Print Page | Close Window

Mosques increasingly not welcome in Europ

Printed From: IslamiCity.com
Category: Regional
Forum Name: Europe
Forum Discription: Europe
URL: http://www.IslamiCity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12812
Printed Date: 17 April 2014 at 12:23am


Topic: Mosques increasingly not welcome in Europ
Posted By: semar
Subject: Mosques increasingly not welcome in Europ
Date Posted: 17 July 2008 at 5:20pm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-07-16-mosques_N.htm - http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-07-16-mosques_N.htm
 
Mosques increasingly not welcome in Europe

By Jeffrey Stinson, USA TODAY
 
mosque%20in%20romeThe Rome mosque, which is the largest in Europe, is located in downtown Mount Antenne park.
 
LONDON — Europeans are increasingly lashing out at the construction of mosques in their cities as terrorism fears and continued immigration feed anti-Muslim sentiment across the continent.
The latest dispute is in Switzerland, which is planning a nationwide referendum to ban minarets on mosques. This month, Italy's interior minister vowed to close a controversial mosque in Milan.

Some analysts call the mosque conflicts the manifestation of a growing fear that Muslims aren't assimilating, don't accept Western values and pose a threat to security. "It's a visible symbol of anti-Muslim feelings in Europe," says Danièle Joly, director of the Center for Research in Ethnic Relations at the University of Warwick in England. "It's part of an Islamophobia. Europeans feel threatened."

The disputes reflect unease with the estimated 18 million Muslims who constitute the continent's second-biggest religion, living amid Western Europe's predominantly Christian population of 400 million, Joly says.

Anti-Muslim sentiment

The clashes also represent a turnaround from the 1980s and '90s, when construction of large mosques was accepted and even celebrated in many cities. "I think the tide has turned," Joly says.

Indicative of the change:

• Supporters of the Swiss referendum collected enough signatures two weeks ago to call for a constitutional ban on minarets, the towers used to call worshipers to prayer. No date has been set for the vote.

• Italy's Interior Minister Roberto Maroni announced this month that he wants to close a Milan mosque because crowds attending Friday prayers spill onto the street and irritate neighbors. In April, the city of Bologna scrapped plans for a new mosque, saying Muslim leaders failed to meet certain requirements, including making public its source of funding.

• In Austria, the southern province of Carinthia passed a law in February that effectively bans the construction of mosques by requiring them to fit within the overall look and harmony of villages and towns.

• Far-right leaders from 15 European cities met in Antwerp, Belgium, in January and called for a ban on new mosques and a halt to "the Islamization" of European cities. The group said mosques act as catalysts for taking over neighborhoods and imposing Islamic ways of life on Europeans.

"We already have more than 6,000 mosques in Europe, which are not only a place to worship but also a symbol of radicalization, some financed by extreme groups in Saudi Arabia or Iran," Filip Dewinter, leader of a Flemish separatist party in Belgium, told Radio Netherlands Worldwide at the conference.

Dewinter criticized a mosque being built in Rotterdam, Netherlands: "Its minarets are six floors high. These kinds of symbols have to stop."

Although the group in Antwerp represented minority political parties from Belgium, Austria and Germany, its cause resonates elsewhere.

Construction of a mosque in Cologne, Germany, drew protests from residents last year and sparked a political debate in Berlin over concerns that it could overshadow the city's great Gothic cathedral.

In London, plans for a "mega-mosque" for 12,000 worshipers next to the site of the 2012 Olympics drew 250,000-plus opposing signatures.

Current controversies over mosques represent an anti-Muslim attitude that initially sprang up after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States and the transit bombings in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005, Joly says. Aggravating those views are pressures from the influx of immigrants and growing population of Muslims throughout Europe.

Other events have fueled worries that many Muslims don't accept Western values: widespread protests by Muslims after a Danish newspaper published cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in 2006, and the 2004 murder of a Dutch filmmaker, Theo van Gogh, by a Muslim extremist in retaliation for a film about abuse of Muslim women.

Restrictions could backfire

Sakib Halilovic, an imam in Zurich, says Switzerland's referendum to ban minarets "plays into the hands" of Muslim extremists by denying them a place to worship or limit what the mosque can look like.

"It will boost radical positions within the Muslim society in Switzerland," Halilovic told the Swiss Broadcasting Corp. last week.

Some moderate Muslims say those against building more mosques sometimes have legitimate concerns.

"Truthfully speaking, we don't need so many mosques," says Irfan al-Alawi, international director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism in London. "We have 1,600 mosques (in Britain) and a (Muslim) population of 1.6 million. It's become a business rather than a worship place."

Al-Alawi, who opposes the London mega-mosque, says disagreements within a mosque can cause some members to branch off and want their own new building that is unnecessary.

The mosques often don't fit in with neighborhoods or outnumber churches or other religious houses of worship, he says.




Replies:
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 17 July 2008 at 10:05pm
 
 To prove their liberal relgion, christians should support the building of mosques. The most important matter is the peaceful preaching. If it spills over into abuse of the beloved pesonalities then it becomes a violation. The christians normally do such things, as they had made cartoons and films recently.
 
 Muslims have to pray and they need the mosques. But it is their duty never to make any slogan which could disturb peace in the locality. Pray as much as they like but not to make the mosque a place for political upheaval at any cost, not even when they out number the christians. They should not try to turn the tables on the other people.
 
 The problem is that the Muslims do not have any leader, a spiritual leader, an Imam, who could guide them. They are being led by about 1000 different heads. Also in England there was news about the Muslim members having a clash in the mosque, thus causing a split and a fight and the closing of that mosque. That is a shame.
 
 The Muslims can only request with love for permission to build mosque. They cannot exert any pressure. They should guarantee peace in the area. They should deliver sermons clearly disallowing any idea of Jihad. But it is seen that nearly all factions of Islam (except just a few) believe in waging a religious war (Jihad) on the non-Muslims.
 
 If the Muslims guarantee that they will teach and preach every Muslim against the suicide bombings and Jihad then it will be easy for the christians and local goverment to permit the construction of the mosque. Is there any Maulvi who will preach against weapon type Jihad ? I hope not.
 
 Jihad with weapons has conditions which are not fulfilled in these days. The whole world is a global village. Every faith people are living in every country. Who will fight who? Jihad needs a leader and the capacity. Jihad is only when the religion is in danger. It is not when name sake Muslims are in danger. But the Jihad against the evil desires of the lower self is applicable at all times and that is the type of Jihad that is mostly needed for the Muslims all over the world.


-------------
If any one is bad some one must suffer


Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 18 July 2008 at 8:26am
Well yes they are threatened.. basically it is a population issue. Mainstream Europeans are not producing that many offspring. So the numbers are shifting. Masjids are just the representation.
 
And many people in Europe do not go to church..so.. the building are often more historic than used. Maybe they should worry about the lack of faith amongst so-called Christians than anything else.
 


-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 18 July 2008 at 2:36pm

Here where I live every Sunday from 7:00 am until around 2:00 pm the main streets are closed off and police officers are dispatched to manually direct traffic due to the constipation of church attendance.  I have gotten trapped before and it took forever to make it about two blocks. What a nightmare, yet the non-Christians and those who do not attend church accept it.

"Current controversies over mosques represent an anti-Muslim attitude that initially sprang up after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States and the transit bombings in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005, Joly says. Aggravating those views are pressures from the influx of immigrants and growing population of Muslims throughout Europe.

Other events have fueled worries that many Muslims don't accept Western values: widespread protests by Muslims after a Danish newspaper published cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in 2006, and the 2004 murder of a Dutch filmmaker, Theo van Gogh, by a Muslim extremist in retaliation for a film about abuse of Muslim women."
 
That really has nothing to do with the building of mosques. Denying construction of a mosque will not save Western values or keep the Muslim population from growing.
 
I am curious, what exactly are these touted Western values that Muslims won't accept? I am Western born and bred and I reject many so-called Western values: immorality, substance abuse, etc...   I don't think they could be speaking of freedom as that would clearly be an oxymoron given that the freedom to build mosques is being denied.  Perhaps it is only freedom of certain people, certain religions, certain ethnicities that is a Western value? If you are a eurocaucasian Christian then you may enjoy the Western value of freedom. Otherwise, not so much.
 
And I am really curious as to which "Islamic ways of life" Muslims have been imposing on Europeans. The last I heard it was Muslims who couldn't wear head scarfs, Muslims who couldn't build mosques, Muslims who are often denied employment, etc....
 
OMG: Muslims are the new European pre-Hitler Jews! 
 
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 18 July 2008 at 4:11pm
Originally posted by minuteman

 
 To prove their liberal relgion, christians should support the building of mosques. The most important matter is the peaceful preaching. If it spills over into abuse of the beloved pesonalities then it becomes a violation. The christians normally do such things, as they had made cartoons and films recently.
Ok
 
 Muslims have to pray and they need the mosques. But it is their duty never to make any slogan which could disturb peace in the locality. Pray as much as they like but not to make the mosque a place for political upheaval at any cost, not even when they out number the christians. They should not try to turn the tables on the other people.
Why would they do that and how a minority can create political upheaval unless they were there due to mess created by the European governments?
Almost every past colonial country has been installed with a western funded dictator with no justice around for the people and you talk about turning tables!
There is so much prayer one can do till time comes to face the Reality in real terms!
 
 The problem is that the Muslims do not have any leader, a spiritual leader, an Imam, who could guide them. They are being led by about 1000 different heads. Also in England there was news about the Muslim members having a clash in the mosque, thus causing a split and a fight and the closing of that mosque. That is a shame.
It is but normal for the people in quasi diaspora in post colonial times of neo colonialism!
The colonial masters doesn't want the Muslims to have a real leader, they will send a Predator drone after him!
Let me tell you by stopping the mosques  will have a bigger problem on European's hands while the Brits ruled India they never stepped on this issue cuz it was a safety valve for them!
And Iqbal said a verse about that in jest
If the Brits have allowed the offering of prayer - Mullah thinks Islam is free in India?

Just that kept the Muslims from  rebelling again and again for freedom!Not that Indian Muslims had the same genes of Arabs for a sustained armed fight for independence!
 
 The Muslims can only request with love for permission to build mosque. They cannot exert any pressure. They should guarantee peace in the area. They should deliver sermons clearly disallowing any idea of Jihad. But it is seen that nearly all factions of Islam (except just a few) believe in waging a religious war (Jihad) on the non-Muslims.
Oh pleeease cut this Ahmediac lecture out!
It is well established fact where ever a full service Mosque was established the crime level dropped generally and particularly it is a well recognized by our city's administration! In the beginning the bible thumping neighbors did all they could to harass by calling the cops for trivial parking issues on 30 minutes of Friday afternoons on a sparsely traveled site! The old mosque site happened to be an old church!
 
 If the Muslims guarantee that they will teach and preach every Muslim against the suicide bombings and Jihad then it will be easy for the christians and local goverment to permit the construction of the mosque. Is there any Maulvi who will preach against weapon type Jihad ? I hope not.

 
 Jihad with weapons has conditions which are not fulfilled in these days. The whole world is a global village. Every faith people are living in every country. Who will fight who? Jihad needs a leader and the capacity. Jihad is only when the religion is in danger. It is not when name sake Muslims are in danger. But the Jihad against the evil desires of the lower self is applicable at all times and that is the type of Jihad that is mostly needed for the Muslims all over the world.

Again Ahmediac rant!
Only the wearer knows where the shoe pinches!


-------------
Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.


Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 21 July 2008 at 8:52am

 

 

And Iqbal said a verse about that in jest
If the Brits have allowed the offering of prayer - Mullah thinks Islam is free in India?

S*R, You seem to be some militant Muslim, like the followers of Maudoodi sahib or like the Ikhwan (Brotherhood) of Egypt. You do not advocate proposals for peaceful living. You may be aware of the Sikh rule in Punjab. There was no permission to say Azaan. Wealth and property of Muslims was not safe. The Sikhs used to keep their horses in the mosques. Most Mosques were locked up. And they used to grind Bhang (some mild vegetable type narcotic) in the mosques.

Dr. Iqbal has been a restectable person. He should not be ignorant to the very bad condition during the Sikh rule. Being a Kashmiri Shaikh, he should have known everything about the restrictions on prayers. Why he said what you have quoted or some one may have planted it on him, we do not know.

 He said if Mulla is allowed to prostrate (Sajdah) in India, the poor man (Mulla) thinks that Islam is free.

What the British did? They opened the Mosques. They allowed every one to pray a smuch as they liked without disturbing the peace. The Hindus, the Sikhs, The Christians and the Muslims were free to perform their religious rites. You think it was a minor thing? Perhaps you need some lessons in relegion and good behaviour.

The British government did not impose any restriction on the religious duties of the Muslims. The Muslims were free to say Azaan, to pray, to Pay Zakaat, To fast during the month of Ramadhan and to go to Hajj. Tell me what was missing of Islam.

I can see your mind. The political Mullas who had no eductaion and no real understanding of the religion, who had for many hundred years been sleeping in India under the kings rules and who had not performed their duties properly suddenly had the idea of Islam. Before they were sleeping. They were respomsible for the very long time under the Muslim Kings rule. But under the British rule, they had some freedom so they wanted to incite people to violence.

Doctor Iqbal sahib was not very much in favor of the Mullas. He was some time under attack by the Mullas. We must remember that teh Muslims were not capable at all in any sense (religious or social). If they had been any good (Saliheen) they would not have lost their land to the Sikhs and later to the British people. You know about "The survival of the fittest". Being unfit people, the Muslims lost the land in India. That shows moral and spiritual weakness. Please understand. That is still continuing.

The Muslim leaders, who do not know the reality of the religion, the basics of Momin and muslim and Munafiq and Kafir, they are mostly sunk deep in their politics and in dividing the poor Muslims in their own parties (Sects), are still taching and preaching for Jihad, the religious war. But do they know about the conditions for Jihad? I had mentioned that in my post but you did not touch on that point. Is it necessary to fight the christians, or Americans or British now? Where would you like to start the battle please?

There is no need to incite the poor muslims who are already suffering very much for the last 200 years due to ignorance and factional infighting. When there is no unity or faith or discipline, why go for war? If this is not the right course for the Muslims to be peaceful then you please lead the way and speak out about your plans. Welcome.



-------------
If any one is bad some one must suffer


Posted By: believer
Date Posted: 22 July 2008 at 12:57pm

shasta's- here is one way

http://www.hahmed.com/blog/2006/11/28/should-muslims-be-allowed-to-impose-islam-on-americans/ - http://www.hahmed.com/blog/2006/11/28/should-muslims-be-allowed-to-impose-islam-on-americans/
 

"Many Muslim cab drivers in Minneapolis are refusing to allow passengers carrying alcohol in their cabs, saying it is against the Islamic Shariah [law] to do so. More than half the taxi drivers on the airport are Muslims, and as soon as they got a majority, they have resorted to imposing their beliefs on others."

I also remember reading something about guide dogs and the blind having trouble getting rides in cabs with Nuslim drivers.


-------------
John 3
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 22 July 2008 at 4:03pm
Originally posted by believer

shasta's- here is one way

http://www.hahmed.com/blog/2006/11/28/should-muslims-be-allowed-to-impose-islam-on-americans/ - http://www.hahmed.com/blog/2006/11/28/should-muslims-be-allowed-to-impose-islam-on-americans/
 

"Many Muslim cab drivers in Minneapolis are refusing to allow passengers carrying alcohol in their cabs, saying it is against the Islamic Shariah [law] to do so. More than half the taxi drivers on the airport are Muslims, and as soon as they got a majority, they have resorted to imposing their beliefs on others."

I also remember reading something about guide dogs and the blind having trouble getting rides in cabs with Nuslim drivers.
 
If you own a grocery store or a coffee shop and someone comes in with alocohol you have the right to ask them to leave.  Most retail stores, hospitals, clinics will not even allow you to carry in water much less alcohol.
 
Alcohol is often banned at public places and businesses, are you saying these cab drivers do not have that same right?  If these men were not Muslims, if it were a group of recovering alcoholics or pregnant women, it would not even be an issue.
 
What about all of those: No shirt No shoes No service signs at businesses?  Does anyone really have the right to deny business to someone who isn't wearing shoes? Or restaurants that won't serve you without a coat or tie?
 
So, what you are saying is if a Christian owns a business and someone wants to come inside that business and commit an act that is against the owner's beliefs or moral code then the owner would have no right to object or refuse service? Say if you have a Christian bookstore and someone comes in with alcohol, or two teenagers come in and start making out. Should that owner be allowed to refuse them service and ask them to leave? 
 
 
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 22 July 2008 at 7:54pm
You're not allowed to drink alcohol in public, including public stores, etc., but I'm not sure that a a grocery store or coffee shop would or legally could refuse admittance to someone carrying an unopened bottle of liquor.  Perhaps a licenced restaurant would object because it would violate their liquor licence, but that's a different matter.  (I remember once bringing a bottle of my home-made wine to a restaurant as a gift for a friend.  It was in a fancy bag I think, so probably the staff didn't even know what it was; but I can't see them creating a fuss about it even if they had known.)
 
Stores and especially restaurants have the right to refuse admittance to people whose behaviour or appearance would be offensive to most other patrons, but a taxi only deals with one client (or group of clients) at a time so again that doesn't apply.
 
I don't know about other countries, but Christian fundamentalists in Canada sometimes run into legal troubles by refusing clients on religious grounds.  I seem to remember that a Catholic-owned print shop was heavily fined for refusing to print some information on contraception or abortion.  Even more controversially, now that same-sex marriage is legal, certain marriage commissioners had to forfeit their licence to perform marriages because they refused to marry homosexual couples.  So yeah, it works both ways.


-------------
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 22 July 2008 at 10:00pm

Whether your business deals with individual clients or groups should not matter. Taxi drivers in this country frequently refuse to pick up fares based on the area of town they are in or skin color.  If it becomes mandatory for taxi drivers to be unable to refuse fares due to alcohol then it should be so across the board.

Apparently there was no problem before 9-11 with the cabbies refusing to drive the passengers. They would just send the passenger to the next taxi and send the driver that refused to the end of the line. After 9-11 it became an issue:
 
"MAC OKs Penalties For Cabbies Who Refuse Fares Minneapolis (AP) ―
Apr 16, 2007 7:23 pm US/Central
 
The operator of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport on Monday approved tougher penalties for cabdrivers who refuse service to travelers carrying alcohol -- a policy that will affect hundreds of Muslim drivers.

On a unanimous voice vote, the Metropolitan Airports Commission agreed to rules that will suspend a driver's airport taxi license for 30 days the first time the driver refuses service and revoke the license for two years after the second violation. The new penalties take effect May 11.

Commissioners hope the rules will end an issue simmering for the past several years.

More than 70 percent of the cabbies at the airport are Somalis -- who are commonly Muslim -- and many of them claim that Islamic law prohibits them from giving rides to people carrying alcohol.
 
Under the airport's old rules, a driver who refused to transport someone carrying alcohol would be told to go to the back of the taxicab line. Since January 2002, there have been more than 4,800 instances of a driver refusing service because a customer possessed, or was suspected of possessing, alcohol, airport officials said."  (WCCO.com)


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 23 July 2008 at 3:22am
Uh oh.. thoaw Muslims are taking over Miineapolis!! Send out alerts..
 
and what is the big deal... get anoter taxi. I have the right to refuse to enter a specfic cab, they too should have the right to refuse someone from entering. They are not slaves. We have right to freedom of religion.
 
You ever hear of the Masters Golf Club? They don't have any femaile members. For a long time they had no black members. As a private entity they have that legal right to do so-whatever the motivation (yes women are a BIG danger to them).
 
Minuteman: ther eis no way for any church or masjid or temple to promise anything to anyone on behalf of other people... Some churches have very negative rhetoric and no one barrs them..
 
I know a woman who is Jewish who was hearing negative trhings al lthe time about Muslims, came to the masjid to learn. All types of negativity out there..
 
 


-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 23 July 2008 at 6:55pm
Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

Whether your business deals with individual clients or groups should not matter.
Of course it matters.  If I am in a taxi and don't like the music the driver is playing on the radio, I will ask him to change it, or turn it down, or whatever.  Since I'm his only customer, I see no reason why he shouldn't accommodate me.  In contrast, if I don't like the music in a restaurant I can ask them to change it, but I don't necessarily expect them to comply because they have to consider their other customers as well.
 
Taxi drivers in this country frequently refuse to pick up fares based on the area of town they are in or skin color.  If it becomes mandatory for taxi drivers to be unable to refuse fares due to alcohol then it should be so across the board.
I'm surprised if that's how it works in your country, but in mine, refusing a fare based on skin colour could get a cabbie in a heap of trouble.  Yeah, maybe it happens and it's hard to prove, but it's unquestionably against the law.
 
Originally posted by Hayfa

and what is the big deal... get anoter taxi. I have the right to refuse to enter a specfic cab, they too should have the right to refuse someone from entering. They are not slaves. We have right to freedom of religion.
If, as Shasta'sAunt says, up to 70% of cab drivers are Somali and most of them are Muslim, then it could be a big deal indeed. You might have to try several cabs before you would get one who would take you.
 
But let's turn it around.  If a cabbie refused to let you in his cab because you were Muslim, would that be "big deal"?


-------------
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.


Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 24 July 2008 at 4:54am
But let's turn it around.  If a cabbie refused to let you in his cab because you were Muslim, would that be "big deal"?
 
Yes because carrying alcohol is rather different then who you are as a person.
 
And actually it is not shirah law being implemented. You can buy alcohol in Pakistan if you are nonMuslim.  It is a personal creed. And it is different if you don't like the music.. you arepaying for a service.. if you don't like it and they won't turn it down, refuse to buy their service.
 
They have the right to refuse to give service. They are not public employees.. its like places that are private that discriminate.. and it happens all the time.. you think it doesn't happen you are foolin yourself.
 
I am not why this is a big deal.. Shirah law would be if the state of Minnesota went by the marriage laws of Islam. This is not Shirah law being implemented in US.  We all are allowed personal choices. Would I ever marry a drinker or smiler no. It is personal choice.
 
 


-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 24 July 2008 at 12:13pm
Well, I didn't say 70% of the cabbies are Somalian, the newspaper article did. However, since this practice had been going on for years before 9-11 and there seemed to be no problem why make it an issue after 9-11? To me it appears to be a case of reverse discrimination. 
 
My husband does have a business and he has refused service to people on a few occasions, people who came in drunk or acting aggressive. He will not allow alcohol or smoking on the premises. He has even had to call the police a few times to get people to leave and the police back him up 100%. It is his right to refuse to serve people.
 
But he has never refused service based on a person's race or religion. On the whole he doesn't even know their religion and doesn't care.  There are laws to protect people from discrimination based on religion, race, etc. There are no laws to protect people's right to carry alcohol or to force another to provide service to that individual.
 
And I am curious as to how the cabbies know the person is carrying alcohol? If it is bagged up or packed away they would never know, so perhaps the people have been drinking or try to drink while in the cab. If that is the case, then almost any business in this country can refuse to serve someone who is drunk or is wanting to drink alcohol within the confines of their business. Try going into any store in a mall and opening a bottle of wine....
 
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Pati
Date Posted: 02 May 2009 at 3:56am
What if we built in Makkah a Church?

After that, we will be able to talk in the same level.

For instance, the Muslim community in Barcelona was very angry because they didn't get the permissions to build a Mosque largest than the cathedral... do you understand?

Come on, it's not difficult to understand. I am not against the mosques, sure, but I cannot accept a foreign community trying to be on the top.

Yes, we are opened, and we accept other religions in our countries, but we cannot accept this kind of challenge, I am sorry.

If you ask for respect, start showing yours.

Regards






-------------
No God wants the killing, but the peace.
The weapons are carried by people, not by religions.


Posted By: semar
Date Posted: 02 May 2009 at 12:07pm
Originally posted by Pati

What if we built in Makkah a Church?

After that, we will be able to talk in the same level.

Barcelona and Makkah are not the same level.  Makkah probably the same level with Vatican. How about we build a mosque in Vatican City?
Perhaps Barcelona is the same level with Jakarta, in Jakarta there many big giant Church and a big giant evangelical building.
 
Many time the news is not ballances, they expose many bad thing about muslim majority country, they don't think critically.
Here is one of the fact, many think that Indonesia is not friendly or or welcome to Christiants, but eventhough christian about 9% of total population the Indonesian government give them 4 natoinal holiday out of 14, and muslim that 86% have 5 days out of 14.
 
Indonesian population:
  • Muslim 86%
  • Protestant 6%
  • Catholic 3%
  • Hindu 2%
  • Other 3%
  •  
    Date (Gregorian Calendar) Date (Islamic Calendar) English Name Local Name Remarks
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_1 - 1 January http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Years_Day - New Year's Day Tahun Baru Masehi Chistian
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_26 - 26 January http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_New_Year - Chinese New Year Tahun Baru Imlek Chineese (Budhist)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_9 - 9 March http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mawlid - Mouloud http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_of_the_Prophet - Birth of the Prophet Maulid Nabi Muhammad Islam
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_26 - 26 March http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyepi - Day of Silence Hari Raya Nyepi (Tahun Baru Saka) Hindhu
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_10 - 10 April http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday - Good Friday Wafat Isa Al-Masih (Jumat Agung) Christian
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_8 - 8 May http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_Birthday - Buddha's Birthday http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesak - Waisak Budhist
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_21 - 21 May http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascension_of_Jesus_Christ - Ascension Day Kenaikan Isa Al-Masih Christian
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_20 - 20 July http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ascension_of_the_Prophet&action=edit&redlink=1 - Ascension of the Prophet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lailat_al_Miraj - Lailat al Miraj Islam
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_17 - 17 August http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Day - Independence Day Hari Proklamasi Kemerdekaan R.I.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_21 - 21 September http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eid_al-Fitr - Eid al-Fitr http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=End_of_Ramadan&action=edit&redlink=1 - End of Ramadan Idul Fitri (Lebaran) Islam
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_28 - 28 November http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eid_al-Adha - Eid al-Adha http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Feast_of_the_Sacrifice&action=edit&redlink=1 - Feast of the Sacrifice Idul Adha Islam
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_18 - 18 December 1 Muharram http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_New_Year - Islamic New Year Tahun Baru 1430 Hijriyah Islam
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_25 - 25 December http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas - Christmas Hari Natal
    Chistian
     
    Sunday off, not Friday off.


    -------------
    Salam/Peace,
    Semar
    The Prophet said: "Do not eat before you are hungry, and stop eating before you are full"
    "1/3 of your stomach for food 1/3 for water, 1/3 for air"


    Posted By: believer
    Date Posted: 02 May 2009 at 12:51pm
    "And I am curious as to how the cabbies know the person is carrying alcohol?"  I wondered this myself.
     
    We have a service in my city that will take people home after New Years Eve parties so they don't drive drunk.  these cabbies are actually doing a wonderful service-saving victims of drunk drivers!  Too bad the Muslim cabbies can't see it this way.
     
    There were also Muslims cabbies that will not pick up blind people with seeing eye dogs.
     
    Forget building a church in Mecca, how about Saudi Arabia!!  Iran, Irag, Afghanistan? 
     
    Curious-
    Is it absolutely necessary to have the minarets?  Call over a loud speaker?  I don't remember reading anything in the Quran about this?
     
    There are a few mosques in my city, they do not have minarets.  I don't know that I have evr heard a call to pray over a loud speaker.


    -------------
    John 3
    16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


    Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
    Date Posted: 02 May 2009 at 5:51pm
    How about we rewrite the Constitution of the United States and just leave out all of the freedom of religion stuff? Then we won't have to feel it is unAmerican, not to mention illegal, to discriminate against certain religions and all these annoying questions will just go away. 
     
    "Come on, it's not difficult to understand. I am not against the mosques, sure, but I cannot accept a foreign community trying to be on the top."
     
    I wonder if the Native Americans felt that way as they watched all of those Spanish Christians landing on their shores. Imagine all of those indigenous people opening their arms to welcome Columbus only to be enslaved and murdered, or Montezuma welcoming Cortes' with gifts and being taken hostage and dethrowned, having your religion forcibly replaced with Christianity, your land being claimed for the Spanish crown, your people enslaved. Destruction of your entire history, the Aztec, Inca, and Mayan empires....
     
     


    -------------
    “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    Posted By: Pati
    Date Posted: 03 May 2009 at 12:37am
    Originally posted by semar

    Barcelona and Makkah are not the same level.  Makkah probably the same level with Vatican. How about we build a mosque in Vatican City?
    Perhaps Barcelona is the same level with Jakarta, in Jakarta there many big giant Church and a big giant evangelical building.


    The first post was talking about Rome, the place where we have the center of the Catholic Christians. And there is no space in Vatican for new Temples, so please, don't make the suggestion.


    Many time the news is not ballances, they expose many bad thing about muslim majority country, they don't think critically.
    Here is one of the fact, many think that Indonesia is not friendly or or welcome to Christiants, but eventhough christian about 9% of total population the Indonesian government give them 4 natoinal holiday out of 14, and muslim that 86% have 5 days out of 14.
     


    In Algeria, for instance, they are talking about a calendar change to accommodate to ours one (Sunday off). They didn't do yet, but they are seriously thinking about it, because they are losing money in their business with Europe.

    And I don't think that Indonesia is not friendly, because I work with people from there and they are, so... The ignorance is the biggest enemy of the truth, and the people should not talk about what they ignore.

    Regards



    -------------
    No God wants the killing, but the peace.
    The weapons are carried by people, not by religions.


    Posted By: believer
    Date Posted: 07 May 2009 at 9:40am
    I am repeating myself here but wonder:
     
    How about building a church in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Irag, Afghanistan? 
     
    Curious-
    Is it absolutely necessary to have the minarets?  Call over a loud speaker?  I don't remember reading anything in the Quran about this?


    -------------
    John 3
    16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


    Posted By: Hayfa
    Date Posted: 07 May 2009 at 10:37am
    How about building a church in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Irag, Afghanistan?

    The only places there are not churches are in Saudi Arabia as far as I know. And they cannot be build there.

    Afghanistan and Iraq have been war zones, so if the Churches got blown up like everything else, blame those who invaded.

    "Come on, it's not difficult to understand. I am not against the mosques, sure, but I cannot accept a foreign community trying to be on the top."

    Pati, what makes someone 'foreign' to you? That sounds very Eurocentric.. which is fine, if that is what you are. But if these people are here as legally as you are..

    It is not about being on top, its about people worshiping.. that is all. And frankly if a place has many Muslims and they want and can afford to build a mosque why not? So is okay for the Mexicans to have a giant loud church that does mass only in Spanish?

    Fear of foreigners has always been part of our history. Where do you live? I live in Washington DC, that the city itself is 80-85% nonwhite. There are big churches, small churches, big mosques, small mosques, Buddhist temples, large synagogues, small synagogues, a HUGE Mormon temple and various other religous places of worship.

    The reason why religious groups is to allow for people to worship. There are no churches in makkah and medina, there are no Christians. So why would you have a church there? Just like why build a mosque in the Andes mountians in the middle of Peru if there are no Muslims? And you only build the size for the amount of people that need to be part of. Heck many churches in Europe are closing due to lack of use..



    -------------
    When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


    Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
    Date Posted: 07 May 2009 at 3:25pm
    How about building a church in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Irag, Afghanistan? 
     
    I know this has been repeated but how about building a mosque in the Vatican?
     
    There are churches in Iran, beautiful churches that flourished because the Muslims did not persecute the early Christians like the early Christians did:
     
    Church of Beit-ol Lahm (Bethlehem) in Esfahan, Iran
    The majority of churches in Iran that possess historical and artistic value were built around the eight century A.H. or the 14th century AD, and the period thereafter. Of course, this does not mean that there were no churches existing in the country before that period.

    During the reign of Shah Abbas, the
    http://www.iranchamber.com/history/safavids/safavids.php - Safavid king, his sagacious policies caused a sizable number of Armenians from Armenia and Azarbaijan to transfer and settle in http://www.iranchamber.com/cities/esfahan/esfahan.php - Esfahan and other regions of Iran. A place called Jolfa was built at the banks of the Zayande-rud River in Esfahan and became the residence of these migrating people. Consequently, churches were erected in that town. Meanwhile, after a short lapse of time, some Armenians moved to Gilan and some resided in http://www.iranchamber.com/cities/esfahan/esfahan.php - Shiraz .
     
    After the death of Shah Abbas the First, his successor, Shah Abbas the Second, also paid close attention to the welfare of Armenians and more churches were erected in Jolfa.

    The influx of many Europeans during the reign of the
    http://www.iranchamber.com/history/qajar/qajar.php - Qajars led to the flourishing of other churches, in addition to those that were constructed previously. A number of these edifices have lasted and acquired architectural and artistic significance.
    http://www.iranchamber.com/monuments/historical_churches_iran.php - http://www.iranchamber.com/monuments/historical_churches_iran.php
     
    Afghanistan has been a country at war since the 1970's. I think the Afghanis would be happy just to have homes and hospitals that aren't being blown up by Americans right now....
     
    Before the United States decided to liberate the Iraqis Christians lived in Iraq quite peacefully. So, I suppose that the Christians suffering there now have only their fellow Christians to blame.
     
    AMMAN-CHRISTIANS Feb-28-2007 (600 words) With photos and map. xxxi

    Iraqi Christians face danger; some say it was better under Saddam

    By Judith Sudilovsky
    http://www.catholicnews.com/index.html - Catholic News Service

    AMMAN, Jordan (CNS) -- Seen as allies of the West, Christians and their institutions have become targets of extremist Islamic groups in Iraq, say Iraqi Christians.

    "Christians are facing a big problem in Iraq. Maybe all Iraqis are facing big problems, but I am talking about the Christians now," said Ra'ed Bahou, the Pontifical Mission for Palestine's regional director for Jordan and Iraq.

    Saddam Hussein's regime -- no matter how cruel and despotic -- kept the lid on any sectarian violence, said one Iraqi Catholic refugee in Jordan, who asked that his name not be used. He said Saddam, a secular leader, was especially good for Christians, as long as they stayed out of the way.

    "Saddam (controlled) everything. Nobody could say anything bad especially (about) us Christians," he said. "Christians in the Middle East are very good people. We are peace-loving people."

    Another refugee said that after years of living in fear and daily bombings many Iraqi Christians felt they were actually safer with Saddam.

    "We are getting tired. When Saddam was in power there was no fighting. Saddam loved the Christians. We were safer with Saddam; now we just leave the country," he said.

    Christians make up about 5 percent of the 1.5 million Iraqi refugees in Jordan, said Bahou, whose agency is under the auspices of the New York-based Catholic Near East Welfare Association.

    Most of the Christians in Iraq were part of the middle class and had a relatively good standard of living before the war, Bahou said. Like most Christians in the Middle East, they devoted a lot of their time to their children and their education.

    "When there is a threat (against) their children's lives, they leave Iraq," he said. "People are leaving for their children."

    At least six Iraqi priests have been kidnapped and five Christian churches bombed in the past few years. At first the Islamic extremists targeted mainly Christians, but now they have turned against each other, said one relief official who works with the Iraqi refugees.

    "In the end there will be no Iraq," she said.

    Bahou said he was "not optimistic about what is going on demographically."

    "Before there used to be 1 million Christians in Iraq; now there are only half a million left. Everything is changing, and it will never be like it was before," he said.

    With only one Chaldean Catholic priest attending to the pastoral needs of the Chaldean refugees in Amman, many Iraqi Catholic refugees have had to find their place within the churches of different rites. Jordanian churches have never been so full, said Bahou, and worshippers must come early to find a seat at Sunday Mass.

    Through the Franciscan Sisters of Mary, the Pontifical Mission in Jordan has sponsored a catechism training program for Iraqi religious educators who have remained in Iraq. For at least three years, workshops were held four times a year, twice in Jordan and twice in Iraq, in coordination with Chaldean Archbishop Louis Sako of Kirkuk. Religious experts from Lebanon also take part in the meetings, said Bahou.

    "Last year we held the two workshops in Amman but we were not able to hold it in Iraq because of the political situation," Bahou said. Nevertheless, he said, "outside contact is very important" for the Christian religious community in Iraq.

    In addition, with so many Iraqis now living in Jordan, keeping the lines of communication open with their religious and spiritual leadership in Iraq becomes very important, Bahou said.

    END

    Believer, you make these sweeping generalities without checking the facts. If you want to believe that all Christians in the Middle East are living lives of terrible persecution then go ahead, but repeating such just makes you appear uneducated. Christians have lived in the Middle East for centuries without any problems, and any difficulties they are experiencing now are a direct result of western interference.


    -------------
    “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
    Eleanor Roosevelt



    Print Page | Close Window