Swiss voters back ban on minarets

[s23b]

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

What's you opinions about this subject? I personally think that it is discriminative towards muslims. If a local authority does not allow some buildings to be built in certain places that's fine for me. It has happened many times in my city too, and i think it was fair. But to ban building minarets in the entire country is nonsensical, because it is only increasing the conflict between the muslims and the non-muslims.

[dahduh]

Nov 29, 2009 18:46:52 GMT s23b said:

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

What's you opinions about this subject? I personally think that it is discriminative towards muslims. If a local authority does not allow some buildings to be built in certain places that's fine for me. It has happened many times in my city too, and i think it was fair. But to ban building minarets in the entire country is nonsensical, because it is only increasing the conflict between the muslims and the non-muslims.

I agree; such a blanket ban violates the principle of equal treatment before the law, and I'm surprised it is even legal. I can't imagine that there is some feature of minarets that make them objectionable on secular grounds.

Mention was made of the ban on headscarves debate in France, and on that subject I must say I'm in two minds; although maybe not so much on headscarves as on burquas. These really are, in my view, prejudicial symbols of oppression of women, and to allow them in western society is to endorse this discrimination.

[hrg]

It certainly violates the European Convention on Human Rights which Switzerland has ratified. I expect a conviction in the European Court of Human Rights (not to be confused with the EU court) in the near future.

[naz]

Nov 29, 2009 20:04:42 GMT dahduh said:

Nov 29, 2009 18:46:52 GMT s23b said:

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

What's you opinions about this subject? I personally think that it is discriminative towards muslims. If a local authority does not allow some buildings to be built in certain places that's fine for me. It has happened many times in my city too, and i think it was fair. But to ban building minarets in the entire country is nonsensical, because it is only increasing the conflict between the muslims and the non-muslims.

I agree; such a blanket ban violates the principle of equal treatment before the law, and I'm surprised it is even legal. I can't imagine that there is some feature of minarets that make them objectionable on secular grounds.

Mention was made of the ban on headscarves debate in France, and on that subject I must say I'm in two minds; although maybe not so much on headscarves as on burquas. These really are, in my view, prejudicial symbols of oppression of women, and to allow them in western society is to endorse this discrimination.

Burqas disgust me. But I would not take away someone's right to wear one.

[dahduh]

Dec 1, 2009 17:09:44 GMT naz said:

Nov 29, 2009 20:04:42 GMT dahduh said:

I agree; such a blanket ban violates the principle of equal treatment before the law, and I'm surprised it is even legal. I can't imagine that there is some feature of minarets that make them objectionable on secular grounds.

Mention was made of the ban on headscarves debate in France, and on that subject I must say I'm in two minds; although maybe not so much on headscarves as on burquas. These really are, in my view, prejudicial symbols of oppression of women, and to allow them in western society is to endorse this discrimination.

Burqas disgust me. But I would not take away someone's right to wear one.

It's the 'right' bit where it gets tricky. A burqa is a very public statement of uniformity, which exposes those who might wear them to an enforced conformity. Just how much of wearing a burqa is a choice?

To make the point, suppose instead of burqas Muslim women were expected to just wear a mask - that's less than a burqa. Would we tolerate such an obvious and blatant crippling of a woman's ability to move and advance in society? I think if a burqa were just a mask, most people wouldn't have much of a problem with banning them. But because a burqa is considered an article of traditional dress, it is considered a 'cultural' thing and the liability it imposes is ignored.

[naz]

Dec 5, 2009 9:35:19 GMT dahduh said:

Dec 1, 2009 17:09:44 GMT naz said:

Burqas disgust me. But I would not take away someone's right to wear one.

It's the 'right' bit where it gets tricky. A burqa is a very public statement of uniformity, which exposes those who might wear them to an enforced conformity. Just how much of wearing a burqa is a choice?

To make the point, suppose instead of burqas Muslim women were expected to just wear a mask - that's less than a burqa. Would we tolerate such an obvious and blatant crippling of a woman's ability to move and advance in society? I think if a burqa were just a mask, most people wouldn't have much of a problem with banning them. But because a burqa is considered an article of traditional dress, it is considered a 'cultural' thing and the liability it imposes is ignored.

The burqa really is a kind of mask.

It is hard to gauge how much "choice" is involved. I imagine most women want to wear them but only because the culture has taught them it is the proper thing to do. But how is that really different from other less drastic standards of Western modesty? What if a Western woman living in some tribal culture was forbidden to cover her breasts?