Talk:Minaret controversy in Switzerland
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] contentious issues
The call to prayer may be one of the main contentious issues with Islam in Western countries.
why? Isn't terrorism one of the more contentious issues? freedom of speech? the Islamic dress controversy? Misheu 07:39, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- I think it should be: The call to prayer may be one of the main contentious issues with minarets in Switzerland.Hup 20:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- sounds much better. though supposedly no mosque has a call to prayer. i think it's more the symbolism of a minaret Misheu 22:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- Cannot provide a citation but I lived near the mosque in Zürich for a few years. They don't make a call to prayer.
- sounds much better. though supposedly no mosque has a call to prayer. i think it's more the symbolism of a minaret Misheu 22:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Arguments
- According to the initiative committee, the minarets are not religious structures. They are not mentioned in the Qu'ran or Islamic scriptures. Many Mosques around the world do not have minarets. The minaret is a symbol of political-religious power which ignores the tolerance of guaranteeing the freedom of religion for all. Quoting a speech of current Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in 1997 (then Mayor of Istanbul): "Mosques are our barracks, domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets, believers our soldiers. This holy army guards my religion." The committee argues that by allowing minarets, it would have to allow muezzins because of freedom of religion. Leading Islam groups would give up the muezzins only on condition that Christian church bells stop ringing. Thus the minarets are instruments to eliminate other religions.
First, this seems to be supporting this opinion, and is largely written as if it is an original thought. Though I'm sure its not, it needs to be reworded to make this clear. Second, it sort of devolves into non sequitors at the end. "...by allowing minarets, it would have to allow muezzins." What? Why is there a problem with muezzins? Then it goes on, "Thus the minarets are instruments to eliminate other religions." How? Because they refuse to give up muezzins (which they have to give up because..?) unless the church bells are given up? so by forcing their evil freedom of religious agenda on this and demanding equal rights, they are eliminating other religions? This whole section just doesn't make sense. Atropos 08:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
