HermanYutic: "The followers’ actions have nothing to do with their doctrine (and to pretend so is pure sophistry)"

You have a point HermanYutic.

Christians use the Bible to justify their actions in the same way. For example, fundamentalists justify the murder of doctors using the Bible. It is not like it doesn't provide them with lots of ammunition. You could justify just about anything using this list:

http://www.humanismbyjoe.com/Violence_and_God.htm

I do think blaming Christianity for the murder of doctors is a bit of a stretch though. That is in effect what you are doing.

I read on some blogs and it is also reported the Swiss Foreign minister feels the same, that by banning the mineret asks for terror attack. For real. People think they should appease the terrorism. Unbelievable! The scaredy cats want to cave in to extremism. And Islam is not a bad thing in the world? lol

The Turkish PM said that minarets are the bayonets of Islam.

Bayonet definition : is a knife-, dagger-, sword-, or spike-shaped weapon designed to fit on, over or underneath the muzzle of a rifle barrel.

Is the Turkish PM Islamaphobic lol. Is he racist hee hee. Is he extremist? I cannot believe some Swiss say it is the symbol of dominance and people get all sketchy about that then the PM of Turkey confirms that is actually the case!

Anyways I know my beliefs and I know what I believe in. I was real loud, annoyingly loud over the Haneef affair as that was a comprehensive failure of human rights and someone from government should have been jailed for that. However religion is simply legalised bigotry and discrimination so only natural as a supporter of human rights I speak out whenever I feel it impinges on my rights or the rights of others.

So cowards and scaredy cats can call me names all they wish but they only proves they are pyhscopaths. Can appear charming and try to say the right thing to impress people, however that is their only criteria, to look impressive. They have no real commmittment to support who has actually been wronged as it depends on who that is. If there is no gain from supporting actual victims instead of actual causes then they throw abuse.

Funny how in the US the integration of muslims is so far superior than here of Europe. There is zero tolerance of crap. Appeasement does not work. Good anology of the failure of appeasement toward Nazis.

So, have we solved the architectural planning problem of minarets in the land of the Geneva convention or should churches and such go underground?

Polly
It will never be solved. The big business want to infiltrate Muslim dominated countries so they will demand visa-a-versa. Liberal policies that challenge the role of religion on society have been ripped up, burnt and thrown in the garbage all for the sake of $$. The working class that have to actually deal with the impacts of religious bigotry are now nothing more than dirt, demonised, ignored, not politically represented and also are the ones losing jobs offshore. No left wing left, it is finished. Liberal values demolished.

Instead of minarets they could spend on the oppressed muslims but a few $ may empower them enough to remove themselves from the shackles of religion. We could not have that, could we?

Saudi scholars have criticised Switzerland for its recent referendum to ban minarets.
“This is a clear evidence of the racial and religious segregation still prevails in the West”
said Shaikh Abdul Mohsen Al Shahri, an eminent scholar in Islamic jurisprudence.

Some have noted that Saudi Arabia does not allow the construction of any churches and even bans Bibles from the country and use this as a basis for claiming that the Saudis are inconsistent in the standards that they are applying to the Swiss.

However, nothing could be further from the truth.

Saudi law is consistent with Sharia law which recognises no religion but Islam.
Therefore, there is no contradiction between Saudi law and the ban on churches.

However, Swiss law is secular and it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of religious belief.
Therefore, there appears to be a contradiction between Swiss law and the ban on minarets.

The Swiss could learn a lesson from the Saudis here and overturn the referendum so that they don’t fall behind the Saudis in the consistent application of law.

For those saying Muslim leaders have been slow in denouncing terrorist acts : http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/terror.htm. Speak to those in the media who have failed to report these statements

For those suggesting that Islam was spread by the sword: read leading western scholars of Islam: Prof. Thomas Arnold “The Spread of Islam in the World: A History of Peaceful Preaching” or various writings of John L. Esposito (editor of Oxford History of Islam).

For some “context”: killing civilians has been legitimised since the Dresden’s of WWII. It is wrong in all religions, whether you’re a Wahhabi or an American President: http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/terrorism.htm

Concerning the Swiss vote: Based on ignorance
salaams