Minarets in Switzerland
| Sun Nov. 29, 2009 10:11 AM PST
No more minarets in Switzerland:
Swiss voters have supported a referendum proposal to ban the building of minarets, official results show.
More than 57% of voters and 22 out of 26 cantons — or provinces — voted in favour of the ban.
The proposal had been put forward by the Swiss People's Party, (SVP), the largest party in parliament, which says minarets are a sign of Islamisation.
Is this a sign of the resurgence of hard-right anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe, or is it just an exceptional result from an exceptional country? Switzerland is a very socially conservative place (its famous multilingual tolerance notwithstanding), so in one sense it's not a surprise that this referendum passed. Still, it was polling at only 37% support a week ago and ended up winning with 57% of the vote. That's a big swing from just a few final days of campaigning,1 and it suggests that it would hardly be impossible for other European countries to follow suit.2
1Unless, of course, Swiss voters have a tendency to lie to pollsters on sensitive questions like this, as they seem to in America.
2If they had referendums, that is. Which most of them don't. But obviously a referendum isn't the only way to accomplish something like this.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
This is primarily
Submitted by B on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 11:09 AM PST.
This is primarily xenophobia, but the swiss are also architecturally and aesthetically conservative. You'd have a hard time getting a permit to build a Frank Lloyd Wright house in most villages. God knows what happens if you forget to rake up your leaves or wash your cow.
Clean cows are happy cows, B, so why knock them?
Submitted by fingerfood on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 12:47 PM PST.
I worked with a man who was raised in Dorchester, just south of Boston, during the 1920's and 30's. He would talk about his street and neighborhood from time to time and one of the things I've never forgotten was him saying that people would routinely scrub the stairs and sidewalks in front of their (3-decker) homes and it would always be his job to polish the mailbox and the front doorknob every Saturday. Back then, he claimed, people in Dorchester - who were all, pretty much, working class - had a certain pride in their neighborhood and streets despite being predominantly renters, not owners.
Dorchester today? You'd be better off staying healthy and staying away. That 3-decker he grew up in is still standing - barely, and the rest of his old street isn't much better: chain-link fences and trash; empty lots; potholes - the usual, run-down menu of neglect.
No polished mailboxes, either - at least, none that I could see. I'll take the raked leaves and squeaky cows any day.
Actually, my point was just
Submitted by B on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 2:08 PM PST.
Actually, my point was just that 57% of the Swiss were not acting as a block on xenophobic instincts. From my perspective, they can keep their washing their cows and promptly rake up their holly berries so they don't stain the walk.
“The mosques are our
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 11:13 AM PST.
“The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and Muslims our soldiers…” - Quote by the Prime Minister of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a so-called "moderate" islamist.
Erdogen was more Islamist in
Submitted by Kevin Drum on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 12:13 PM PST.
Erdogen was more Islamist in the past, and that quote comes from a poem he read in public ten years ago. (And for which he was jailed.) I don't know the context all that well, but I wonder if it's all that different from Baptists singing "Onward Christian Soldiers"?
The difference is that since
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 12:50 PM PST.
The difference is that since he has been in power, he has completely de-secularized and re-islamized turkish politics. What the Refah party wanted to do (an almost Iran style Islamic revolution) but could not, the AKP has achieved through systematic and slow conquest of the all institutions of the country - all that with the help and even the blessings of Brussels. Only parts of the military and business community are still controlled by secularists. In a few years, the Turkish republic will be secular only by name and will compete head-on with Iran and Saudi Arabia for the leadership of the Ummah.
Shrill exageration can be amusing, but this is silly
Submitted by The Lounsbury (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 2:56 PM PST.
It's hard to know even where to start, although I rather guess we have a fine neo-fascist Turkish secularist on our hands.
Oh my!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 3:29 PM PST.
FYI: I'm neither Turkish, faschist nor secular, and there's nothing new about any of that. You demand arguments by others, you get them. What do you give back: a useless display of your prejudiced mind. Start arguing or shut up.
I am not a fan of Erdogen's
Submitted by MNPundit (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 3:04 AM PST.
I am not a fan of Erdogen's AKP. They strike me as competent Bushies in terms of religion. That is, imagine Monica Goodling only qualified for her job. It's probably legal, but it's not a positive development.
Swiss
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 11:30 AM PST.
I can't remember which blogger law I'm about to violate but the Swiss do indeed have a xenophobic past. I recently read a book about WWII and the air war over Germany and Switzerland treated U.S. air crews as hostiles. They also didn't allow refugees asylum. There no telling how many Jews were refused entry into the country. So, it doesn't surprise me at all that they voted for the ban.
The swiss have anything else
Submitted by Mat Mueller (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 2:26 PM PST.
The swiss have anything else than a xenophobic past. During WW II, Switzerland let more than 300'000 refugees, many of the jews, in. (The USA took 250'000)... when Switzerland ( back then with a people of 4 million) asked in 1939 the US to take 30'000 jewish Kids, which came to Switzerlabd as refugees, the congress denied the request.
Switzerland was surrounded by nazis, but they never gave in. It takes a lot of courage for a small country in such a situation to stay true to its values of freedom and democracy.
Because Switzerland was neutral, it had to declare all foreign air crews as hostile. But the sympathies were clearly with the allies. 11 german fighters were shot down over Switzerland. When US Planes flew over swiss territory the swiss aimed to not hit the planes. The US Ambassador reported in 1942 to Washington:"anti-aircraft fire here has been privately descriped as 'diplomatic shooting for the benefit of the German and Italian Legation's'".
That the Swiss voted against the minaret has nothing to do with racism, Much more it's a sign of commonsense. If Switzerland would be a racist country how can it be that allmost 20% of the population are foreigners? The Swiss have never liked anything totalitarian, and that's why they don't like islamo-fashists. The Swiss will always respect the freedom of religion, but they will never accept people who think they can come and tell them what to do and how they have to do it.
Switzerland is the only country were the political power is still in the hands of the people and not in the hands of an administration. That's why they pay less taxes, have a lower crime rate, more personal rights, a healthier economy, and a army who achieved all their objectives without useless bloodsheeding. Switzerland is a role model for the rest if the world.
20% foreigners
Submitted by Dutchmarbel (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 4:54 PM PST.
In 2007, 1.45 million resident foreigners (85.4%, or 19.1% of the total population, had European citizenship (Italian: 295,507; German: 224,324; citizens of Serbia and Montenegro: 196,078; Portuguese: 193,299; French: 83,129; Turkish: 75,382; Spanish: 66,519, Macedonian: 60,509; Bosnian: 41,654; Croatian: 38,144; Austrian: 36,155; British: 32,207). ; 109,113 residents were from Asia; 69,010 from the Americas; 66,599 from Africa; and 3,777 from Oceania.
Hear, hear. My grandfather
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 5:55 AM PST.
Hear, hear.
My grandfather told me stories of faking out the Nazi's by deliberately mis-aiming his gun at allied aircraft in Swiss airspace. Our extended family (up country) took in several Jewish families during the war.
and, anyone looking at the Swiss countryside would have to agree that minarets would hardly be appropriate. After all, the Swiss are not denying Islamic worship. It would be like denying witches the ability to nail wolf entrails on the entrance to city hall, which would tend to change the "look and feel" of government. There is a difference between worshipping as one sees fit and the act of worshipping.
Please try to separate thoughts associated with "xenophobia" from practicality. They are not the same. It is like, I think, the Mae West saying, "I don't care what you do in your bedroom, as long as you don't scare the horses in the street".
As I recall minarets aren't
Submitted by cld (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 11:40 AM PST.
As I recall minarets aren't actually necessary, the muezzin just has to be in some position where a lot of people can hear him.
But it goes on five times a day. Who would want to listen to this echoing through the valleys five times a day?
The call to prayer is
Submitted by Kevin Drum on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 12:14 PM PST.
The call to prayer is already banned. This referendum was strictly about building minarets.
Because in my irish catholic
Submitted by mark robbins (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 3:15 PM PST.
Because in my irish catholic town we never hear loud church bells five times a day starting at 6:30am. Nope. Never happens.
Wow
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 9:02 PM PST.
The minarets are never allowed to be used for prayer call in Europe..
they are merely a beautiful architectural piece, to make them different from a factory or a church.
Minarets originated immitating church towers in the middle east..the first minarets were even square exactly like church towers.
muslims in Switzerland are neither prolific builders (they are too poor to splurge on a minaret), nor religious since they are almost all native Europeans..and actually indistinguishable from the rest since they are white (Bosniaks, kosovar, Turks).
this move is simply made to show them their place and make it clear they are not welcomed..something they have always known.
otherwise its beyond me why 4 minarets amongst 10 million people would bother the Swiss that much.
and if their identity and values are really being threatened by 4 minarets then they will need a lot of referendums coz those values turned out to be that fragile.
I guess all that has been said about freedom of worship meant for christians, and all the brag about human rights means (for whites)..
it just shows you what kind of a country Switzerland is, and what kind of mountionous narrow minded Nazi/ultra catholic Swiss people are...also reminds me how lucky I am to be American.
after all here in The US we dont referendum to ask the religious majority to approve of the minority religion..otherwise there would be 2 or 3 religions in this world.
Well, before doing some
Submitted by Mat Mueller (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 9:55 PM PST.
Well, before doing some namecalling 'ultra/nazi catholic'... get your self informed. Switzerland is the one of the few countries in Europe which has no national-socialist or communist history.
The Swiss constitution was copied word by word from the original US. The difference nowadays is, that the actual swiss constitution is closer to the ideas of the founding fathers than is the american.
The people can ask for a referndum whenever they think it's nessacary. This is called direct democracy. The people have the last word, not the government.
In a small country where 8'000'000 people live on 30'000 square kilometers ( about 20% are alps) it's normal that people react,, when you start beeing bullyed around by some few muslims who openly hate christianty and the political system based on personal freedom and democracy.
This is truly completely and
Submitted by Ernst (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 3:30 PM PST.
This is truly completely and moronically ignorant and repugnant. First the USA constitution was designed by the founders to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. That's why the senate and the electoral college exists for starters. Secondly the founders were very big on religious freedom. The idea that a constitution that allows outlawing certain religious buildings is closer to what the founders wanted is breathtakingly moronic.
And yes, having 4 minarets is bullying. Way to stand up for yourselves! Why they might have build a fifth! one. And then the nation surely would have collapsed!! equality and freedom have won the day against the insidious fifth column that were bent on establishing the long prophesied alpen caliphate.
But hey, seeing that we're talking about the swiss, I shouldn't be so hard on your grandstanding bloviating about personal freedom and democracy, I mean you guys allow your wifes to vote for what? all of 30 years now? surely that must count for something!
Show us the way yea defender of freedom and democracy!
Moderate yes, why the quotes
Submitted by The Lounsbury (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 11:49 AM PST.
Erdogan has been Prime Minister of Turkey since 2003, perhaps besides one out of context quote, would you like to demonstrate in his seven years moving Turkey towards compliance with EU norms - in policy and human rights (more than the "secular" generals ever did to be certain) - where his lack of moderation comes in as to actual fact.
Happy to oblige, The Lounsbury.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 12:24 PM PST.
The Turkish constitution enshrines a radical separation of mosque and state, and it establishes the military as the guardian of the secular state for the simple reason that Attaturk knew full well that otherwise secularism would be lost and Turkey would swing back to being an Islamic state. That is now history.
Erdogan has established an alliance with Iran.
Erdogan is eroding freedom of the press in Turkey.
Incidentally, I cannot think of a worse role model for Turkey regarding Islam than the EU. Have you noticed how well integrated and peaceable the Muslims of Europe are?
So, in fact you have merely hand waving exageration.
Submitted by The Lounsbury (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 2:54 PM PST.
Erdogan is dealing intelligently with neighbours, you can't pretend Iran is not next door. As for eroding freedom of press in Turkey, that makes me laugh. Against what benchmark are you measuring Erdogan. I should think not the military years.
More examples: no more pork in Turkey
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 1:22 PM PST.
Even before the appearence of H1N1, the AKP managed to ban the farming, slaughtering and sales of pork through a maximalist application of health and hygiene regulations. This is stealth application of islamic law. Another example: the targeted draconian application of health and hygiene regulations in the hotel and restaurant industry makes it ever more difficult to get a beer (or any alcoholic beverage) served in the country.
liquor in Turkey
Submitted by Argaman (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 5:08 PM PST.
My experience a few years ago (2007) in Istanbul was just the opposite. I wasn't looking to eat pork (I keep kosher), but I had no trouble finding beer or wine to drink. I think the situation in Turkey is a lot more complicated than you're making it out to be.
On pork and beer
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 12:16 PM PST.
Google "Istanbul's Last Pork Butcher" for the pork story. As for beer: he who knows only Istanbul doesn't know Turkey. When you already go to the "untouristy" parts of the city, you realize how different Turkey is from "Istanbul-the-postcard". Go to a place like Kayseri or Konya to get a clue. Order your beer in Turkish so that you'll be thought to be a Muslim and not a tourist. You'll need some patience, maybe even some legs (mandatory flight plan during Ramadan!). 20 years ago things were different.
Erdogan: "Moderate Islam" is offensive and an insult to Islam.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 2:28 PM PST.
Speaking at Kanal D TV’s Arena program, PM Erdogan commented on the term “moderate Islam”, often used in the West to describe AKP and said, ‘These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”
Source: Milliyet, Turkey, August 21, 2007.
At least the Swiss care about liberty
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 12:14 PM PST.
f you care about liberty, you cannot desire Sharia. And if you do not desire Sharia, your opposition should begin with preventing symbols of Islamic dominance to propagate--such as minarets. The Swiss have already banned "the call to prayer," which consists of an assertion that Allah will dominate all (in addition to being loud and annoying--but even that is part of the assertion of dominance).
Most of Europe is far behind, with the exception (depending on elections) of Wilders's party in Netherlands.
Posts about Islam really
Submitted by mark robbins (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 3:23 PM PST.
Posts about Islam really bring out the xenophobic assholes.
How about dealing with the real threat of violent extremists, rather than peaceful muslims who want a fucking tower on top of their buildings.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/29/switzerland-bans-mosque-mina...
If that is somehow a threat to Western Civilization, then kiss it goodbye, cause it's tissue paper thin.
Tower
Submitted by Worked In Islamic Countries (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 11:23 AM PST.
I am fairly sure that your description of a minaret as a "fucking tower" would land you in deep trouble with the religious police in most Islamic countries and it is not just the hard line places that have these police. The so called moderate places like Malaysia have them too.
As for xenophobic assholes, all I can think is that you have never been to an Islamic country where all non Muslims are decidedly considered second class. Check out how "moderate" Malaysia treats its indigenous Chinese and Indian population.
For a first class experience you may want to try working in Saudi Arabia.
Being slightly better then
Submitted by Ernst (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 3:48 PM PST.
Being slightly better then those guys doesn't make you the good guy. It just makes you a slightly lesser dick.
xenophobic assholes to the left of me, xenophobic assholes to the right, here I am...
Calvin was a greater threat to liberty than any Imam
Submitted by tpx on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 9:34 AM PST.
Declaratio orthodoxae fidei: “One should forget all mankind when His glory is in question. . . . God does not even allow whole towns and populations to be spared, but will have the walls razed and the memory of the inhabitants destroyed and all things ruined as a sign of His utter detestation, lest the contagion spread.”
“We are all made of mud, and this mud is not just on the hem of our gown, or on the sole of our boots, or in our shoes. We are full of it, we are nothing but mud and filth both inside and outside.”
Banning religion practice is
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 12:37 PM PST.
Banning religion practice is now the way to promote "liberty"? that's a new one. And you say Muslims are the ones who want to destroy freedom?
How about banning Christians from saying "Your kingdom come" in the Lord's Prayer? That's a challenge to secular authority if there ever was one.
Switzerland has always been Swiss-only
Submitted by durakje (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 12:49 PM PST.
Just try getting a Swiss passport if you weren't born there -- it's the most difficult country in Europe to gain residence and citizenship in, Muslim or no. Lived there for 25 years? Gainfully employed? Speak two of the official languages fluently? Sorry, unless your neighbors agree, you won't become a citizen. IIRC, can't even apply for citizenship until you have 10 years' residence under your belt. There was an NYT story on this several months back.
I love Switzerland, but the Swiss have a serious case of stick up the ass. Your neighbors will call the cops if you put your garbage out too early, or if the guy that lives upstairs from them takes a shower at 11 pm.
And Anonymous, sorry, but minarets != imminent Sharia. If anything, the minaret ban will make things worse and calcify Swiss Muslim attitudes, impeding integration rather than facilitating it.
Much like, um, here in the Netherlands. Wilders is like an old racist uncle with Tourette's that you'd like to keep away from family gatherings but can't. Wilders' supporters range from the seemingly reasonable to the bitterly incoherent, but by and large they sound like teabaggers, whining that they work so hard, but they're being killed by taxes, and not-integratin', welfare-takin' darky Muslim furriners are robbing them of their way of life. Which they don't, they're not, and in most cases they're doing the jobs you turn your nose up at.
Too bad I can't vote against the shithead. He claims to be all for freedom of expression, but has no problems denying others a voice. His attitudes and proposed policies will impede integration more than anything.
Isn't there some notorious
Submitted by cld (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 1:05 PM PST.
Isn't there some notorious Swiss banker who is both a Nazi and an Islamic fundamentalist?
He probably does more singlehandedly to wreck Swiss opinion of Islam than any other thing.
francois genoud
Submitted by cld (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 1:48 PM PST.
Banning minarets is somewhat
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 1:10 PM PST.
Banning minarets is somewhat justifiable on aesthetic grounds, as nothing is as discordant and disconcerting in the Alps landscape than some oriental minarets popping up everywhere. But otherwise, it's xenophobia.
And I mean, if the mosques getting built in recent years in the West actually had any architectural value, I didn't see it. Most are hideous, concrete affairs. I would ban the whole deal if I had the choice.
Banning minarets is somewhat
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 1:10 PM PST.
Banning minarets is somewhat justifiable on aesthetic grounds, as nothing is as discordant and disconcerting in the Alps landscape than some oriental minarets popping up everywhere. But otherwise, it's xenophobia.
And I mean, if the mosques getting built in recent years in the West actually had any architectural value, I didn't see it. Most are hideous, concrete affairs. I would ban the whole deal if I had the choice.
Kind of extreme to ban
Submitted by SRW1 (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 4:34 PM PST.
Kind of extreme to ban certain types of buildings in, of all places, your constitution just because you find them aesthetically displeasing, don't you think so? Most countries make do with local building regulations in such cases. But of cause the Swiss are nothing if not thorough. Too bad though they found it necessary to violate their own constitution. So much about defending liberty.
Mote, beam, eye
Submitted by Bruce Webb (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 8:40 AM PST.
Maybe you should take a look at the architectural restrictions in the typical U.S. historical district, or in any given older town in New England. Then maybe take a glance at the CC&Rs of your typical gated community in Texas. Good luck slipping a minaret in.
Or propose one within sight and sound of Stonehenge or the Mound of Tara in Ireland or in Colonial Williamsburg and you will find out where the limits of freedom of religion are.
Whatever the underlying motivations of the Swiss here, U.S. municipalities and states issue all kind of land use and building restriction much stricter than this one. In any Swiss Canton simply adopted the Land Use Code of Snohomish County (which I used to administer) such minarets would become effectively illegal outside certain industrial zones, they wouldn't be able to meet height limits and setbacks in most rural and suburban areas. And those rules were not adopted because people in NW Washington are xenophobic haters. People are making too much of this, look around and you will find similar building and siting restrictions all around your.
Sorry, judgement failed you on this one
Submitted by SRW1 (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 9:14 AM PST.
Bruce, I tend to find your comments well founded more often than not. But you sure seem to have missed a salient point on this one. The Swiss didn't vote on a land use proposal, they decided to put the prohibition of minarets into their CONSTITUTION. Whats the purpose of that, other than a big f**k you?
And of course you're entirely leaving out the context of the SVP campaign. Might want to look at some of the posters they produced for it. Some of them were prohibited in several of the bigger Swiss cities for being overtly racist.
Imagine the referendum in Muslim nations
Submitted by Grant (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 2:00 PM PST.
Imagine the result if the referendum had been regarding church steeples in a Muslim nation. Oh wait, churches would already be illegal or suicidal in many fundamentalist Islamic nations.
As well
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 2:18 PM PST.
As well as possession of a Bible- but we are supposed to "celebrate" diversity in this country even if it kills us.
Such as?
Submitted by The Lounsbury (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 3:01 PM PST.
Besides Saudi Arabia. Name them.
Re : Such As ?
Submitted by Been To Switzerland (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 8:04 PM PST.
You are correct in your assertion that churches are only banned in Saudi Arabia in the Islamic world. However, you did not take into account the whole original post which states, “...churches would already be illegal or suicidal...”
They are regularly bombed and worshipers murdered elsewhere in the Islamic world; Iraq, Indonesia, Pakistan, India (not even an Islamic country but bombed by Muslims), Chechnya, Bangladesh, Philippines (again not even an Islamic country but bombed by Muslims), and Egypt.
Besides, in Switzerland they only voted to stop building minarets. It is still, and always has been, legal to build mosques. They are not bombed, or worshipers murdered, either.
Define regularly and provide
Submitted by Mo (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 11:02 AM PST.
Define regularly and provide some evidence. Don't know of a church that was bombed in India or Pakistan (in those cases it's a Hindu temple, of course, Mosques are also terrorized in India as well). Never read about any churches being targeted in those countries. Usually, it's a hotel, a tourist site or other secular site. So provide some evidence besides your hysteria, since your hysteria about "every Muslim country" turned out to be precisely 1 country.
Hey, this is the internet ....
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 12:37 PM PST.
... it's the ultimate DIY Infozone. Try Google "church attack pakistan", "church attack egypt", "christian attack indonesia", "church burned nigeria", "hindu attack bangladesh", etc ... and count the bodies. And now try "switzerland attack muslim", "switzerland burned mosque", ... Now count the dead, compare and tell me who is intolerant.
Hey, this is the internet ....
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 12:50 PM PST.
... it's the ultimate DIY Infozone. Try Google "church attack pakistan", "church attack egypt", "christian attack indonesia", "church burned nigeria", "hindu attack bangladesh", etc ... and count the bodies. And now try "switzerland attack muslim", "switzerland burned mosque", ... Now count the dead, compare and tell me who is intolerant.
Hey, this is the internet 2 ....
Submitted by Been To Switzerland (not verified) on Mon Nov. 30, 2009 7:09 PM PST.
As previously suggested do a quick Google and you'll get the answers that you are so desperate to ignore.
Never though of flipping things around and Googling such activities in Switzerland. it certainly adds some contrast.
Country X is oppresive, therefore we should be too?
Submitted by PQuincy (not verified) on Sun Nov. 29, 2009 6:47 PM PST.
The argument that Saudi Arabia bans the practice of Christianity, thus justifying a Swiss ban on minarets, seems popular, and I've seen it in various discussions.
By this logic, of course, any form of oppression anywhere in the world would justify a Western country practicing the same oppression. They oppress Christians in Saudi Arabia, so let's oppress Muslims here in Switzerland or the US. They murder albinos in parts of Africa, so let's murder people of color here in Switzerland or the US. Excellent thinking! /snark
My mother (Swiss, by the way), taught me that it was foolish to act badly because someone else does, but hey, what did she know?
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
