Thank you for your response. I suppose that there should be a fine line between for example letting Muslim immigrants build minarets and letting them institute their religious law (sharia) in their host society. Here where I live (I’m Canadian) there was a debate over whether Muslims should be allowed to live under sharia law here. The Canadian authorities said no, even though the law’s proponents said it would only apply to proponents, not to non-Muslims. I think the Canadian government did the right thing.

Regarding the minarets, I suppose I just don’t see why building a minaret would represent Islamic supremacy while a mosque would not. From an aesthetic standpoint I can understand, especially in a country like Switzerland which has centuries of tradition (something Canada or other New World countries do not). But while I don’t necessarily advocate banning minarets (of course the Swiss are free to make their own decisions), I see how it is important to keep religious groups from imposing their strictures into law.

Far from becoming multicultural or at least, pluralist, I understand that some of the Muslim enclaves in the UK are pushing for separate law – a dangerous move. With some of the extreme Muslim leaders publicly ambivalent about terrorism – some even upholding it as a legitimate act of defending the faith – I fear that one day, they may precipitate an anti-Muslim European holocaust.

The Swiss minarets are only one small part of the problem.

Thank you for your response. Sorry to be delayed; I have been sick (and, I’ll admit) lazy! As I mentioned in the article, had this poll taken place in Canada I would have voted to allow the minaret. Howeever, I’m trying to see it from the perspective of (at least some) Swiss. As I mentioned, I can’t see the political point of banning the minarets if you don’t ban the whole mosque. On the other hand, on a purely aesthetic level, I can see how a minaret doesn’t “fit” in a landscape of church spires, chalets and ski gondolas. In the same way, Norway (my grandmother’s country of origin) has some stupendously beautiful Lutheran churches with high steeples. But I can see how they wouldn’t “fit” in for example a city like Bangkok, Thailand, which is located in a Buddhist majority country. I mention Bangkok because I remember looking at a book about it and seeing pictures of the city. It at first struck me as strange that there were no churches in the background (I’m sure there are a few churches in Bangkok, but they’re probably small because I doubt Christians form any more than 1% of Thailand’s population). So even though if I were Swiss I might have voted to permit the minarets, I am trying to understand the perspectives of those who did not.

Now just from my perspective as a Lutheran, sometimes I feel a bit “inferior” that we don’t have a big cathedral as the Catholic, Anglican and United Church downtown (on Church Street. But then I think of what you were just saying: that a group’s faith doesn’t depend on the size of their place of worship. And one day I’ll take my daughter to Norway so she can appreciate the beautiful Lutheran churches there purely on aesthetic grounds!

I was interested when I heard about this in the news. At first I didn’t know that the tower element was called a minaret so I was trying to figure out what they were talking about. It became ridiculous to me once I found out what a minaret was.

No way in hell they should ban this. Its a piece of architecture, nothing more nothing less. There are churches in inner city areas of North American cities that are so broke they are in store fronts. Does that mean they are any less deep in their faith? Nope. So how would not allowing those Muslims that can afford to build a standard place of worship with all the elements stop them from worshiping on what ever level they are inclined to?

My point? If someone is gonna be extreme about their religious views, you can toss them into a mold filled basement with no lights and they will still practice in extreme ways.

The architecture of a building used to practice a belief system has little to do with the level of dedication, the level if interest, and the level of extremism of those practicing. So why go and disrespect this culture and tell them their buildings cannot be completed as designed? Thats crazy to me. Unless it was an unsafe building element prone to collapse that building inspectors would shut down, it should be allowed to be built.

Good article

B