Pierce, Muslims have no problem at all with stifling legitimate speech. If you don’t believe that, go talk to the Danish cartoonists and ask them about the Muslims who demanded that the cartoonists be killed for “insulting” Mohammad. The liberals keep talking about how conservative Christians are “intolerant” but are totally unwilling to see that Islam is far worse. More importantly, secular liberals don’t want anyone to say anything that might infer that Christianity’s world view just might be right because that would be “politically correct”. It is a shame that secular liberals are all too willing to attack conservative Christians but are actually terrified of taking on Islam, but face it….Christians got out of the business of wholesale religious-based murder many centuries ago…..but Muslims don’t seem to mind killing for Allah any vocal infidels who say anything against Islam. Simple Test…..say anything against Jesus in the West….what will happen to you? Not very much at all more than a dirty look. Go to an Islamic country (or even a majority Muslim community in Europe) and say something against Mohammad. See how much your political correctness gets you? Who are you truly more afraid of in the long run? Evangelist Christians or any Muslims? Are you going to be honest enough to admit who is truly the more intolerant? It’s easy to rail against Christians because you don’t have to worry about anything until after you die and have to see whether or not you will be going to hell. You will find out just how “tolerant” Muslims are within about five seconds. I know all of this from personal experience….and it isn’t very pretty. If a Muslim believes that ALL of the Quran is divine and must be obeyed to the letter, then he will commit to Jihad. If a Muslim does not believe that the Quran is totally accurate, then he is considered an apostate and will be killed by his fellow Muslims. That’s just life….in the real world.

the swiss are wrong

When we retreat, they advance, and the Swiss are drawing the line on Islamic imperialism.
Good for them!

Democracy in action. A 13% one sided win…

atease

I didn’t say anything positive or negative about Christians or Muslims. I think the ban is bad public policy, and I question the blog post’s reasoning that it’s anything to cheer about that the Swiss did something political incorrect–or, as I would put it, conscientiously impolite.

In any event, most Muslim immigrants in Switzerland are from Bosnia and Herzegovina or Turkey, both of which do not have any sort of public policy banning apostasy, and, indeed, do allow church crosses and steeples. Switzerland, with little history of overt conflict between Muslims living in that country and the rest of its population, has every reason to believe it’s Muslim population is moderate, and this policy suggests they not bother integrating into Swiss society.

Even if they were immigrants from a country with more problematic religious relations, during the history of IRA terrorism, it would have been unreasonable for anyone to take more than proximate measures that directly improve public safety against Catholics or the Irish in any country. Those measures would be things like not letting IRA-affiliated individuals into their country, not undue suspicion or symbolic gestures against a class of resident.

What in the heck are you talking about? What a bunch of rambling disjointed, pointless nonsense. I am not ridiculing your point of view, I have no idea what your point of view is based on the above cacophonous pontification.

dklisa? Keep saying things like this,”West the way it is, the way Westerners like it and Muslims are more than welcome to go back to where they like it.” and you will be gettin’ a fatwa issued on you!

That is a point I have made all my adult life. Don’t come to my country and demand that I and it change to suit you, whether you are Muslim, Hindu, socialist or Hispanic. Don’t like how things are in America? Tote your a$$ back where you came from.

I’ll be charitable, and assume you’re asking for clarification, instead of merely pointing out something you do not understand.

The post in this blog suggests that the policy may be ineffective, but that it is a good thing that the Swiss are avoiding being “politically correct.” I argue that being politically incorrect is a bad reason to undertake a public policy, and I hardly see how that reflects well of Switzerland.

The way most of us talk about political correctness has gotten out of hand. At its most basic level, being politically correct means being polite, all things being equal. What critics of political correctness are really saying, I think, is that we should not be polite to the point that we avoid talking about political choices we really should talk about–so, for instance, politeness should not cause us to avoid talking about any restriction on immigration, for fear of offending immigrants. But that’s all based on the thing being something that’s legitimate to talk about in the first place.

Should a country make a symbolic gesture to make Muslims less visible, with the ostensible intention of “sending them a message,” if that policy has no other positive consequences? No. That’s a bad idea, and because it’s politically incorrect. It hurts some people a little without helping anyone.

Eddie. Since you decided to use a cheap “race card” argument, I felt that it was necessary to refute your arguments with hard, solid facts instead. Maybe if you have ever been in the Middle East, you will find that your arguments about all of those “non-violent” Muslims to be pretty inaccurate. They are more than willing to support the Jihadists as long as they can show a false face to the West of being basically “peace-loving”. Try asking an Assyrian Iraqi about just how free his or she is to speak about their Christian faith around all of those “tolerant” Muslims. Just be prepared for a big surprise….

What’s the deal with attacking the notion of political correctness? If you believe that we should not make senseless gestures simply to offend people, you believe something similar to the people you might characterize as “politically correct.” If you think this minaret ban is pointless, but, all things being equal, you would restrict someone else’s rights, just ‘cuz, you’re not being cool and non-politically correct. You’re being a jackass. If you think it’s pointless, but maybe, you know, we’re keeping score or something, and that anything that hurts Muslims helps (white?) Christians, well, most people consider that intolerant, but that’s the debate, isn’t it?

Now, if you’re worried about politeness paralyzing valid political points, that’s reasonable. But nobody who articulates a sentiment that you might consider “politically correct” thinks they’re stifling anything legitimate. That’s not a unique problem–that’s just people having different ideas of what’s a reasonable policy. No, (most) liberals do not think we have cause to cast undue restrictions on all Muslims or on Islam because some Muslims perpetrated 9/11, even if they did so out of religious extremism. If you disagree, perhaps you will be called intolerant. That’s just life.

5-3 conservatives (since you include libertarians, I will too) were against this.

One liberal who commented was for it.

Hmmmm.

And is that so strange, Neiman????

Its a supressive, hateful religion with NO tolerance towards “non-believers” (jew, hindu, christian etc etc) is it any wonder that the small country of Switzerland (Home of Heidi) wants to keep it a little bit theirs. Muslims went there, now integrate. If they wont, they should be the first to want to leave and go back from they came! leave the West the way it is, the way Westerners like it and Muslims are more than welcome to go back to where they like it.

Load, try reading certain posts out loud. Especially the ones about needing to round up the conservatives into camps because they’re like nazis. I’m just glad I can scroll past people without ‘hearing’ it.

Splendid idea, Boba That sounds only fair.

“Well, Eddie…”

You spent almost a page of text rebutting one line of tongue-in-cheek satire. Gratz’ man.

Do you support the banning of nonviolent religious expression? Neiman doesn’t, and that’s why he’s good in my book. Political correctness for political correctness’ sake isn’t a good thing, but neither is urinating on the Qur’an. You’d do well to realize that something doesn’t have inherent value simply because it defies the traditional liberal conversational norm.

I recognize the threats present in fundamentalist Islam, but I also recognize that the majority of Muslims truly don’t adhere to the writings of their holy book. The majority of people, even Muslims, tekteam, just can’t get behind holy wars and racial profiling.

“Islam is made up of many ethnic groups, why do you call it “brown?” ”

Because, despite it having more Asian adherents than Middle-Eastern, the common association is still with Arabs. It was part of the satire.

Muslims have only themselves to thank for this. The majority who aren’t violent have quietly let the nasty minority run loose out of fear and cynical envy. You don’t see Christians doing these things, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, and all the rest. Just Muslims.

Now, the Jews had done nothing and been nothing in the European scheme of things before the Holocaust. Looked what was done to them. The Muslims are coddling within their ranks some very aggressive and violent operators and they are going to take the opprobrium across the board. Splitting hairs is nice in theory, but humans do not work that way. Those of any group will always instinctively see those of others groups as representative of the whole group when what they perceive is negative. If a bear attacks you, all bears are therefore dangerous. It’s basic nature.

The left’s constant refusal to hold the rest of the Muslims to account for allowing their coreligionists who are nutty to run loose without opposition is going to work against the Muslims. As the Islamic Supremacists spread and act out, ALL Muslims will be hated in response. Eventually a new Holocaust will come and with all that the fundamentalist whackos have done, do you really think anyone is going to care?

If we want peace, we have to hold the majority of Muslims responsible right now and get it across to them that they need to put a smack down on the miscreants. If not, they will be held responsible later and it won’t be dialogue, it will be bloodshed. We unbelievers cannot change things within from without. It would be like Catholics dictating good behavior to Orthodox Jews. The Muslim masses need to see what the creeps are making them look like for themselves and respond to it for their own sakes. If not, then the criminals will drag the rest down with them.