|
Has Religious Tolerance Gone Too Far?; Accomodation versus Assimilation
|
|
Topic Started: Aug 12 2005, 06:46 AM (583 Views)
|
|
Minuet
|
Aug 15 2005, 08:35 AM
Post #46
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
- Posts:
- 36,559
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #2
- Joined:
- May 19, 2003
|
- somerled
- Aug 15 2005, 12:11 AM
- Minuet
- Aug 15 2005, 01:48 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Aug 14 2005, 07:54 PM
There are multiple issues in this. I think the biggest issue is not about any noise, but about noise that people specifically don't want to hear. The church bells are ok for people that want to hear them, but not necessarily for those who don't. The same is true for the Islamic call to prayer.
Some unwanted noises are considered necessary. I don't particularly like my neighbors' lawn mower noise at any time of day - heck, I don't like my own - but it's acceptable noise because I know that I would like a neighborhood full of sloppy property even less. There's a practical reason for the noise. My neighbor's blaring stereo on the other hand is not practical or necessary and therefore not acceptable.
In addition to noise that is not desired, religion adds another dimension because it's more than just annoying noise - it's a message. This is especially true with the Islamic call to prayer where the message is a verbal. If we are going to allow any group to broadcast their belief systems like this, then we would also have to allow more undesirable groups to do the same. How about Satanic calls to worship? How about KKK meeting calls? How about political meeting calls? Where does it end?
In the interest of public peace, I see no reason why any of these groups can't keep their public gatherings among themselves. If the issue is to make sure members know when the meetings are being held, then they should establish predictable times - either a specific clock-driven time or an identifiable time like "sundown". I mean there must be some reason for the times they choose. So make the parameters known to everyone and there goes the need for public noise.
How about they broadcast on a specific radio channel that people can tune into in the privacy of thier own homes or in thier cars in order to hear the call to prayer. Those who don't want to hear don't have to tune in that way
Do that for all religions then , don't just single out one. And last time I heard - the KKK was not a long standing religion of cultural significance. So allowing them to publicise their meetings would be silly, and they wouldn't want to anyway as they are all cowards (to a man - if you can call them men) and prefer to meet in secret. Your argument is nonsense.
Somerled - I have not actually commented on church bells except to ask others how they feel in comparison so please do not assume what my position is on the bells ringing.
My comments with regards to the radio broadcast was meant only for the call to prayer. It was not meant to suggest in any way shape or form that the KKK should have the right to broadcast thier meetings.
My personal experience has been that when I was a child I used to hear church bells regularly. That is no longer the case and I can only assume that they died out because of complaints from others in a large and diverse city. You are right that all should be treated the same. Therefore if the bells are no longer allowed here then the calls to prayer should not either.
Many different forms of the christian religion use regular broadcasts on TV and radio to spread the word. It is an ideal form because I can choose to listen or not. It is public and open, yet includes the element of choice. I really don't see why the Muslims cannot use the airwaves in the same manner.
|
|
|
| |
|
Hoss
|
Aug 15 2005, 08:50 AM
Post #47
|
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
- Posts:
- 19,893
- Group:
- Validating
- Member
- #29
- Joined:
- August 28, 2003
|
I must say that I wouldn't want to live in a neighborhood with that blaring on loud-speakers 5 times a day. Perhaps a peak decibel level vs. tone and defined limit for rms sound power over audibal spectrum at defined coordinates from the noise source could be established on a city-by-city basis.
The old saying "your rights end where my nose (or ears) begins" comes to mind.
|
|
|
| |
|
who
|
Aug 15 2005, 09:18 AM
Post #48
|
Have light saber. Will travel.
- Posts:
- 2,250
- Group:
- Senior Officer
- Member
- #381
- Joined:
- March 12, 2005
|
- Swidden
- Aug 15 2005, 01:06 AM
- who
- Aug 13 2005, 08:52 PM
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.
Who, For one we have a body of law that is likely to prevent shari'a law frmo ever really getting a foothold in the US. There is this little thing called the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment in particular that is likely to prevent that from happening. As far as any threat to "traditional Americans" becoming a minority, I can only infer that you mean Americans of European ancestry. While some may find this uncomfortable, it is essentially a natural progression, a matter of cultural evolution that cannot be avoided. The countries of Europe enjoy standards of living and political climates that simply do not foster a desire for their citizens to leave in search of a better life elsewhere. What little that does occur (in comparison to other Third World countries) seems more likely to occur on the continent itself. - Quote:
-
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.
In much the same way that the America of today would be barely recognizable to those that framed the Constitution to begin with.
Swidden, perhaps it is where I have lived but I do not recall hearing church bells except perhaps in early childhood. My memory on this is hazy but it seems that the people that lived close to the church did not like the noise and it was stopped. In a community with a majority of Muslims I do not think the call to prayer would be stopped as it appears that the culture has little tolerance.
Yes, I do mean Americans of European ancestry and people from across the globe who have come to the US with a desire to become Americans. My mother's family even changed their last name so it would sound more American. I think this blending of different ethnic and racial groups has made America a better country.
In a recent poll in the UK about 50% of Muslims considered themselves Muslims first and citizens of the UK second. 25% had little or no loyalty to the UK. I do not know if a similar poll has been done in the US but I suspect the result would be similar.
I may be wrong but I think Islam is having a jihad. I think the goal is to make the entire planet Muslim by any means possible. Part of it is with murder through terrorism or the genocide in Africa. Part of it is through immigration and high reproductive rates. This is State sponsored through oil rich countries like Saudi Arabia.
The situation with Mexico is different with Mexicans crossing the border in huge numbers illegally. They are then spreading across the US. With the Mexicans there is a high crime rate. The US has recently arrested a number of major gang members and they are illegal Mexicans. From what I understand, LA recently elected a major of Mexican descent. With this was a crowd of Mexicans waving Mexican flags.
I see this as a problem as these two groups do not appear to wish to adopt American values but to have America adopt their values. One area where this can be seem is language. The US has been unified by the English language. Now the US is English/Spanish.
There are many other factors which affect both the US and Europe. Aging of the population is a major problem. The exhaustion of natural resources is a problem. All of these factors will change America. Yes, America has changed over the years and the changes has been largely positive. I am concerned that these new changes will be negative.
I think the US must secure its southern border. I think the proliferation of State sponsored Islam needs to be evaluated. Immigration should be limited to those who wish to become a part of American society. I think the UK & Europe face similar issues. I do not know what the situation is in Canada and Oz.
|
|
|
| |
|
ImpulseEngine
|
Aug 15 2005, 09:32 AM
Post #49
|
Admiral
- Posts:
- 9,851
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #7
- Joined:
- August 26, 2003
|
- somerled
- Aug 15 2005, 12:11 AM
- Minuet
- Aug 15 2005, 01:48 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Aug 14 2005, 07:54 PM
There are multiple issues in this. I think the biggest issue is not about any noise, but about noise that people specifically don't want to hear. The church bells are ok for people that want to hear them, but not necessarily for those who don't. The same is true for the Islamic call to prayer.
Some unwanted noises are considered necessary. I don't particularly like my neighbors' lawn mower noise at any time of day - heck, I don't like my own - but it's acceptable noise because I know that I would like a neighborhood full of sloppy property even less. There's a practical reason for the noise. My neighbor's blaring stereo on the other hand is not practical or necessary and therefore not acceptable.
In addition to noise that is not desired, religion adds another dimension because it's more than just annoying noise - it's a message. This is especially true with the Islamic call to prayer where the message is a verbal. If we are going to allow any group to broadcast their belief systems like this, then we would also have to allow more undesirable groups to do the same. How about Satanic calls to worship? How about KKK meeting calls? How about political meeting calls? Where does it end?
In the interest of public peace, I see no reason why any of these groups can't keep their public gatherings among themselves. If the issue is to make sure members know when the meetings are being held, then they should establish predictable times - either a specific clock-driven time or an identifiable time like "sundown". I mean there must be some reason for the times they choose. So make the parameters known to everyone and there goes the need for public noise.
How about they broadcast on a specific radio channel that people can tune into in the privacy of thier own homes or in thier cars in order to hear the call to prayer. Those who don't want to hear don't have to tune in that way
Do that for all religions then , don't just single out one. And last time I heard - the KKK was not a long standing religion of cultural significance. So allowing them to publicise their meetings would be silly, and they wouldn't want to anyway as they are all cowards (to a man - if you can call them men) and prefer to meet in secret. Your argument is nonsense.
That's the whole point, Somerled, which I think you may have missed. It would be silly to do that for all religions. If 20 different religions decided they all want to do this, we'd be listening to religious announcements constantly throughout the day. If you can personally tune all that out, more power to you. However, I doubt the majority of people could do that.
And if you grant that right to religions, how can you deny other groups from making public broadcasts of their meeting times? That was why I mentioned the KKK. It's not a religion by the way, it's an organization founded on white supremecy which we tolerate (barely) in the US because of our freedom of speech. However, that doesn't mean that those who oppose its principals and who are the overwhelming majority want to hear anything about its meetings.
|
|
|
| |
|
Coda
|
Aug 16 2005, 12:56 AM
Post #50
|
Commander
- Posts:
- 707
- Group:
- Senior Officer
- Member
- #251
- Joined:
- October 19, 2004
|
If my local goverment were to OK, relious calls to prayer, They would be guilty of discrimination by omission, since not all religions are able to do it...And since the religion with the most followers is the most influential. I would think that all religions would want as much exposure to as many people as many times a day as possible.
And if that is allowed, Then I would like a garantee from the gov't that I have freedom from religion. Which means The gov't should provide me with sound isolation ear phones that allows me to think about what I choose to and not be constantly reminded about religion. Maybe they will pay for making people deaf, so those who choose not to hear, don't have to hear and be asked by others which religion I belong to.
|
|
|
| |
|
Swidden
|
Aug 16 2005, 01:53 AM
Post #51
|
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
- Posts:
- 12,243
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #31
- Joined:
- August 30, 2003
|
^^^ Not if your local government already allows the use of things like church bells. Then to not allow for the Islamic call is in itself an omission.
|
|
|
| |
|
somerled
|
Aug 16 2005, 08:41 AM
Post #52
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
- Posts:
- 19,451
- Group:
- Banned
- Member
- #62
- Joined:
- September 24, 2003
|
- ImpulseEngine
- Aug 16 2005, 12:32 AM
- somerled
- Aug 15 2005, 12:11 AM
- Minuet
- Aug 15 2005, 01:48 PM
- ImpulseEngine
- Aug 14 2005, 07:54 PM
There are multiple issues in this. I think the biggest issue is not about any noise, but about noise that people specifically don't want to hear. The church bells are ok for people that want to hear them, but not necessarily for those who don't. The same is true for the Islamic call to prayer.
Some unwanted noises are considered necessary. I don't particularly like my neighbors' lawn mower noise at any time of day - heck, I don't like my own - but it's acceptable noise because I know that I would like a neighborhood full of sloppy property even less. There's a practical reason for the noise. My neighbor's blaring stereo on the other hand is not practical or necessary and therefore not acceptable.
In addition to noise that is not desired, religion adds another dimension because it's more than just annoying noise - it's a message. This is especially true with the Islamic call to prayer where the message is a verbal. If we are going to allow any group to broadcast their belief systems like this, then we would also have to allow more undesirable groups to do the same. How about Satanic calls to worship? How about KKK meeting calls? How about political meeting calls? Where does it end?
In the interest of public peace, I see no reason why any of these groups can't keep their public gatherings among themselves. If the issue is to make sure members know when the meetings are being held, then they should establish predictable times - either a specific clock-driven time or an identifiable time like "sundown". I mean there must be some reason for the times they choose. So make the parameters known to everyone and there goes the need for public noise.
How about they broadcast on a specific radio channel that people can tune into in the privacy of thier own homes or in thier cars in order to hear the call to prayer. Those who don't want to hear don't have to tune in that way
Do that for all religions then , don't just single out one. And last time I heard - the KKK was not a long standing religion of cultural significance. So allowing them to publicise their meetings would be silly, and they wouldn't want to anyway as they are all cowards (to a man - if you can call them men) and prefer to meet in secret. Your argument is nonsense.
That's the whole point, Somerled, which I think you may have missed. It would be silly to do that for all religions. If 20 different religions decided they all want to do this, we'd be listening to religious announcements constantly throughout the day. If you can personally tune all that out, more power to you. However, I doubt the majority of people could do that. And if you grant that right to religions, how can you deny other groups from making public broadcasts of their meeting times? That was why I mentioned the KKK. It's not a religion by the way, it's an organization founded on white supremecy which we tolerate (barely) in the US because of our freedom of speech. However, that doesn't mean that those who oppose its principals and who are the overwhelming majority want to hear anything about its meetings.
Nothing to stop them from having low power local AM or HF radio broad castes and publicising these and the correct frequency to tune into amongst their parisioners.
Who : - Quote:
-
In a recent poll in the UK about 50% of Muslims considered themselves Muslims first and citizens of the UK second. 25% had little or no loyalty to the UK. I do not know if a similar poll has been done in the US but I suspect the result would be similar. So what ? and care to produce a link to the poll so we can all see it ?
If I were , for some reason and some time in the future decide to live and work in the UK (or shock horror - the USA ) , and decided to nationalise, I would always be an Australian who just happens to live and work in the UK (USA). My cultural roots are here and will always be here. Just like my grandparents' roots happened to be in The Isles and Ireland and Scotland . What off it ?
|
|
|
| |
|
who
|
Aug 16 2005, 08:59 AM
Post #53
|
Have light saber. Will travel.
- Posts:
- 2,250
- Group:
- Senior Officer
- Member
- #381
- Joined:
- March 12, 2005
|
I think using church bells diverts the issue. I have not heard of any complaints about church bells recently. The complaints are about the Muslim calls to prayer. I think it should be treated as a noise issue.
|
|
|
| |