Skip to main content

View Diary: The Swiss Vote against Religious Freedom (257 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They don't have the right if (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    capelza, lazybum

    specifically religious edifices are targeted. At least in this country, I would expect the ACLU would take a stand against it.

    Economic Left/Right: -4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.82

    Your argument is not Scottish.

    by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Nov 30, 2009 at 01:23:50 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  But there could be zoning restrictions (0+ / 0-)

      that if shown to be non-discriminatory could have some effect on siting and appearance and height...

      Pogo & Murphy's Law, every time. Also "Trust but verify" - St. Ronnie (hah...)

      by IreGyre on Mon Nov 30, 2009 at 05:43:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  But that is only an American right (0+ / 0-)

      are we arguing that American rights should automatically apply around the world?

      In the UK, where I grew up, there is absolutely no concept of the freedom of religion such as here in the US.  In fact, religious discrimination is written into the law, and that's the way it is.  For now.  They also don't have the right to freedom of speech in the same way.

      In other countries they have different rights, like right to health care, that we do not.  But that's why we have our country and they have theirs.

      •  I am arguing that it should be a right (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        capelza, unspeakable

        around the world. Obviously, from a legal standpoint, this right isn't recognized universally. I think certain rights should be universal. We often complain when other countries violate basic human rights. What constitutes universal human rights isn't something we all agree on.

        Economic Left/Right: -4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.82

        Your argument is not Scottish.

        by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Nov 30, 2009 at 08:09:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  From the Universal Declaration on Human Rights: (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        capelza, ignatz uk, unspeakable

        Article 18.

           * Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

        Economic Left/Right: -4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.82

        Your argument is not Scottish.

        by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Nov 30, 2009 at 08:33:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm not sure that extends to steeples. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AaronInSanDiego

          The freedom to manifest one's religion or belief in worship almost surely implies the freedom to have and build a temple; I'm not sure if it guarantees the right to build a steeple, bell tower or minaret.

          That being said, regardless of what rights people have, there's no denying that the campaign against the building of minarets targeted xenophobic sentiments in the populace.  Regardless of who has what rights, I think the campaign was a bad idea, and the decision, whether ultimately good or bad, was made for the wrong reasons.

          •  If the referendum were against (0+ / 0-)

            tall tower-like structures, without reference to a particular structure used by a particular religion, that would be different. Or if it referred to a particular architectural feature in a religion-neutral way. Of course, one would then have to ask the motivation for the law. In any case, the campaign reveals that the primary purpose is discrimination.

            Economic Left/Right: -4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.82

            Your argument is not Scottish.

            by AaronInSanDiego on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 08:59:51 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site