Swiss choose fear over freedom

Why bicker?

1) healthy debate brings out good ideas
2) lazy minds don't want to be challenged and sink into superstition
3) thinking together we can come to solutions that individually we can not come to
4) accepting ignorance itself needs to be defined
5) the new world is one of information / ideas - we need to be a part of it
6) interfaith for validation validates superstition
7) interfaith for debate forces each of us to look deeper into who we are and what we want to be
8) a diversity of ideas is only a good in certain ideologies
9) we need to ask, how do our ideas cause harm, what ideas need to be rejected, what ideas bring us together, what ideas are worth fighting for
10) the idea that we are all guilty does not help us to grow up, we need to know what we are guilty of, why we are engaging in it, and how do we stop it
11) identifying our false ideologies (in older terminology superstition) helps us to get past them and move towards a "more true" ideology
12) if we can not face the false thinking in ourselves, how can we help each other?
13) the idea that we should all open our hearts and minds doesn't work if one person takes that to mean I can tell you what the truth is but you can't tell me.
14) How do we prevent our posterity from "growing up in a world that inevitably destroys itself because of pride, finger pointing and ignorance?" don't we have to point out what pride and ignorance are (and in so doing be challenged right back) 15)"Grow up and learn to accept each other" but certain ideologies want to convert the whole world - ie they don't want to accept each other except as subject to what they believe is the one and only source of truth (a monoideology)

just a partial list that I can come up with spontaneously for why we should "bicker"

But let me offer a prayer, in agreement, that comes from the Vedas:
May He protect both of us. May He nourish both of us. May we both acquire the capacity (to study and understand the scriptures). May our study be brilliant. May we not argue with each other. Om peace, peace, peace.

Mary, thanks, you question is huge.
With regard to Hari see Bhagvatam
With regard to Aum see Mandukya Upanishad.

I would answer you but it would take far too long and I am sure I could not do justice. Perhaps over time.

hariaum

As a member of the younger generation I don't understand why grown men and women point the finger saying this religion is bad or that religion is bad. You have some guy in here quoting Qur'an as an expert making the claim Muslims are violent. You have Muslims stating no this is not the case here is the context and quotes from the Qur'an. WTF cares? Quit pointing the finger and make peace and find soulutions.

Is any country or religion innocent? NO. Every country including the Arab and Jewish nations AND America and every religion crossing all faiths is guilty of causing harm to another Country and Religion at some point in history. Face it, get over it.

Look I'm tired of seeing people bicker. Some American's want to know why ARAB Nations (people not religion), cheered on 9/11? Well for one if you take yourself out of the U.S. is innocent of everything world and see over the course of history we've gone in to Arab nations and overthrown governments for our best interest you can see why they feel the way they do Is it right? NO, did it make me angry? Yes but Muslims are not the enemy, ignorance is. Let's flip the side of the coin and look at the Arab world. Their TV is biased against America in many parts of the world and the reason I just gave is why. That's part of the problem. Let's look at Israel. Israel needs to quit antagonizing other nations with the pre-emptive strike against Iran. Iran isn't going to Nuke Israel. If they do start praying because the end of the world will come.

Watch the Doha Debates. Watch the Tough on Israel debate that can be found on youtube. Then watch the Doha Debate on Muslim Women, don't go in with any opinions, just listen to what others are saying.

I have been fortunate to take part in inter-faith religious dialogues conducted at many college campuses around the country including Rice University, Elhurst College and MIT. Not once was the 3rd grade finger pointed condeming another religion but rather religious discussions based on stories like Sarah's found in the Quran,Bible and Torah. Not one time did the Imams Rabbis and Priests argue of whose right or wrong or whose religion did what.

IF you want to keep pointing the finger go ahead that is your right. Round up every Muslim you can find and have another holocaust, see how that works in todays nuclear world. Everyone is guilty get over it.

Do you really want your children and grandchildren growing up in a world that inevitably destroys itself because of pride, finger pointing and ignorance? Be part of something different. Make a difference. Open your hearts and minds. Grow up and learn to accept each other.

Excellent prose, Navin1, and the content also very fine.

Bur what does hariaum mean?

Asma Uddin, of the Becket Fund, typically misrepresents the constitutional principle of “separation between Religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States,” James Madison, W&MQ 3:555. The men who wrote the Constitution understood the words they used.

As documented in my recent book, The Religion Commandments in the Constitution, the distortion of the “Religious Right” and the “Becket Fund” is destroyed by the words of the Constitution’s religion Commandments: it is a “religious” test which shall not be required, “religion” which shall not be established by Congress or law, and the voluntary exercise of “religion” which shall not be prohibited, which means totally forbidden, as distinguished from “abridging” which means reduced and applies to speech, press, peaceable assembly, and petition.

In the USA religion action is not above the law, as the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed years ago in Reynolds v. U.S.

America is a nation in which citizens of all religions and of none are welcome to participate freely and fully in all of America’s social and political functions, but no religion action is above the laws of the land. It is opinion only which is unabridged by law.

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man and his God, ... that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions. ... [I am] ... convinced he [man] has no natural right in opposition to his social duties” (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptists, January 1, 1802).

By the way, even though the words “church and state” are not in the Constitution, this is what Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: “In the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention. ... They all attributed the peaceful dominion of religion in their country to the separation of church and state. ... I did not meet a single individual ... who was not of the same opinion,” Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1835.

Cabaret Theatre in New Brun.C.C.
Royal Dilemma,
dramatis personae;
King:Leader of Germanic Tribes,Honored Man,Eternal Hero,Monumental Person Gaius Julius Arm.
Queen:Virtual Being

Queen:Roman soldiers are coming toward Our Land.
King:I dont think Roman Army.I'm thinking War between You and Me.
Q-You have affairs with Brown Women
K-I always love only You
Q-Did you drink your French Rose Wine
K-Did you take your Midol.Please,lets make Peace
Q-You are Rudy and Ugly
K-Your Cousins dont help us.Persia is at War with Romans
Q-They want.Enemy of my enemy is my freind.Yes.
K-You are correct politically.You are doing very well Monologue
Q-Monologue is my Business.

And Halozcel came in,
Q-Who are you ?
H-Your Majesty,I came here by Time Mashine(Back to Future,Zemeckis's Cult Film) from 21st Century.I would like to present my opinion about Judenrein
Q-I'm listening you

-You will forget 350 yemeni,but you will try to protect your Communities in USA,France,Germany,England etc.
-You will organise Arned Defence Battalions,even Brigades.
-You will struggle....,No hopelessness,you will struggle....
-Jacob will not lose.Jacob will survive/live forever.

Curtain.

In a very short while, Yemen will be officially Judenrein. Coming under increasing attack from violent Islamist gangs, Yemen's 350 remaining Jews are under heavy guard, prior to departure. These Yemeni Jews practice a unique form of Judaism, which will soon be lost to our culture.

They, like all Middle Eastern Jews, have been in the Middle East since long before Mohamed set foot upon the earth. The Jewish presence in Yemen dates back to the Solomonic era--3,000 years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/24/AR2009112403898.html

I think that the plight of living human beings is a little more important than architecture. The murders of Jews in Yemen, however, is not of interest to OnFaith. WaPo bid them a hurried fairwell. Where is the outcry? The protests?

Synagogues have been firebombed in Florida, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, France, Sweden, Holland, Germany, Venezuela, etc., for months, and where is OnFaith.

Jews are unsafe in the streets of Europe. Will, it, too, soon be Judenrein like the MIddle East?

Where is the outcry from Muslims?

Zebra Zebra Zebra

black and white and black and white.

I have no problem saying discrimination by Brahmins in India is a moral wrong. Even, the reason they are wrong is that it fails to realize in action the truth that we are all creations of God.

But let us look cooly at what makes the brahmins mistreat the untouchables: they think they are better. They think they know more about god than the untouchables. They think that they are the chosen, they are the ones that are with god, and the others are against That.

Oh look, the same ideology that creates false discrimination exists in India. Wow, can you imagine!

Oh wait, we identified the ideology that caused harm to humans. I wonder if we can remove it wherever we find it - the minds of arrogant brahmins, the koran, the bible, the nazis.. Yes, oh my gosh, a principle by which to understand what is right and wrong that doesn't have to come in a book, a humanist principle, an advaitic principle.

I am ready to apply the principle, are you?

I am ready to support laws that allow all persons to enter Hindu temples regardless of caste, are you ready to say that islam should be judged by humanist principles?

Or is what you say just rhetoric: the hindus are bad, so the muslims can be worse. While the hindus don't eat with untouchables, muslims kill inifidels. I am ready to welcome you to the ideology of one humanity that knows the truth is one but known by many different names (a vedic injunction). Are you ready to join?

hariaum

Navin1 forgets the transgressions of upper caste Hindus on the untouchables of India. The latter are not allowed even to enter a Hindu temple, sit at same leve as the upper caste Hindus.

The upper caste Hindus consider even the shadow of the untouchable to be defiling. The upper caste Hindus have burned down villages of the untouchables for centuries. It still happens.

Hindus of India are known for urine drinking, burning alive young brides for the sake of dowry, burning alive widows in the name of sati, painting their homes and temples with swastikas, painting homes with cow dung paste, burning cow dung cakes for fuel, worshiping ordinary animals like monkeys, snakes, and cows.

The phrase "HOLY COW !" originated from such absurd practices.

Thank you Sally62. It is nice to actually hear a comment based on what the Swiss view is, not just what is imputed to them. Those who oppose Islamization of Europe want this to be a slap in the face of Islam so they can claim a victory. Muslims and Muslim apologists want this to be about Islam so they can claim to be victims, which is increasingly becoming their favorite pastime. My sister lived in Switzerland for years and, from what she told me, the Swiss like to be Swiss and aren't so fond of change, whatever that may be. It is their country and their culture and it is irrelevant whether we like it or not. This is for them to decide and it is for them to choose how to define and protect their culture. And from what I have seen of Swiss architecture, it seems to me minarets don't really fit with the style and they are not necessary in any way to practice Islam.

In a very short while, Yemen will be officially Judenrein. Coming under increasing attack from violent Islamist gangs, Yemen's 350 remaining Jews are under heavy guard, prior to departure. These Yemeni Jews practice a unique form of Judaism, which will soon be lost to our culture.

They, like all Middle Eastern Jews, have been in the Middle East since long before Mohamed set foot upon the earth. The Jewish presence in Yemen dates back to the Solomonic era--3,000 years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/24/AR2009112403898.html

I think that the plight of living human beings is a little more important than architecture. The murders of Jews in Yemen, however, is not of interest to OnFaith. WaPo bid them a hurried fairwell. Where is the outcry? The protests?

Synagogues have been firebombed in Florida, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, France, Sweden, Holland, Germany, Venezuela, etc., for months, and where is OnFaith.

Jews are unsafe in the streets of Europe. Will, it, too, soon be Judenrein like the MIddle East?

Where is the outcry from Muslims?

So when there is no compulsion in religion and the crime of apostasy is punishable by death, that is not a compulsion?

So when mohamed marched with 10000 strong army on an unarmed city of Mecca that was considered a place of open discussion and a city of trade, commerce, and religious tolerance, that was not compulsion.

Would anyone believe that an army of Hindus with overwhelming force marching to Mecca was going to support their religious freedom? You have to be self deluded to think that the conversion of Mecca was not by force. It was the start of the attack on religious freedoms by Mohamed and his ideological need to tell people that he was god's messenger.

Even if we accept that his visions (if he had any) were what he says they are, how do you know that the angel Gabriel was not trying to sow disharmony amongst god's children - that he was an agent of Satan, not God. After all Satan is going to come and say, I am the true god, believe in me, do what I say, and you will be happy. If you don't believe in me you will be unhappy because I will punish you forever.

While a true god would come and say, I love you and all of this creation. You must love even those who disagree with you. I will never hate anyone. There is no book of god greater than my creation. There is no angel that mediates between you and me. You must love the infidel as the infidel is also my creation. A spiritual man should not be raising armies and making war for these are things of the material world. A spiritual man should not be taking multiple wives as these are things of this earth. A spiritual mas should bow to all that go before him for I am within all that go before him.

Oh sorry, a true god says join me or suffer eternally for the ignorance I taught you. Or at least that is what the koran and bible teach.

I suppose, though, that Zebra has a point. If the muslims didn't transgress against the other religions (as the polytheists transgressed against mo), there would be no conflict. (Of course the Mecca model would be to wipe out all groups affiliated with the muslims that did transgress against us - isn't that what mohamed's model of politics was?) Of course there is no proof that the polytheists transgressed against Mohamed that I know of.

hariaum

Zebra insists on recycling the following misinformation:
“The Koran says: LAKUM DEENEKUM WALE YADEEN meaning : TO YOU YOUR FAITH, TO ME MINE.
And at another place the Koran says: "THERE IS NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION”
She simply missed a minor detail; those verses were abrogated (cancelled) by the later so-called Medina verses. A sample of those gems:

Kill the infidels (unbelievers) wherever they are found (Koran 9:5), and that peace will come only to those who submit to him (Koran 8:17, 48:29, and 65). The Koran also has Allah saying that unbelievers should be killed (Koran 2:191, 3:141, 4:104, 4:89, 8:12-16, 9:5, 9:73-74, 9:123, 25:52…), that Muslim apostates should be killed or chastised (Koran 2:39, 2:85, 3:85, 3:106, 4:89, 16:106, and 47:25-28), that the heads and fingers of unbelievers should be cut off (Koran 5:33, 8:12, and 47:4), and that Muslims should fight and humiliate Jews and Christians (Koran 5:18 and 9:29).

Such verses are processed as tolerant verses only by the likes of Zebra.

rohitcuny:

You have said some kind things about Muslims. Thank you!

For the sake of clarity, it is important to note that Koran is a collection of messages brought by angel Gabriel for a period of 22-23 years. Each message came on a particular day at a certain time dealing with the events of the time or day.

Prophet Muhammad before he was given prophethood,spoke with Rabbis and Christian theologians of the time. When he was designated to spread the message of God (i.e. granted prophethood), he started preaching ONENESS of GOD.

The polythiests of the Kaaba at the time had 360 gods. They felt threatened by the message of ONENESS of GOD (Kaaba was a source of revenue for them). They ploteed to kill the prophet. He escaped to the city of Yathrab called Medina today.

The residents of Medina accepted Prophet's message.

The prophet then gathered an Army of 10,000 and conquered Mecca, the place of Kaaba.

He declared a general amnesty to the people of Mecca.

Initially, the Jews and the Christians supported the Prophet because of his message of oneness. They signed treaties with Muslims.

Later on, the Jews and Christians broke those treaties and there were wars between Muslims and Jews and Christians and Muslims.

So, when the polytheists tried to kill the Prophet and his small group of followers the message of God on that day condemned the polytheists.

When battles ensued between Muslims and Jews the message of God expressed condemnation of those PARTICULAR JEWS (not Judaism as such).

So, each verse from the Koran must be read in the context of the day and period.

THERE IS NO BLANKET CONDEMNATION OF JUDAISM OR CHRISTIANITY. On the contrary, Jews and Christians in the Koran are called "people of the book". Muslims are commanded to respect "people of the book."

The prophet was preaching monotheism. Preaching is not a crime. Trying to kill the preacher is a crime.

Since the Koran says "To you your faith, to me mine" or THERE IS NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION", there would not have been a conflict with the polytheists either, but for the transgressions of the polytheists.

However, there is a philosophical and spiritual difference between belief in ONE God and belief in many gods. That is why Christianity, Judaism and Islam are very similar in some ways but different in other ways.

Hope this helps clarify things at least partly.

The extent of Hindus was from at least Afghanistan to Vietnam. The fact that India is largely Hindu is because it has been sectored into many countries.

I don't think that sectoring was wrong. But the damage to Hindus is far greater than people in India seem to realize.

There is no paradox. Human beings are god made. Muslims (the people) are human beings who have the same faults and goods as any other human being made by the God that is truth. We must never hate the person.

But Islam (the ideology) is not the people. We can understand the ideology separate from the people. Like all other ideologies some parts are good (there is no god but god, the only real service to god is to care for the poor...) and some parts are just plain evil (god hates the non-believer, lie to the infidel until you have power and then crush them....)

So the critical mind, in this critical stage for humanity, is to define what we mean by the good of an ideology and the bad of an ideology. We must find what parts of an ideology makes humans act well and what parts make us act poorly.

I believe this is a sense of dvaitic thinking - dividing between people (humans)- enforced by a belief in the chosen people of a hateful god. That is, if we worship a hateful god (truth), we become hateful. Some believe it is due to the misogyny (that I think is part of the dvaitic constructs) but I like the data / analysis. Some believe it is because they are not in power (the christo-islamists). Whatever the cause, we better figure this our before too long with the loose nukes about.

hariaum

Shlomofisher says: For example, the supreme Taliban's hard line leader in Afghanistan, Mullah Mohammed Omar, issued an edict that Buddhist statues insulted Islam. Apparently no one clued in Mullah Mohammed Omar that Islam is an insult to humanity! In any event, within days of his edict, all Buddhist statues, including a giant 5th century Buddha at Bamiyan carved out of sandstone (see photos), were destroyed as the "civilized" world could only stand by and watch it happen.
ISLAM: "Religion of Peace?"
----------
Fine, but note that Afghanistan has been Muslim for more than a thousand years and the Buddha statues have been ALLOWED TO STAND until very recently. India was ruled by a Muslim minority for 600 years, and at the end it was still, by and large, a Hindu majority country.

I agree with you that there are dangers in some of the things which the Koran says, but we have to give credit to Muslims that their actual behavior has been quite good, for the most part.

A paradox? OK, a paradox then. We have to live with it.

-- I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers. (8:12)

(and many other equally alarming passages)

This is what the Swiss were protesting. Good for them!
Posted by: Montedoro | December 6, 2009 1:12 PM
----------------
I have a copy of the Koran, a gift of a Muslim student, and the quotes which Montedoro gave us above are actually there in the Koran (check for yourself).

This creates a mystery. Muslims generally are a kind and good hearted people, and I, a non-Muslim, have always been treated well by them.

And yet these passages are actually there in the Koran.

This creates a task for three groups.

For the average Muslims, who are decent persons, to acknowledge that these passages are there in the Koran, and that their non-Muslim friends are going to find them offensive and frightening. Hiding from them is not a solution. You have to find a way to reassure non-Muslims that Islam has finally given up the way of violence.

For the anti-Muslim crowd, it is important to remember how decent Muslims are in actual practice. They give to the poor, they tend to be honest, and if they are eating and you approach, they will invariably offer you some of their food.

For the PC crowd who see no danger in Islam, they need to understand that those Muslims who carry out aggression towards non-Muslims are not bad Muslims, they are following the Koran. An uncomfortable truth, but a truth nonetheless.

So we have here a messy state of affairs, and we can get out of it, but it will take work and remembering that as humab=n beings we are all one.

I believe that the ban on minarets will be good for Muslims because it is when Muslims are seen as pushy then they are in most danger.

In my home town in India, there is a call to prayer broadcast every morning at sunrise. Many people who are sleeping find this irritating. The call should be for Muslims only. Why should non-Muslims have to wake up for it?

The same holds for religious songs sung at Hindu temples (but they do not do it every day, only some special days of the year).

Consider the word "ideology." A certain discourse, or groups of discourses, develop to privilege this or that minority. These discourses, in our case, also serve fabulously powerful interests such as British Petroleum, which has gotten away with murder (literally) on US soil.

NONE of this is to say that we should not be concerned about discrimination against Muslims, of course. But a minaret is not a person. It is not the three hundred fifty Yemeni Jews facing exodus from a land in which they've dwelled for three thousand years.

How is it that we here nothing of these Yemeni Jews upon whom I posted below? They are the last of a three-thousand-year old civilization! With their deportation it will END. Just as the Egyptian Jewish culture died out. Just as Jewish culture all over the Middle East died out with ethnic cleansing. And of the Turkish Jews and Christians? The Egyptian Christians? (Egypt is all but Juedenrein now.) The Iraqi Christians (Iraq is all but Judenrein now.)

The firebombings of synagogues in French, Turkish, Sweden, Holland, Venezuela?

And closer to home: the synoguge attacks in Chicago, Florida, Los Angeles, New York City?

The outcry from Muslims in the media?

Ironic that there is no ban on building mosques (even though there is on building anyone else's places of worship in Muslim lands). It is a minaret people - get over it. Even Sharia laws don't state that one is necessary.

Then all the hoopla to compare Christianity with Islam - it is all hogwash. Go look at the numbers killed in the name of Islam and those numbers are skyrocketing and other 'ideologies' pale in comparison. Go to the basics of Islam's teachings and you will find that it is a good and holy thing to kill and persecute anyone who is not a Muslim while it is NOT in anyone else's ideology.

The only group that rivals Islam in killing are the Communists/Marxists/socialists. If Christianity was mono-theist there would be no wickums, hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, etc in our countries while they are being eliminated out of Muslim countries.

Ignorance abounds in the report and in the comments when I read such things.

Look at the first paragraph: 'Others arrived in the past half-century: economic migrants welcomed -- and as often ghettoized -- by European nations without the populations to do needful work.'

Excuse me - this sentence contradicts itself! If they arrived for work then there was no work in the first place that means they arrived for other reasons. Read Sharia laws and their goals of establishing the barbaric Sharia laws worldwide. They arrived to sit on their behinds on welfare and breed like rats to ensure their numbers started to rival the host population (sounds like a cancer to me!).

And we NEVER hear about all the riots caused by Muslims because they don't report it or they label the perpetrators as someone else (Asians, disaffected youth, etc). how about the escalating crime rates of Muslim on non-Muslim, the rising antisemitism from them, etc - no reports of that either.

The continuing sob story of Muslim persecution is just not a reality. When they start banning mosque building and driving them out - then I will be interested because then I will know the Europeans are growing a backbone.

The Swiss are good history students. They study the past and they learn from it. The Wilhelm Tell Overture is a bugle call to the past. They value their lifestyle, their religions are tolerant up to a point. We ought to learn from them and take their actions seriously. Emulating is complementing and lessons are to be learned from that action. Please note that the Swiss do not shoot first and ask questions later. They are protective of their own turf and march by the motto, "Don't treat on me." Didn't we have such a motto once. Well, if it worked once doesn't anyoen think that it might work again?
Victoria

In a very short while, Yemen will be officially Judenrein. Coming under increasing attack from violent Islamist gangs, Yemen's 350 remaining Jews are under heavy guard. These Yemeni Jews practice a unique form of Judaism, which will soon be lost to our culture.

They, like all Middle Eastern Jews, have been in the Middle East since long before Mohammed set foot upon the earth. The Jewish presence in Yemen dates back to the Solomonic era--3,000 years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/24/AR2009112403898.html

I think that the plight of living human beings is a little more important than architecture. The murders of Jews in Yemen, however, is not of interest to OnFaith. Where is the outcry from Muslims? The protests?

Synagogues have been firebombed in Florida, France, Sweden, etc., for months, and where is OnFaith.

Jews are unsafe in the streets of Europe. Will, it, too, soon be Judenrein like the MIddle East?

Where is the outcry from Muslims? The end of a long, long culture is occurring in Yemen....The protests from Muslims? From OnFaith?

Bravo to the Swiss for voting to prohibit the construction of new minarets! The is the first popular vote in Europe against the spread of Islam in Europe. It is a very tiny victory for Western values, but it is the first such victory. May there be many more! The minarets are a symbol of political Islam, of Islamic power. They are not at all necessary for the practice of Islam, and the Swiss vote does not affect the Swiss Moslems' practice of their religion in any way. The Swiss have a perfect right to preserve the architectural character of their cities. If Moslems choose to live in Switzerland, they can jolly well adapt to Switzerland instead of expecting their Swiss hosts to adapt to them. The Swiss vote was a symbolic rejection of Islamic religious bigotry. Intolerance of Islamic religious bigotry is perfectly acceptable -- even desirable. If anyone is in doubt that Islam promotes religious bigotry and supremace, look at these verses from the Koran:
-- “You are the noblest community ever raised up for mankind.” (3:110)
-- The unbelievers among the people of the book and the pagans shall burn forever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures. (98.6).
-- Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve. (8.55)
--The unbelievers are your inveterate enemy. (4:101)
-- Mohammed is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. (48:29).
-- It is unlawful for a believer to kill another believer, accidents excepted. (4:92)
-- Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends. (5:51)
-- Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme. (8:40)
-- Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme. (2:193)
-- The true believers fight for the cause of God, but the infidels fight for the devil. (4:76)
-- We will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. (3:151)
-- I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers. (8:12)
This is what the Swiss were protesting. Good for them!

Free to practice your religion in the United States, you say? No way!!!!!!An imam in Michigan was killed by the FBI recently and you feel that the United States is a "shining light", the example the rest of the world should follow? My sister you are not free and if you were a little older you would remember an America where the government could not legally go through your life like a hot knife goes through a stick of butter just because you proclaimed that there was only one ilah-Allah. Check your history, the United States of today looks more like Mecca during the time before the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, left for Medina than anything place else. Certainly not the standard that anyone should be shooting for.

What an ill-informed and biased op-ed...

I'm French, and I've had the opportunity to live in the US for a couple of years. With all its flaws, I'll choose our "laïcité" model anyday over the American bigotry in public life. Europeans are not all like the Swiss, and even the Swiss are not all alike (the French-speaking cantons in Switzerland, i.e. those generally more sensible to the French "laïcité" model, voted against the ban with wide margins). Switzerland is a little, extremely rich country, with little or no history of ethnic or religious diversity, that is so afraid it won't preserve its warm little existence locked behind the doors of its bank vaults in a changing world, it is inventing itself problems. Over here, we consider that the minarets are a problem that is swiftly dealt with at the local level, according to urbanism and architecture regulations. We don't deny there are issues regarding the presence of Islam in public life that have to be dealt with (e.g. the presence of burka-wearing women in public places) ; but we're more than ever committed to preserve our laïcité model, which is a way to guarantee religious freedom by the assurance that the State is religion-blind, and not a masterplan to deprive people of their ability to worship whichever God they like, as it is assumed by this article...

Radical Islam: Terror in Its Own Words

Part-3b http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCTTAR_IeBA
Part-4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYWu2v_FY_4
Part-5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBgT35YO5dQ

Radical Islam: Terror in Its Own Words
Part-1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXFYH5ckDKQ
Part-2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCUlslaXSzk
Part-3a http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYASn6oXkUc

It is sad to see so many hateful comments.Islam should not be judge by acts of few terrorist any more than KU KLUX KLAN/Hitler define Chritianity or the incidence in India in state of Gujarat/Babri Mosque destruction define Hinduism.Act of a Derange person at Forthood not any different than act of a deranged person in Seattle Their name and religion have nothing to do with. As for Minarets Taj Mahal has Minarets a symbol of love for swiss many go to India to see TajMahal I wonder making a Minarets look like Missiles or if they have make it look like TajMahal what will be the outcome of the vote.It was a Hate vote nothing else.As a Muslim and millions like myself I am involved in Improving the quality of life of Stroke Victim #1 Cause of Disability in America and #3 cause of Death not sure where people getting Ideas that every 1.5 billion muslims are ratching bad Schemes some where in the world its all hateful thinking Jesus(Peace be upon him)never preached that.

Sally62,

No,you are wrong.Islam dictates Clothing(in Two different verses).Islam is Not Only Quran.Quran doesnt write Prayer Ritual,Circumcision/FGM and House of War Concept.

Islam Dictates,Interferes,Intervenes everything and everything.Islam/Submission dictates;
-What you wear and what you dont wear,
-What you eat and drink and what you not eat and drink.Islam hates Wine/Cabardes 1974 Drinkers,but,there are Wine Rivers in Islam Paradise.
-How you do in WC.Sample,in many islamic countries Pissuars removed from WC,because Pissuar is a Infidel Invention.
-What you do in your bed.Yes,yes.Here is very important.Islam dictates what you do in your bed.Because of my Respect to Panelist and Madam Posters,I try to write eloquently,
A-Intercourse should be done on the bed.All commerce in the Car,on the Beach,Lawn,Bath etc. are Sins,
B-Intercourse should be done under Comforter,Quilt.Without Comforter,it's a Sin.
C-Man should be Over and Woman should be Under.All others are Sin.
-Islam intervenes Organs(Circumcision and FGM)

Sally 62,
Islam/submission dictates Everyrhing,everything.....

By the way, you would not be allowed to build a minaret in Washington, DC either. No private building is allowed to he higher than the Capital Dome. We put it in law, the Swiss vote on it. Same result!

What am I most proud about being an Anglo Saxon and American? It is probably their ability over time and in most cases to include and grow from new citizens with different cultures.

How has this worked over the centuries? Adaption in public life, expression of cultures and heritages in private life.

Where do some minorities get off thinking that their heritage is more worthy than all the others that make up our great country? When did Polish, Chinese, African or German immigrants impose that official documents or schools be in their languages or food be available in public venues the way their heritage dictates? Do all Americans from Russia, Korea or the Indian subcontinent wear traditional clothing to work every day? (Islam does not dictate clothing in the Koran, it is cultural)

This is where I ask myself if this isn't just manipulation and (politically correct) blackmail by a few minorities who somehow consider their traditions more worthy than all the others.

As some one else said, the Swiss do not like their skyline changed. One the the many things I like about Switzeralnd is how they have managed to retain their skyline. Zurich, Lucerne, Berne,Basel are much nicer looking cities than say New York.
While I may not object to a mosque being built in my street I would certainly object to a minaret, particularly if it is used to call the faithful to prayer three times a day. It has nothing to do with religion but everything to do with intrusion into a way of life.
How many Muslim countries allow referanda to be held in their countries?
Peoples' referanda is the ultimate in democracy. The U.S could do with one over its public health option.

Column in Haaretz, noting the similarity between the minaret vote and the law that forbids kosher slaugher, thus allowing Jews to live in Switzerland but forcing the observant to import meat....

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1132945.html

So a democracy, a vote of the people makes a vote and all of a sudden the world is up in arms? Talk about a bunch of gd hypocrites - all of you need to take a good look in the mirror.

As far as the Muslim religion is concerned it needs to learn how to reign in its own radicals. If not they will always be shunned regardless of their cries and explanations.

Ombudsman wrote:

"Switzerland need only announce they'll allow as many minarets as Saudi Arabia permits Jewish Temples or Christian Churches."

This was my first reaction, as well. Islam needs to be no less permissive of Christianity on its home turf than Switzerland is now that the minaret ban is in effect. Muslims in Switzerland are still allowed to have mosques (sans minarets), yet Christians in Saudi Arabia operate under far greater restrictions. Churches? They aren't even allowed to bring bibles or, heaven forbid, crosses or rosaries into Saudi Arabia!

The truth is that even if Switzerland wants to restrict certain outward architectural manifestations inconsistent with its view of its culture, its conduct is far less restrictive than is the case in Islam. And it is not just Saudi Arabia. Look at the campaign of intimidation and even bombing going on at this very time in Iraq against the Christian minority whose existence there antedates Islam's founding by hundreds of years.

The Swiss are not in-spired.

I've lived in Switzerland for 40 years and find it almost funny to read all the "serious" analyses about this vote from people who project their issues on the Swiss rather than trying to understand what really happened.
1) It can take years to get permission to build a shed in your garden here. Anyone can oppose your building request. A hospital construczion was stopped for 5 years in Neuchatel because a neighbor felt it would block his view of the Alps.
The Swiss do NOT like change to their environments.
2) Since the 70s there have been numerous votes to block foreigners from entry (at first it was Italians that were the boogey men, then the Portugese)
The Swiss (like most people around the world) do NOT like foreigners who don't adapt yet demand separate rules for themselves.

PLEASE stop with "this is about Muslims/Islam" when it is simply that ex Yougoslavs and North Africans are the most recent group to arrive and who disrespectfully demand their adopted country adapt to them rather than them adapting to the country that gives them a haven!

Please look around at the six reported "honor deaths" which have already occurred in this country. Moslems who kill their daughters or wives because they mildly displease them. The Ft.Hood massacre should have been a wake-up call, but WAPO didn't hear it. Here comes this article criticizing a peaceful nation, Switzerland, which is only trying to protect their population from barbarians. Too bad our leaders don't act responsibly and protect our population. Instead, we get political correctness.

Switzerland need only announce they'll allow as many minarets as Saudi Arabia permits Jewish Temples or Christian Churches.

Muslim countries are amongst the most intolerant in the world when it comes to religious freedom.

I don't feel a particular need to coddle a religion that is trying to kill us where we live.

Even our domestic Muslims are intolerant and prone to violence. Elijah Muhammad of the Nation of Islam ordered the murder of Malcolm X. The Black Muslims in our nation's prisons teach racial and religious intolerance. Radical Islamic clerics in NYC were responsible for the first bombing of the World Trade Center and Clinton's excessive multiculturalism discouraged any meaningful response.

The Islamic world boycotted Danish goods because of a cartoon in a Danish newspaper. Europe only has itself to blame for their selfish low fertility demographics - requiring the importation of foreign Muslim workers. These are the same people who have gone overboard on Climate-Scare. What idiots!

Every year huge numbers of Arabs/Muslims from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Kuwaitis, Syria, Egypt, Albania and dozens of other ethnic Muslim states who hate America swarm into the United States and add to the already increasing numbers of Arab/Muslim. And every year hundreds of mosques, which preach the extermination of all non-Muslims and the Islamization of America, are being added to the thousands already pointing their minarets skyward. Militant Islam is rapidly spreading its tentacles across America. One of the few Islamic moderates in this country, Muhammad Hisham Kabbani of the Islamic Supreme Council of America, estimated that "extremists" have taken over 80% of the mosques in the US, nearly all funded by Saudi Arabia. These extremists are working single-mindedly to turn America into an Islamic state, with the Koran as its foundation.

Many mosques, "Islamic Learning Centers" and Arab/Muslim Student Unions are distributing large numbers of pamphlets and leaflets attacking Judaism, Christianity and other non-Muslim religions and urging young Americans (esp. angry black Americans) to convert to Islam! Not surprisingly, a large number of African-Americans convert to Islam while in the prison systems! The National Islamic Prison Foundation, which coordinates a campaign to convert inmates to Islam claim an average of 135,000 such conversions per year.

These evil people exploit the freedoms given to them here in America and other democracies when their goal is to extinguish ALL freedom!

WAKE UP AMERICA!!! The threat is real and expanding!

France is faring no better. In 1945, there were 100,000 Muslims in France. A fifty fold increase since then now has them numbering 7 million out of a total population of 60 million! Muslims are already 25% of all French under the age of 21. If present birth trends continue, by 2030 a quarter of France's people will be Muslim, more than enough to determine who controls the national parliament and executive. The nuclear-armed French military is already 15 percent Muslim. And if the French-Muslim birth rate continues as projected, France will have a Muslim majority in less than 25 years! Another telling statistic is that although the Muslims are 12% of France's population, 70 percent of a total of 60,775 prisoners in France are Muslims! All of France's urban suburbs are being roamed by Muslim black African or Arabic gangs. One-fifth of all births in France are Muslims! Mohammed is one of the most common names next to Pierre! And Paris has the largest Arab community outside of the Middle East! This is a result of a lenient immigration policy, high Muslim birthrate and conversions. A very high proportion of French Muslims are in the underclass, that segment of the population that relies not so much on education and work as on welfare and predatory activities. In fact, over one thousand Muslim neighborhoods are under monitoring throughout France. Seven hundred of those Muslim neighborhoods are listed as "violent" and nearly 400 hundred are listed as "very violent." Violence ranges from rape (95% of rapists are Muslim), murder (85% of murderers are Muslim), theft and looting of cars (58% committed by Muslims) and street fighting to assault on teachers and civil servants.

In 1970 there were an estimated one-hundred thousand Muslims in the United States. Today, a mere 34 years later, the number is approximately 7-10 million! More than a quarter of a million people of Arab descent live in southeastern Michigan, making the area the second-largest Arab community outside the Middle East (after Paris, France). One frightening example of their prolific growth in American is Dearborn, Michigan. Of a total population of 90,000 Dearborn residents, 25,000 are now Arabs! And of all the Dearborn children under the age of 18, a full 58% are Arab children! Other developing centers of Arab/Muslim growth are Florida, Texas, New Jersey and California. God Bless America!

Sweden: Cold temperatures have not discouraged Muslim immigration. One out of every 22 Swedes are now Muslims and Islam is the nation's second largest religion. Farewell to the blue-eye, blonde hair Swedish beauties! Of the nearly 9 million people in Sweden, 400,000 are Muslim, leading to a drastic increase in anti-Semitic acts against Sweden's 17,000 Jews.

In Holland [The Netherlands], because of its total lack of anti-terrorism laws and its very high level of religious, cultural and judicial tolerance, Muslim-fundamentalist terrorist groups are allowed to thrive. The Muslims now number about 15% of the population. In 20 years' time the majority of Holland's under 18 year old children will be Muslim. In fact, 50 per cent of the newborns during the next twenty years will be Muslim! In Amsterdam, the most popular name for a newborn boy is Mohammed, and a majority of residents will be Muslim within 10 to 15 years. A finger in the dike won't work this time, folks!

Two million Muslims have soaked into Germany; one million into Italy; 200,000 in Spain; 500,000 in Belgium...1/10th its entire population and 1/4 of Brussels, its capitol city. Half of all babies born in Belgium are now Muslims! In total, 11,000,000 Muslims have saturated Western Europe! It now becomes clear just who is organizing and marching in Europe's anti-Israel and anti-American demonstrations!

In Italy, 95% of all rapists are Muslims. Eighty-five percent of all murderers are Muslims. Ah, such a wonderful religion of peace! What does the Pope and the rest of the Vatican Church have to say about this? Nothing! And what will the ordinary Italian say when, in ten years, Muslims will be the majority in Italy!!!

The USA has, as a matter of public policy, and despite the First Amendment, banned even hand-drawn representations of imaginary children having sex. US Federal law also bans sale or possession of animal abuse videos. The rationale being that such representations are toxic per se.

It's not much of a stretch to apply the same logic to a religion which is demonstrably the inspiration for the world's #1 security threat today.

And let's not forget that many of our staunch allies ban religious edifices (e.g. churches in Saudi Arabia) and entire religions (e.g. Scientology in Germany). Calling something a "religion" does not mean it is not harmful. And in an American context, we have already accepted that the First Amendment, despite its plain language to the contrary, is in practice *far* from absolute.

For the record, I disagree with ALL of the examples of banned behavior above. But let's not play "holier than thou" here in America.

Good for you Swiss voters! Don't let yourselves be lectured by those in my country who for "religious" reasons consistently vote to protect marriage from people who want to get married.

Our democracy has been mauled by the religious right. You've made an excellent decision and a democratic one too as long as you make the same decision the next time a protestant or Catholic church wants to construct a spire or two of their own.

As a dual national Swiss-American living in the USA, who voted in favor of this initiative after giving it careful thought, I believe I have something to say to my fellow Americans and others who may misunderstand this decision by the Swiss people. For me, my vote was about preserving Swiss culture -- NOT religious intolerance. Muslims remain free to worship as they wish. Switzerland is a very small country, maybe a little bigger than Massachusetts with a population of 7 million people. It has distinct cultures that have been around for hundreds of years. If it were to become a melting pot like America, in a generation or two there would be no Switzerland.

To Zebra4

Let me see. The problem with the Dutch and immigrants lies in the large numbers from North Africa, mainly Morocco. The Dutch did not have any colonies in North Africa. The Danes never had any colonies in Africa or Asia. The problem they have is with immigrants from those areas. The Germans never had any colonies in modern Turkey and their problems are with immigrants from Turkey. The Irish never had any colonies anywhere and their problems are with immgrants from Eastern Europe, mainly Poland. I could go on and on, but the point is quite simple: Europe has had a problem with immigrants for decades and it is now getting quite ugly. While to some degree the problems in England and France may well lie with immgrants from their former colonies, I suggest that you read the quality news outlets in both countries about what is being said about immigrants from Eastern Europe, mainly Poland. To blame all of Europe's immigrations problems with colonialism does not address what the true problem is. Europe has not figured out how to create either multi-cultural or diverse societies and the anti-immigrant sentiment is one example of this failure.

Yep, those commie, athiest, socialist Swiss have terrible society.

My god, look at all the countries they have invaded on false pretences and all the people who go without healthcare....oh yeah...thats what the god fearing do.

Even non-Muslim Christians under Palestinian-controlled areas ["West Bank" and Gaza] are not faring so well. Bethlehem was 70 percent Christian in the 1970s. Today it is close to 70 percent Muslim. The growing Islamization of Palestinian society makes Christians very uncomfortable. The size of the Christian Arab community in the West Bank may have fallen as low as 10,000, a drop of 50 percent since the mid-1990s.

Two of Europe's most legally tolerant regions...namely, the Dutch-language areas around Europe's most important west coast harbors, Antwerp [Belgium] and Rotterdam [Netherlands]... as the main breeding ground for Muslim-fundamentalist terrorist groups. Osama bin Laden 's organization even runs shipping companies as fronts from Amsterdam.

Something rotten in Denmark? How about the 200,000 Muslim immigrants trying to dictate their anti-Israel, anti-America and anti-Western values upon 5 million Danes? Even though they represent only 4% of the population, the Muslims consume upwards of 40 percent of welfare spending. They also account for 65-75% of the country's convicted rapists... with almost all victims non-Muslim Danes! Demographers have predicted that in just 40 years, one out of every three Danes will be Muslim. At this point, we're sure the Danes wish it were their Jewish population which was growing faster than rabbits on a hot tin roof. Jews are almost always model citizens! But the Danish Jews only number 6,000. Click here to see Danish Muslims in action!

WAKE UP AMERICA, while there is still time!

Other examples: Algeria is wracked by bitter fighting between Islamic Fundamentalists and the military. Death toll, 100,000 over a ten year period! Nigeria is in the midst of a war in which Muslims are murdering Christians and burning down their churches. Moslems against Christians. It doesn't take much to trigger an angry mob of Muslims. The Miss Universe Pageant was held there at the end of 2002. Muslim opposition to the pageant boiled over after a local journalist wrote that the prophet Mohammed would have approved of the contest and might even have wanted to marry one of the contestants. The ensuing riots in Kaduna left 220 dead and 400 wounded. In Kenya the Islamic Party has declared Holy War on the government. In Turkey the secular Muslim government is being challenged by the militant Refah Islamic Party. A civil war rages in the Sudan between Muslims in the north against the Christians in the south. Sudan's militant Muslim regime is slaughtering Christians who refuse to convert to Islam. In recent years, more than two million Sudanese have been killed out of a population of 35 million as its government used bombings and famine in its war on its own people.

Will non-Islamic nations be forced to build a "Giant Wall" as China did to keep out the Islamicized Monguls? Will the electronically-enhanced, concrete wall the Israeli I.D.F. recently erected keep out the Arab-Palestinian terrorists?

ISLAM: "Religion of Peace?"

Ten thousand Lebanese Christians were massacred in 1860s, while over 100,000 were killed in the Lebanese civil war of 1975-1990. Thousands of women were raped. That war was provoked by Yasser Arafat's PLO. Damour was once a thriving Christian Lebanese village until 500 (primarily young boys) were massacred and its population was expelled. This sort of violence and intolerance symbolizes treatment of Christians by Muslims in the Middle East. And, instead of an international arrest warrant Arafat received a Nobel Peace Prize!

Until a nation has embraced Islam, it is legally considered a battlefield (Dar-ul-Harb). Once it has converted to Islam (or all its citizens have been slaughtered or driven out), it then becomes a Land of Peace (Dar-us-Salaam). For those who think that the threat of Islam is only a phenomenon of the Middle East, think again! Although the Jewish State of Israel has been fighting a brave and fierce battle against Islam for over 50 years, there are many other "hot spots" in the world.

For example, the supreme Taliban's hard line leader in Afghanistan, Mullah Mohammed Omar, issued an edict that Buddhist statues insulted Islam. Apparently no one clued in Mullah Mohammed Omar that Islam is an insult to humanity! In any event, within days of his edict, all Buddhist statues, including a giant 5th century Buddha at Bamiyan carved out of sandstone (see photos), were destroyed as the "civilized" world could only stand by and watch it happen.

ISLAM: "Religion of Peace?"

Unfortunately, most people aren’t aware of Islam's murderous philosophy or they find it too monstrous to believe. However, a brief review of recent history and current events should make you doubters out there re-think your position. Two articles in the L.A. Times wrote about Muslims in Indonesia forcing Christians of all denominations to convert to Islam or get their throats slit. Thousands upon thousands of Christians were first converted and, according to rigid Islamic religious dictate, forced to undergo sexual mutilation of their foreskin or clitoris (with kitchen knives and razor blades) to make them conform to Muslim standards. Then they were are enslaved to their local Muslim chieftain. This was not some aberration of Islam but rather business as usual for all but the so-called "moderate" factions. This is Islam's sad legacy of murder, terror, lies and brainwashing to advance their cause of global conversion and subjugation... their so-called "personal struggle"... THEIR "Jihad!"

ISLAM: "Religion of Peace?"

While much of the world fixates on its usual obsession... setting up Jews for a second Holocaust, Islam is also hard at work laying waste to major portions of the world and preparing to impose Islamic rule over everybody and extinguishing their respective non-Islamic civilizations.

"Are you nuts," you might ask? " After all, is not Israel their primary enemy?" But to think that all Islamic issues spring forth from the Arab-Israeli conflict and that only Israel is a target shows a naivety that only invites disaster down the road! After Islam finishes off Israel, their "Little Satan," all the other larger Satans will meet up with the Sword of Islam! America has already seen the spillover of Islamic terrorism... the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut with the loss of hundreds of U.S. marines, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole naval ship off Yemen, the 9-11-01 World Trade Center bombing in New York, and now the murders at Ft. Hood. Yet America has received but a small taste of what Islam has in store for them!

The world "ISLAM" is Arabic for "surrender" or "submission" to the will of Allah [God]. In the language of the Holy Qur'an, Islam means the readiness of a person to take orders from God and to follow them through. It is not derived from the word, "peace," as Muslims would have us believe! Look it up in any dictionary and see for yourself! Seeing a Muslim praying nearly flat on his face five times a day even projects the appearance of a master-slave relationship... a submission of sorts. And while the Muslim is submissive to Allah, all "non-believers" (Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Catholics, etc.) MUST submit to the Muslim. That's how THEIR God wills it to be!

ISLAM: "Religion of Peace?”

Islam is today being portrayed as a peaceful and tolerant religion. History proves otherwise! Though there were certainly periods of relative tranquility and tolerance, minorities and non-Muslims have always been prosecuted under Islam. In fact, Islamic ideology is based upon an intense hatred of the non-Muslim. For Muslims, there exist two kinds of non-Muslim enemies... kafir (non-believers in Islam) and ahl al-kitab (People of the Book). Kafir, such as Buddhists and Hindus, must either convert to Islam or face execution. People of the Book include Jews and Christians. These people need only submit to Muslim authority to avoid forced conversion or death. Although they may keep their original faith, their status becomes dhimmi (a "protected," yet inferior non-Muslim status). So instead of outright forced conversion or slaughter, the Christians and Jews would be allowed to remain somewhat unmolested as long as they acknowledged the superiority of the Muslim. However, as 100,000 dead Lebanese Christians and Israel's beleaguered Jewish population have discovered over the years, these guarantees have proved worthless!

jeffreed:

The countries you named were the colonial powers of the previous two centuries.

The Dutch colonized Indonesia, The British colonized the sub-continents of India amd many countries of Africa. The French colonized Algeria and Morocco. The Italians colonized Libya etc. etc.

The Europeans posed as great democrats and do-gooders. They exploited the lands and the people. Europeans always used deception to get into those countries.

It is the Europens who invented terrorism. The French bombed Algerian cities in 1945 and killed thousands of people.

The British Army killed several hundred unarmed innocent men, women, and children at Jalianwala Bagh.

(The Europeans imported the natives of the lands they colonized as cheap labor. The situation has changed now.)

The list is long. You should get the point.

Read the history of European colonialism.

Since the second world war Europe has had a problem with immigration. Whether we are talking about Germany and its importing workers from Turkey or the British importing workers from the West Indies, the question of immigration has divided the European nations. For the most part, the idea of importing workers - immigrants - has enjoyed the support of the elites and been opposed by ordinary citizens. What we are now seeing in Denmark, Holland, France, and elsewhere is the ordinary hard working citizens are rising up and opposing not only those immigrants already there by wanting to restrict immigration in the future. This is what happened in Switzerland. The interesting question is will the same thing happen in this country? Anyone who tells you that they know the answer to this question is simply mistaken.

My ancestor from Switzerland was a Mennonite who came here about 1840. He lived in the Bernese Oberland.

Mennonites were not popular in Switzerland at one time because they did not believe in infant baptism and they did not want to fight in wars.

A small number of the most stubborn dissenters were drowned in the river in Berne, Switzerland; I think this was in the late 1500s. Others merely went to other countries.

When I visited Switzerland some years ago, we visited a cave where tradition says some Mennonites worhipped in secret.

We assume my ancestor came here for a better life.

If I were Swiss I'd be against minarets for the same reason that Sen. Kennedy opposed electro-windmills in Nantucket Sound: they're ugly and offend against the natural landscape.
Posted by: norriehoyt
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Your thoughts are ugly.

"I am also from a muslim family and grew up as muslism ... but I want a complete and absolute separation between politics and religion ... and I would not hesitate for a second to stand up and protect what we have here in America (however imperfect) from any and all intolerant ideologies ... The swiss has the right to decide to protect their way of life just like any culture or country .. "

Posted by: DontNeedReligion
***************************************************

How are minarets a threat to Swiss way of life?

Diversity enriches cultures not diminishes them. America is rich in diversity.

When I go to the mall or other public places, I see Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, Asians and think how God is wonderful to create different kinds of people. We might be different looking yet we are the same.

We have the same basic needs (food shelter, procreation) and similar secondary needs like the need to communicate, marry, eat different foods, spiritual needs.

There are thousands of different ways in which we fulfill those needs. That is why we have 3,000 different cultures and languages in the world.

If I were Swiss I'd be against minarets for the same reason that Sen. Kennedy opposed electro-windmills in Nantucket Sound: they're ugly and offend against the natural landscape.

Dear Mrs. Uddin
As much as I, a Swiss citizen, am gutted about the Swiss vote on minarets ban, I do not agree with your comment that exhibits little understanding of Swiss democracy, history and - yes - laïcité. Switzerland has been a place of refuge for the persecuted for centuries. This was also the case for the Muslims from the Balkans; contrary to your assertion, they didn't come as economic migrants to Switzerland, but - in their very large majority - as war refugees in the last 20 years.
It is wrong (and very easy) to explain the Swiss vote with primitive fear or even with stubborn xenophobia. Switzerland has a long democratic history, and it represents the successful attempt to integrate people of several ethnics, languages, and religions into one community. Switzerland has succeeded in the long term - certainly not all multiethnic states can say that.
While it is elsewhere still going strong to measure the degree of civilization of a society at the highest possible proportion of migrants, many Swiss feel quite differently. They think that living together is more worthwile than living in parallel (in "ghettos"). This conception has ensured utmost freedom for every single person in Switzerland. That's also why Swiss are not reluctant to look at immigration from the perspective of whether it fits the community with their shared values (e.g. democracy, principle of equal opportunities, equal rights for women, etc.) or not.
Of course, fears have been conjured and some might have voted in favor of the minaret ban because they see in every Muslim a potential terrorist. And that grieves me.
For small states, so said Montesquieu, direct democracy fits. Switzerland has the direct democracy and practices it with passion and conviction. Swiss citizens take their political responsabilities very seriously in all wha matters the public affairs of the community. The fact that 57.5% of participants have expressed themselves in the vote against the further construction of minarets, is an information about which one should take enough time to think.

Agree with the previous poster. Ms. Uddin's article is one sided and she looks at everything through the narrow lens of her own religion. I bet people and muslims like Ms Uddin would not make a sound when other muslim countries routinely ban churches, persecute hindus, jews, christians or anybody they dont agree with or dislike ... People like Ms Uddin's righetous rage is only reserved for her own kind ... where was her outrage when christians were burned alive in her native country? Talk about hypocracy ...

I am also from a muslim family and grew up as muslism ... but I want a complete and absolute separation between politics and religion ... and I would not hesitate for a second to stand up and protect what we have here in America (however imperfect) from any and all intolerant ideologies ... The swiss has the right to decide to protect their way of life just like any culture or country ..

There are a total of four mosques in the entire country of Switzerland, It amuses me a great deal that they can be a threat to skyline or culture of Switzerland.

Europeans have always posed as great democrats and do-gooders. The Swiss may not have been the architects of European colonialism, many other European countries were. They went to other countries to subjugate the people of Asia, Africa, Australia, Newzealand and S. and Central America. They exploited the resources of those lands and in the process killed millions of people.

This charade of democracy and preserving the skyline is not convincing at all.

Ms. Uddin mentions two problems with laïcité: the obvious infringment of basic rights, and that it does not work. Both of these are addressed below.

The notion that keeping religion out of public life is an infringement of a basic right is not obvious. While people should be free to belive whatever they want, others value freedome FROM religion as much as freedom of religion. Keeping religion out of the public domain is perhaps one way to satify all belief systems, including agnostics,atheists, and humanists.

Ms. Uddin paints with a broad brush when she states that keeping religion out of the public sphere has not worked anywhere, and she provides no specific examples to support such a generalization. In fact, eeping religion out of the public sphere has, indeed, worked all over the world, and the examples of thriving secular societies are numberless. Suffice to say that the United States and Europe are largely secular, but function quite well.

Basically you are warning that if people do not do as you wish then violent actions may take place. This kind of reasoning represents what has been so disturbing from people of Muslim faith. There is a willingness to accept and justify violence on its fringes (and at his core in some countries). If you strive to be more accepted in the society I would argue that Muslims should work from within, but actively and publicly, to extirpate the ferment of violence and condemn it when it happens. We simply do not see that.

Europe has gone a long way from any fundamentalism, mainly the Christian one and many Europeans are wary to loose this freedom bitterly won. Having fought to remove the priests, pastors, ... from checking their consciences at each and every turn, people do not want to see this seemingly religious "emptiness" be confused for an invitation for another aggressive religion to fill the apparent void. A majority of Europeans is very happy with this empty space as they see it as an opportunity for the spirit to be freer.

This is the verdict of the people of Switzerland. Actually there should have been 80% votes in favor of not allowing any symbol on the top of any worship place other than Christians, Hindus and others. Muslims should not take any advantage because they don't all the same in their own countries so why to expect something which they do not allow in their own countries. How many churches do we have in Saudi Arabia, not even a single house and if some are seen attending any pray meetings, they are directly dispatched to Jails for un-definate period. In Pakistan we have above 100 yrs old churches. Don't forget that all Muslims are first Muslims then citizens of any country, this also stands for their own countries. They consider all other human beings as 'Infidels'(who are liable to a capital punishment). Through this column I would suggest to all non-muslims to kindly read the Holy Book of Muslims. Remember, when Prophet Ismaiel was born the Angel at that time pronounced that this 'Child will point his finger to others and others will point their fingers at him'. It is not to suggest that Muslims must be persecuted as others are persecuted in their countries, rather they must be allowed to join people having broader vision towards human race, rather looking at them with narrow approach.

This is the verdict of the people of Switzerland. Actually there should have been 80% votes in favor of not allowing any symbol on the top of any worship place other than Christians, Hindus and others. Muslims should not take any advantage because they don't all the same in their own countries so why to expect something which they do not allow in their own countries. How many churches do we have in Saudi Arabia, not even a single house and if some are seen attending any pray meetings, they are directly dispatched to Jails for un-definate period. In Pakistan we have above 100 yrs old churches. Don't forget that all Muslims are first Muslims then citizens of any country, this also stands for their own countries. They consider all other human beings as 'Infidels'(who are liable to a capital punishment). Through this column I would suggest to all non-muslims to kindly read the Holy Book of Muslims. Remember, when Prophet Ismaiel was born the Angel at that time pronounced that this 'Child will point his finger to others and others will point their fingers at him'. It is not to suggest that Muslims must be persecuted as others are persecuted in their countries, rather they must be allowed to join people having broader vision towards human race, rather looking at them with narrow approach.

To say that the Swiss vote was a result of fear is to be completely ignorant of Swiss politics.

First, the German Swiss majority control eveything political. Swiss German pride is the reason Switzerland is not member of European union and would only do what is best for Swizerland.

Secondly, the Muslim religion has just about taken over the French culture do to Frances religious revolution and religious vacuum.

A seventh century lifestyle seems a little incongruous on the shores of Lake Geneva. Just because Lake Geneva has a crescent shape, doesn't mean the gnomes of Switzerland don't have the right to enforce zoning laws on religious structures.

Modern Turkey owes its existence to the great Ghazi - Mustapha Kemal - the Atatürk. He demanded that the government and military remain secular. He sent the Caliphate packing and made the Turks give up their fezzes - the ridiculous hats the Shriners wear. He regarded it as as a symbol of feudalism.

When faith moves from the internal to the external it becomes political in nature. The Swiss being an intelligent and cultured people, well aware of the bloody history of religious strife in Europe, simply don't want a repeat. In every country where Islam has achieved critical mass, religious violence has increased, denial is delusion.

It's quite fascinating to read all these postings, proclaiming the superior morality of the western nations , while justifying the swiss action by comparing it to simialr actions in muslim countries.
If western civilisation is better then Islam, why does it have to resort to the same policy it so much despise.
religious intolerance is bad, unless we do it because we are morally right?
Any way, from a country that found it accepatble to steal the money of the Holocauste victims, one would expect nothing less

2. The Swiss like their city skylines the way they are and would like to keep them that way.
**************

precisely, this is where the conversation begins and ends for me, all this other stuff, while interesting and perhaps relevant in other contexts, is simply superfluous to the discussion of this particular law.

its hard to see anything that objectionable with the law. afterall, mosques are not banned.and if i was swiss i wouldnt want my historic skyline dotted with non-native and conpicuous architectural elements like minarets. the only use of the minaret was already rendered moot, since the cally to prayer is not allowed in switzerland--and understandably so.

i hope more european countries protect their cityscapes and unqiue cultures in this way.

muslims can practice their faith in europe and has access to amazing economic opportunities they wouldnt otherwise have, they are hardly an object of sympathy.

Mary_Cunningham writes...
"And, you might not have noticed, but Muslims in Europe are violent. "

ALL Muslims are violent not just the ones who immigrate. It's in their doctrine to be violent. Iran has already "warned" Switzerland about the minaret ban. Muslims are getting ready to export their dictatorship.

Right now somewhere in the world a Muslim is either planning/executing/executed an act of violence against civilians/women/govrnments.

It has taken western states at least a couple of thousand years to put religion, ie Christianity, in its place, often at great cost of life and treasure. Or, have we forgotten the Reformation, the Inquisition, the Salem witch hunters, etc.? Except for sporadic outburst of delusional fervor, now mostly confined to American fundamentalism and a resurgent Catholicism, Christianity has mostly accepted its place outside the public policy sphere. Not so with Islam. Islam sees itself as integral to the state. Perhaps it would not be stretching the point to say that Islam sees the state as its willing tool with the powers to bully and coerce those who differ. I am a knee jerk liberal, and it is because I am a liberal, that I think it judicious that the democratic state always be on guard against any and all religions. The great paradox is that without the secular state as referee, none of us can have religious freedom. It is worthwhile for all who prattle on about religious tolerance, which arose out of the willingness of the state to wrest power from religion, to remember that.

Ms. Uddin says: "But there is simply no parallel between American Muslim communities -- free and full participants in public life as much or as little as we choose -- and European Muslim communities, subject to popular votes and state policies denying basic rights, and expressing their alienation accordingly."

In the UK, there are half as many Hindus of Indian origin as there are Muslims from the Indian sub-continent. There is no reason to believe that white English people would discriminate against brown-skinned Muslims but love brown-skinned Hindus. Yet when was the last time you heard of Hindu terrorists in the UK blowing up buses or subways?

In fact, the median family income of Hindus in the UK is roughly equal to that of white families. The family incomes of Muslims on the other hand is roughly half of that because they keep their women at home as baby-producing machines. Whose fault is that? According to Ms. Uddin and her fellow Muslims, the answer is obvious - it's the fault of the native English of course!

I think that MS. Uddin misses the point. There is a mixture of various factors involved

1. One of the basis of Calvinism is turning your back to ostentation. A minaret that towers above all other buildings and is a fixture that changes the skyline is ostentation. In fact allmost churches in Switzerland built after the Reformation are very low key.

2. The Swiss like their city skylines the way they are and would like to keep them that way.

3. Calvinism is a very individualistic religion. You pray for your own soul and you are personally responsible for your salvation. There are no promoters or attorneys to plead for you, there is no one act which will erase your sins and no sin against others which is easilly forgiven. Modern Islam is anything but that The eschatlogical flipflop for "shahedi" - martyr and "dhimmi" and "musta'nim" unbeliever makes the Swiss as well as others uneasy in presence of a symbol of that faith. If it gives Ms. Uddin any peace of mind, there are very similar reactions to the paving of city streets in NC and otherparts of the South with churches mega and mini, shoulder to shoulder, literally pave entire towns. The towns and townships react very similarly to the Swiss when a non-evangelical christian house of worship seeks a permit to build.

4. Add a pinch of intolerance, of which there is no shortage and you have the result you got.

Secularism has absolutely nothing to do with it.

In 1947, roughly 35-40% of the people in what is now Pakistan were Hindu. Today, Pakistan is 98% Muslim, and the last remnants of once-flourishing Hindu, Sikh, Zoroastrian and Christian communities are fleeing to India or the West. In India meanwhile, the percentage of Muslims has increased from 8% to 15%. Now that Pakistanis have run out of religious minorities to exterminate, the Religion of Peace types have turned on each other, and Shiites, Ahmadiyyas, Ismailis and other are being killed in large numbers.

This pattern is being repeated across the Muslim world - from Morocco to Pakistan, all Muslim countries are more than 90% Muslim, and people of other religions are discriminated against, forcibly converted, raped, killed or expelled. None of this seems to bother Ms. Uddin - but if the Swiss ban minarets, she and her fellow Muslims quiver with outrage about the violation of "enlightenment values".

The Swiss are doing the right thing -do unto Muslims what they do so cheerfully unto others. Perhaps then Muslims will change their 7th century mentality.

"The problem with laïcité is twofold. First and most obviously, it is an infringement of basic rights."

Works both ways. If Islam wants to enjoy "basic rights" then Islam, its writings sharia law and the preponderance of cultural attitudes and views held by most of its adherents must endorse the basic rights you seek.

I am not an expert, but a significant number of muslims have demostrated that Islam doesn't respect secular human rights. Fix Islam and then we'll talk.

while intellectually I agree that what the Swiss did was kind of awful - I really don't think I can join the pearl-clutching club quite yet until someone starts making a stink about the lack of religious freedom in moslim countries. At least the Swiss are allowing mosques - what about the Saudis not allowing any Christian or Jewish houses of worship at all? Why has no one bothered to point out this obvious one-sided hypocrisy? When folks start talking about the Saudis and the lack of religious freedom in moslim countries then maybe I'll find my outrage about this issue.

This piece by Asma Uddin is a borderline fraud.

The Eurpean Muslim communities haven't been denied basic rights until now.

In Britain, Muslims have enjoyed liberties but that have not stopped them from becoming alienated.

It's plain and simple: Islam is driving Muslims into alienation and violence, and in some cases into incompetence. You only have read this article to realize that.

Unfiortunately, the On Faith section is allowing incompetent Muslims to defelect attention from their self-induced deficencies.

Those who are condemning the yung lady for her rather altruistic views of American tolerance, have proved how intolerant the world really is. Now, I invite all Muslim countries, particularly the oil-producing ones like Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and others to produce a list of people/countries they will not sell oil to based on their demonstrated intolerance of "otherness". This will include the French, for their attitude to head scarves, and the Swiss, and the oil producing countries need to make this aspect of Islamic intolerance public. We want their raw materials, their oil supplies and their cheap labour, but we want their people to remain hidden in the shadows.None of these blighted commenters seem to know that it was Islamic scholarship that kept learning alive during the Dark Ages. And that Christians can live in Muslim countries, at peace with their neighbors, far more easily that Muslims can live in other countries, that call themselves secular, but are really quite narrowminded.

Those who think religion have no role in public life are asked to note that most American laws are based on the Ten Commandments. Had religion, the work of Rev. Trevor Huddleston and Most. Rev. Desmond Tutu, not had a role in public life, South Africa would have still been under aparthied. It was the work of these two men, and that of the American Rev. Leon Sullivan, that were major factors in bringing aparthied to its knees, at time when the Honored Elder, Nelson MAndela was still in prison.
How quickly we forget. Religion adds morality to public life. This absence of morality could explain the Swiss willingness to bank the money of ruthless exploiters like Sani Abacha of Nigeria, as well as countless other theftocrats from all over the world.They were also Hitler's bankers,remember?

If the Swiss vote resulted from fear, that is understandable. Reports about what is done by adherents of Islamic faith make it clear that it has no place in today's world. Punishments under Sharia law are atrocities. Subjugation of women is condoned. Honor killing! In Pakistan,until a few years ago a woman needed four independent male witnesses to file a complaint for being raped.

The Catholic Church's role in covering up
widespread practice of pedophilia by priests is shameful. But Islam takes the
cake for being archaic and tyrannical.

As far as I'm concerned, the author of this pitiful article needs to move out of the U.S.

As far as I'm concerned, the author of this pitiful article needs to move out of the U.S.

Pure unadulterated Sophistry ala wattenberg and the TROTSKYITE CABALjOHN mORRISON

This A.T.Uddin is a hypocrite. Using and hiding behind the screen of political and religious "correctness", she's contributing to this deliberate fog by attempting further concealment of the concept of the Islamist's subversion of Europe and ignoring the adage of the "camel's nose under the tent".....inch by inch...etc.

I think her writing this tripe is an insult to the intelligence of those of us in the West who're waiting for "tolerance" in Ridyadh, and elsewhere for the open practice of religions in that darkest of closets....the Muslim/Islamist areas of rigid control.

Compared to the polyglot nation of the USA, European nations and especially miniature nations like Switzerland, are far more homogeneous with regard to ethnic makeup and cultural traditions.

Immigrants that make significant efforts to assimilate into their adopted cultures are going to do far better than those that remain aloof. Islam is not known in Europe as having an assimilation-friendly orientation.

For example, as one huge source of conflict, contrast Sharia law with the secular democratic legal structure found throughout western Europe. Many Muslims wish to enfranchise Sharia law within their closed communities in the West, and these efforts are bound to fail - should in fact fail.

Other notorious religously/culturally sanctioned practices such as honor killing and female genital mutiliation are still practiced by some Muslims here in the West, while remaining severe violations of western secular law.

Minarets are very likely symbols of an alien presence to many Europeans - and reactions such as the anti-minaret referendum may seem like knee-jerk bigotry, but are really based on clearly understandable social dynamics.

And then of course, Muslim nations are noted for their own complete lack of religious tolerance and diversity. All in all, the Swiss vote is not so hard to understand, when you don't apply exclusively American standards (which engender their own problems).

The primary In Group/Out Group principle of social dynamics is always universally in play....mutual cooperation,tolerance and understanding is the only way to temper it's influence.

Muslims in Europe need to break down their own cultural/religious defenses to a far greater degree.....educated Muslims in America are more likely to be secularized, multi-generational, and religiously moderate - having significantly absorbed and recapitulated the prevailing cultural values in their own lifestyles. This makes all the difference.......

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-06-07-eu-immigration_x.htm

Enough hypocrisy. How about the plight of non-Muslims in most Muslim nations? Do they have Hindu/Jewish/Buddhist temples in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait... Why not?

Is Islam intolerant of others or it believes it is superior? In any case, why blame Swiss when they ban certain design for a mosque?

After 500 years of struggle to throw off the hegemony of the Catholic Church, are we now supposed to accept a 500-year setback because of the primitive Moslems and their "faith?" Let them practice their desert religion at home, the countries they came from. We don't need their "faith" here, in fact, we don't need to be ruled by any "faith" with its typical irrational fantasies and tales of prophets and sky-men. If the Moslems are allowed they will gnaw into Western civilization like rodents, undoing the great work of out Enlightenment and plunge the West into the ignorance and superstition that is the hallmark of Islam (and the other religions.)

Muslim migration to Europe can be characterized as mass migration, similar to the movement of Latinos to the US in the past 20 years. However, whilst the Catholic Latinos have followed the path towards assimilation similar to, say, earlier Italians and Poles, Muslim immigrants in Europe have founded colonies within the host countries rather than be assimilated.

And (as below) the violence which characterizes the Muslim migrants. Americans are just lucky that their migrants are Catholics.

Why are numbers so lacking when writing about Muslim immigrants? America has 0.6% of its population Muslim, and you can bet, after 9/11 very few new Muslim migrants were allowed entry. Switzerland, in contrast, has a Muslim population of 4.3%, funded by the intolerant Wahhabi Saudis, and almost all of whom arrived in the past 20 years .

Americans lecturing Europeans about Muslim immigration is thus a bit rich: considering you don't have any!

I guarantee if the US had experienced that type of onslaught--the equivalent of 14 million new Americans--there would be an outcry. Oh wait! There already is an uproar about illegal Mexican migrants.

And, you might not have noticed, but Muslims in Europe are violent. France experienced a summer of rioting in 2007, Britain has had similar riots in Bradford, to say nothing about the children of Pakistani migrants blowing up the underground, and Somali, Iraqi, Pakistani, Indian Muslim migrants trying--and fortunately for the rest of us failing--to wreck maximum havoc on civilians by bombing airlines, tubes, nightclubs...North African Muslims blew up Spanish commuter trains, Chechnyan Muslim Russian schools...well, you get the picture.

Eviloverlord:
Perhaps recent outbreaks of laicite are in response to ubiquitous aggressive evangelism - the insistence on using public spaces to promote particular religions (almost always Christianity)
==========================================
Sure goober, the Swiss banned minarets because they were afraid of evangelical Christians.

Goober.

Stop moralizing and attacking the Swiss. Each country that is offended by aggressive Islamist culture in their country has their own way of crystallizing their objections.

In France, those who object to Islamist culture undermining traditional French culture, draw the line at oppressing and subjucating women starting with the veil. To the French, hiding the beauty of women under a veil of shame undermines their feminist ideals and egalitarian values.

In Switzerland, if you have ever been there, the Alpine skyline dominates the visual sense of a culture of villages picturesquely nestled in respectful peace with surroundings. To the Swiss, raising minarets of an aggressive, rigid and often violent religion challenges their pacific nature along with the sometimes indescribably beautiful skyline.

Maybe it's the ignorant Americans, who engage in shallow rhetoric of equality and tolerance while engaging in unprovoked wars of aggression against Islam, who fail to appreciate and respect the values of others, including Muslims and Europeans alike?

Those who support Obama's "surge" in Afghanistan and sit around carping at Europeans, all sound like ignorant, ADD judgmentalists to me.

Nothing happens in a vacuum. A repressive response to religion is the direct result of excesses committed in the name of religion. Doesn't make a purely secular society any more desirable perhaps, but it's a little easier dealing with a bureaucrat obey man's law than a religious zealot that obeys god's law (and is frequently persuaded that he alone knows what god's law is).

Asma T. Uddin,

How come I never read any voice from you raising concerns about freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia??

Doesn't it sound specious that you target only the Swiss, who are just banning Minarets not mosques!

Please sell your intolerance elsewhere!

Perhaps recent outbreaks of laicite are in response to ubiquitous aggressive evangelism - the insistence on using public spaces to promote particular religions (almost always Christianity) - crosses in public parks, religious commandments in schools and courtrooms, etc. Perhaps if the religious focused more on their own space and less on forcing their views on others, there would be less of an opposing reaction.

EO

Dear Asma T Uddin,
Attorney,Editor-in-Chief of Altmuslimah,
Member of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and Muslim Women Lawyer for Human Rights.

Welcome to On Faith.
It will be a great pleasure to read your articles and discuss if you grant.

Some information;
-The Europeans discovered Muslim Invaders not since seven century ago,but,beginning of Eighth Century,when Umayyads invaded Spain.Someones illogically flatter too much as Golden Age of Spain(absolutely Myth) and they say *Umayyads ruled Spain 800 years very well(not 800 years,but,300-500 years indeed).On the other side,Umayyads couldnt rule their Homeland for 80 years and overthrown by people.
-Aggressive Secularists in Turkey ? Please,please a little Conscience.
A-Secular Turkey constructed 100000 Mosques in last fifty years,
B-Secular Turkey built 500 Islamic Schools,
C-Secular Turkey opened 10000 Arabic Quran Courses,
D-Secular Turkey epuipped Loudspeakers on Minarets/Muslims Bayonets(as it is said) that Arabic Call to Prayer chanted from Sunrise to Sunset
E-Secular Turkey employed 80000 Imams,but Turkey hasnt employed 80000 Medical Docteors.
A secular state shouldnt do such Islam Populism,but,Turkey did(it seems to me,Turkey did wrong).Who,including yourself thanks to Turkey ? Nobody,on the contrary,Turkey being blamed by muslims.Isnt it Ungratefulness ? Please,a little Justice.

Dear Sub-Continenter Madam,
There are Contradictions in your article.
At the beginning,you say *a society ill-equipped to deal with Islam*,but,at the end,you write *Swiss majority's fear-some rational* Which one is correct ? Btw,The Europeans know Real Islam much better than you.Real Islam is the name of the Cult in Saudia and Islamic Republic Iran,not a few American Muslims' Fantacies.
As far as I understand from your post to Marie Claire Magazine and Swat Valley article,you,such as most of American Muslims dont tell about Real Islam.Freedom is a Sin in Islam/Submission.
Book of Allah says *It is NOT FITTING for a Believer,man or woman,when a matter has been DECIDED by Allah and His Messenger to have any option their decision.If anyone DISOBEYS Allah,s/he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path* 33.36

Dear Muslimah,
You critisize Marie Claire Magazine,but doesnt face/address *Two women equal One Man* or *taking four women* or *whenever he likes,he can kick her/them out*You are a Woman and Lawyer,are those still Valid in 21st Century such as many other things which debase women ?
Swiss Vote is the result of Aggressive,Discordant,Disturber Islam.What Swiss Nation did is definitely right,but,Not Enough.Much more things have to be done.
Dont blame Swiss,but,address *why peoples in all over the world fear Islam/Cult of Hate*
Dont critisize Marie Claire,but,face and say something to those who subjugate,oppress,debase women in islamic countries.

I thank you to read my post.

Uddin says:

"..... a ban on minarets in a county possessing a mere four of them -- eloquently testifies to a society ill-equipped to deal with Islam, by virtue of being ill-equipped to deal with faith."

This might be true if Islam were a mere faith. Islam, as you should know, is a primitive political ideology masquerading as a religion.

Arif2 aka Ibrahim Mahfouz aka A. Kafir aka CCNL aka ABHAB aka Halozcel1.

Correction to previous post: Meant to write
"350 souls in Yemen."

I have no doubt that (a) more tolerance for religious minorities in Muslim countries, (b) better treatment of women and gays, (c) the outspoken condemnation of Islamic violence against European Jews would go a long way toward ending the fear among some Westerners.

Right now, the remaining 350 Jews in Morrocco are under close guard by the military because, for reasons having nothing to do with them, they are under attack by Islamist militia groups.

These 350 souls, remnants of a civilization that pre-dates Islam, are awaiting transport to Israel, a land, which until now, they had no desire to go to. They are Yemeni.

In the media, there has been no outcry among Western Muslims, no outcry at the endless brutality against European Jews by EuroMuslims.

Perhaps, when the West sees more of this sort of thing, some of its anxieties would be relieved.

On the Swiss: Yes, they do not want religion in their face, and neither do most Americans. My own view, as noted elsewhere on this thread is that the referendum might have been avoided it Swiss authorities had inquired as to eliminating the call to prayer. These calls have been problematic in the US. At one Mosq both second generation Muslim Americans and everyone else in the town was so driven to distraction, that the calls were ended.

My guess is that the Swiss authorities feared being thought of as bigots and so did not broach the matter. Then, too, they did not think the referendum would pass.

Personally, I was sorry it had to happen; it is divisive.
--------------
That said, I have a very strong commitment to a secular society and WEstern values. I think politically, civically minded members of the Muslim community must consider the needs of the countries in which they live, just as those countries, if they are Western, must question whether they need to do more in the interest of an enlightened pluralism.

It works both ways, Asma. Knee-jerk, bobble-headed politically correct pronouncements from Christian and Jewish talking media heads and politicians will not solve the problem.

As two essayists on this blog have noted, it is high time that Muslims started speaking out more loudly against Islamist persecution of other religious groups, not only in Muslim countries, but in Europe.

What else does Alexis de Tocqueville say... on Islam;
"I studied the Koran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad."

- Alexis de Tocqueville

The Swiss are free by the way and to stay that way they need to ban Islam next. Mosques are not safe in Muslim countries, in Pakistan muslims explode in a mosque taking out numerous muslims... wonder if the minaret is still intact? Mosques are an unsafe place.

The secularist state believes that religion is harmful to society. In the same way a state bans other harmful material (in the US literature that calls for the overthrow of the government), or regulates potentially dangerous ideas (pornography), the state needs to decide when a "simple" thing is not so simple and needs to be removed from the political sphere. So the US removed christianity's direct hand in government prevailing at the time of the drafting of the constitution.

I agree that the Swiss are restricting religious freedom that as a principle is wrong. But as a lawyer, would not the same charge be levied against most islamic states? Are you willing to say that most islamic states are unable to deal with faith? Is Mecca unable to deal with faith since it bans the open worship of other religions - a ban that goes far beyond minarets.

Christianity is a mono-ideology. Islam is a mono-ideology. Both are intolerant. But where 47% of the Swiss wanted to allow minarets, how many Saudi's, Iranians, Libyans, Egyptians... want Hindu temples, animist temples, etc. to be allowed to build wherever they want.

Perhaps it is that mono-ideology propagates hate and fear. If so, then banning monoideologies would be a world of good.

hariaum