| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Has Religious Tolerance Gone Too Far?; Accomodation versus Assimilation | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 12 2005, 06:46 AM (586 Views) | |
| ds9074 | Aug 13 2005, 05:43 AM Post #16 |
|
Admiral
|
Personally I love the sound of Church bells. They are an integral part of the character of particularly rural England. Church bells drifting across the fields on a summers evening when they are practicing, church bells on a Sunday, church bells on a cold Christmas morning. I can see that if they are being run for very long periods ever night in a built up area they may cause a nusance but this is not usually the case. Where it is the Church does then need to consider the views of others. However in terms of a comparison I'm afraid I have this to say. Whereas this doesnt nessasarily apply in the USA, the UK is formally and legally a Christian state. The Christian church therefore has certain privilages over other religions in this country. Since a majority of people are Christians or of that background I'm in favour of that continuing. In Egypt they have a problem in the cities there with the call to prayer becoming a volume competition between all the competing Mosques in a small place. They have fitted loud speakers and are turning up the volume. Loud speakers were mentioned here. The solution being proposed was to go back a hundred years before amplification became avaliable. I say to the Mosques in this case have your call to prayer in public by all means but it cannot be amplified. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| psyfi | Aug 13 2005, 07:00 AM Post #17 |
|
psyfi
|
Leaving my house or selling it is, quite frankly, ridiculous because here my actual way of life is being greatly disturbed. I am home and “you” should have no right to intrude on me there and force me to either leave my home or listen. This would be true of any message, not just a religious one. Also, I never used the term ‘indoctrinated.” The fact is that being forced each and every day to “hear religion” against my will is sufficient to prohibit it whether I am being indoctrinated or not. Also, your comparisons are not valid. Looking out your window and seeing a church or a religious artifact in a church is in no way the same as what we are talking about. A closer comparison would be that five times a day your neighbor knocks on your door (bang, bang, bang, bang, BANG!) and shouts a message you don’t want to hear or believe in. Who wouldn’t call the cops on such an occasion, and what police officers in their right mind wouldn’t stop the neighbor from doing that? But even if I believed in the message, I wouldn’t want to lose my freedom NOT to hear it. Even tolerance should have its limits. There are a host of things that people should be intolerant of in this world. Now, on to the Ten Commandments. I believe that if a community wants to place them on public property, it should be allowed. I don’t have to look at them. I can quickly walk by if I wish (which I wouldn’t). If a court house guard, however, came over to me and forced me to spend a minute gazing at the Commandments each time I entered the building, then we would have the same problem we have in this case. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| who | Aug 13 2005, 08:15 AM Post #18 |
|
Have light saber. Will travel.
|
I think sound is different from vision. With sound it is forced on us within our home whereas with vision of things out of our home we have a choice to look or not. I also think it should be above the community level. If Muslims have moved into a community and are the majority I think the rights of the minority have to be respected. I do not think people should be forced to listen to it 1,825 times a year or move. Although I do not think it is in the constitution, I think we have some right to peace and quiet. Imagine if automobiles were not required to have mufflers. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| WayneSTOSfan | Aug 13 2005, 09:29 AM Post #19 |
|
Lieutenant
|
The Musical sound of church bells are VERY different than VOICES over loudspeakers..... THE more important issue is not being addresed here... The whole diversity/tolerance camp is creating a bunch of little fiefdoms all over the US...NONE of these groups is trying to fit into the greater whole ANYmore!!! ALL ealier waves of immigrants asimilated ..the Diversity crowd is creating a bunch of BALKANIZED outposts ready to go to ...oh lets just call it WAR with each other.... THE whole notion of bi-ligual teaching just reinforces the you stay over there I'll stay over here mentality... IT was one of the greatest mistakes ever made!!! |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Swidden | Aug 13 2005, 11:14 AM Post #20 |
|
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
|
True, the tonal quality of a voice versus a bell is different. However, if the purpose of church bells are similar to that of the Islamic call to prayer, then and one is allowed in a community the other will have to be as well.
When it comes to religion, the only ones anyone tries to fit in with is their own fellow believers. Since we have no formal American faith a multitude of religions are given equal value before the law.
Some did better than others depending on how they were welcomed (European origin vs. non-European origin). Nonetheless, it usually takes a group a couple of familial generations to become fully assimilated. The first generation, the one to migrate, hold very strongly on to its cultural traits. The second generation, the first born here is enculturated in both the old and the new. The old has very strong influences due to it coming from the parents. The third is yet another step removed. At some point some important old country traditions and possibly a religious faith remain, but the rest has been thoroughly enculturated into the new host country. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Aug 13 2005, 01:36 PM Post #21 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Who is talking about "force", you wouldn’t be "forced" to leave, you could "choose" to leave. You aren’t "forced" to listen, you can put on a pare of head phones and listen to something else those two minuets. Any other message would fall under a noise ordnance issue, and to that I said I already agree with you that its up to the local legislature on whether something is noise or not. But you went on to say that the issue is more then that and that it should be looked at because of its religious ramifications. I understand that you feel this way. I am saying that I absolutely disagree with you on this point. I do not believe its sufficient cause to prohibit it. If I did I would have to also stand with the people who want to remove religious artifacts from government billings. There argument is the same as yours here, they believe seeing (which I don’t see any different from hearing) a religious artifact in a government building is sufficient cause to prohibit it. I also do not agree with them. I do not believe this comparison is correct, with the "bang, bang, bang, bang, BANG" Your neighbor is harassing you specifically (if you asked him to stop). But with sound just coming into your home Randomly, its the same as a visual images coming into your home. How is one sense different then the other? I agree, for me child molestation or religious persecution are high on that list. Hearing or seeing someone else’s religious beliefs is very very low (if not at all) on that list. I believe the same can be said here, if someone sat you down and forced you to listen to the callings that would be one thing. But that is not happening here, there are easy ways for you to ignore them for the ten minutes a day (put the radio on or TV or some cotton in your ears) just as you don’t need to look at the ten commandments when you walk by them if you didn’t want to. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Aug 13 2005, 01:46 PM Post #22 |
|
Time to put something here
|
In this age of modern connivance it is just as simple to hear or not hear as it is to see or not see. I put the TV on and I can barley here the noise that is out side, put a little louder and I can; hear the out side at all. Problem solved.* * It should be pointed out that where I live it is quite loud out side, if these callings where any louder thin it is here then it would defiantly be a noise ordinance issue, but I am willing to bet that it is not the case. Exaggeration, its 5 times a day not 1,825 times a day. No one is forcing any one to listen. Forcing some one to listen is tying them up in a cheer and placing the speakers right in front of them. When we exaggerate an issue we make it immensely more complicated to reach a compromise. I do not find ten minuets a day is an infringement of my peace and quiet. If it where we would have to out law lawn mowers as well. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Aug 13 2005, 01:58 PM Post #23 |
|
Time to put something here
|
I do not see how they are.
So the only fiefdoms that should exist are the ones that use church bells, every one else should assimilate? I would have to disagree with that. Ether you allow one, or you allow none. As an atheist I would be all for allowing none, but that would be incredibly wrong of me to support something that benefits my ideals while curtails others. assimilation does not mean you abandon traditions of your past, if it did your statement would be completely wrong and earlier waves of immigrants have not assimilated. Just come to my house to see this being true, I have an Italian flag right next to my American one. From the article:
They are assimilating, but this does not mean they must give up their tradition of Islamic calling for Christian church bells to complete the process. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| psyfi | Aug 13 2005, 03:40 PM Post #24 |
|
psyfi
|
Dan, the idea that a person is not being forced to listen is one that is not in touch with the reality of the experience of life at home. Suppose I am in the bathroom or nursing a baby or in the middle of cooking a meal or talking on the phone. There are two million incidents at home where the call to prayer would indeed make life difficult in the extreme for a person who did not want to be subjected to it even if they were willing to stop what they were doing and put on head phones or whatever. In fact, it is likely that in many cases, by the time they got whatever they needed to stop themselves from hearing this stuff, they would have had to listen to a lot of it. Who the hell wants to live like that and why should they have to? But you are right, this is all about the noise factor and on this basis alone, I do say that it should not be allowed which it seems you also would feel this way. One way in which we perceive quite differently is when it comes to hearing vs. seeing. My experience in life is that it is easy not to look at something I don’t want to see and far, far, far more difficult not to hear it. I can’t simply close my ears or shift over to some different sound like I can my eyes. Not hearing takes extra effort like getting out earplugs, putting my hands over my ears for two full minutes, and so forth and even then I can sometimes still hear! This is how it is different than just seeing. I say that the extra effort it takes requires some consideration. Given this difference, I do not think that it is the same as a simple plaque up on a wall or a picture of The Last Supper or something like that. Hearing is inherently more difficult to tune out and this puts it in a different category all together. I am very big on freedom of religious expression which is why I am thanking God that Roberts is the nominee. HOWEVER, the one area where I think that there should be some limits on our freedom to express ourselves when it comes to religion is when others are truly turned into a captive audience. I think the use of a broadcasting system that is difficult to tune out and which plays 1,825 times a year does indeed make people a captive audience. This, I believe, is our real source of disagreement. I agree with you that there are lots of things higher on the list of what we need to be intolerant of. However, “hearing or seeing someone else’s religious beliefs” is very, very low ONLY if you do not add the element of being forced to be a captive audience. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Aug 13 2005, 06:29 PM Post #25 |
|
Time to put something here
|
[Part I bolded:] If this is the case then I would venture to say it cant be that big a deal. I guess it all comes down to how people preserve religious belief. It would seem that you take offence to hearing opposing religious belief in any from or any amount of time, I on the other hand do not. If I did I would have driven my self-crazy with the amount of Christian religious information that is shown all over the place, which I do not believe in. As for the noise, I didn’t say I wouldn’t allow it, In fact I would, I said that I agree it would be up to the local government and their laws on noise. I guess I would have to agree, I do not see it that way. With the amount of Christian influences in dally life I just cant get worked up because an Islamic group wants to do a little of the same. And I do not see this as forcing any more then the ten commandments being in a courthouse. Or having most holiday cartoons that my kids want to watch being based in the Christian faith. It does not bother me to hear or see something of opposing religious belief, its going to happen – I can ether learn to live with it or I can fight till my dying breath – I chose not to fight. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| psyfi | Aug 13 2005, 07:16 PM Post #26 |
|
psyfi
|
^^^ Dan, I think that in most cases the laws on noise would not allow the Muslim call to prayer since they have repeatedly, in many communities, disallowed church bells and/or allowed them with heavy restrictions. Yes, we disagree about what constitutes being a captive audience. I notice that you seem to insist on perceiving me as taking offense to hearing opposing religious beliefs which I actually find kind of amusing, especially if you will remember that in my first comments on this article I mentioned that I have and listen to the Muslim Call to prayer and think it is beautiful. In my particular case, if I was forced to listen to a local mosque calling folks to prayer five times a day, I would actually bend down and pray on said occasions even though I am a Christian as I don’t like to turn down opportunities for prayer. The fact is that it is not hearing opposing views of religion I object to, it is being forced to do so. I would object to this if the views had no religion in them at all and were political or on some other topic. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Swidden | Aug 13 2005, 07:27 PM Post #27 |
|
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
|
^^^ Most of the time Psyfi, it has to do with the hours and the decibel levels. In my area 10 PM - 6 AM noise restrictions are stronger than 6 AM - 10 PM. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| psyfi | Aug 13 2005, 08:20 PM Post #28 |
|
psyfi
|
Yes, that is true in my area as well which I don't understand. The properties around here are fairly large, between 3/4th and a full acre each and it seems to be perfectly okay when Grandpa decides to get out his buzz saw at 6AM and cut down a few tree limbs in his yard. I guess they feel that it is okay because most people are up and getting ready for work but it drives me crazy. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Aug 13 2005, 09:25 PM Post #29 |
|
Time to put something here
|
If its a noise issue, then the local government must do what they think best. If they deem it fine however and you do not mind hearing the religiousness of others then what’s the problem? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| who | Aug 13 2005, 10:52 PM Post #30 |
|
Have light saber. Will travel.
|
I think if we go back to the original article it is about noise and religion. As Muslims gain political power in communities then Islamic law will prevail within the confines of current US law. This ties in with the other thread where traditional Americans are rapidly becoming a minority. Saudi Arabia is pouring huge amounts of money into the construction of Mosques and Islamic centers in the US. There is an invasion of America through its southern border. America is being attacked on all fronts. Considering the widely different cultures of Saudi Arabia and Mexico, the America of today will change into an entirely different culture. There are other major factors at work and the America of the future will be far different from the America of today. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |



2:07 PM Jul 11