BF2S Forums Switzerland bans minarets

Uzique wrote:

jord wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

But I thought you Euros were 'enlightened'. It's what you keep telling people in my country...

Indeed, we are. Thanks, always nice to be reminded.

yeah, for about 400 years now, cheers for the reminder.

switzerland is a faggot-ass country. always on the fence. always quietly right-wing. they all had boners when nazi germany was in power.

Nice of you to call my country faggot-ass... Yeah, Switzerland's right-wing (for Europe) and we don't deny it. It was still a democratic vote, and considering about a seventh of the country are Muslims, I wonder how many voted yes...

What I know, from personal experience, is that people who grow up in Switzerland who were originally from different countries feel very Swiss - sometimes more so than where they originally came from - and want their cultures to adapt the Swiss qualities. Therefore, minarets don't really fit in the picture, because by definition they're supposed to have tall spires, sometimes with onion-shaped crowns, which in no way fits in with traditional, Swiss architecture (or even the modern stuff).

So from a cultural point of view, I get it - but maybe they could have just imposed regulations on sizes of spires, or allowance of shapes, etc.

What we definitely don't want, however, is adhan at 5AM. As far as the unspoken laws of Switzerland go, this equates to murder .

And Europe is progressive, hands down. Switzerland just has a direct democracy, so things take time in our country (last Canton to grant women voting rights was in 1990, even though it had been instated federally in '71) - the democracy decreed this, now, so, you know - the people have spoken. How many countries can claim that their people are listened to?

-kon

This will do jackall to stop the supposed 'islamification' of Europe, people aren't going to stop moving there because there aren't minarets.

On the other hand it will make a lot of otherwise docile people very angry.

I grew up in egypt with the sound of the adhan and bells from the neighborhood church. The two buildings were just beside eachother.

I <3 it...

oug wrote:

If it were a move against all religions I'd support it. But it seems this is a product of right-wing narrow mindedness directed against foreigners. Apparently the fear campaign is catching on...

You would support a move against all religion but say that this is narrow-mindedness?

JohnG@lt wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

oug wrote:

If it were a move against all religions I'd support it. But it seems this is a product of right-wing narrow mindedness directed against foreigners. Apparently the fear campaign is catching on...

You would support a move against all religion but say that this is narrow-mindedness?

He's so blind in his hate and rage that he can't see the pathetic irony that is his belief system.

Mmmm I think he's an Atheist trying to construe that he wishes for all Religion to be removed as much as possible, not just Islam. I tend to agree, when in Rome...

Am I wrong in my understanding this has nothing to do with religion but just a style of architecture?

If so, good on them. There should be more laws banning bad/ugly/out of place buildings.

JohnG@lt wrote:

jord wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

He's so blind in his hate and rage that he can't see the pathetic irony that is his belief system.

Mmmm I think he's an Atheist trying to construe that he wishes for all Religion to be removed as much as possible, not just Islam. I tend to agree, when in Rome...

I'm well aware. But he'd cheer on a ban of all religions but would cry if they rounded him up and banned all atheists.

that's a bit of an absurd argument.

of course he'd cry if they banned all atheists as well as all religions... religions are spiritual belief-systems based on hex-book tradition and irrationality. banning all atheists would be a move to deserve widespread-outcry; it would make as much sense as banning all libertarians or banning all academics from a society.

kon, good post. europe IS progressive, thank you for seeing that despite switzerland's apparent backwardness. i can see and agree that switzerland is a pretty stark exception to the european rule, and thanks for the insight as to why your/the people have such a mentality.

Uzique wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

jord wrote:

Mmmm I think he's an Atheist trying to construe that he wishes for all Religion to be removed as much as possible, not just Islam. I tend to agree, when in Rome...

I'm well aware. But he'd cheer on a ban of all religions but would cry if they rounded him up and banned all atheists.

that's a bit of an absurd argument.

of course he'd cry if they banned all atheists as well as all religions... religions are spiritual belief-systems based on hex-book tradition and irrationality. banning all atheists would be a move to deserve widespread-outcry; it would make as much sense as banning all libertarians or banning all academics from a society.

kon, good post. europe IS progressive, thank you for seeing that despite switzerland's apparent backwardness. i can see and agree that switzerland is a pretty stark exception to the european rule, and thanks for the insight as to why your/the people have such a mentality.

Thanks for proving my point about your closed mindedness. You're as much 'us vs them' and inclusive as the religious evangelicals you denounce.

Uzique wrote:

you denounce islam as being a religion of violence, you're hardly a beacon of nonbias open-mindedness.

arguing about bias and perspectivism in D&ST is a fucking pointless pursuit. im arguing MY viewpoint. of course it is informed by my attitudes and personal values- are yours not? don't be ridiculous. it's a fruitless and futile way to 'debate'; you may as well be attacking the validity of my sources constantly like all the other half-assed 'debaters' do whenever someone dares to link to an essay or a news-source.

this is why D&ST fucking sucks. im apparently a pseudo-intellectual elitist whereas you're the chairman of the oxford debating society with your 'your opinion is an opinion!' and 'your sources are questionable!' bullshit.

p.s. where the FUCK have i "denounced religious evangelicals"? i said banning minarets was a bad idea. i said europe was post-enlightenment and progressivist. what when where. you're full of shit.

No, it was oug that said he would happily ban all religious belief from society. You defended him so I lumped you in with him.

The problem is your viewpoint is not original, nor is anything you say. You have a distinctly left wing view of the world and anything outside of the bounds of that political sphere is viewed with contempt. You probably don't realize it yourself but it oozes out of every post you write. There's nothing inherently wrong with having those views but to toss around terms like 'liberal' or 'progressive' to describe your thought process is idiocy. There's absolutely nothing liberal about the left view of politics except that it is generally populated by wanna-be artists and pseudo-intellectuals and to think of themselves as 'liberal' soothes their ego. They get to be 'rebels' and 'original' even while conforming to a very strict ideology. If you don't see the irony contained in that last sentence there really is no helping you.

Progress is an entirely subjective term. One's progress is another's regression, it depends entirely on ones perspective. To usurp a term like 'progressive' is not only presumptuous, but in many cases it is an outright fallacy. But I digress. You've shown nothing more than an ability to conform to a certain ideology. This doesn't make you either 'liberal' or 'progressive', but in fact makes you a conservative in your own way. Just look at the way you've spluttered through this thread, any attack on your beliefs and you fly off the handle, the same way a religious evangelical would.

I'm trying to get you to open your eyes and view the world around you without the prisms of ideology. It's the only way that one can become a rational person. Your views are too colored by feelings and absurd ideologies. Do this, and you'll become a true 'liberal' instead of a liberal in name only.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-12-01 09:12:54)

Uzique wrote:

err im left wing now?

just because i dont agree with banning minarets? here's a protip: im not religious, but i'll defend religious rights. im not left-wing, but i'll speak out against idiotic moves made by the right. the generalisations you are making about me show you to be even more of an 'idiot' than you flippantly tag me as being... im from an old-money english background, right-wing and conservative to the back-teeth. i don't consider myself an artsy liberal or a sympathetic left-winger, i just couldnt carry that attitude off with my background and world-view. politically im well-educated enough to defend my views against your obtuse generalisations, thanks very much. if i have any political leanings i would say i very loosely see merits in libertarianism as an ideological and ideal system, though with no practical prospect of implementation.

can you please stop constantly making these bullshit half-guess ad hominem remarks now. you mention irony and idiocy but what you fail to recognize is the irony in your own condescending "It's okay, you may not see it about yourself, but i see it in every post..." shit. just quit, you know when you call a middle-class english conservative a pseudo-intellectual, young-hip socialist that your smart-streak has ended. make an intelligent response as to why minarets and minarets alone should be banned. tell me why europe as a continent and collection of (multi)cultures ISN'T progressivist (protip: i have said europe is progressivist, not myself, why the fuck would i say im a progressivist person, that's ridiculous)- stop down-talking to me about all this 'break free of your ideology' bullshit; you're the one sat there with a patent neocon islamophobia, mr.pigeonhole.

Well, if what you say is true, you sure do hide it well.

There is no rational reason to ban minarets. It's a reactionary movement based solely on feelings and not rational thought. Does it really matter what religion people choose to follow? No. Can I sympathize with those that are afraid of Islam? Yes, but only because of the baggage that it brings with it. Life under Islamic rule would be the same as Europe returning to the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church ruled the lives and thoughts of everyone with an iron fist. That is, of course, the worst case scenario. Banning minarets is just a form of self-delusion and a denial of reality. They are there and banning the display of their religious symbols doesn't make them go away.

Btw, the 'conservative' ranks of British society have historically produced many of the most devout to socialist ideas. The same can be said for America. It's called 'Champagne Socialism'. If you say that it's not what you are, then fine, but the overt pride you've shown in calling Europe a 'progressive' society belies your words.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-12-01 09:39:21)

JohnG@lt wrote:

jord wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

He's so blind in his hate and rage that he can't see the pathetic irony that is his belief system.

Mmmm I think he's an Atheist trying to construe that he wishes for all Religion to be removed as much as possible, not just Islam. I tend to agree, when in Rome...

I'm well aware. But he'd cheer on a ban of all religions but would cry if they rounded him up and banned all atheists.

This was a discussion about buildings no? It is my understanding that Switzerland banned minarets, not the religion. If it was me, I'd ban churches too. I couldn't care less about the believers themselves. People can believe whatever they want as long as they keep it to themselves. What we're talking about here is the position of the state. Imo either you drop the hammer on all religions or none of them.

Now if you want to talk about my personal beliefs, I find myself agreeing a lot with this guy... http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=132898

JohnG@lt wrote:

No, I said it was pointless to argue with people and expect them to embrace multiculturalism. Xenophobia is just part of what we are as humans. Do I think it's ok? No. I just know it's fruitless to expect otherwise. The best you could do is temper their feelings so it doesn't blow up into another holocaust. Everyone picks on someone lower on the ladder than themselves. Whether intellectually or physically, it helps their self esteem to know that there is someone worse off than they are. Muslims happen to be on the bottom right now so a bit of reactionary kicking is understandable. Is it right or justified? No, of course not. But you have to pick your battles and this isn't really one of them. With more time in the community, Islam will come to be more accepted and stupid stuff like a ban on minarets will be erased from memory with time. Getting bent out of shape and angry about it just feeds into the peoples fears that voted for the ban.

Nothing is pointless. Xenophobia is not part of who we are, it is cultivated. A lot of effort is put in order to scare people, create false impressions, and lay blame on the minorities. It thus takes even more effort to erase that fear. By letting things like that slide, slowly and gradually we come into a status quo that promotes division. It is a duty of a society that seeks equality to react as fiercely as possible to every such action. By addressing one small thing at a time, you gradually set the basis for a populace free of such misconceptions. Complacency is our worst enemy.

man, your style of debating is so classically bad, you're neatly summed up somewhere between reductio ad absurdum and ad hominem in the classic-little-book-of-rhetoric. he said that xenophobia is conditioned - which it is - and your argument then quickly flows to such posits as "to ever think a classless society could exist is delusional". nobody is talking about economic or social class, we're talking about xenophobia. 'fear of the unknown' as an instinctive, root-level psychological and sociological process? sure. minarets are not "the unknown". you're taking this into deep deep extremes of bullshit pretension.

"thoughts and ideas are not equal" just takes that pretension and ups it a notch into the bizarre and fucking irrelevant. nobody is theorizing nonsense here about a marxist mentality. haha, jesus. and your assertion that 'militant islam is anathema to our society' is, firstly questionable ("our society" is multicultural and doesn't take a definitive stance on anything, rarely) and secondly, nobody is talking about militant islam. now at this point, if i was a pompous pseudo-intellectual such as yourself (here's that irony i was talking about, hint hint) I would say that you are too badly stuck into your ideological paradigm; you're a living talking walking example of the typical american mentality. jeez man, you just need to liberate yourself before you can truly call yourself open-minded. throw off the shackles of intellectual dumbery and resist the urge to be lazy and stereotypical! non-pseudo intellectuals of the world, unite! etc.etc. god, you talk such gash...

Last edited by Uzique (2009-12-01 11:37:41)