Switzerland bans building of minarets

[SpitfireMK461]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8385069.stm

Swiss voters back ban on minarets

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.

The government opposed the ban, saying it would harm Switzerland's image, particularly in the Muslim world.

The BBC's Imogen Foulkes, in Bern, says the surprise result is very bad news for the Swiss government which also fears unrest among the Muslim community.

Our correspondent says voters worried about rising immigration - and with it the rise of Islam - have ignored the government's advice.

"The Federal Council (government) respects this decision. Consequently the construction of new minarets in Switzerland is no longer permitted," said the government in a statement, quoted by the AFP news agency.

Justice Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf said the result reflected fear of Islamic fundamentalism.

"These concerns have to be taken seriously. However, the Federal Council takes the view that a ban on the construction of new minarets is not a feasible means of countering extremist tendencies," she said.

She sought to reassure Swiss Muslims, saying the decision was "not a rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture".

Switzerland is home to some 400,000 Muslims and has just four minarets.

After Christianity, Islam is the most widespread religion in Switzerland, but it remains relatively hidden.

There are unofficial Muslim prayer rooms, and planning applications for new minarets are almost always refused.

Supporters of a ban claimed that allowing minarets would represent the growth of an ideology and a legal system - Sharia law - which are incompatible with Swiss democracy.

But others say the referendum campaign incited hatred. On Thursday the Geneva mosque was vandalised for the third time during the campaign, according to local media.

Before the vote, Amnesty International warned that the ban would violate Switzerland's obligations to freedom of religious expression.

'Political symbol'

The president of Zurich's Association of Muslim Organisations, Tamir Hadjipolu, told the BBC that if the ban was implemented, Switzerland's Muslim community would live in fear.

"This will cause major problems because during this campaign in the last two weeks different mosques were attacked, which we never experienced in 40 years in Switzerland.

"So with the campaign... the Islamaphobia has increased very intensively."

Sunday's referendum was held after the People's party collected 100,000 signatures from eligible voters within 18 months calling for a vote.

SVP member of parliament Ulrich Schluer said the campaign had helped integration by encouraging debate. He rejected the charge of discrimination.

In recent years many countries in Europe have been debating their relationship with Islam, and how best to integrate their Muslim populations.

France focused on the headscarf, while in Germany there was controversy over plans to build one of Europe's largest mosques in Cologne.

This is a very interesting decision by Swiss voters. Europe has been conflicted with the rising Muslim population for many years now, but these seems to be the largest move against them so far, and I'm not so sure how I feel about it.

I can understand Switzerland, and the rest of western Europe, wanting to protect their cultures. They can trace their cultures back over a thousand years and do not want to see it changed by an increase in immigration. I can also understand them wanting immigrants to assimilate, to an extent, into their culture, considering the immigrants are the ones wanting to be there. While in Switzerland's case a large portion of their Muslim population consists of refugees, this in not the case for the rest of Europe. I also somewhat like a country finally taking a stand against a religion that goes into [a some times violent] uproar every time it is offended, i.e. cartoons of Mohammed.

At the same time it seems wrong to restrict a religion as such. Banning the construction of minarets seems only a few steps short of banning mosques all together, and unlike France which at leasts uses the excuse of being a secular government when banning head scarfs in schools, this action is directed right at Muslims. It is a clear move to restrict the spread of Islam.

The issue also seems to draw a parallel with the rising Hispanic population here in the United States. While this country has seen huge immigration for most of its existence, most immigrants found ways to assimilate into the culture and lifestyle of America while being able to retain their own heritage. This large Hispanic immigration, though, has not done so. As a result, the demographics of the nation are changing rapidly.

So do you agree with the Swiss voters? Is this a step too far; is it a slippery slope? Is it a sign of things to come in other European countries, or even the US?

 

[Jay]

As a non-European, I find it a bit bewildering. Islam is not like Dutch Elm disease, slowly creeping through the population and quietly killing it off. Religions rise and fall; I myself think that Islam has reached it's peak in "popularity", much like the surge in Christianity in America from 2000-2005.

It just strikes me as intolerant. Here in America immigrants and their culture is just a way of life. Right now it is people from Central America that are in the cross hairs, and I will admit that many here are a bit hesitant to accept them, as they are perceived as:

-poor
-brown
-catholic

The same people cannot see that they are also:

-patriotic
-hard working
-family oriented

So in other words, they are treated just as the Italians and Irish were 100-150 years ago. We got over it. So get over it, Europe, or risk seeing another holocaust or ethnic cleansing. An outlandish statement? Sadly, no it isn't.

most immigrants found ways to assimilate into the culture and lifestyle of America while being able to retain their own heritage. This large Hispanic immigration, though, has not done so.

Tell that to my wife's family. Her parents had, and still have a hard time with the language, but made DAMNED sure their children would not, and made sure they were "Americanized". It is more common than you think; maybe in your area immigrants from Central America are new there, so I can understand where you are coming from, but where I live, where 30% of the population is Hispanic, you stop noticing it.

 

[Interrobang]

As a Atheist myself, I can live very well without any new churches, temples or mosques around. Two aspects of this story do worry me though.
For once, I always considerd Switzerland (as well as most of Europe) a country in wich you are free to choose your faith (or not choose any). For some of the believers their faith means building halls with big penis-like towers next to them - but who am I to judge . But, I don?t see how the freedom to choose your religion goes with deciding wich religion gets to have their penis-towers next to their holy halls and wich not. The Belivers are there anyway. The holy hall is too. If you grant one religion it?s towers, and the other not ... that?s nothing less than discrimination. And as I am myself also not a member of the one mayor european religion ... that is a worry for the future. If and how the religious mayorities will choose to interfere with my life when they see fit. Civil rights don?t seem to bother them much ...

Secondly, I don?t "belive" in having Architecture restrained in a way that bans it from using a certain "form".
Take the Mosque that is due to be build in Colonge ...

That looks fantastic. I can?t see anything wrong with that or why it shouldn?t have those minarets. Why would you want to ban them from putting those tiny little penises next to it?

 

[MacGuffin]

So get over it, Europe, or risk seeing another holocaust or ethnic cleansing. An outlandish statement? Sadly, no it isn't.

Aren't you a bit exaggerating now?

We're talking about Switzerland. They were not even involved in the first Holocaust -- at least not directly. The most harmful thing they did to humanity, is inventing milk chocolate, immoral banking habits and "Heidi".

This referendum is only about Switzerland. And I firmly reject the Swiss being representative for Europe.

They always like to do their own thing. That's why they are not even part of the EU.

Having said that, I cannot see what's offensive about minaretts. They are just buildings. Stone and concrete. Dead objects. The muslims in Switzerland will keep on practising their religion without them.

Let's talk about steeples instead. Really annoying. Those bloody church bells wake me every Sunday, when I want to sleep in. That's offensive! Yes, I think we should vote on banning steeples.

 

[Blind_Io]

As a non-European, I find it a bit bewildering. Islam is not like Dutch Elm disease, slowly creeping through the population and quietly killing it off. Religions rise and fall; I myself think that Islam has reached it's peak in "popularity", much like the surge in Christianity in America from 2000-2005.

It just strikes me as intolerant. Here in America immigrants and their culture is just a way of life. Right now it is people from Central America that are in the cross hairs, and I will admit that many here are a bit hesitant to accept them, as they are perceived as:

-poor
-brown
-catholic

The same people cannot see that they are also:

-patriotic
-hard working
-family oriented

So in other words, they are treated just as the Italians and Irish were 100-150 years ago. We got over it. So get over it, Europe, or risk seeing another holocaust or ethnic cleansing. An outlandish statement? Sadly, no it isn't.



Tell that to my wife's family. Her parents had, and still have a hard time with the language, but made DAMNED sure their children would not, and made sure they were "Americanized". It is more common than you think; maybe in your area immigrants from Central America are new there, so I can understand where you are coming from, but where I live, where 30% of the population is Hispanic, you stop noticing it.

I get what you're saying, but much of the discontent comes from the crime, drugs and human trafficking associated with illegal immigration.

I have no problem with legal immigration, I welcome it; but illegal immigration is, without a doubt, fueling a major crime increase all through the US.

/off topic.

 

[nomix]

This is the road to fascism. No doubt.

This idea that the presence of other cultures, or 'foreign' religion threatens our own culture is very 20s.

"A jew is no a European. He is an oriental."

Vidkun Quisling, leader of Nasjonal Samling, Norwegian Nazi party between 1933 and 1945.

 

[Firecat]

Only in America...



Wait...what? I'm not all that surprised by this. It seems that European countries love to ban things. It just goes to show how less free (and more racist/intolerant) society is in some of those parts.

 

[nomix]

One thing worth noting.

The referendum ended with 57 % support for the new law.

The turnout in the referendum was 53 %.

The actual percentage of the Swiss who voted for the law is (57 / 53 * 100 =) 30,2 %.

So, as the turnout was so low, the Swiss government has to implement a racist, discriminatory law that surtainly breaks with human rights (as 20 of 23 Kantons voted "Yes" they'll be changing the constitution). With the support of 30 % of the population.

Sure, if everybody turned out, I'm sure the numbers might be different, but I'm also sure they would swing the vote on the law to "no".

Switzerland has a stupendous amount of referendums, which must probably lead to a lot of people getting tired of them, that might be one cause 43 % of aligable voters didn't turn out.

Another point I'd like to make is that extremists will always turn out more uniformily to vote when they can achieve something than more moderate people.

Thirdly, the polls conducted before the referendum hinted at 51% no, 35 % yes (the rest voting blank). When a poll indicates that your side's already won, you're less likely to turn out, and if it says that your side might lose, you're more likely to turn out to vote.

I'm sure this'll be fixed in the end, though.

1. It's probably going to get struck down in the human rights court.
2. It only takes 100 000 signatures to have another vote. And that time, those who opose the law (which is probably a lot of people) won't stay home.



(By the way, changing a constitution is supposed to be hard work. Switzerland just managed to CHANGE THEIR BLOODY CONSTITUTION with the popular support of 30 % of their population, in ONE DAY. Nice system..)

 

[MacGuffin]

There is a reason why I think referendums are a bad idea -- at least when it comes to a country's reputation or really important issues.

 

[Crazyjeeper]

There is a reason why I think referendums are a bad idea -- at least when it comes to a country's reputation or really important issues.

Yup, tyranny of the majority. There is a reason that pure democracy is a bad idea. Having a representative government can help keep things like this from happening.

 

[salle]

well if the government can't argue their point ... that banning the building of minarets is you know, against EVERYTHING a democratic non oppressive state stands for.... then isn't that a big failure as well... also that 47% of the voters stayed at home... I thought voting was mandatory in Switzerland..

 

[tigger]

That's just pathetic. Though I don't really buy into the slippery-slope-to-fascism argument. They're not actually restricting Muslim's right to assemble and worship; just arbitrarily banning a type of structure so they can feel better about themselves. Yes, just sad and pathetic.

And I don't want to completely derail the topic, but ...

The issue also seems to draw a parallel with the rising Hispanic population here in the United States. While this country has seen huge immigration for most of its existence, most immigrants found ways to assimilate into the culture and lifestyle of America while being able to retain their own heritage. This large Hispanic immigration, though, has not done so. As a result, the demographics of the nation are changing rapidly.

Are you kidding me? There is no difference between the Hispanic immigration to the US and just about any other mass immigration to this nation. I'm curious as to how Hispanics are "resisting assimilation" any more than anyone else has? I don't want to hear about the language "barrier" either. You learn 20-25 words of Spanish and you're set. I can go into a carniceria and get dozen tamales or a whole roast chicken no problem. :lol:

Immigrants do not instantly assimilate anywhere. It takes a few generations. This is what annoys the fuck out of me about the immigration debate here and the 'Islamization' fearmongering in Europe. People immigrate, build communities, learn the customs/culture/language/etc ... and over decades become a part of the nations identity. It doesn't happen over night.

 

[nomix]

I do think there's good reason to believe that islam-hate is on the rise in Europe. We are getting more and more xenophobic.

Though, what's so extraordinarily stupid whit this is that it causes enormous outrage and pain, while not accomplishing anything what-so-ever. I just get very confused when I hear people talk of how Switzerland has voted against Islam, but they so haven't, they've just made people angry, while other people gloathe.

Though, I'm sure the SVP is hoping for a surge of muslim violence in Switzerland. That would serve them, if not the country.

 

[wooflepoof]

Religion... :/

 

[NooDle]

I can understand that they deem these things to be "un-Swiss" and harmful to the countryside.
But if you're banning these, be consistent and ban EVERY church from EVERY religion

 

[LeVeL]

As far as I can tell the current Muslim "situation" (for lack of a better word) is similar to the black "situation" in the US - no one can say a bad word about them because its RACIST! You said something bad to a Muslim, you MUST just be prejudiced against him because he is a TERRORIST! ZOMG! The Swiss didn't want to have half their polulation become Muslim (coughhelloukcough) and they voted on it. More power to em! In the US that would never fly because the people don't actually have any power and the politicians would be too afraid of a public outcry for doing something like this. Switzerland: the most democratic nation on Earth?

edit: btw, how is this any worse than the Emirates not letting anyone who's ever been to Israel into their country? No one seems to care about that one...

 

[AiR]

This isnt about banning churches or places of worship, it's about banning a structure which only function is to preach to everyone, even those who do not want to hear it. It's a bit populist (they won't get building permits anyway) but I would vote yes. Religion serves no meaningful function in a modern society, if people want to devote to it then that is fine as long as they keep to themselves. I will have none of their hokus pokus.

 

[Posmo]

Knowing what sort of stuff has gone on in minarets in the UK and in Sweden, I can't say I'm completely against the ban..

EDIT:

This isnt about banning churches or places of worship, it's about banning a structure which only function is to preach to everyone, even those who do not want to hear it. It's a bit populist (they won't get building permits anyway) but I would vote yes. Religion serves no meaningful function in a modern society, if people want to devote to it then that is fine as long as they keep to themselves. I will have none of their hokus pokus.

Yep, and in a modern western society a minaret is just an unneeded symbol of oppression.

 

[nomix]

As far as I can tell the current Muslim "situation" (for lack of a better word) is similar to the black "situation" in the US - no one can say a bad word about them because its RACIST! You said something bad to a Muslim, you MUST just be prejudiced against him because he is a TERRORIST! ZOMG! The Swiss didn't want to have half their polulation become Muslim (coughhelloukcough) and they voted on it. More power to em! In the US that would never fly because the people don't actually have any power and the politicians would be too afraid of a public outcry for doing something like this. Switzerland: the most democratic nation on Earth?

30 % of the Swiss population voted to change the consitution, and the government followed through.

In the US, changing the constitution in one day with a popular mandate from 30 % of the population would never fly.

Secondly, if this is an attempt at restricting Islam in Switzerland, it is a feeble one, it's only a means to discriminate against a minority that some people think of as less Swiss than other groups. It's stigmatization, and it's useless. If you want to kurb Islam in Switzerland, you restrict the building of mosques, you don't restrict the building of minarets, which can only serve to make a conflict.

And of course, that'll be the result, and that's what this fascist party wants.

edit: btw, how is this any worse than the Emirates not letting anyone who's ever been to Israel into their country? No one seems to care about that one...

It's not. It's a lot better. But it's still no good.

This isnt about banning churches or places of worship, it's about banning a structure which only function is to preach to everyone, even those who do not want to hear it. It's a bit populist (they won't get building permits anyway) but I would vote yes. Religion serves no meaningful function in a modern society, if people want to devote to it then that is fine as long as they keep to themselves. I will have none of their hokus pokus.

I don't have a problem with that stand, but I do have a problem with the idea that one inflicts the law on just one religious group. You can talk all you want about how religion shouldn't be on display in public places, and how this is just as discriminatory if a christian church wants to build a minaret, but this law is deliberately targeted against a single religious minority, it's a complete turnaround regarding the constitution.

Churces don't have minarets. They have church towers. And all the time there's no law prohibiting those, the law is discriminatory.

 

[Cowboy]

this thread will not end well.....