=indystar&sParam=32168245.story
     

    antsi

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 6, 2008
    1,427
    38
    I can't really applaud this. If they were banning steeples on Christian churches, I'd be screaming bloody murder and rightly so. The government has no business telling people what their churches should be shaped like.

    One of the things the Europeans are (rightly) enraged about is how Islamists are demanding special treatment under the law, such as the power to try people for crimes under religious authority instead of civil authority, trying to ban movies or cartoons that are insulting to Islam, etc. Conservative Europeans are right to look on these kind of demands as a major threat to a civil society and the rule of law.

    However, imposing special restrictions on Islam is not the way to fight back against special privileges for Islam. Under the rule of law, there shouldn't be any special anything for anybody. The law should be the law, and treat everyone the same.
     

    SavageEagle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    19,568
    38
    antsi, I can understand where you're coming from, but let's say that Satanists decide to start building huge effigies to Satan, or Neo-Nazi's decide to start building huge monuments to Hitler, or pedophiles decide to start building temples to worship the kiddie-porn Gods... Should that sort of stuff be allowed as well? Do you want your Country to have the image that evil is OK?
     

    Scutter01

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Mar 21, 2008
    23,750
    48
    antsi, I can understand where you're coming from, but let's say that Satanists decide to start building huge effigies to Satan, or Neo-Nazi's decide to start building huge monuments to Hitler, or pedophiles decide to start building temples to worship the kiddie-porn Gods... Should that sort of stuff be allowed as well? Do you want your Country to have the image that evil is OK?


    Yes. That's exactly what the 1st Amendment was written to protect. You of all people should understand that.
     

    SavageEagle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    19,568
    38
    The first Amendment doesn't protect me from saying all of a certain people should be wiped out. The 1A doesn't protect me from kiddie porn. The 1A doesn't protect me from performing Satanic acts. If your religion advocates killing others it is not protected by the 1A. Islam is one of those religions.

    Also, I don't want my Great Country being associated with the Evils stated above. It's already looking that way and that's a shame.
     

    5.56'aholic

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 5, 2009
    981
    28
    <- tragic boating accident
    . Under the rule of law, there shouldn't be any special anything for anybody. The law should be the law, and treat everyone the same.

    Exactly, remove the exemptions, exceptions and all of this other b.s. that the "law" puts into place to protect the special interest groups, so we can all once again just be humans. Everyone preaches diversity while at the same time creating inequality via "laws" that only protect certain people. All people should be afford the same protection under just law.
     

    Scutter01

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Mar 21, 2008
    23,750
    48
    The first Amendment doesn't protect me from saying all of a certain people should be wiped out. The 1A doesn't protect me from kiddie porn. The 1A doesn't protect me from performing Satanic acts. If your religion advocates killing others it is not protected by the 1A. Islam is one of those religions.

    Also, I don't want my Great Country being associated with the Evils stated above. It's already looking that way and that's a shame.

    We're not talking about murdering people. We're talking about builing minarets. In fact, your exact quote was this:

    but let's say that Satanists decide to start building huge effigies to Satan, or Neo-Nazi's decide to start building huge monuments to Hitler, or pedophiles decide to start building temples to worship the kiddie-porn Gods... Should that sort of stuff be allowed as well?

    To which my answer was yes, they should be allowed to build those things. I said nothing about "wiping people out", so please don't put words in my mouth. The 1st Amendment protects your right to freedom of religion. You want to start deciding which religions should be allowed and how they should be allowed to worship?
     

    SavageEagle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    19,568
    38
    We're not talking about murdering people. We're talking about builing minarets. In fact, your exact quote was this:



    To which my answer was yes, they should be allowed to build those things. I said nothing about "wiping people out", so please don't put words in my mouth. The 1st Amendment protects your right to freedom of religion. You want to start deciding which religions should be allowed and how they should be allowed to worship?

    I didn't say you said anything so I wasn't putting words in your mouth. :rolleyes: And by building those things you are condoning those acts and advocating them as well. Building minarets are advocating Islam which advocates killing people. Which is against the law. Why should we allow religions that advocate killing people? You say Islam is a peaceful religion? We have a great many threads with quotes from the Quran that clearly state to the contrary.

    So yea, if a religion advocates breaking our laws, then yes, it should not be allowed. But because we are a tolerant Nation, we allow them. Then we act surprised when they attack us and kill people. Surprise, Surprise. :dunno:
     

    Scutter01

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Mar 21, 2008
    23,750
    48
    I'm not gonna argue this point with you, because you clearly have no clue what I'm talking about.
     

    popeye

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Dec 10, 2008
    233
    16
    Deepest, darkest, Indiana
    Islamics hide their political and moral agenda behind their religion. The U.S. and other extremely liberal country's provide a breeding ground for a way of life that a lot of people object to, including myself. I don't like or trust them starting with the way their women are treated. You can't tell me it's enjoyable to wear a head scarf forever to satisfy archaic dogma. Are they allowed to preform female circumcision here? How soon before stoning's are acceptable? These people and their "religion/politics" (one and the same) are the ENEMY. Screw them and their minarets. Drawing the line may offend them, and our leftists, but Muslims hate us, and have picked up on the lazy socialist attitude that prevails here, and use it to their advantage.
     
    Last edited:

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    I didn't say you said anything so I wasn't putting words in your mouth. :rolleyes: And by building those things you are condoning those acts and advocating them as well. Building minarets are advocating Islam which advocates killing people. Which is against the law. Why should we allow religions that advocate killing people? You say Islam is a peaceful religion? We have a great many threads with quotes from the Quran that clearly state to the contrary.

    So yea, if a religion advocates breaking our laws, then yes, it should not be allowed. But because we are a tolerant Nation, we allow them. Then we act surprised when they attack us and kill people. Surprise, Surprise. :dunno:

    All right, Ryan, here's one for you:

    Judaism mandates male children be circumcised 8 days after birth.

    Some people consider this mutilation of the child and think it should be his choice when he is older.

    The mutilation of children (or anyone) is a violation of our law.

    Do you now advocate disallowing Jewish synagogues because that religion could be seen as advocating the mutilation of children's bodies?

    Be very careful which roads you begin to tread down.

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    SavageEagle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    19,568
    38
    All right, Ryan, here's one for you:

    Judaism mandates male children be circumcised 8 days after birth.

    Some people consider this mutilation of the child and think it should be his choice when he is older.

    The mutilation of children (or anyone) is a violation of our law.

    Do you now advocate disallowing Jewish synagogues because that religion could be seen as advocating the mutilation of children's bodies?

    Be very careful which roads you begin to tread down.

    Blessings,
    Bill

    That's not quite the same. I'm not jewish and I got the snip. :dunno: But that's a far stretch from advocating killing or enslaving people just because they don't believe the same way. We don't condone that morally or legally so why should it be tolerated religiously?
     

    techres

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Industry Partner
    Rating - 100%
    27   0   0
    Mar 14, 2008
    6,479
    38
    1
    People get to pick their religions.
    People with money get to buy property and build buildings.
    People with buildings get to use them how they will, including religious services.

    If I want to have my freedoms, then they get theirs.

    Even more so, guess what, those rights are God given and I have no interest in going up against God.

    Don't like their religion? Worried about their political plans?

    Then you get your rights to believe your concerns.
    You have the right to gather up money and build a building on land.
    And in that building you can teach & preach whatever you will.


    They get their rights, I get mine, and you get yours.
     

    Scam1789

    Long time Member mostly lurking.
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Apr 11, 2008
    160
    18
    Pittsboro
    that's a far stretch from advocating killing or enslaving people just because they don't believe the same way. We don't condone that morally or legally so why should it be tolerated religiously?

    No one is saying the belief "that non believers should be killed" should be condoned. Only that the freedoms we believe in protect faith, not murder. Aarchitecture and murder are a far cry from one another. And not every Muslim believes the passages of the Koran you reference should be taken literally.

    Some sacred texts make large statements without any desire to be taken literally.

    Christ said If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (Mathew 5:29) I don't think I have ever known a Christian who took that literally.

    There are religious extremists, but to dub every Muslim a terrorist equal to Nazi's, Satan worshipers, and child pornographers; is just ignorant.

    Racism, and Religious intolerance is not what the God of any faith I have ever heard of would advocate. And it is definitely not the ideals of the freedoms that we as Americans should hold dear.
     

    SavageEagle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    19,568
    38
    I don't have an interest in going against God either. But when their religion condones killing, isn't that going against God? It sure is against the law. So if it's against the law and against God's law, how is building temples to worship killers and advocate doing the same protected?
     
    Top Bottom