This Wall Street Journal article is about some of the repercussions Switzerland faces because of its recent referendum on the banning of new minarets on mosques.
It needs to be said -- Switzerland did not ban the Muslim religion or the building of mosques. They banned overtly Muslim architecture. Their country is Swiss culturally and they'd like it to look like it. They have a vested interest in keeping their cantons and villages and countryside looking medieval, picturesque, and Swiss! Why should the desires of a small group for superficial representations of an imported institution trump the desires of the Swiss to keep their traditional landscape?
Sure, the voters may have been influenced by such factors as prejudice against a religion whose adherents often fail to integrate with their new home country, or by the riots of young Muslims in France, or by the problems many European countries have with their home-grown Islamic extremists. Sovereign countries should be proactive in protecting those institutions and customs which make them them.
Perhaps the Swiss would like to be in charge of shaping their country rather than letting the chaotic forces of immigration, political correctness, and outside pressures shape it for them. I bet if the Swiss had voted to ban McDonald's or keep out Super Walmarts (who knows, maybe they have!), they'd be feted as humanitarians and win the Nobel Peace Prize.
This shouldnt be done, everyone should have the right to practice their religion.
Posted by: florida cosmetology ce | 01/30/2012 at 08:39 AM
Florida Cosmetology c.e.
Thank you for your nuanced response. I'm in agreement with you about freedom to practice one's religion, except in the case of the followers of Vlad, the Impaler.
MTheads
Posted by: MTheads | 02/03/2012 at 07:54 AM