Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

Religious freedom in Switzerland ...

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-30 11:46

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-30 13:34

It is just an arcitctural style, minarets aren't part of the Koran or Islamic theology. I think it is a good thing, and a majour success for democracy that they can come to a democratic decision about these things.

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-30 13:37

Who the fuck wanted a fuck-ton of minarets to fag up idyllic swiss villages anyway?

Name: Anonymous 2009-11-30 17:26

>>3
Sandniggers did.

The rest of Europe, and the US, are tripping over their own feet, running to welcome their new colonial masters.  The Swiss, of all people, said "no."

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-01 14:17

>>1
You say it like it's something bad!
Swiss, I'm impress. Although you've always been a truly free nation. I think a considerable part of those dissing this decision now just do it to look PC.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-01 20:12

Anybody been to Switzerland?  They are the most priggish, arrogant, greedy, unfriendly people I have ever met.  And I've been to a lot of places.  Pretty though.  And clean.  Good cheese.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-12 16:25

>>6

So you think child molesting towelheads are better? Go move to the turd world, why don't ya?

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-15 14:38

OP, religious freedom was always a bit iffy in switzerland, because a few centuries ago there was a catholic vs protestant war there and ever since the two sides have not liked each other very much and ignore every other religion. Catholic church steeples used to be banned in some regions, so this minaret thing is nothing new.

Also worth noting it's a country that was created out of xenophobia and it's been one of its directing principles ever since. Didn't join EU, only became a UN member fairly recently, etc. They like their country clean and tidy.

Picture hobbits with guns and you have a good approximation.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-15 14:47

>>8

Right hobbits with guns.  At least the Swiss aren't afraid of the towelies like everybody else.  The Swiss had the balls to say "This is our country, Goddamn it, and you do not get to rewrite our laws to suit your religion."  Would god give the same wisdom to the rest of the West. 

I don't mind other religions -- what I mind is that this religion seems to think that it gets to decide what nonbelievers have to put up with.  Feck off, I'm not a muslim, and I will insult any prophet I damn well please, and I will call savage philosophies savage.  And if you start in on artists and writers in my country than you'd better be prepared for my revenge.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-16 5:58

It has nothing to do with religion, it is a mere planning restriction. Minarets are essentially shaped like giant cocks, sorry but I just prefer traditional swiss architecture.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-16 8:02

>>9 and >>10

I'm afraid this has nothing to do with the law or planning restrictions. Minarets are actually perfectly compliant with swiss law, even now. In fact you could mistake most of them for steeples since they've been adapted to swiss architectural aesthetics, and you'll find network antennas that look much more like minarets than swiss minarets do.

I guess it's normal for outsiders not to read up on the details, even the big details, so know that swiss law had nothing, and still has nothing that forbids minarets or minaret-like structures.

What was voted instead is a constitutional amendment, precisely because popular votes on laws work differently (namely, the people can't alter the law, they can only accept to reject laws made by qualified legislators) and it's technically impossible to pass a law against building minarets, most notably because the difference between a minaret and any other sort of tall building is strictly ideological and the law doesn't deal with ideology. So they were made inconstitutional instead. It's not about building standards, simply on the big list of swiss principles, not laws, there is now "it is forbidden to build minarets".

Which is actually a bit of a problem for judges now because there's no constitutional definition of what a minaret is. You could build a perfect visual minaret replica and call it a love rocket and it'd be allowed.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-16 8:05

To clarify, the muhammedians use the minarets to scream and shout that it is time to worship their imaginary friend now.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-16 19:26

But not in switzerland. Just like they don't regularly ring the bells in catholic steeples to announce prayer time. In fact you couldn't even fit a man on a swiss minaret, just like many steeples those things aren't built functional.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-16 23:32

>>12
time to worship their imaginary friend

Allah is not an imaginary friend.  Allah is Allah.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-16 23:33

‎ الله‎

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-17 9:04

Great news!
http://age-of-treason.blogspot.com/2009/11/switzerland-minus-minarets.html
The fracturing of the illusory leftist "block" is going as expected.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-17 9:34

>>14
Allah is a faggort.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-17 10:01


Allah, God, Yahweh, Nirvana, Wu, it's all the same thing.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-17 10:13

>>18
Don't forget Mel Gibson.

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-17 12:24

>>19

shut up jew

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-17 16:48

>>20
why would a jew like mel gibson?

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-17 17:15

>>21

ANTI-SEMANTICISM IS A DISEASE
http://library.flawlesslogic.com/monroe.htm
You catch it getting in contact with JOOS

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-17 18:07

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-17 18:09

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-03 1:16

the fact is that there is nothing free about banning religious buildings. if 4chan was banned for being abhorrent morally, and for being a rallying point for hackers and trolls, you would be outraged, but because you aren't a muslim you see this as free.

admittedly there's no theological value to minarets, but there's no theological value to church steeples- should we ban them too? why not?

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-03 6:57

>>25
It's just a planning restriction. Why are you so desperate to ruin serene swiss villages with these eyesores?

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-03 7:11

The only reason this vote actually got so much of a vote is because the people voting to ban the minarets were the only people that bothered to really vote. A lot of the people that accepted the minarets assumed that they would just let it pass.

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-03 8:44

>>26
if it were on the basis of keeping Swiss villages picturesque, I wouldn't find it so annoying, but this was done to stop the apparent "Islamic invasion of europe" according to a lot of the voters, which I DO take issue with. I find it hard to believe that the only possible eyesores for poor little Swiss villages would be minarets, and the lack of resistance for any other buildings- for example, things made of metal and glass, not stone- is what leads me to believe the ban is just xenophobic.

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-03 16:53

>>28
If the tables were turned and Europeans wanted to flood Muslim nations and the Muslims held a similar ban, would you still consider that "xenophobic"?

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-03 17:48

>>29
Moslems don't hold bans. They cut off your hands, stone your wife and rape your kids. And then kill you and your kids.
Seriously, just look at those Danish cartoonists and what they have to suffer in their own homes for insulting some figure revered mainly in a different continent.
This is not xenophobia. This is keeping your freedom. It is understandable to see banning of a religious place of worship to be an example of a lack of freedom, but it is parallel to the banning of NAZI revival. To protect freedom, you have to shun that which is against freedom.
And what about the Italian cross issue, huh? Is it OK to ban crucifixes but not OK to ban huge towers that make hideous noise throughout the day?

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-03 18:02

>>30
They cut off your hands, stone your wife and rape your kids. And then kill you and your kids.
Seriously, just look at those Danish cartoonists and what they have to suffer in their own homes for insulting some figure revered mainly in a different continent.
This is not xenophobia. This is keeping your freedom. It is understandable to see banning of a religious place of worship to be an example of a lack of freedom, but it is parallel to the banning of NAZI revival. To protect freedom, you have to shun that which is against freedom.
And what about the Italian cross issue, huh? Is it OK to ban crucifixes but not OK to ban huge towers that make hideous noise throughout the day?

I was speaking hypothetically. What if the tables were turned and the Europeans were the hand severing, wife stoning, child raping, savages and the Moslems were the civilized people who had a western world that brought prosperity for them? What if they objected to the Europeanization of Arabia, and the flood of Europeans? And the Moslems decided to issue a ban, would you still consider it "xenophobic"? (This being purely hypothetical, of course).

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-03 18:29

>>31
Xenophobia is such a taboo, that it has lost its meaning. It's become a slur. Something you call a person you don't like.
A xenophobic is someone who is reluctant to accept outlanders for whatever reason, valid or not.

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-03 23:03

DEM YUROPEEUNZ ZURE IZ SMARTUR DAN US AMERIKKKUNZ WIT OUR CLOSE MINDZ AND DUM PHOBIAS

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-04 4:03

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-04 4:15

>>28
What the fuck are you talking about? There are all sorts of planning restrictions in Switzerland, just like in every country. The ban on minarets is just a standard bureaucratic clause that has caused even the most moderate of muslims to fly into a rage over, because the majority of muslims actually do believe they are part of the spearhead of an invasion from their islamic fatherlands. They have been indoctrinated from infancy to believe so, this shouldn't really come as a suprise.

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-04 15:19

>>29
yes.
 

as for the rest of you, I'm an antitheist because of things like islam. I don't see minarets as a threat though

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-06 22:44

>>33
DAAAYYYYUUUUMMMM STRRRRAAAAIGGGGHHHTTTTT. DEM YUROPEENUZ (LOLOLOLOL PEENUZ, LYK PENIS) SUREEEE BE GOODZ.

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-07 12:02

Religious freedom in teh Jewnited Jewstates of Jewmericunts ...
http://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/judaismnationalreligion.htm
... does not exist.

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-10 22:20

Wow did i find a new 4chans that isn't controlz by infantz and fags. That isn't jew friendly or anything friendly either?

wow.. can I touch it?

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-10 22:56


Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List