Aslaug's Axe Shed

Oooh, this is a sore topic these days.

A lot of people will happily declare themselves in favor of human rights, and they may even declare that THEY … as opposed to people coming from a certain, rather powderkeg’y area of the world … are heartily in favor of civil rights. This, they say, naturally includes freedom. Freedom from oppression, freedom of thought and, at least nominally, freedom of religion. Other freedoms as well. Oh, they will gladly stand up and declare, at the top of their lungs, that certain segments of the population, typically of a certain skin tone and religious conviction, are vile oppressors of women, violently anti-semitic and oh, by the way, it’s probably not cool to kill gay people even though gay people according to many of the complainers are awful sinners in the first place.

Self righteous, sanctimonious HORSESHIT …

There, I said it.

A couple of days ago, Switzerland took a referendum. This in itself is not unusual, since every law has to pass a rerendum in that particular country, but this law still stood out. It was proposed by the ultra-nationalist SVP (the abbreviation for what translated would be the Swiss People’s Party … hmm, I smell a trend here), who gathered one hundred thousand signatures to support their demand for a referendum. By Swiss law, one hundred thousand signatures means the suggestion MUST be put up for a referendum.

So what did this suggested law say?

Easy. It was made illegal to build minarets in Switzerland. For those fo you who don’t know what it is, a minaret is the tower attached to a mosque. Traditionally, this is where the imam stands when he calls the faithful to prayer.

However, in Switzerland, this wasn’t done for a simple reason. Standing at the top of a tall tower, shouting in Arabic, would constitute a disturbance of the peace and, incidentally, it would be an intruson of religion into public life in a way which is unacceptable in a secularized society. Consequently, it used to be illegal not to build minarets, but to use them for their intended purpose.

So far so good. I don’t personally see a problem with that. The alternative would be to allow Christian doomsayers to stroll the streets, declaring that the end of the world is nigh or for Hindu faithful to pierce themselves with spears and knives in public when that particular festival is undertaken.

I don’t particularly like it when religion becomes a part of public, secular life like that. I believe it has absolutely no business there, whatsoever.. But I do believe people have a right to buildings in which they can take part in their relevant rites. I believe that freedom of religion includes the access to sites where religious practice can take place undisturbed, and according to the wishes of the congregation. Sadly what happened in Switzerland yesterday is in direct contradiction of this.

By overwhelming majority, the population voted in favor of banning the building of minarets. It is specified that the four existing minarets in the country are not affected, that mosques may still be built and that muslims retain the right to practice their faith in Switzerland.

They’d BETTER retain the right!

The posters used by those in favor of the ban, showed a drawing of a woman wearing a burka, in front of the swiss flag thrown to the ground, covered in minarets springing from its surface. Frankly, Joseph G??bbels would have been proud of this particular piece of trash, but I am not willing to go so far as to say that this was a nazi-inspired piece of legislation. What it is, however, is insensitive, foolish and in direct conflict with the European charter of human rights. And fortunately, the Swiss minister of justice has already made it abundantly clear that this law will be reviewed in that light and that it will therefore, almost certainly, be overturned.

Those in favor, of course, shout at the top of their lungs about how the minaret is a symbol of Islamic fundamentalism.

You know, I find that funny. Grotesque, but funny. The minaret is an integral part of any masjid or jama of any size whatsoever, and as a European, I am insulted that this kind of senseless, bigoted prejudice has surfaced once again.

Let’s be fair here. Let’s be absolutely -fair-. If this is allowed to stand, Switserland should henceforth also ban all future building of belltowers for churches and cathedrals. And no star of David on the front of any synagogue. And so on and so forth. Equal rights. Singling out ONE religion for deliberate and purposeful differential treatment is an act of complete social barbarism.

And don’t think I don’t know the standard answer to this:

“Do you think Christians would be allowed to build churches in Iran, perhaps? Or do you think they’d be allowed to in Saudi Arabia?”

NO! I don’t think they would be, but if we wish to maintain a moral high ground, if we wish to maintain that WE stand for freedom of thought, freedom from oppression and freedom of religion, we must not sink to the levels of oppressive, totalitarian dictatorships ourselves. If we do, we are no better than the people we thusly scorn.

I don’t want to listen to Imams intoning their call to prayer, any more than I want to be stopped by Jehova’s witnesses in the street, or any more than I want the local baptists to come to my front door, asking me “have you given any thought to Jesus lately?” (the answer to which is universally “yes, I have”, which always seem to surprise them utterly). But I want people to have the right to build their buildings of religious importance in peace. Because how we treat our minorities is one of the most important defining factors in our worth as civilized nations.

And before I forget … The DANISH People’s Party already applauded the Swiss legislation, calling for a similar law to be introduced in Denmark.

So far, they are howling against the wind.

Long may it bloody remain so!