On the 29th of November, a public referendum was held in Switzerland to consider, among other things, whether Minarets should be banned from construction. For those that do not know, Minarets are tall spires with onion shaped or conical crowns that are used as architectural highlights in the construction of Islamic Mosques.

Early predictions claimed that the referendum would fail, however 57.5% of the vote approved the proposal to ban the construction of Minarets.

So what impact does this have upon the country, and what does it say about Switzerland's population? Sure, their Islamic population may only make up 5% of the total, but does this newly enforced ban upon Minarets infringe upon the rights of those individuals to practice their own religion? How would the public react if a similar action was taken against Christian churches? Discuss.

EDIT:

My opinion on this issue is one of surprise. While I am not a follower of religion myself, I respect the rights of others to follow a religious path, and this decision by the Swiss people can only be seen as a limiting one to those of the Muslim faith; one of the largest religions in the world. If a Christian Church was forced to downsize or limited in any way in a foreign country where Christianity is not dominant, I'm sure there would be a media furor around the issue.

The core point here that seems apparent to me is that the Swiss public have in effect used historical context (specifically 9/11 and the War on Terror) as the justification for a double standard in regards to religion. If a nation does not wish to officially recognise a religion, it may call it a cult, and in some cases that is justified. But the only outcome that would arise from this decision is one of hostility, it has no practical use.

Most Western cultures and Islam do not work well together. Sharia Law and Western Democracy don't work well together and I see no problem with a country trying to limit the amount of Islamic culture mixing with theirs.

Are Minarets required for them to worship Allah? By the look of them they're a fairly minor part of the Mosque's construction, off to one side and not joined to the rest of the building.

I'm asking seriously, as I don't know. If not, then it's no issue. If it is, then there may be a question of religious discrimination here.

Scolar Visari:
Most Western cultures and Islam do not work well together. Sharia Law and Western Democracy don't work well together and I see no problem with a country trying to limit the amount of Islamic culture mixing with theirs.

You could have simply written [InsertGenericIslamophobicRemarkDisguisedAsCulturalDefenceDiatribeHere] and saved yourself the typing time.

How are minarets conduscive of Sharia Law?

Amnestic:
Are Minarets required for them to worship Allah? By the look of them they're a fairly minor part of the Mosque's construction, off to one side and not joined to the rest of the building.

I'm asking seriously, as I don't know. If not, then it's no issue. If it is, then there may be a question of religious discrimination here.

A church or a cathedral doesn't need a tower, either, but they still erect one.

The fact is, unless this ban is spread to cover all towers and tall buildings, it is specifically targetting Islam and is thus religious discrimination.

Amnestic:
Are Minarets required for them to worship Allah? By the look of them they're a fairly minor part of the Mosque's construction, off to one side and not joined to the rest of the building.

I'm asking seriously, as I don't know. If not, then it's no issue. If it is, then there may be a question of religious discrimination here.

The importance of the minarets is argueable. My knowledge of Islam is a little off, but isn't the minaret the place where the mosque leaders call everybody to pray 5 times a day. Isn't that kind of a big deal? (For Islam anyway, since one of the 5 pillars is to pray 5 times a day.)

I don't think it's so much the buildings themselves, but the fact that so many westerners seem to have an irrational fear of Islam. Obviously somebody thinks they are a big deal, maybe the minarets aren't a big deal, but why even go through the trouble of banning them if you don't think it's a big deal.

Really though, it's not like the Muslims are asking for special privileges, it's more like: " Hey, could you please not ban the construction of add-ons for our holy buildings? Thanks."

Scolar Visari:
Most Western cultures and Islam do not work well together. Sharia Law and Western Democracy don't work well together and I see no problem with a country trying to limit the amount of Islamic culture mixing with theirs.

It's not like all muslims want Sharia Law implemented. Of course Sharia Law and democracy as we know it won't mix very well or easily but that doesn't mean muslims can't live in a democracy.

As I understand it most of the politicians were against it because it would infringe upon the rights. But of course, the public doesn't care about minorities or rights... A similar suggestion with churches would of course have spelled a no.I think it's embarrasing so double moraled people are.

No matter how small a percentage a population makes up of the total, it's not allowed to discriminate them. And freedom of religion should allow all kinds of religious buildings to be built. Nobody complains when a syngagoge in a Christian country is being built.

Amnestic:
Are Minarets required for them to worship Allah? By the look of them they're a fairly minor part of the Mosque's construction, off to one side and not joined to the rest of the building.

I'm asking seriously, as I don't know. If not, then it's no issue. If it is, then there may be a question of religious discrimination here.

I suspect their not neccesarily required for prayer (But I'm not Muslim, I don't know the specifics). But the idea of the Minaret is that the Imam would go up there and make the "Call to Prayer", to remind people to get over to the Mosque.

Seeing as in this modern age we have clocks, Mosques are irrelevent in the same way as Church towers. But it's a traditional thing...and Religion without tradition is like a sandwich without bread.

Rokar333:

Amnestic:
Are Minarets required for them to worship Allah? By the look of them they're a fairly minor part of the Mosque's construction, off to one side and not joined to the rest of the building.

I'm asking seriously, as I don't know. If not, then it's no issue. If it is, then there may be a question of religious discrimination here.

The importance of the minarets is argueable. My knowledge of Islam is a little off, but isn't the minaret the place where the mosque leaders call everybody to pray 5 times a day. Isn't that kind of a big deal? (For Islam anyway, since one of the 5 pillars is to pray 5 times a day.)

As far as I know, you're right. But I've read they didn't use them for that in Switzerland so they're there purely for the aesthetics.

RyVal:

Scolar Visari:
Most Western cultures and Islam do not work well together. Sharia Law and Western Democracy don't work well together and I see no problem with a country trying to limit the amount of Islamic culture mixing with theirs.

You could have simply written [InsertGenericIslamophobicRemarkDisguisedAsCulturalDefenceDiatribeHere] and saved yourself the typing time.

How are minarets conduscive of Sharia Law?

Amnestic:
Are Minarets required for them to worship Allah? By the look of them they're a fairly minor part of the Mosque's construction, off to one side and not joined to the rest of the building.

I'm asking seriously, as I don't know. If not, then it's no issue. If it is, then there may be a question of religious discrimination here.

A church or a cathedral doesn't need a tower, either, but they still erect one.

The fact is, unless this ban is spread to cover all towers and tall buildings, it is specifically targetting Islam and is thus religious discrimination.

Sorry for being so generic, I'll try to be more specific now.

First off, Minarets are not conduscive of Sharia Law. However, they act as a sort of symbol of Islamicisation. Many people, and especially Europeans are very frightfull of Islamicisation and the things it brings.

Now that I got that out of the way, let me say that Islam is not bad and neither are Muslims. The problem is that Islamic religion also tends to be the governing body. The whole seperation of church and state thing that the west has going on doesn't really fly well with the combination thing that Islam has.

You're also right in saying that this is religious discrimination. A number of European countries have taken action to reduce the number of Muslims or Muslim traditions in their countries for fear of Islamicisation. Is this the right way to handle things? Probably not, but it is a very real fear that a number of peolple around the world feel.

Rokar333:

Amnestic:
Are Minarets required for them to worship Allah? By the look of them they're a fairly minor part of the Mosque's construction, off to one side and not joined to the rest of the building.

I'm asking seriously, as I don't know. If not, then it's no issue. If it is, then there may be a question of religious discrimination here.

The importance of the minarets is argueable. My knowledge of Islam is a little off, but isn't the minaret the place where the mosque leaders call everybody to pray 5 times a day. Isn't that kind of a big deal? (For Islam anyway, since one of the 5 pillars is to pray 5 times a day.)

I don't think it's so much the buildings themselves, but the fact that so many westerners seem to have an irrational fear of Islam. Obviously somebody thinks they are a big deal, maybe the minarets aren't a big deal, but why even go through the trouble of banning them if you don't think it's a big deal.

Really though, it's not like the Muslims are asking for special privileges, it's more like: " Hey, could you please not ban the construction of add-ons for our holy buildings? Thanks."

This is pretty much it. Obviously I can't comment properly on the issue as I'm not a Muslim, but the easiest way to empathise with the situation is to align it with your nation's dominant religion, which in Australia is Christianity. It's never going to happen, but if there was any type of legislation passed which discriminated against the Church in any way there would be an outroar from Catholic groups all over the nation. This ban is not just a minor restriction, as far as I'm aware it's a large slap in the face to the nation's Muslim population. The worst thing about it all is that it is speculated to be based upon fear of their religion by the general population, which doesn't say much for the Swiss and their tolerance.

As far as I can tell, this bill looks like a contravention of the Swiss Constitution and is likely to be killed by the judiciary.

Calgetorix:

Rokar333:

Amnestic:
Are Minarets required for them to worship Allah? By the look of them they're a fairly minor part of the Mosque's construction, off to one side and not joined to the rest of the building.

I'm asking seriously, as I don't know. If not, then it's no issue. If it is, then there may be a question of religious discrimination here.

The importance of the minarets is argueable. My knowledge of Islam is a little off, but isn't the minaret the place where the mosque leaders call everybody to pray 5 times a day. Isn't that kind of a big deal? (For Islam anyway, since one of the 5 pillars is to pray 5 times a day.)

As far as I know, you're right. But I've read they didn't use them for that in Switzerland so they're there purely for the aesthetics.

That was part of my point. If they are only there for aesthetic, why even go through the trouble of banning them?

This, coming soon after Maine voted to repeal the mixed gender marrage laws, would seem to show the flaws in giving the people direct power in government. The masses, as a whole, act largelly upon instict and impulse, which is why it is appropate that political parties who represent the people, moderate the general will of the masses. This is why it is also appropiate that nations have a constitution and a judiary which keeps the people, and the leglistaure, in check.

The result of this poll is most telling, Islamification, or Islamaphobia is becoming a real fear amoung Europeans, governments should probably do more to address these concerns. I expect soon the BNP will be calling for a referendum to held here in the UK on the issue of mosques being constructed here.

Rokar333:

Calgetorix:

Rokar333:

Amnestic:
Are Minarets required for them to worship Allah? By the look of them they're a fairly minor part of the Mosque's construction, off to one side and not joined to the rest of the building.

I'm asking seriously, as I don't know. If not, then it's no issue. If it is, then there may be a question of religious discrimination here.

The importance of the minarets is argueable. My knowledge of Islam is a little off, but isn't the minaret the place where the mosque leaders call everybody to pray 5 times a day. Isn't that kind of a big deal? (For Islam anyway, since one of the 5 pillars is to pray 5 times a day.)

As far as I know, you're right. But I've read they didn't use them for that in Switzerland so they're there purely for the aesthetics.

That was part of my point. If they are only there for aesthetic, why even go through the trouble of banning them?

The Swiss Constitution explicits grants freedom to practice religion, so they're limited to what they can ban. Personally, I think it's just a petty, pathetic attempt to antagonise Muslims by trying to ban the most prominent thing associated with their religion they think the Swiss Constitution might let them get away with.

I think the idea is silly. Basically what your dealing with is the realization that the Muslim Culture represents a problem. However Western Morality is against singling out a specific group for any reason. The current level of difficulties with that speific culture however being almost impossible to reconcile with a morality that never conceived of such a problem before.

The Swiss are basically trying to encourage the Muslims to leave without actually singling them out or tossing them from the nation. In their case the position is unusually touchy because where the US primarily has problems with the issue due to morality, the Swiss have that problem as well as their general desire to remain neutral in everything, which this most certainly is not.

Speaking personally I think this is wrong since Islam can be practiced apart fromt he cultures of The Middle East, and things like Sharia law and the like. It's targeting the religion as opposed to the culture that is the problem.

I simply feel that if they are going to bother to do stuff like this why not just stop beating around the bush and just ban Islam since that's basically what they are trying to work up to without actually doing it.

Seems one of the reasons it gained so much steam is because radical feminists have been running around going "ISLAM IS EBIL AND IF WE LET THEM BUILD THEIR MINARETS THEY'LL FORCE YOU TO WEAR BURKAS!"

Edit: Did not use the force >_>

halfeclipse:
Seems one of the reasons it gained so much steam is because radical feminists have been running around going "ISLAM IS EBIL AND IF WE LET THEM BUILD THEIR MINARETS THEY'LL YOU TO WEAR BURKAS!"

-.- idiots like that are why feminists get so little respect these days. Sort of like Muslims, ironically.

So i was researching this a little further.

Do you know how many minarets there actually in Switzerland?

Four.

That's in the entire country. Glad to see they're nipping this Muslim takeover thing in the bud.

halfeclipse:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6936267.ece

Seems one of the reasons it gained so much steam is because radical feminists have been running around going "ISLAM IS EBIL AND IF WE LET THEM BUILD THEIR MINARETS THEY'LL FORCE YOU TO WEAR BURKAS!"

Edit: Did not use the force >_>

Oh god right wingers gaining favor in Switzerland of all places, these truly are dark times.

OP: the fuck?

I was shocked, really. I mean, Switzerland?!

It's not so much the fact they were banned, as it is the motivations for doing so. "They are a symbol of islamic power and we must show we won't stand for it", yeah thats a great way to treat your fellow man.

All this does really is make a big show of aggravating the members of a religion and making them feel oppressed/unwelcome in Switzerland.

Does the Swiss law system function like the U.S's does? If so, this will probably be taken to court soon enough and repealed in the end for discrimination against religion.

Knight Templar:
It's not so much the fact they were banned, as it is the motivations for doing so. "They are a symbol of islamic power and we must show we won't stand for it", yeah thats a great way to treat your fellow man.

This.

I mean, I see nothing wrong with the structures. It seems to me like the argument is that "It is a symbol of Islam"

Seems like a dick move on the part of the swiss

Wow.

I read this before and thought it was just the rambling of some bigoted gaggle of fascist
wackjobs. I could never, in my darkest nightmares have imagined that such a thing could actually get major momentum.

As a man of faith myself, I tried to think about what it would be like to be isolated for "special treatment" like that, based on my religious/cultural identity. The thought is chilling.

This is a mockery of democracy, and this is an insult to the Swiss people (who, in my experience, are among the most accepting and open minded folk in the world).

Wildrow12:
This is a mockery of democracy, and this is an insult to the Swiss people (who, in my experience, are among the most accepting and open minded folk in the world).

it's a failure of democracy, and an insult BY the Swiss people who voted to approve this ban.

I have mixed feelings about this: since so many of you have been so quick to denounce this as some sort of atrocity, you get to see a contrary view.

Is there some reason that people think that every place on Earth should be culturally diverse? The Swiss are a rather homogeneous population that, at least politically, have seemed to like keeping to themselves and out of the affairs of others while keeping others out of their own affairs. An architectural ban that discourages foreign cultural influence seems consistent with that attitude.

If the Swiss don't want Islamic influence in their society, who would I be to think that they should just let it happen anyway? Sometimes it seems that those favorable of diversity want to assert their own sort of cultural imperialism with the probable outcome of Mosques and McDonald's in every city on Earth. I maintain that not everywhere is America or Britain, nor should it be. If it is the interest of the people to maintain a distinct cultural identity within their country, so be it.

I think the practical effect of the vote will be that Muslims who want not to integrate into Swiss society will not go to Switzerland, while those who can be a Muslim without needing a large community around them that is also Muslim may be able to fit in just fine. It should be noted that immigrant communities often seem to keep themselves distinct from the larger culture; by targeting the construction of new Mosques, Switzerland might mitigate one reason for that ghettoizing effect.

It's instructive that France has had problems with Muslim immigration, race riots, etc. and a headache with Islam versus the established secularism. Can you really blame the Swiss for wanting to avoid the social consequences that immigration has had on other parts of Europe? That doesn't mean they should make it illegal to innovate within their own culture or make some kind of belief system mandatory, but it doesn't seem altogether unreasonable for them to want to limit the effect of an already established global religion on their own much smaller culture.

I'm pretty sure Switzerland has a constitution that explicitly permits freedom of expression and personal conviction; i.e. it's a secular state.

Of course, banning minarets does not particularly restrict the freedom to practice Islam, which is why it might sneak past the judiciary when it is inevitably challenged (although I suspect it will be struck down). Nevertheless, it's a pretty blatant attack on a religion. I would simply say that if Swiss politicians and electorate wish to snipe at cultures, attitudes and religions they don't like, they should have the balls to just come out and change their constitution appropriately.

This is silly. It's not like minarets send mind control waves to convert people to Islam.

My guess is that most people didn't really care and didn't go to vote.

Aw, damned populism.
This irrational fear of Islam "taking over the world" needs to go drown in a river.
Seriously, it's not any specific religion, pretty much all religions are responsible for atrocities.
It's about proper integration into the secular society. And forcing people not to build churches the way they want to (which is exactly what happened here) does not help improve the relationships between the various cultural groups.
If anything, it drives people apart and hampers integration.

As someone said previously, the original reason for building Minarets was the same as church towers with big bells in, as an aid to calling people to prayer. Nowadays there is no need for that which is why hardly any (if any) new churches are built with towers.

While I know its not a popular opinion, I have to side with the Swiss. The only point a minaret really serves in modern times is as a big middle finger to people in the area going "We're here and we'll do what we like" For the record, if the Swiss then decided to ban the building of any new church spires I'd side with them on that.

Agema:
Of course, banning minarets does not particularly restrict the freedom to practice Islam, which is why it might sneak past the judiciary when it is inevitably challenged (although I suspect it will be struck down).

I seriously doubt it will be struck down. Its not limiting the Muslims ability to practice their religeon, so they have no reason to strike it down.

EDIT:

Skeleon:
It's about proper integration into the secular society. And forcing people not to build churches the way they want to (which is exactly what happened here) does not help improve the relationships between the various cultural groups.
If anything, it drives people apart and hampers integration.

So your saying that if you invited me into your home and I decided that I wanted to walk around in my underwear because thats fine where I come from, you would have no problem with it? People seem to think integration should mean allowing people to do what they want, but it should be those coming into a country to change so as to fit in with the current culture. Christians have been doing this for years in other countries (middle east, China etc) so why is it we don't expect Muslims to do the same?

Skeleon:
Aw, damned populism.
This irrational fear of Islam "taking over the world" needs to go drown in a river.
Seriously, it's not any specific religion, pretty much all religions are responsible for atrocities.
It's about proper integration into the secular society. And forcing people not to build churches the way they want to (which is exactly what happened here) does not help improve the relationships between the various cultural groups.
If anything, it drives people apart and hampers integration.

But what if they just don't want integration? What if they want that cultural influence to just stay away?

Plinglebob:
So your saying that if you invited me into your home and I decided that I wanted to walk around in my underwear because thats fine where I come from, you would have no problem with it?

Funnily enough, I wouldn't, as I do the same, but that's not the point you're trying to make, I suppose.

People seem to think integration should mean allowing people to do what they want,but it should be those coming into a country to change so as to fit in with the current culture.

No, it's about giving them the same rights. If Christians are allowed to build churches with towers, why not Muslims?
I heartily disagree because I place very little value on "traditional culture" whereas I find secularism the best way to go. I'm not a Christian so I don't consider giving Christians a different treatment justified. If we allow one religious group to build their thingies, grant this right to all of them.

Christians have been doing this for years in other countries (middle east, China etc) so why is it we don't expect Muslims to do the same?

Actually, Christians in other countries also build their churches with towers.

I don't see it as giving Muslims special treatment but as giving everybody the same.

Seanchaidh:
But what if they just don't want integration? What if they want that cultural influence to just stay away?

That might be true for a number of first-generation imigrants, but I have yet to meet a Turk, African or whatever who grew up here who was not a "moderate" so to speak. No doubt they exist, true, but that's not the norm. You can't force cultural change on everybody, but if you show them how much safer and better life is in a secular society, they or their children at least will learn. Integration of difficult cases is definitely not achieved through actively denying people their right of religious expression, so I don't even know what that point was about.

This is a crime against architecture and aesthetics. I find it difficult to wrap my head around the whole religious angle but they're banning a building style and not just that but one of the mot visually striking and generally beautiful ones there are.

Skeleon:

Seanchaidh:
But what if they just don't want integration? What if they want that cultural influence to just stay away?

That might be true for a number of first-generation imigrants, but I have yet to meet a Turk, African or whatever who grew up here who was not a "moderate" so to speak. No doubt they exist, true, but that's not the norm. You can't force cultural change on everybody, but if you show them how much safer and better life is in a secular society, they or their children at least will learn. Integration of difficult cases is definitely not achieved through actively denying people their right of religious expression, so I don't even know what that point was about.

I was referring to the Swiss. Why should they be favorable to outsiders with a different culture coming in and putting religious buildings all over the place?