The Swiss are poised to vote on a disturbing attack on religion: a ban on minarets on mosques used for the adhan (call to prayer). If passed, the referendum this Sunday would be a clear denial of a basic human right for Muslims and an act of popular intolerance against a minority group.
The measure is the work of the right-wing Swiss People’s Party. The organizer is Ulrich Schlüer, who insists that “The minaret has got nothing to do with religion. It’s a symbol of political power, a prelude to the introduction of sharia law.”
While it is true that the first minarets appeared 80 years after Muhammad’s death, they do play a significant role in the calling of the faithful and providing the faithful with a visual vantage point — much like a church bell tower served to call to Christians. It is odd that the party is not seeking a ban on church towers.
For the full story, click here.
“It is odd that the party is not seeking a ban on church towers.”
Is it? Nearly every country has these sort of hypocrites in office in one form or another. Open prejudice, religious or racial intolerance are always supported by enough people to elect these sorts of people. I’m far more interested to see the result of this vote than whether or not some crackpot proposes it.
America has no shortage of elected members of congress and senate with similarly intolerant views. It all just depends on whether there’s enough to make it into law.
JF,
I think the Professor was being sarcastic.
@Nal
I got that. Just venting a bit. Nothing against JT.
The toxins of hatred can only be contained by the individual who is cultivating them.
But a swift kick in the butt by the Swiss voters would send the bigot back to pout.
Julia Onken, a prominent feminist and psychologist and bestselling author of self-help books, last week called on women to vote for the ban. “Mosques are male houses, minarets are male power symbols,” she declared. “The building of minarets is also a visible signal of the state’s acceptance of the oppression of women.”
(From the article in The Guardian)
….
Is this feminist fantasizing?
And to think that they were neutral during WWII. Yeah right, they were the first country to close the borders to Jews.
A new movie should come out called “Swindlers List.”
This unease isn’t limited to Switzerland. The same problem occurs in France too, as this Washington Post articleshows.
Why is this a problem? It is not exactly a secret that Muslims wish to impose Sharia law on the countries in which they live. If you have a bully on your block do you let him take your house? Or do you and some neighbors get together and kick his a . . . so next time he will think twice?
And as far as feminist fantasizing, from what I have read on this blog alone, it is a rational thought.
Unfortunately Islam appears to be both a religion and a political ideology or at least that is the way it is used by the ruling class of Imam’s. Doesn’t Switzerland have a right to prevent their country from becoming like Iran?
At what point do civil liberties cross the line into national suicide. Switzerland is, by all appearances, a relatively free country that recognizes individual rights. Does it have a duty to protect them to the point of it’s own demise? That seems to me to be a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Thanks AY,
The Swiss are a country with a hypocritical history and bigotry is high among their faults. I’m not a fan of Sharia Law or of fundamentalist Islam, but then I simply don’t care for any religious fundamentalists and consider them a threat to all of civilization. That being said the Minaret and the call to prayer is a feature of Islam and not only do I not find it offensive, but I would consider their ban to be religiously bigoted in any environment.
Culture Wars discussion … I’m going to get more eggnog
What about the people who are inspired by minarets?
Takoma “Julia Onken, …last week called on women to vote for the ban. “Mosques are male houses, minarets are male power symbols,” she declared. “The building of minarets is also a visible signal of the state’s acceptance of the oppression of women.”
….
Is this feminist fantasizing?
——
More of a well deserved poke in the eye IMO.
I’d go for a ban on all public ‘call to’ noise coming from churches- a in my neighborhood in the city would ring it’s bells on Sunday mornings and wake me up- srsly, the people that were going to church knew what time it was and were already up, the people that weren’t going didn’t want to be awakened. I always put those bell in the category of a alaegorical ruler slap on the hands to us sinners
Switzerland has one of the most advanced Bill of Rights in the world. The U.S. should have those rights spelled out as clearly.
http://www.ddleague-usa.net/sbor.htm
The freedom ot practice religion is protected, but the freedom to announce a religion is not.
Switzerland is a direct democracy.
@ Frank:
True… though the fact remains that Switzerland closed its borders to those feeing the Nazis and Swiss banks swindled billions of dollars of mostly German Jews.
@ Mike Spindell:
“the Minaret and the call to prayer is a feature of Islam and not only do I not find it offensive, but I would consider their ban to be religiously bigoted in any environment.”
Are you kidding? Have you ever lived in a neighborhood where calls to prayer are broadcast from a minaret on powerful PA systems at 5 a.m.? I have… it ain’t pretty, brother, I tell you, especially for those – like me – who treasure their morning sleep!…
On a related subject, in Belmont near Boston, the Mormons built this huge temple with a sky-scrapper steeple. People all around also resisted–though the Mormons ended up prevailing. A real shame to the cityscape…
Frank: Correction
“… those FLEEING…”
Nal,
What about the people who are inspired by minarets?
In-SPIRED … minarets! I get it.
This is a very revealing video about a trip to Mecca and throwing pebbles at the devil (stoning the ol’ cuss). The video is 14 minutes long and well worth the time investment (I veiwed it twice) 3 millon plus pilgrams….
Hajj!
I regard all religions with equal contempt.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/27/stoning-of-the-devil-phot_n_372183.html
Not to mention that the Swiss provide the armed guards for the Vatican. This was done during WWII when they claimed to be neutral.
How about that….who guards the Vatican?
The “Helvetians”:
Not many of the visitors to Rome, who pose for a photograph in front of the Swiss soldiers on guard at the gates of Vatican City, are familiar with the history of these troops who take an oath of loyalty to the Pope.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/swiss_guard/swissguard/storia_en.htm
Tower of Power
‘On the Serious Side’
just to add to my previous comment and respond to some of those left by others:
lottakatz: “I’d go for a ban on all public ‘call to’ noise coming from churches- a in my neighborhood in the city would ring it’s bells on Sunday mornings and wake me up”
Totally agree with this. Churches, and other organizations, should not be allowed to get away with noise pollution. In Japan political candidates and their teams drive around in vans with loudspeakers saying little more than thank you for voting for __insert name here__. Worse still if you live in a large apartment building as they will set up a loudspeaker by the side of the road pointed at your building and talk for hours. A few church bells is a minor annoyance compared to election season here. That said, I think all forms of such noise pollution should be banned as it most definitely constitutes a public nuisance.
The law under discussion, as I understand it, is not specifically about the call to prayer, though, but rather the minarets themselves. Even if every minaret was eliminated, I’m pretty confident that the call to prayer would still be done at street level.
Takoma: “in Belmont near Boston, the Mormons built this huge temple with a sky-scrapper steeple. People all around also resisted–though the Mormons ended up prevailing. A real shame to the cityscape…”
I am not familiar with the details of the situation in Belmont but it’s not unusual for cities to have height limits on buildings, or even design approval to ensure it does not clash with the local area. (e.g. permission not given to build a giant skyscraper amongst old stone buildings, or in a resort area, etc.)
The problem here, that I see, is that it is targeting a specific religion, and not based on practical requirements applied to all persons and organizations equally.
An American female exec in Citibank relate to me how she went uot into the garden on the weekend to trim the hedge and the neighbour came running out of her back door yelling and waving her arms “No, no no” stopping her and telling her it was forbidden to do gardening on a Sunday. Bigots.
I have solutions for all these problems; don’t let the parents brain wash the children with “their” version of “a” truth/religion.
Think about it.
JF, thanks for the clarification, I admit I did not respond to the linked article but rather to Takoma and my incorrect assumption that the use of the minaret was of major concern.
Pete Moran 1, November 28, 2009 at 12:41 am
I have solutions for all these problems; don’t let the parents brain wash the children with “their” version of “a” truth/religion.
Think about it.
*************************
Ok, now what if they are all brain washed? to wit, David Korseh, Jim Jones, Charles Manson to begin the list?
@ Former Federal LEO:
“I regard all religions with equal contempt.”
Wow, man, I couldn’t have said it better…
speaking of the Mormons, they have a temple in Maryland just north of DC which can be seen from the beltway (I-495) around DC. As you are coming from east to west, the temple rises above the tree line and bears some resemblance to the city of Oz. On a well placed bridge, framing the temple spires, someone wrote “Surrender Dorothy”. Not all shared my appreciation and it was eventually painted over. It was a classic. And indicative of what I know about that religion.
“Switzerland has one of the most advanced Bill of Rights in the world. The U.S. should have those rights spelled out as clearly.”
Frank,
This may be true, but the Swiss served as the bankers for the NAZI’s during WWII. held Jewish belongings in their banks, refused to allow Jews refuge during WWII and even today have prevented Jews from recovering their money stolen by Germany in WWII. While they talk a good democratic game, their notion is limited to themselves alone.
Secondly, as someone upstream mentioned previously if this was also a ban on church steeples and church bells, than there would be some sense of equity. It isn’t though and nobody in Switzerland would dare advocating such a ban and remain politically viable. The true test of any democracy is how it protects its minorities from the harassment of the majority. Switzerland has failed at that for many years.
Byron,
I’ve seen that Mormon Temple from the highway and it was impressive in bulk, if not architecture. It was actually stunning in the sense it did seem like something out of the Wizard of Oz. This highlights the problem with the Swiss ban which is whose religious practices and architecture get banned and if specifically one religion, why not all?
Mike S:
Mormons don’t advocate, as far as I know, for the usurpation of liberty and the application of religious law from the 8th century.
They also don’t have prayer calls at 5 am.
Byron,
Think about it I’m Jewish and I support Israel, why am I not bitterly denouncing Islam? Perhaps it’s because the actions of some, do not per se denote the actions of all. To me the enemy is not any religion, but the Fundamentalists who try to hijack it for their own hate filled purposes. As far as LDS goes I do have some bitterness towards them for their “conversion” of Jews who died in the Shoah, which to me was a sign of ultimate disrespect for the Jewish People.
Plus if you want to read about the workings of LDS, there is a book called “The Morman Murders,” written and well-documented by a NY Times reporter, that provides some interesting details. My point is simply that no religion should be singled out, when others are left unscathed.
http://www.samplemovie.org@Tv