France to ban veil

[Cold_Zero]

Oh and because Greg is here, I feel obligated to do my weekly Turkey bashing.
Turkey is the most racist country in the world. They are a country that out and out denies that they committed genocide on the Armenians and throws people in jail for implying that it was genocide (because you are insulting the National Pride.) They have perpetrated genocide on Armenians, Cypriots, Greeks living in Turkey and Kurds. Worse, we have turned a blind eye to Turkey’s history because they provided strategic bases for our Cold War effort.

[IBCoupe]

Bud,

Re: Israeli Settlements
I can come up with a legitimate justification. Also, it's not an outright ban on a particular religious building. Israelis can go ahead and erect suburbs elsewhere within Israel, despite the dismantling of some settlements. Also, there's nothing inherently Jewish about a desert suburb.

Re: Communities Dictating
I don't have a problem with communities dictating qualities of buildings, either. Limit the heights. Limit the materials. There are any number of ordinances that could have been passed to effectively outlaw minarets. That's how your neighborhood has eliminated church steeples. That's how cape cod has eliminated golden arches. And Switzerland could have, neighborhood by neighborhood, gone and made it impossible for anyone to make a minaret. And, if it was a nationally-organized effort to run local lives, it'd be sleazy, but it wouldn't be nearly as offensive as an outwardly bigoted national referendum to blatantly attack Muslim architecture.

Which is why I've framed my challenge to you the way I have. Find me a legitimate public purpose for specifically banning minarets, by name, and do your darndest not to sound like a xenophobic bigot when you say it.

[IBCoupe]

And we continue to turn a blind eye because of its proximity to the rest of the Middle East.

And it absolutely was a genocide.

[Cold_Zero]

Can I ask you personally, if you think that demanding that people immigrating to a country assimilate into the culture by speaking the language, not knocking social norms and severing their ties to the ‘old country’ is just as bigoted? I have heard of the ‘tests’ and the process to immigrate to the Netherlands and Denmark and to be honest, I have a feeling that most Americans would be shocked.

[Cold_Zero]

Which is why I've framed my challenge to you the way I have. Find me a legitimate public purpose for specifically banning minarets, by name, and do your darndest not to sound like a xenophobic bigot when you say it.

What historical precedence do minarets have in the historic, cultural and architectural heritage of Switzerland? None. Can you name any one native cultural or ethnic group inside the Confederation that lays claims to minarets, as theirs? You know like Moorish architecture in Spain, Ottoman architecture in the Balkans? So a foreign group settles in their non native land, feels the need to build their religious places of worship to their old world style and the host country is the bigoted because they used a referendum (which is part of the Swiss national pastime) to say no? They are even making it harder for Foreign Nationals to marry inside Switzerland, to cut down on sham marriages. I am sure you will have a problem with that as well.

[IBCoupe]

Yes, I will have a problem with that. It's bigoted. Defend it as much as you want. Justify it however you must. It's bigoted and xenophobic to treat immigrants as "less than." If they are citizens, then they are citizens.

I don't care how much you love Switzerland. It's wrong.

[szh]

Yes, I will have a problem with that. It's bigoted. Defend it as much as you want. Justify it however you must. It's bigoted and xenophobic to treat immigrants as "less than." If they are citizens, then they are citizens.

I don't care how much you love Switzerland. It's wrong.

Yes, indeed.

The same is true for Muslim countries as well - the s*** that I see happening there to their own citizens who belong to minority religions, is absolutely and totally unacceptable.

Z

[Cold_Zero]

What about the first question I posed. I am kind of interested on your take of the immigration policy in northern Europe.

[Cold_Zero]

Yes, I will have a problem with that. It's bigoted. Defend it as much as you want. Justify it however you must. It's bigoted and xenophobic to treat immigrants as "less than." If they are citizens, then they are citizens.

I don't care how much you love Switzerland. It's wrong.

I think the real issue (as in the majority of Europe) is that you have a large group of immigrates that abide by the laws of the land, positively participate to the common good and assimilate into the culture/society quite well. Then you have a small group of zealots (provocateurs) who want to push their agenda, incite discontent, to change laws and reform society to create their vision of an idealistic Theocracy err I mean society, in someone else’s country. And thus the tensions start.

[IBCoupe]

I don't care much about the immigration policies for other countries. They're free to make it as difficult as they want to in order to become a citizen, but once people are citizens, I expect those countries to treat them like citizens.

The minute Switzerland accepted Muslim immigrants as citizens was the minute a Mosque became a part of Swiss culture. They just need to deal with it.

[AZhitman]

I concur with the above... but even the US has zoning restrictions that impact certain faith's houses of worship.

[Cold_Zero]

And I assume that under your logic said immigrants have no social obligations to their new country.

[Cold_Zero]

Greg he is upset because the ban spells out one style of architecture that impacts one religious group. For it to be non bigoted all religious groups must suffer under the ban. Question what is the religious association with Minarets to Islam? Can you build a Mosque without one? Architecture does have a direct religious association with Eastern Orthodoxy. You have to build them in a certain way to function as a church.

[AZhitman]

I'm just not seeing a ban on a specific religious building. It's a code prohibiting minarets, which wouldn't be an issue EVEN IF that country had a Constitution that guaranteed freedom of religion.

There's churches here in AZ that have had to revise their steeple plans to comply with local zoning. Heck, MY old church had to fight with the city to get a zoning waiver because of the size of our parking lot and the number of egress points.

[Cold_Zero]

Try build a church in Columbia MD. You effectively can't because it is a planned community. So you have to share one of the public facilities to hold worship service. Which leads you open to being shut down by the city if they don't like what you preach.

[IBCoupe]

...but even the US has zoning restrictions that impact certain faith's houses of worship.

But that's different, because those are other things that happen to impact houses of worship along with everybody else. This is a law that explicitly targets one religious group.

And I assume that under your logic said immigrants have no social obligations to their new country.

You mean beyond those imposed upon every other citizen? No, of course not. A citizen is a citizen.

Greg he is upset because the ban spells out one style of architecture that impacts one religious group. For it to be non bigoted all religious groups must suffer under the ban. Question what is the religious association with Minarets to Islam? Can you build a Mosque without one? Architecture does have a direct religious association with Eastern Orthodoxy. You have to build them in a certain way to function as a church.

No, for it to be non-bigoted, it needs to have a real purpose. I'm still waiting for the legitimate, non-bigoted purpose. You guys still have yet to present it. What good is this law? What's the point? It doesn't matter if the thing is necessary or unnecessary to the construction of a Mosque. It doesn't matter if it's a fundamental part of Islam. It's a bald-faced attack on the religion, with no legitimate public policy justification.

I'm just not seeing a ban on a specific religious building. It's a code prohibiting minarets, which wouldn't be an issue EVEN IF that country had a Constitution that guaranteed freedom of religion.

There's churches here in AZ that have had to revise their steeple plans to comply with local zoning. Heck, MY old church had to fight with the city to get a zoning waiver because of the size of our parking lot and the number of egress points.

What else are minarets used for?

And you're talking about general zoning requirements, Greg. These aren't requirements that say, "No Crucifixes in this State." Even if we didn't have the First Amendment, Greg, why would that be an acceptable law? You don't need a Crucifix to build a Church. You don't need one to pray. But what's the public policy justification for government intervention in private property?

Which leads you open to being shut down by the city if they don't like what you preach.

If that's the case, you've got First Amendment protections. Call a lawyer.

[AZhitman]

I'm not gonna continue to debate the "acceptability" of the policies and practices of another country's government. I've said it at least once before: They're not America - they don't have our Constitution or our guaranteed freedoms.

If you're worried about public policy justification for government intervention in private property, you might want to pop in on any number of Communist regimes.

[heliochrome85]

I'm not gonna continue to debate the "acceptability" of the policies and practices of another country's government. I've said it at least once before: They're not America - they don't have our Constitution or our guaranteed freedoms.

If you're worried about public policy justification for government intervention in private property, you might want to pop in on any number of Communist regimes.

^THIS

[AZhitman]

You just got voted off the island. And take your annoying monkey with you.

...but leave the carpet - that thing kicks a$$.

[IBCoupe]

I'm not gonna continue to debate the "acceptability" of the policies and practices of another country's government. I've said it at least once before: They're not America - they don't have our Constitution or our guaranteed freedoms.

If you're worried about public policy justification for government intervention in private property, you might want to pop in on any number of Communist regimes.

Nobody's forcing you to reply. If you're not going to debate an issue central to the thread, then don't.

Even if we were still talking about France, I have to ask: what the hell are you doing in this thread? You know exactly what's going to be debated.

[stebo0728]

I'd just like to say ....


... carry on.

[heliochrome85]

I'd just like to say ....


... carry on.

what a great post! thanks.

[IBCoupe]

I just wanted to tell you both: Good luck. We're all counting on you.

[heliochrome85]

I just wanted to tell you both: Good luck. We're all counting on you.

i just wanted to tell you, you missed a spot.

[IBCoupe]

Stupid road gunk. I didn't actually miss it, it just didn't come off and I was too lazy to use the strong stuff + a credit card I don't intend to use again to get it off.

[heliochrome85]

Stupid road gunk. I didn't actually miss it, it just didn't come off and I was too lazy to use the strong stuff + a credit card I don't intend to use again to get it off.

yesterdays lazy cures todays crazy

[IBCoupe]

I'm going to be crazy in the future anyways. I can feel it coming.

[AZhitman]

I'm thinking you should probably start rockin' the veil.

[IBCoupe]

When's the next flight to France?

[heliochrome85]

I'm thinking you should probably start rockin' the veil.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXY_B4EQ ... r_embedded[/youtube]

AND YES I WOULD MARRY JEREMY CLARKSON.