Oh, sorry, that wasn’t directed at you–I figured you knew that. More at athelas who was speaking of the monolithic Islamic world as something inherently bad for women. A lot of cultures are, but not very Muslim culture is exactly the same.
I spoke to a friend of mine who is an Arab immigrant about this, and he surprised me by not really caring so much. He said “do you think they would let you build a cathedral in a Muslim country?” And then I surprised myself when I realized I didn’t really care whether Christians would be allowed to build religious buildings in Muslim countries.
So I guess the point is that I don’t see the bigotry and religious intolerance angle.
[quote=“Mosier, post:262, topic:519366”]
I spoke to a friend of mine who is an Arab immigrant about this, and he surprised me by not really caring so much. He said “do you think they would let you build a cathedral in a Muslim country?”
[quote]
Well, we’ve had fine evidence that the answer is yes, excluding whacko Saudi.
Really, banning on specific religion’s specific religious edifice architectural feature (incoherently really arguing about stopping spread of radical Islam, although how the bloody fuck minarets promote radicalism escapes me) isn’t religious bigotry.
I think it would be self evident that a law banning synagogues from showing stars of david or hebrew lettering would be bigotry, so is this.
Disturbingly this is a replay of the early 20th century nastiness towards Jews.
Suppose, just for the sake of argument, we accept that there are gangs of Muslims roaming the streets of Zurich and raping women. Is banning minarets an effective rape preventative?
“By symbolically castrating ze Muslim men, cutting off their ‘minarets’, so to speak, ve psychologically prevent them from being able to complete the act.”
Seems kind of bloody unlikely, that. If there’s a problem with rape or other violent crime, there are any number of things the Swiss could try in terms of police responses and so forth that would be more effective than banning minarets. (Given the likely actual efficacy of banning minarets in the prevention of crime, that list would probably include putting up a buch of public posters that say “Hey, immigrant guys, raping women is totally not cool.”)
And, if Malaysia jumped off a cliff, then what–Switzerland would jump off maybe a not so high cliff?
As noted, it really is symptomatic of a larger issue involving immigration in Wester European countries and the lack of real discussion as to whether that is a good or a bad thing. Again, I think the referendum result itself is a mistake (Please note that it does NOT ban the building of Mosques but only that minarets) but it does show that there is a growing and very real concern about immigration. If we don’t address this then I honestly believe that a neo-facist party will win power in an EU country.
Instead we should have honest debate that will hopefully lead to reduced immigration and proper review as to why people want to come to Wesern Europe (basic solution, make life better for them in their own countries and they really won’t want to leave). Over time, with a moratorium on immigration, there will be proper integration and Islam will be seen much like Catholic church in a predominantly Protestant countries.
I would tend to say that it’s the prior deciding of what the result should be that means such debate isn’t hugely likely. 
Heh well given the current situation is fairly liberal immigration policies maybe my position should be the starting point of the discussion. I really do feel that it would be the best result for all parties involved.
What constitutes “fairly liberal”? By my view continental policies are fairly illiberal (but then one gets much illegal immigration).
I’d rather see more liberal and organised legal immigration to the EU, counterweight to declining natality.
Why not just encourage more native births? Moreover, is falling fertility necessarilly a bad thing? This rush to replace old with new seems, well, a little rushed. Other steps should be taken before cheap labour is imported.
Natality programs seem to generally fail. Oddly women in the aggregate in free societies with a degree of wealth to provide choice seem not to like being baby machines (in the aggregate).
When it deeps below replacement level, it certainly creates serious challenges for carrying the aging populations, very serious problems actually. Importing new labour is a means of adjusting for that, the US of A effectively does that.
What rush? Immigration policies have gotten massively tighter in Europe (Western Europe) since the 1960s.
Brown people are not that scary mate.
Perhaps not but encouraging native growth can often mean the difference between one child and two. Indeed, familes put off growth simply because they worry that they can’t afford it. An issue that doesn’t seem to bother immigrant communities. Programs that encourage reasonable growth can work (as shown in France).
And damn the consequences? Cheap labour often costs more than it saves via depressed wages, health and educational costs as well as cultural clashes the likes of which we are seeing with the Swiss. It also retards technological growth and development. Why not try the above first before taking the easy way out?
Yet oddly the numbers have grown. How’s that?
Let’s not discuss the facts, instead let’s fall back on calling people racist :rolleyes: And you wonder why stupid referendums like this pass, it’s because reasonable debate is stiffled by these sorts of “glib” comments.
Well, sure, but who doesn’t think their opinion is the right one?
The problem with phrasing beginning a dialogue in the way you have is that it sort of suggests that what you believe will occur is not so much give-and-take, but rather an explanation by those who would agree with you the correct ideas to those who disagree. Not so much a discussion as one side informing another, with the end result clear to see.
Well, “cultural clash” is very vague. So far the only cultural clash I’m seeing is that the Swiss don’t like to see Muslim places of worship. Add to that Lonesome Polecat’s claim that Muslims are raping poor innocent white woman, and you can start to see why people are getting defensive.
I question that France has shown anything actually.
The remainder of your “facts” are just-so assertions of dubious value.
Oh stop the martyr act, you’ve made a string of assertions with absolutely no facts to back them - reasonable debate begins with actual facts, not glib assertions and appeals to nativism.
But first things first, I observed that natality programs seem not to have worked, I shall go find proper data cites from some non-partisan source. Pray do the same rather than asserting anti immigration spin as fact.
Lochdale,
Excellent posts. And good for you for stopping the racist bullshit as soon as it was offered up.
I’m curious. Was this prejudice displayed against all foreigners or was it targeted at specific groups like South or Eastern Europeans?
:rolleyes:
And how is that not designed to appeal to racism? Do supporters need to tattoo “Racist” on their foreheads? In English?
*Instead we should have honest debate that will hopefully lead to reduced immigration and proper review as to why people want to come to Wesern Europe *
That’s not going to happen though - there is too much invested in getting cheap labour to allow people to have a say. Note that the Swiss are acting in a perfectly natural way, wanting to keep their country & traditions without altering their ethnic makeup. It’s no different to Japan, Israel or non-western countries.
:rolleyes::rolleyes:
from the comments on 3quarks:
"Don’t want to die in a bombbed airplane? = racist
Don’t want to die in a bombed train station? = racist
Don’t want to be raped for being native European? = racist
Don’t want to be stoned for being homosexual? = racist
Don’t want to be forced to completely cover your body with a bedsheet? = racist
Don’t want to be knifed for a disagreement in conversation? = racist
Don’t want to see your own Culture of 2000 years forcibly displaced by massive Anti-Culture immigration and rule by technocrats? = racist
Yes, when it comes to self-preservation of life, liberty, property, person, free opinion, traditional culture, self-determination, Democratic government, non-violence, equal rights not special rights, and simply being left alone among your own people to decide your own values and your own way of life the “racists” certainly do come out in numbers.
Posted by: Unitedincommonsense | Nov 30, 2009 7:15:59 PM"