Direct Democracy

December 1st, 2009 at 9:29 am by David Farrar

This story from Switzerland is a prime example of why , rather than representative democracy, can be a bad idea.

became the first country in Europe today to vote to curb the religious practices of Muslims when a referendum banning the construction of minarets on mosques was backed by a solid majority.

The surprise result, banning minarets in a country that has only four mosques with minarets and no major problems with Islamist militancy, stunned the Swiss establishment …

This is simply a horrendous decision. Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right, and should not be at the whim of referenda.

The campaign to ban minarets was described by the country’s justice minister as a “proxy war” for drumming up conflict between ethnic Swiss and Muslim immigrants. But the ban was supported by a majority of 57.5%, 20 percentage points more than predicted in opinion polls in the run-up to the vote.

This is interesting in that many back the ban, but did not want to admit to it. The advantage of parliamentary votes is they are public and people have to stand by their vote.

There are problems in Europe with Islamic extremism and non-integration. But the solution is not to ban minarets on mosques, targeting an entire religion.

Tags: , ,

214 Responses to “Direct Democracy”

  1. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    In Saudi Arabia one can be arrested for possessing a bible. Why not take your concerns with freedom of religion to that state?

    The argument is over simplified by being used as a means to attack Citizens referenda.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Danyl Mclauchlan (1,069 comments) says:

    Chill out dude, it’s central Europe – what’s the worst that could happen?

    [DPF: Heh you do make me laugh]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    ..and who, in terms of religious belief, is most likely today to do that “worst?”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    ..and who, in terms of religious belief, is most likely today to do that “worst?”

    Governments.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Brian Smaller (4,023 comments) says:

    You cannot even build a new church in most Islamic countries and you cannot display the outward trappings of your religion on your own body or on your places of worship. I think that ban is a good idea, because sooner or later you have some scratchy tape recording of wailing booming out over loud speakers five times a day.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    It’s a valid argument against direct democracy, that was the point of the post. The result may be illegal anyway, which makes it a ridiculous exercise.

    Lack of religious freedom and democracy in Saudi Arabia (and many other countries) is a separate issue. It’s a bit PC trying to insist that all possible related cases are mentioned whenever you try to make a point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,903 comments) says:

    “..and who, in terms of religious belief, is most likely today to do that “worst?””

    Global warmenisers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. MT_Tinman (3,186 comments) says:

    Good on the Swiss.

    DPF, my own religion calls for the killing, cooking and eating of leftists at least once a day.

    Thank you for your backing it as “a fundamental human right”.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Brian, are you saying religious bans are bad in some countries but good in others?

    One of the complaints about minarets in Switzerland was that they looked missile shaped. Jeez. You could as easily say a cross looks like a B52. Or a drone.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Grant Michael McKenna (1,160 comments) says:

    The nature of the vote as a ‘proxy’ for concerns over Islamification should be recognised; many voted against minarets in order to express their unhappiness with Switzerland’s tolerance of Iranian terrorists. Check the Swiss media for letters to the paper- and note how it was women who voted for the ban in greater numbers than men; they may fear Islamification more than men do.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    DPF – I am surprised at your attitude: “This is simply a horrendous decision”

    The Swiss action is true democrary at work. It may turn out to be a wrong action (I doubt it), and if so then the decision makers -ie: the people, have to live with it.

    With a system where the real desire of the people is ignored (as happens here in NZ) then you get resentment at the politicians building up and eventually a lose of trust and faith in the system.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. wreck1080 (3,917 comments) says:

    Screw it, this is great. After all, the islamists have been lobbying for the banning of crosses and christian decorations for some time now.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Lack of religious freedom and democracy in Saudi Arabia (and many other countries) is a separate issue.”

    More confused illogical rubbish from the extreme left.

    Islam has many radical adherents, as Europe is discovering, and where ever they go, these radicals are intent on making Islam the only religion.

    The real question is should sects who advocate no freedom of religion be allowed the freedom to pursue this cause?

    The Swiss people obviously feel threatened by radical Islam, and they have a right to express their concern and to come to whatever conclusion they choose on the above question.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. andrei (2,657 comments) says:

    I guess Heidi doesn’t like the idea of having to wear a bhurka – Yodel de yoldie dee

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Grant Michael McKenna (1,160 comments) says:

    I should say that I only read the Swiss German papers and the views expressed therein- the French, Italian and Romansh are closed books to me.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Yeah, ban their minarets and burkas. Beat them at their own game. Why not stone anyone kneeling towards Mecca. That will show them how much better we are than them.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “One of the complaints about minarets in Switzerland was that they looked missile shaped”

    As usual, the resident leftists loon’s opinions are driven by his narrow information sources, those being the dens of leftist propagandists who pose as mainstream media journalists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. kowtow (8,487 comments) says:

    It’s not as simple as good vote /bad vote. This is a manifestation of the deep unease that electorates across Europe are experiencing at rapid changes that they are witnessing in their societies and feel powerless to influence because POLITICAL ELITES are not listening to the people…. issues such as mass immigration,EU enlargement,Lisbon Treaty,Turkish membership,irresponsible financial leadership etc etc The powerful and their advocates don’t like direct democracy as it tends to cut them out of the equation.Citizen referenda in NZ a case in point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    I should say that I only read the Swiss German papers and the views expressed therein- the French, Italian and Romansh are closed books to me.

    The pattern of voting shows it was the Swiss Germans that were more for the ban, the vote went the other way in the south.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. LUCY (359 comments) says:

    Nope. Switzerland and Europe should just bend over………..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Why not stone anyone kneeling towards Mecca.”

    Better still, let’s call anyone who listens to Glenn Beck crazy.

    Nothing more nauseating to observe than secular progressives pretending to tolerance. Go away fraud.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. backster (2,172 comments) says:

    For once I consider your comments are nonsense. I agree with BARRY, the voters have exercised commonsense and it is your comments that are anti democratic and display the arrogance of many in Politics. I have no doubt that had the New Zealand people been given the right to exercise the opinion on the drinking age and other matters of conscience over the past decade it would have resulted in a far better state of society, though one of which you and our Socialist Rulers would have disapproved.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. James (1,338 comments) says:

    This is a nice piece of facism.Democracy is just another form of dictatorship.So what that Islamic countries ban everything….does doing the same thing in the West make it right?No…..it actually a surrender of whats good to whats evil.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    Redbaiter you really need to get out more if you have fallen as low as defending the removal of freedom of religion as a sign of a positive western democracy.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Good on you James. Let these people take over and you’ll be one of the first dangling from a lamp post by your stupid fucking neck.

    Here’s the real question you simpering liberal twit.

    Should those who wish to destroy freedom be permitted to use freedom to achieve that objective??

    Answer that question and you’re dealing with the real issue.

    Everything else is just hot air.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Haha, no Red, I can tolerate your craziness, if you stick to anonymous blogging.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    As Chris C pointed out yesterday, this was the campaign poster for the party that initiated the referendum:
    http://www.artthrob.co.za/08apr/images/svp_01a.jpg

    ‘White sheep kicking out the black ones? Yeah why not?’

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    DPF Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right…

    As is freedom FROM religion. And this decision does nothing at all to remove muslims religious freedom. They can still worship.

    Is this really any different from the French who ban the public display of religious symbols in secular space, such as no crosses to be worn when working in a government office? Or Italy where a recent decision will see crucifixes removed from public schools?

    A better article from the guardian for you to read http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/30/switzerland-minaret-ban-islam

    Switzerland is by tradition a Christian country, but many of its citizens are secular in outlook and the church has lost much of its influence over everyday life. The UK I grew up in was (and is) nominally Christian but I never believed in God and made a point of challenging Christian attitudes to gay people and women who had sex outside marriage. Bizarrely, people like me have no place in the current debate about the role of religion in public life, where we are excluded by another false choice: uncritically welcoming Islam or being accused of joining forces with the BNP. This is ridiculous, absurd and a slur on a great number of decent people, but it’s what happens when humane principles which challenge a set of ideologies –which is what “faith” is to non-believers – are regularly caricatured as racism

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Jeff83 you need to control your compulsion to preach patronising self destructive liberalism based on paper thin thought processes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    Should those who wish to destroy freedom be permitted to use freedom to achieve that objective??

    Answer that question and you’re dealing with the real issue.

    I don’t think the answer is to beat them to the punch and destroy freedom before anyone else has a chance to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    fuck the moral high ground. this is a war.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. EverlastingFire (286 comments) says:

    If the Swiss don’t want it in their country then that’s their choice. The people have spoken. End of story.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Rakaia George (313 comments) says:

    Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right

    Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right, but the ability to build monuments to it wherever you like is not.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Multiculturalism is just another step in the left’s long march to destroy freedom in the west.

    Only fools believe otherwise.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    geee..!..what a surprise there..!..red..!

    you are a racist as well..

    quite the ‘package’..aren’t you..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “I don’t think the answer is to beat them to the punch and destroy freedom before anyone else has a chance to.”

    Ryan, I try not to attack any one solution unless I have one I believe is better in mind.

    Its easy to criticise. Coming up with solutions is a lot harder.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “you are a racist as well..”

    Islam is not a race. Take your knee jerk still born commie claptrap to your own site.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    sheesh..!..red..!

    “..Better still, let’s call anyone who listens to Glenn Beck crazy..”

    your first ‘good idea’..

    well done..!

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Multiculturalism is just another step in the left’s long march to destroy freedom in the west.

    You probably don’t even see the contradiction in that. Who is trying to fool who?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Simon (724 comments) says:

    Don’t you mean freedom from religion is a fundamental human right.

    Minarets are used for calls to pray. Who wants to listen to that crap five times a day.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    are you saying you are not a racist..?..red..?

    do tell..!

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    Ryan, I try not to attack any one solution unless I have one I believe is better in mind.

    Its easy to criticise. Coming up with solutions is a lot harder.

    True enough. I think that in practical terms, a move like the Swiss majority have made will inevitably cause more problems than they prevent. I think I’d have to know more about the instance.

    Do you know what spurred the referendum in the first place? Seems like quite a specific ban.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Repton (769 comments) says:

    Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right, but the ability to build monuments to it wherever you like is not.

    It’s good to see commenters on New Zealand’s top right-wing blog sticking up for government’s ability to restrict what people can do on private property!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Freedom can only exist as long as it is defended against those who would destroy it.

    Or

    You have to break eggs to make an omelet.

    There is absolutely no doubt that any increase in the influence of radical Islamists on culture and government results in less freedom.

    (Especially for women, adherents of other religions, and homosexuals like James, for a few pertinent examples.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    whereas you..?..red..?

    with yr gulag/final solution-plans/ideas..?

    (..to deal with the commie scum..)

    where do you/your politics sit..

    ..in any ranking of ‘freedoms’..

    ..eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Simon (724 comments) says:

    Repton Have you not heard a call to prayer?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    Little wonder then that the Swiss were so reluctant to defend the Americas Cup in the UAE ….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. s.russell (1,642 comments) says:

    One of the fundamental characteristics of a real democracy is the protection afforded to the rights of minorities against majorities. A democracy grants the same rights to all. If Christians have the right to erect steeples on the churches (something that harms no-one) then Muslims must have the right to erect minarets on their mosques (something that harms no-one).

    I agree with DPF. This is an excellent example of why the will of the mob is best mediated through elected representatives who can consider the bigger picture and protect fundamental freedoms against public whims. If the public don’t like it, they can vote those representatives out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “It’s good to see commenters on New Zealand’s top right-wing blog sticking up for government’s ability to restrict what people can do on private property!”

    Its nauseating to see the left posturing as defenders of property rights.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    Freedom isn’t free
    It costs folks like you and me
    And if we don’t all chip in
    We’ll never pay that bill
    Freedom isn’t free
    Now there’s a hefty in’ fee
    And if you don’t throw in your buck ‘o five
    Who will?

    Freedom costs a buck ‘o five :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “One of the fundamental characteristics of a real democracy is the protection afforded to the rights of minorities against majorities.”

    Fucking liberal rubbish. One of the main requirements of a democracy is to defend it against those forces that would destroy it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    The minaret thing is up to the Swiss (and some of their banking clients).

    The point here is that direct democracy is fraught with conflicting decisions and unintended consequences.

    It’s worth noting that if direct democracy was applied here to the Brash Act it would show that Key and English know what they are talking about.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. dimmocrazy (286 comments) says:

    This post only shows one thing: that Mr Farrar is again at the ready to espouse leftist ideas, without grasping or comprehending the issues and the context. In other words, despite his often blusterous language, he is a dogmatic ideologist, a statist, someone who is ready to step over, disregard, nay trample on the voice of a majority if it does not fit within some philosophy for which he cannot really provide any sound foundation in moral principle of empirical proof.
    I for one am very happy with this post, as it exposes Mr Farrar for what he is, and it also helpfully explains why he has been so slow and evasive about the greatest scams that are being perpetrated on free people at the moment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Simon (724 comments) says:

    Yep the left wouldn’t know a property right if they fell over one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. KiwiGreg (3,255 comments) says:

    Switzerland is less a country than a state of mind, most real power rests in the cantons. I would guess the vote is “racist” in the sense of expressing a deep seated unease on the impact of (particularly) Turkish immigration. I go to Switzerland quite a bit. Nice place but I couldn’t live there – imagine the most anal-retentive person you know; then imagine a whole country full of even more anally-retentive people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,752 comments) says:

    Good on the Swiss for Crusading for Democracy.

    We know what John Key thinks of Democracy when 88% of voters have spoken.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Le Grande Fromage (145 comments) says:

    lefties should be very carefull what they wish for. I cannot understand how they dont realise that bending over for the Muslims will only result in them eventually being fed their own genitals by scimitar weilding loons.

    As much as I would love to see that I fear that our Muslim conquerers would not be inclined to show mercy to those of us who have always despised and mistrusted them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “I for one am very happy with this post, as it exposes Mr Farrar for what he is, and it also helpfully explains why he has been so slow and evasive about the greatest scams that are being perpetrated on free people at the moment.”

    Look, whatever differences you may have with Mr. Farrar politically, he provides you with an outlet for your opinions that is unrivalled in the blogosphere for its tolerance (real) and diversity of opinion. I do not think you should use his own site to attack him to the extent you have. Uncharitable to say the least.

    As for the issue, Mr. Farrar believes, like many others, that by defending multiculturalism, he is defending freedom. Being a true liberal.

    I disagree, and perhaps you disagree, but you can do that without attacking the host on his own site, especially when he provides a forum unmatched in the blogosphere for its real commitment to the principle of freedom of expression.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    Jesusonaskateboard – an intelligent AND intelligible post from redbaiter, I’m gobsmacked.

    Three thumbs up for redbaiter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. William2 (24 comments) says:

    dpf wrote
    “This story from Switzerland is a prime example of why direct democracy, rather than representative democracy, can be a bad idea.”

    Indeed. Another example, it was not until 1971 that women in Switzerland were finally able to vote in Federal elections. It was only in 1990 that the last canton holding out on local elections was forced by the Supreme Court to allow women to vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    There is absolutely no doubt that any increase in the influence of radical Islamists on culture and government results in less freedom.

    Just like there is no doubt that any increase in fundamental Christianity results in less freedom. However not allowing mosques to be built has no ‘positive’ impact on reducing ‘fundamentalism’, quite the opposite as it just proves what radical preachers say, that the west has double standards.

    This is why the referendum is ridiculous, if you wanted to attack fundamental Islam surely you would attack the burqa (like France) and as DPF stated just shows why the whole thing is totally flawed, tyranny of the majority.

    Jeff83 you need to control your compulsion to preach patronising self destructive liberalism based on paper thin thought processes.

    I thought freedom of religion was part of the bill of rights (here, US etc) and it along with freedom of speech are two of the pivotal ideas which are the very foundations which western society is built on and are hardly revolutionary “liberalism” ideals.

    Your desire to sell these in a fire sale over some misplaced anger over our governments ignoring your desire to smack your grandchildren legally is frightening.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    “This is a nice piece of facism.Democracy is just another form of dictatorship.”

    One more village missing its idiot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,752 comments) says:

    A good chunk of the 400,000 muslims in Switzerland are refugees from Bosnia. Isn’t the war over in Bosnia? Didn’t Western intervention fix it? What was Bill Clinton doing between cigars?

    Time to go home me thinks.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    The test of this legislation is whether you would support the construction of a nazi recruiting office in London with a 20metre high swastika mounted on top in 1942 as a ‘human right’.

    We are at war with Islamic fundamentalism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    True enough. I think that in practical terms, a move like the Swiss majority have made will inevitably cause more problems than they prevent. I think I’d have to know more about the instance.

    As usual, the leftists hide behind cowardice rather than confront the problems.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Nigel (515 comments) says:

    For those that say Muslims do not accept other religions go to Turkey, look at the Mosque/Temple/Synagogue all practising for over 500 years, within 1/2 a mile of each other. Find me that in any Christian country.
    There are no religions that are without blood on their hands, Freedom of religious expression & seperation of Church & State are critical.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    Le Grande Fromage – nah its all good :)

    not sure how the Muslim defending gay leftists will go though! or the outspoken female leftists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    As usual, the leftists hide behind cowardice rather than confront the problems.

    Sonny, that’s not really addressing what I said. This is a question of causality. Doing something for the sake of feeling like you’re doing something isn’t necessarily going to bring about the result you want.

    I’m not sure what you’re calling cowardice, but it’s often much more of a struggle to respect someone and make an effort to build bridges than to label them an enemy and slam the door in their face. And in the long term, it brings more preferable results.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    We are at war with Islamic fundamentalism.

    You could enlist and got to Afghanistan.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. joe90 (273 comments) says:

    The Third Man

    “You know what the fellow said – in Italy, for thirty years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace – and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Scott (1,800 comments) says:

    In principle I agree with freedom of religion. However Islam has shown consistently that it is the enemy of freedom and Western democracy. I would go on to say that it has been the enemy of Western civilisation since its inception around 700 A.D., but that is just me.

    I suspect the good citizens of Switzerland have had enough of Moslem mischiefmaking and want to stop it spread through their own country. Given even liberal Norway, because of violence and pack rapes against its women, is cracking down on Moslems, shows you how concerned European countries are becoming.

    But look if David and others want to stick up for Islam it’s up to them. However if Islam takes hold in this country then it will destroy everything that you hold dear. Do you think the Islamic priests would put up with the sexual behaviour that many on this blog think is normal? How long do you think you will have freedom of religion if New Zealand becomes Moslem?

    Jeff 83 and other anti-theists may bang on about Christians all they like. But Christianity is incredibly tolerant compared to the forces of Islam. If you don’t believe me go to any Moslem country and see how your freewheeling liberal western mores are received.

    Sometimes we have to get a clue. Liberal commentators have to realise that freedom carries responsibility. We cannot allow freedom in this country to people who given any sort of chance will destroy the very freedoms that we hold dear.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Repton (769 comments) says:

    Repton Have you not heard a call to prayer?

    Actually, no.

    If it was keeping me awake, I’d call noise control.

    I’m still surprised that, in what looks like a conflict between government regulation and private property rights, all the right-wingers here are coming down firmly on the side of government regulation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    Yea Ryan, Neville Chamberlain agrees – appeasement and bridge building is the way to go :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    We are at war with Islamic fundamentalism.

    Bought the line hook, line and sinker. Wonder if Fox gets commission.

    And you want to win “this war” by giving up what we are fighting for and adopting effectively what the people we are “fighting” against implement, i.e. a lack of a freedom of religion. Sounds logical to me…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    Sometimes we have to get a clue. Liberal commentators have to realise that freedom carries responsibility. We cannot allow freedom in this country to people who given any sort of chance will destroy the very freedoms that we hold dear.

    We cant allow us giving freedom to destroy that freedom, so we must remove the freedom before it is detroyed. Did I miss something?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Neville Chamberlain agrees – appeasement and bridge building is the way to go

    Would someone different have done any better?

    Finest Years: Churchill as Warlord 1940-1945, a new biography of Winston Churchill.

    Hastings himself comes close to grasping this paradox when he writes, “In May 1940 [when the House of Commons deposed then prime minister Neville Chamberlain and Churchill acceded to the office] while few influential figures questioned Churchill’s brilliance or oratorical genius, they perceived his career as wreathed in misjudgements.”

    Bearing in mind that one of the biggest and earliest misjudgements had been Churchill’s championing of the Gallipoli landings in World War 1, one may wonder how the man became prime minister.

    Hastings barely touches on this, apart from musing that Churchill would have fared no better than Chamberlain in trying to stave off war and quoting how much opposition there was within the ruling Conservative Party to him.

    http://www.odt.co.nz/entertainment/books/83753/sycophantic-view-a-flawed-hero

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    Yea Ryan, Neville Chamberlain agrees – appeasement and bridge building is the way to go

    Refraining from being a fucking arsehole to someone is not “appeasement”. It’s “not being a fucking arsehole”.

    And if you want to compare apples and oranges, why not add – Hitler agrees, building bridges and integrating minorities is pure cowardice.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Bought the line hook, line and sinker. Wonder if Fox gets commission.

    Somalia
    USS Cole
    9/11
    Bali
    Madrid
    7/7
    Bombay
    Fort Hood

    It’s not happening here so why worry aye Jeff? A couple of dead Kiwis in Bali is nothing to worry about.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Le Grande Fromage (145 comments) says:

    Fuck of Jeff. If they want to erect minarets they have the “freedom” to piss off back to the Islamic crap hole they came from.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    I’m still surprised that, in what looks like a conflict between government regulation and private property rights, all the right-wingers here are coming down firmly on the side of government regulation.

    That’s because right wingers are practical first and ideological last.

    When someone is shooting at you, free trade is not top of the agenda.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    When someone is shooting at you, free trade is not top of the agenda.

    “There are no objectivists in a foxhole.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    Sonny if you actually believe the underlying cause is religion you really have not allot of hope, hence the Fox comment.

    The reason for the strikes against the west have more to do with our foreign policy in the middle east for the last 80 years than anything. Religion is just a tool used to mobilise that resentment giving it a grander purpose, much like the crusades used Christianity to hide their core purpose of gathering wealth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    Fuck of Jeff. If they want to erect minarets they have the “freedom” to piss off back to the Islamic crap hole they came from.

    When one can not debate the point one can always resort to the Winston Peters line of reasoning.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    I’m not sure what you’re calling cowardice, but it’s often much more of a struggle to respect someone and make an effort to build bridges than to label them an enemy and slam the door in their face. And in the long term, it brings more preferable results.

    Wrong Ryan, peace comes from overwhelming strength of arms. That is what has brought you your liberal mindset and the relative peace we have had in recent time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. James (1,338 comments) says:

    I see the facist Redbaiter thinks that destroying freedom before others can is somehow the way to go.We had to destroy the village to save it……and he has the nerve to warn me about hanging from lamposts when he is a fan of that very thing for those he opposes…remember the ANZAC day debate Red?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    Wrong Ryan, peace comes from overwhelming strength of arms.

    Worked pretty well in the 20th century didnt it…..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    The reason for the strikes against the west have more to do with our foreign policy in the middle east for the last 80 years than anything.

    Yes, those arabs really hate the billions and billions of dollars the west pays them for their oil.

    And the oppressive western culture that pervades from Egypt to Afghanistan must really piss them off.

    If only those europeans had experienced the terrible things that western culture brings over the last 80 years, they would also be terrorists and attack american cities.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Worked pretty well in the 20th century didnt it…..

    Yes, in recent times 30% less wars and 80% less wartime casualties.

    What is your qualification for peaceful and non-peaceful times Jeff?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. James (1,338 comments) says:

    “Sometimes we have to get a clue. Liberal commentators have to realise that freedom carries responsibility. We cannot allow freedom in this country to people who given any sort of chance will destroy the very freedoms that we hold dear.”

    Thats a stupid argument and self defeating.There are already laws to prevent force being used against people which is the only way millitant Islam can work.A free society allows all ideas and actions that are not coercive despite what we may think of them.If we are going to deny Muslims their rights then I want Christians restrained too…..those bastards have caused more trouble here in NZ with their force mongering than any Muslim to date.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    Wrong Ryan, peace comes from overwhelming strength of arms. That is what has brought you your liberal mindset and the relative peace we have had in recent time.

    Well, there are different kinds of peace. Certainly, if every Muslim in Switzerland was rounded up and put in guarded cells, or perhaps shot dead, there would be no Muslim-initiated violence in Switzerland by definition. That’s peace of a sort, but isn’t the “preferable result” I was talking about.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Nigel (515 comments) says:

    Sorry there are no innocents Christian or Muslim in my opinion, they both have extremists & they both have issues, that doesn’t mean we should excuse them, or demand better behaviour, but to suggest one religion has a monopoly on excess is wrong as IMHO the issue is not the religion per se, but some exponents of those religions & it is the human factor whether extreme Mullahs or Priests or Rabbi’s that should be targeted because it’s human exploitation of religion to manipulate people not the religions ( generally ) themselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Scott (1,800 comments) says:

    “We cant allow us giving freedom to destroy that freedom, so we must remove the freedom before it is detroyed. Did I miss something?”

    Sadly Jeff on matters regarding theism, you have missed everything!

    My response is a pragmatic one based on “freedom of religion” which is something I generally support. However if a local community feels that Islam is a major threat and that don’t want it, to me that is perfectly understandable.

    We are very tolerant in New Zealand of Islam. Too tolerant in my opinion. I guess this is the difference between liberals and others. Liberals have high-minded ideals that they apply in every situation despite any commonsense. This is a good example. Liberals tolerate and support Islam, even though if Islam spreads, which it always tries to do, it would destroy everything that Liberals hold dear.

    To me that just doesn’t make sense. Maybe it’s because I take religion seriously? I would be in favour for limited toleration of Islam. However I would make no public taxpayer provided provision for Islam instruction in schools and any other Islamic religious practices in our nation. Islam is a foreign religion and one that I think is incredibly bad and harmful. I take religion seriously. I think Islam is a bad religion.

    The other point I would like to make is that Liberals are tolerant of religion, because they actually believe in no religion. If you actually believed in something then I think you would have a different point of view.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    Yes, those arabs really hate the billions and billions of dollars the west pays them for their oil.

    And the oppressive western culture that pervades from Egypt to Afghanistan must really piss them off.

    Maybe you should actually look into the subject more than the superficial level of knowledge that you currently have. You might find things like the US propping up the corrupt Saudi Government, corrupt former Iranian dictatorship, the creation of Israel in Palestine and the subsequent unquestionable financial and political support, the support of Saddam in his invasion of Iran (I could go on) might just outweigh in the mind of an average Arab person the money they get as a result of the Wests reliance on their Oil, just a guess.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Scott (1,800 comments) says:

    Thank you James and Nigel. You show beneath your thin veneer of tolerance, that you actually oppose Christianity. I would argue with you, but to be honest there is little point. Those who can’t see the difference between their local pastor and a jihad suicide bomber, are without a clue.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    To me that just doesn’t make sense. Maybe it’s because I take religion seriously? I would be in favour for limited toleration of Islam. However I would make no public taxpayer provided provision for Islam instruction in schools and any other Islamic religious practices in our nation. Islam is a foreign religion and one that I think is incredibly bad and harmful. I take religion seriously. I think Islam is a bad religion.

    The other point I would like to make is that Liberals are tolerant of religion, because they actually believe in no religion. If you actually believed in something then I think you would have a different point of view.

    TURN OFF FOX NEWS YOUR SENSE OF REALITY IS GETTING MASHED.

    First – “Liberals do not believe in religion”. Well I guess my sister and mother dont exist then do they? Nor the countless other liberals who believe in religious activies. I must of missed the contract I was meant to sign that said I couldnt be religious if I was a liberal. And finally just because one like my self doesnt beleive in organised religion doesnt make us not believe in religion full stop.

    no public taxpayer provided provision for Islam instruction in schools and any other Islamic religious practices in our nation

    With the exemption of one school near the airport which I am unsure if it receives tax payer funding where is this “funding of Islamic instruction?” Pretty sure that is against the education act whcih stipulates religious instruction is not part of schooling (and bible class gets around it by being optional). Not sure of the exact details but I agree, however I dont believe the taxpayer should be funding any religous activity.

    Liberals tolerate and support Islam, even though if Islam spreads, which it always tries to do, it would destroy everything that Liberals hold dear.

    If one does not support the notion of freedom of religon then the entire concept is a farce. In effect you are saying you support the freedom to believe in Christanity and thats it, which is effectively what those you oppose try and enforce.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    You might find things like the US propping up the corrupt Saudi Government, corrupt former Iranian dictatorship, the creation of Israel in Palestine and the subsequent unquestionable financial and political support, the support of Saddam in his invasion of Iran

    So you’ve seen the CIA dossier Jeff where it says that US support is conditional on these regimes gassing kurds, maintaining sharia law, outlawing bibles, and murdering christians.

    Your argument is like stating that the NZ government is responsible for the crimes of all the people it supports on welfare.

    might just outweigh in the mind of an average Arab person the money they get as a result of the Wests reliance on their Oil, just a guess.

    You presume that the rest of the world is full of dumb liberals like yourself. I would presume having a modern comfortable standard of living is more important than their being poor but not having any foreigners or their money in their country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Brian Smaller (4,023 comments) says:

    And you want to win “this war” by giving up what we are fighting for and adopting effectively what the people we are “fighting” against implement, i.e. a lack of a freedom of religion. Sounds logical to me…

    Really? We carpet bombed Japan and Germany in WWII and utterly destroyed the economies of both countries. The free West won that war, and the world was better off for it – most especially the Japs and the Germans.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. petal (706 comments) says:

    The problem is that most people do not see the difference between Islam as a religion, and Islam as a political system. DPF is especially blinkered it seems.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    If one does not support the notion of freedom of religon then the entire concept is a farce. In effect you are saying you support the freedom to believe in Christanity and thats it, which is effectively what those you oppose try and enforce.

    Ok Jeff. Do you support the right of paedophiles to live next door to schools?

    Or of gang members to live next door to the families of their murder victims?

    You think like a brick.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Scott (1,800 comments) says:

    Jeff 83 — once again I do believe in freedom of religion. However I am also a pragmatist. There has to be some reality and common sense to our opinions. Surely you can see that if Islam became dominant in New Zealand then our way of life would be destroyed? Please answer that honestly before you say anything else.

    Similarly I am not an apologist for Islam. I am a Christian apologist because I sincerely believe that Christ is the way the truth and the life. Anything else to me misses the mark. That’s what I think. So although we tolerate other religions we certainly in my view should not support them and put any public money towards them. Nor would I like to see Islamic temples with minarets in my hometown or anywhere else in New Zealand for that matter.

    Again they are alien to our way of life and would destroy it. Surely you can see that?

    If you do believe in something religious by the way then I am happy to hear it. I must confess that you strike me as an ultraliberal with not a clue on religious matters. However I am happy to be corrected.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. malcolm (1,952 comments) says:

    Really? We carpet bombed Japan and Germany in WWII and utterly destroyed the economies of both countries.

    A largely irrelevant side note, but most of Germany’s industry was not bombed and this was deliberate. Well before the end of the war the US was planning how to rebuild Germany to avoid the post-WWI problems and to be a strong bulwark against the USSR.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    If religious non-integration (of Muslims) in is a problem in Europe, do the Swiss believe that giving Muslims a reason to resent whitey is a good way to solve the problem?

    Rationality fail.

    +1 vote for what Danyl McLaughlan said in the 2nd comment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. MajorBloodnok (361 comments) says:

    If the majority of the citizens of a sovereign country decide XYZ, who are we to criticize them?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    most especially the Japs and the Germans.

    I guess you mean the ones that survived.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    This story from Switzerland is a prime example of why direct democracy, rather than representative democracy, can be a bad idea.

    Really?

    This is simply a horrendous decision. Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right, and should not be at the whim of [representative government].

    DPF is currently in Israel. A representative democracy. Israel does have a few religious laws concerning marriage.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Jeff83 (745 comments) says:

    “Ok Jeff. Do you support the right of paedophiles to live next door to schools? ”

    WTF

    I mean seriously WTF

    How the fuck is paedophiles living next to schools have anything to do with allowing people to practice their religion in a non extremism form.

    I mean fucking seriously people.

    “Dumb liberals like yourself”

    Cant argue the facts so go for the insults, gottya.

    Im off, the level of your debate is so low I would hear better arguments in a 3rd form social studies class.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    I suspect it is more that the people who bemoan ["the Muslims this, the muslims that, I don't like/trust the Muslims"] really want is not integration, but some sort of Final Solution.

    Whereby “all of them” are expelled from “white lands” and sent “back to where they came from”.

    Not wanting to Godwin the thread but let’s for once try to be honest. You read sentiments similar to what I have just described on almost every KB thread involving anything Islamic. Political blogosphere discussions the world over are much the same.

    White christian Islamophobia in the west is going to lead to some sort of calamity within my lifetime. Either a Pogrom, or World War 3. Or some combination. /Rant.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. democracymum (648 comments) says:

    I have to disagree with you on this one David and blogged about this
    issue myself yesterday at:

    http://www.democracymum.co.nz

    Why shouldn’t the Swiss have the right to say what they want their cities to look like?

    I think this issue makes a very good case for direct democracy and why referenda matter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    I suspect it is more that the people who bemoan ["the Muslims this, the muslims that, I don't like/trust the Muslims"] really want is not integration, but some sort of Final Solution.

    Typical bigotry that underlies most leftists beliefs.

    We don’t want any more murder RRM.

    I like most people and cultures that aren’t trying to kill me and, like all people, I want to see the continuation of the positive aspects of my culture.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    If the talking up here of an anti-Islam war is anything to go by then I think you could be right RRM. If they wish enough it may be granted. Not sure what is behind it, maybe to teach them for not being good subjects of colonisation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. RAS (63 comments) says:

    Uhh just a reality check. The swiss ban is on a particular bit of architecture not religion. Personally, I think they should extend it and ban the International style as well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    “Typical bigotry that underlies most leftists beliefs.”

    Then WHY is putting a steeple on a Muslim church a problem?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Im off, the level of your debate is so low I would hear better arguments in a 3rd form social studies class.

    You can’t conjure a decent response you mean. Your are definitely very dumb.

    “Ok Jeff. Do you support the right of paedophiles to live next door to schools? ”

    WTF

    I mean seriously WTF

    You are a retard if you can’t see the point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    White christian Islamophobia in the west is going to lead to some sort of calamity within my lifetime. Either a Pogrom, or World War 3. Or some combination. /Rant.

    You mean like 9/11? Or Beslam? Or Darfur? Except the other way round.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Then WHY is putting a steeple on a Muslim church a problem?

    What just happened in Fort Hood RRM?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    If religious non-integration (of Muslims) in is a problem in Europe, do the Swiss believe that giving Muslims a reason to resent whitey is a good way to solve the problem?

    If locking up murderers gives them a good reason to resent the state or ‘whiteys’ should we not do it then?

    Coward.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Yep, they’re ALL murderers aren’t they Sonny?

    One zealot goes on a rampage at a US army base. Therefore, suppress Islam everywhere.

    As I said.
    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/12/direct_democracy.html#comment-637920

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Yep, they’re ALL murderers aren’t they Sonny?

    One zealot goes on a rampage at a US army base. Therefore, suppress Islam everywhere.

    Your words and no one elses.

    Idiot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    No. YOU held up the Fort Hood killings as a justification for controlling the religious expression of Muslims in the west @ 12:57.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    This:

    What just happened in Fort Hood RRM?

    Does not say this:

    Yep, they’re ALL murderers aren’t they Sonny?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    One zealot goes on a rampage at a US army base. Therefore, suppress Islam everywhere.

    Was Fort Hood the only instance of an Islamic Fundamentalist killing christians in recent times RRM?

    What is your solution to protect the people of Fort Hood, the women in Norway, and others who feel themselves in similar danger?

    I don’t explicitly single out banning minarets in switzerland as I never thought about it until today, but I support the swiss peoples feelings of fear and the need to do something about it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    What question of mine were you answering with “What just happened at Fort Hood RRM?”

    You know you want Islam gone, you just can’t rationally say why. If you are honest you would say it’s because you just don’t trust them. But that is uncomfortable so you try to create rational arguments that one crime somewhere by a Muslim should lead to general bans on the freedoms of other Muslims.

    So I stand by everything I said at 12:46. And you are Exhibit #1 of the reason why.
    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/12/direct_democracy.html#comment-637920

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. LC (162 comments) says:

    To live in a country where my personal vote counts. Imagine, smacking law turned down. ETS cancelled. Personal tax cuts. Ah the paradise of direct democracy. Good on the Swiss. Wish it was NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    ya make it sound like messing with the middle east is a bad thing!

    keep em fighting each other as long as possible! well, at least until the oil runs out.

    the iran/iraq war was excellent.

    saddam had his uses too :)

    then there was the sunnis vs the shites thing. that was also excellent. muslims fighting muslims is like porn to me :)

    just need the yanks to take our irans nuke facilities, waste their navy and say “what ya gonna do about it??” that should keep the muslims occupied for a while

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    LC – Would a reduction in your personal tax to (say) 20% leave enough crown revenue to operate Courts and pay Police wages?

    Are you sure?

    Quick, voting closes in 30 minutes.

    You need a filter of informed legislators to run a country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    “Bought the line hook, line and sinker. Wonder if Fox gets commission.”

    HAHAHAH jesus

    lemme guess – you buy into the man made climate change thing?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    You know you want Islam gone, you just can’t rationally say why. If you are honest you would say it’s because you just don’t trust them. But that is uncomfortable so you try to create rational arguments that one crime somewhere by a Muslim should lead to general bans on the freedoms of other Muslims.

    RRM, I knew next to nothing about Islam before 911 and thought little about it. I have always been comfortable and interested in the Muslims I meet and have not been aware or suspicious.

    Of course I do not trust Islamic fundamentalism after the events of this decade. It is not uncomfortable, I am not assuaged wth liberal guilt like yourself.

    Since 911 it has come to my awareness that a large group of people who happen to be Islamists are actively trying to destroy tyhe west and like to kill christians and jews wherever possible. I believe it is responsible of the west to defend themselves. It is unfortunate, but people such as Major Malik were organised and encouraged at radical mosques.

    What do you have to say to the families of these people:

    Matthew Cook, son-in-law of Jamie and Scotty Casteel. Cook is from New York State and has been home from Iraq for about a year. “He’s been shot in the abdomen and that’s all we know,” Jamie Casteel told The Associated Press.

    Amber Bahr, 19, was shot in the stomach but was in stable condition, said her mother, Lisa Pfund of Random Lake, Wis.

    Ashley Saucedo told WOOD-TV in Michigan that her husband was shot in the arm, but she couldn’t discuss specifics.

    From the New York Times:

    Peggy McCarty reported that her daughter, Specialist Keara Bono, 21, of the Army Reserve, called her from a hospital and said she had been shot in the back, according to CNN. She had arrived at Fort Hood a day earlier and was scheduled to deploy to Iraq on Dec. 7.

    Some of the names of the deceased have been released. Here is a list of the victims revealed thus far.

    Private first class Michael Pearson, 21, of Bolingbrook was reportedly shot three times — in the spine and the chest — when a gunman entered the Soldiers Readiness Processing Center and opened fire with two handguns.
    Story continues below

    Kelvyn Park High School graduate Francheska Velez, 21, had just returned from Iraq, and was pregnant, her uncle told CBS 2. She had been in the Army since February 2007, according to her Facebook page.

    From the New York Times:

    Captain John Gaffaney, 56, of San Diego.

    Specialist Jason D. Hunt, 22, of Frederick, Oklahoma, joined the military three years ago. “And when his two-year commitment was finished, he re-enlisted, right in the middle of the Iraq desert on his 21st birthday.”

    Sergeant Amy Krueger, 29, of Kiel, Wisconsin. The Times writes, “Sgt. Amy Krueger was from a smaall town, and joined the Army shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, a few years after graduating from high school. Sergeant Krueger ‘was a feisty young lady who wouldn’t back down from anything,’ said Faye Billmann, an English teacher at Kiel High School.”

    Pfc. Aaron Thomas Nemelka (19) had been planning to propose to his girlfriends next month before deploying for Iraq or Afghanistan in January, relatives told The Salt Lake Tribune and The Deseret news. They said that Private Nemelka, who was an Eagle Scout, had been training to dispose of munitions.

    Captain Russell Seager, 51, of Racine, Wisconsin was a registered nurse and was on his way to Iraq to help soldiers struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder.

    Specialist Kham Xiong, 23, of St. Paul. From the Times: “Specialist Xiong, who has three young children, had moved his family to Texas while he prepared to deploy overseas.”

    Lieutenant Colonel Juanita Warman, 55, of Independence, Missouri. The Times reports that Lt. Col. Warman “followed in the footsteps of her father and grandfather when she joined the armed forces, her sister, Margaret Yaggie, said.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    Nice list there, Sunny, how about a similar list of the innocents murdered in Iraq and Afghanistan as Bush pursued his WAR ON TERROR. You know, people who have nothing to do with the great power ames, just ahppen to be born in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. LC (162 comments) says:

    RRM. Sure would. Crown revenue would match or be less than income anyway. Remember the role of govt is to:

    Provide internal defence (Police, Justice system)
    provide external defence (Armed forces)
    To fund major public works that private enterprise cannot or does not want to do (such as dams, roads etc)

    See what’s missing??? So Govt revenue would come from the follwoing sources:

    A flat tax of 10% on all personal income. And 10% on companies etc. No tax on savings though because the tax has already been paid on the earning).
    A minor consumption tax (less than 10%)
    Excise tax and duties.

    You do not need a filter of any sort. You imply that people can not make informed decisions. You are wrong. We could even use a vote proxy system (a la aardvark – http://www.aardvark.co.nz), so that I can leave the small item things for someone to take care of on my behalf.

    Important votes can be televised once per week (say before lotto). There’s 52 chances per year where citizens can have their say (better than once per 3 years).

    Radical – No
    Achievebale – Yes
    Will happen – sadly no.

    Your reply does indicate your bias towards collectivism, whereas you can tell i am biased towards individualism.

    I have faith in people of all races/beliefs/education. We (as a team) make better decisions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    LC – Would a reduction in your personal tax to (say) 20% leave enough crown revenue to operate Courts and pay Police wages?

    Are you sure?

    Quick, voting closes in 30 minutes.

    Easy, Yes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Sonny;
    Call me a leftist or a psychopath or whatever, I’m sorry but adding names to the dead does not change the logical structure here.

    If there are irreconcilable differences between the (white, christian) western world and the islamic world, and they are really a threat to us, then we should close our borders to them and declare war with specified Muslim countries that are threatening us.

    It makes so much more sense to me that the west should be engaging in trade and tourism with the Muslim world, rather than getting into a race to the bottom by starting to treat Muslims in the West as second-class citizens BEFORE we get to the stage of having open hostilities as above.

    My concern is that inflammatory actions in the west (e.g. Switzerland & the Minarets) are going to sour the relationship further to the point where not just militant radical Islamists, but a whole half of the world could start to have a problem with whitey, and then there could be a world war.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    Nice list there, Sunny, how about a similar list of the innocents murdered in Iraq and Afghanistan as Bush pursued his WAR ON TERROR. You know, people who have nothing to do with the great power ames, just ahppen to be born in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    You mean all the arabs killed by other arabs with the support of possibly al-qaeda and other non-iraqi influences?

    You need to talk to the insurgents about why they want continuing conflict in iraq.

    Ask a kuwaiti what they think of the american military.

    Personally, if faced with a tank and soldiers on the street corner, I wouldn’t shoot at them. Then they are likely to go away eventually.

    Were you happy that George Bush snr pulled out of iraq too soon and Saddam was able to murder hundreds of thousands of opponents and that America left afghanistan too quickly after the soviet invasion?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    petal 12:18 pm,

    The problem is that most people do not see the difference between Islam as a religion, and Islam as a political system. DPF is especially blinkered it seems.

    Indeed.
    There is no such thing as separation of church and state in (most except Turkey) Muslim countries. The culture of Islam embraces BOTH. We keep on focussing on the ‘freedom of religion’ ticket, but ignore the combined aims, both religious and political, of Islam.
    To extend ‘religious freedom’ to Islam, is to extend, by default, political freedom too. The end result is the establishment of an Islamic hegemony in (what were) western democracies, with the laws of the land operating under Sharia Law.

    Those too naive to see, or who refuse to see, the threat Islam is to the west really do need to think more deeply about the implications if Islam is given free reign.
    As others have said: this is a war, like it or not. And not just a physical war, but a spiritual war for the hearts, minds, and SOULS of the entire global populace.
    We need to wake up, much like the Swiss are starting to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    LC – I fear you would be in a minority of voters who understand how the state services operate and what level of funding is required!

    Hence my concerns about this kind of direct democracy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. david (2,557 comments) says:

    If the truth is known we will probably find it is more of a town planning thing than a religious one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    There is no such thing as separation of church and state in (most except Turkey) Muslim countries. The culture of Islam embraces BOTH.

    There are people from other religions who want their religion’s values promoted/enforced via the state too.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    I guess the Swiss don’t like religious symbols that stand out. They are much more discreet, like this:

    http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/33/94133-004-7C39F857.jpg

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    Ryan Sproull 1:59 pm,

    There are people from other religions who want their religion’s values promoted/enforced via the state too.

    While I know people who desire to see Christian values promoted (even many non Christians) within our society, I know no one personally who desires that the state enforce those values.
    Biblical Christianity has never worked on that basis.
    It is rather a religion that targets the hearts and minds of people, not a political force – big difference.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    While I know people who desire to see Christian values promoted (even many non Christians) within our society, I know no one personally who desires that the state enforce those values.
    Biblical Christianity has never worked on that basis.
    It is rather a religion that targets the hearts and minds of people, not a political force – big difference.

    I have met Christians who would like gay marriage to be prevented by the state, and even gay sex being censured by the state.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    ^^^ Kris K – remember this?
    Density Church, Queen St…
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!
    Enough is enough!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    Not wanting to Godwin the thread but let’s for once try to be honest. You read sentiments similar to what I have just described on almost every KB thread involving anything Islamic. Political blogosphere discussions the world over are much the same.

    Yes. There are many variations on the simple theme: Islam is Stoopid.

    In the rightosphere its called free speech and legitimate criticism of a fundamentalist religion we hate. We hate fundamentalist Islam as it is misogynistic, repressive and violent.

    In the leftosphere its called Islamophobia and must not be listened to because its hateful.

    In the Islamosphere its called Islamophobia and falls under the category all non-Muslims are hateful haters who must be hated.

    White christian Islamophobia in the west is going to lead to some sort of calamity within my lifetime. Either a Pogrom, or World War 3. Or some combination. /Rant.

    In the leftosphere the biggest thought crime you can commit is to hate. Because the guiding philosophy of the left is “fear is the path to the dark side. fear leads to anger. anger leads to hate. hate leads to suffering” or something like that. Now the problem with having built your entire political philosophy around a movie design to appeal to 13 yo. boys is that occasionally leftists jump to emotional conclusions.

    We hate repression and violence. We see this in Islam and so we hate Islam, but we are not going to commit to repression and violence. You are jumping to conclusions. /Rant.

    Hatred only leads to violence on Star Wars

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. Colonel Masters (409 comments) says:

    Repton: Have you not heard a call to prayer?

    Actually, no.

    If it was keeping me awake, I’d call noise control.

    Why don’t they just use Twitter?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    Pete George 2:05 pm,

    I guess the Swiss don’t like religious symbols that stand out. They are much more discreet, like this:

    I kinda think you’re missing the point, Pete.
    As I said to you yesterday; it’s the MEANING behind the symbolism that’s more important.
    Please keep up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. Scott (1,800 comments) says:

    In reply to RRM “Call me a leftist or a psychopath or whatever” — your own words RRM.
    What you advocate is what I call the Neville Chamberlain view of the world. Basically we are all nice people and why can’t we get along like good sensible chaps?
    You just in my view are not taking religion seriously enough. These people are Moslems. There are two houses in the Muslim world view. Their world is divided into two houses. There is the house of Islam and there is the house of war.
    Everyone must submit to Allah. What the Moslem envisages is a worldwide Caliphate under the rule of Allah.

    I don’t know what it would take some people to realise the nature of the threat that we face. How many 9/11’s and Fort Hood’s and Bali bombers will it take?

    Islam is a militant religion and it has been since Muhamed began it around 700 A.D. Being nice and tolerant on our part is all well and good but it won’t do much to stop suicide bombers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. freethinker (691 comments) says:

    The swiss are not restricting the right to worship their religion just that they may not have a particular shape atop their mosques. Following the example set by muslim countries can hardly be criticized unless you believe in do as i say not as I do. It looks like DPF is completely wrong footed on the subject of direct democracy, but thankfully he has opened up the debate so 1/10 for espousing an unpopular view but 9/10 for opening up the debate. Swiss muslims can of course return to Bosnia or wherever if they find the lack of mosque minarets too much to bear.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    Ryan Sproull 2:09 pm,

    I have met Christians who would like gay marriage to be prevented by the state, and even gay sex being censured by the state.

    I have met non Christians who would like gay marriage to be prevented by the state, and even gay sex being censured by the state.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    Me too, but at least when I oppose poof marriages, i do it from an informed and rational perspective, not because a voice in the sky told me to. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    RRM 2:10 pm,

    Kris K – remember this?
    Density Church, Queen St…
    Enough is enough!

    I am not a Destiny Church member, nor do I adhere to most of what ‘bishop’ Brian says.
    He appears to be moving further away from what I consider Biblical Christianity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    Kris K – what DO you consider “biblical christianity”? I know you are anti science because you don’t accept evolutionary theory, but are you as stupid in the garden as Jesus?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. goonix (140 comments) says:

    I just knew this thread would be an absolute trainwreck before I clicked on it! Ah Kiwiblog, how you entertain thee.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    MyNameIsJack 2:26 pm,

    … the opposite of non Biblical Christianity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    I have met non Christians who would like gay marriage to be prevented by the state, and even gay sex being censured by the state.

    But you haven’t met Christians who do? Or if you have, you have never heard them support that position by referring to what God says is how people should live?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  153. RAS (63 comments) says:

    freethinker at 2:16 pm

    Hear hear! I’d also point out that all the arguments which have been against direct democracy apply equally to its “representative” form. Representative democracy itself has an incredibly poor track record of protecting human/minority rights. This is why there’s also a need for something called the rule of law. It’s dubious that what’s essentially a building code constitutes a real breech of fundamental human rights, but if it does, the courts will strike it down the same as if it had originated from the swiss parliament.
    Everybody (including David) can stop wringing their hands now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  154. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    Ryan Sproull 2:34 pm,

    I have met non Christians who would like gay marriage to be prevented by the state, and even gay sex being censured by the state.

    But you haven’t met Christians who do? Or if you have, you have never heard them support that position by referring to what God says is how people should live?

    So you’re saying that our laws can only reflect societal morals if they’re NOT based on Biblical values?
    New Zealand IS founded upon Christian principles and values. Many non Christians embrace these same values, and see the sense in retaining them. The values people embrace affect the way they live, the way they vote, and hopefully the laws of the land, and those that make and enforce those laws. You don’t have to be a Christian to see the myth behind ‘free’ sex, and the effect it has upon the stability of the family, for example.

    Whether you like it or not, Ryan, our laws (used to at least) reflect Biblical values and principles. As they have become less so we have observed the decline of western democracy. Similarly, we have also observed less resistance to the ongoing onslaught from religions/ideologies such as Islam, eastern mysticism, etc. I believe this is no coincidence.
    The foundation of western democarcy is Judeo-Christian principles. Remove that foundation and watch the west fall (update on the 6 o’clock news).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  155. DJP6-25 (1,387 comments) says:

    Scott [11.27] and Sonny Blount [11.38] You’ve summed it up nicely.

    cheers

    David Prosser.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  156. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    New Zealand IS founded upon Christian principles and values. Citations to support this absurdity, please.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  157. Ryan Sproull (7,153 comments) says:

    So you’re saying that our laws can only reflect societal morals if they’re NOT based on Biblical values?
    New Zealand IS founded upon Christian principles and values. Many non Christians embrace these same values, and see the sense in retaining them. The values people embrace affect the way they live, the way they vote, and hopefully the laws of the land, and those that make and enforce those laws. You don’t have to be a Christian to see the myth behind ‘free’ sex, and the effect it has upon the stability of the family, for example.

    Whether you like it or not, Ryan, our laws (used to at least) reflect Biblical values and principles. As they have become less so we have observed the decline of western democracy. Similarly, we have also observed less resistance to the ongoing onslaught from religions/ideologies such as Islam, eastern mysticism, etc. I believe this is no coincidence.
    The foundation of western democarcy is Judeo-Christian principles. Remove that foundation and watch the west fall (update on the 6 o’clock news).

    No, I am saying that there are Christians who, because they are Christian, want their Christian values imposed on the whole of our society – Christian Kiwis and non-Christian Kiwis alike – via the force of the state.

    And you said that you have not met such a person.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  158. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    New Zealand IS founded upon Christian principles and values. Many non Christians embrace these same values

    NZ was founded on non-Christian principles and values, the Christian thing came with the missionaries.

    I only embrace the decent Christian principles and values, I reject the crap ones like intolerance and superiority and double standards and resistance to evolving with the times.

    How Christian based is direct democracy?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  159. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Scott 2.16 We are not taking religion seriously enough? I presume you are referring only to Islam. So tell us just how seriously you would like us to take it? The Fourth Crusade? Or is that in progress as we speak?

    The problem for you Islamophobes is that after you have had your fill of fear-filled rants about Muslims, they are still there. Oh dear, now what? A nuclear winter? War without end? I think not. Democracies have a poor track record in that regard.

    So, we engage them. We accept the immigrants and refugees into our midst, welcome them, in fact, and guarantee them the exact same freedom we expect for ourselves. We jealously guard our freedom and our system of law, but not by restricting their freedom other than expecting all to respect those laws by observing them.

    And we cease and desist economic exploitation and invasions when not in clear self defence, pay for their natural resources that prop up our planet-threatening lifestyles, and allow for them the exact same human rights we take for granted.

    And so all you fearful types can sleep at night, we maintain a strong defensive profile, because you just never know what is around the corner.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  160. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Nigel ludicrously posted at 11.08:

    For those that say Muslims do not accept other religions go to Turkey, look at the Mosque/Temple/Synagogue all practising for over 500 years, within 1/2 a mile of each other. Find me that in any Christian country.”

    Nigel, Turkey is no haven of tolerance. Think of the Armenian Christian genocide, the oppression of the Kurds – a 20 to 25 per cent minority, and it is extremely harsh on Christians. This goes back a long way. The Turks turned St Sophia Cathedral was turned into a mosque. In recent time there has been priest murder and seizure of Christian property. At least until fairly recently Christians could not become officers in the Turkish Army or teach in Turkish secondary schools.

    Compared with Turkey, Switzerland is true haven of tolerance – after and before the referendum on minarets.

    See these links:

    http://www.minorityrights.org/676/press-releases/turkeys-christian-and-other-religious-minorities-face-discrimination-and-rights-violations.html

    and this:

    http://www.worthynews.com/4833-turkey-militants-attack-christian-bookshop

    and this:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE50L08720090122
    and this

    http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE50L08O20090122

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  161. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Pete George can you please elaborate on your 3.09 post?

    NZ was founded on non-Christian principles and values, the Christian thing came with the missionaries.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  162. Brian (Shadowfoot) (80 comments) says:

    Direct democracy is tyranny of the majority.

    Will Judaism be next? Then Protestant?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  163. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Brian (Shadowfoot) at 3.50:

    Direct democracy is tyranny of the majority.

    The voice of MMP. Tyranny of the majority bad, tyranny of the minority bloody fantastic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  164. Chuck Bird (4,884 comments) says:

    I know there are those who believe that binding CIR with a lot lower number of signatures required is a magic bullet. I am not one of them. However, binding referenda has its place. Many binding CIR results will result in bad legislation. But we certainly get bad legislation under our existing system. John Key thought he would look good promoting a so called compromise. He has now acknowledged that the legislation that he is responsible for is a “dogs breakfast”. It is in fact worse than Bradford’s original bill.

    Back room deals under MMP certainly does not make for good legislation.

    Over 87% voted for change. If only parents were able to vote on this issue the number probably would have been well over 90%. Many of the vocal supporters of the anti-smacking legislation have not had children.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  165. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    RRM,

    Said better and sans Yoda-isms:

    “A kind Providence has placed in our breasts a hatred of the unjust and cruel, in order that we may preserve ourselves from cruelty and injustice. They who bear cruelty, are accomplices in it. The pretended gentleness which excludes that charitable rancour, produces an indifference which is half an approbation. They never will love where they ought to love, who do not hate where they ought to hate.”–Edmund Burke

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  166. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    That is all very well U-C but I don’t see the “enlightened” west tooling up for a crusade to put right Islam’s cruelty and Injustice… why not?

    And I read about the evils of Islam on political fan-boy websites and… nowhere else. Why?

    Is there a connection????

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  167. grumpyoldhori (2,362 comments) says:

    Germans voting for fascism, nothing new in that.
    I wonder if those Swiss_German banks have handed all that Jewish gold back yet.
    Curious that the Allies did not fuck Switzerland up in 45 by cutting all the road and rail links when one reads just how many armaments they were making for the Reich.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  168. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Goonix at 2.27:

    Kiwiblog, how you entertain thee.

    Great! now we’ve got Quakers posting. Hope he’s straighter than Nixon.

    Wahabi will be next. Not to worry, they will look rational beside the posts of Phxxx, the unmentionable.

    The ecumenicity of DPF’s publishing astounds.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  169. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Grumpy at 4.15:

    Curious that the Allies did not fuck Switzerland up in 45 by cutting all the road and rail links when one reads just how many armaments they were making for the Reich.

    Yep, the Swedes, too. They and the Swiss making Bofors and Oerlikon firepower for both sides.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  170. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    Freedom of religion equates to freedom to erect architecture which jars with its surroundings?

    Poor Michael Hill and his pink house… who knew he was being religiously oppressed?!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  171. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Lucy Hansen posted at 3.09 of Muslims:

    So, we engage them. We accept the immigrants and refugees into our midst, welcome them, in fact, and guarantee them the exact same freedom we expect for ourselves.

    Lucy, you or another member of the syndicate that posts as Lucy, sounds vaguely British. If so you are sure you didn’t flee to NZ to escape the Islamicisation of Bradford, London, etc?

    Don’t be such a lickspittle.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  172. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    That is all very well U-C but I don’t see the “enlightened” west tooling up for a crusade to put right Islam’s cruelty and Injustice… why not?

    Because crusades don’t work too well. Crusades are themselves cruel and unjust and very, very expensive. We prefer talking at them until their ears bleed.

    And I read about the evils of Islam on political fan-boy websites and… nowhere else. Why?

    You don’t get out enough. Poke around the Euston Manifesto and see how fan-boyish you find the locals.

    http://eustonmanifesto.org/

    Is there a connection????

    4 question marks, hah, I laugh at your puny 4 qestion marks!!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  173. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    <blockquote<can you please elaborate on your 3.09 post?

    I thought that was obvious, NZ was inhabited long before Christianity arrived.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  174. dad4justice (8,222 comments) says:

    petey ; New Zealand was visited by Christian Crusaders in sailing ships a lot earlier than those poly’s that rowed down under in canoes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  175. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Pete George ri-posted at 6.14

    “…NZ was inhabited long before Christianity arrived…”

    The island archipelago may have been inhabited three or four centuries before Christianity arrived, but was it New Zealand? Was it a country or a collection of Polynesian settlements? A country or nation though?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  176. billyborker (1,102 comments) says:

    dad4justice (5575) Vote: 0 1 Says:

    December 1st, 2009 at 6:20 pm
    petey ; New Zealand was visited by Christian Crusaders in sailing ships a lot earlier than those poly’s that rowed down under in canoes.

    I thought it was the Chinese.

    Look, D4J the troll has crawled out from under the rakaia bridge.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  177. Sonny Blount (1,782 comments) says:

    And I read about the evils of Islam on political fan-boy websites and… nowhere else. Why?

    Is there a connection????

    You don’t read widely?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  178. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    New Zealand was visited by Christian Crusaders in sailing ships a lot earlier than those poly’s that rowed down under in canoes.

    Did they pass by here in an Ark by any chance?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  179. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    And I read about the evils of Islam on political fan-boy websites and… nowhere else. Why?

    You don’t get out enough? Go visit Euston Manifesto

    That is all very well U-C but I don’t see the “enlightened” west tooling up for a crusade to put right Islam’s cruelty and Injustice… why not?

    Because crusading is expensive and ultimately ineffective.

    We (as a whole society) prefer to talk at them until their ears bleed, offer them the highlights of our culture (porn & booze & football & some other stuff). Its cheaper and ultimately more effective, because we can open up their society from within. We do not offer them respect.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  180. kiwireader (45 comments) says:

    Well I’m probably a bit late in commenting for you to read this DPF, but as with your other recent post on some other matter regarding Islam, your views are not reflective of most of your readers.

    Like someone else mentioned, this is more than simply banning minarets – it is sending a message saying “hey, we have had enough of Islamic immigration/colonisation, and we want something done about”. I read somewhere that 60% of the Dutch public believe that Islamic immigration was the worst policy decision since WW2. No doubt other countries overflowing with Muslims will think the same thing. Europe really is circling the drain, and good on the Swiss for being brave enough to do something about it, however small.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  181. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    So what does Europe do about it’s falling birth rates, aging population, and a need for cheap labour?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  182. Fletch (6,390 comments) says:

    There was an article about the Swiss system in the October edition of Investigate by Amy Brooke and it looks like an excellent system. No more ramming through of legislations – they have a 100 day moratorium on everything. Their president is one of a council of seven that annually rotates so you don’t get power hungry people like Helen Clark coming into power for long periods of time.

    It’s probably the best version of democracy out there.

    Amy ran the idea of the 100 day moratorium past one of Australia’s top constitutional lawyers at the annual Summersounds Symposium to check for any possible flaws or catches and he said there was no reason why it couldn’t work in NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  183. kiwireader (45 comments) says:

    Pete – problems indeed, none of which should be solved by immigration from Islamic countries.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  184. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Where do they get them from them kiwireader? The world is getting short of good white Christian workers willing to work for low wages.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  185. kiwireader (45 comments) says:

    I’m not saying they need to be white and Christian Pete, I’m saying not Muslim. Where they get labour from, I don’t know, and I don’t particularly care. To me Islamic immigration is a far bigger problem.

    Western culture and Islamic culture are chalk and cheese, simple as that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  186. Paul G. Buchanan (294 comments) says:

    Unfortunately, the way DPF has phrased the post and much of the discussion has conflated two separate issues: the problem of direct democracy, on the one hand, and the “problem” of Islamic influence in European society on the other. Since so much heat has been generated on the latter, I shall restrict my comments to the former.

    As mentioned already, representational democracy is designed, in part, to overcome the tyranny of the majority. In that sense it is a check on demagogery, ignorance and mob rule posing as popular wisdom. It is therefore a useful political construct in heterogenous societies with significant minorities, be they racial, ethnic, sexual, religious, linguistic, physically or intellectually challenged–or some combination thereof. It mitigates the excesses of unfettered majority rule by providing institutionalised voice to those who are not part of the majority. The majority still have the power of numbers, but the resort to knee-jerk solutions is tempered by minority representation in policy-making. This is not to mean all should be PC. It just means that social stability is better assured by inclusive political representation because it allows for non-confrontational solutions to majority-minority conflicts.

    Direct democracy, on the other hand, works best in small homogeneous societies with traditions of consensus in decision-making. Shared values help the direct translation of popular preferences into policy directives, and leads to better responsiveness on the part of decision-makers. But in heterogenous societies, direct democracy can exacerbate rather than ameliorate majority-minority conflict. That is what has happened with this referendum.

    When NZ was less sensitive to non-Pakeha interests and the Empire ruled the domain, direct democracy amongst Pakeha was feasible. It may have missed the non-Pakeha side of the equation but it more easily led to consensus. However, given the reality of Aotearoa as a heterogenous society from its modern (colonial) origins, the direct democracy option was less useful. This is not to say that representational democracy in its current form is not being abused by minorities in NZ; it just is to say that the abuse of direct democracy under such circumstances has the potential to be much worse given the character and look of NZ society.

    The problem for Switzerland is that while small and still fairly homogeneous, its political system has not caught up with its immigration policy. This has been a building issue for some time–witness concerns about Italian immigration in the past–but has now some to a head over Muslim immigrants. Focusing on a particular architectual feature because of its symbolism and supposed implications for the future is what the referendum was obviously about, but it is the failure of the Swiss political system to adapt to the realities of multiculturality that has made direct democracy seemingly counter-productive (at least on a symbolic level and probably on a practical level given the possibility of a Muslim backlash). Given Swiss demographics the same prohibition could have been passed by representational means with less fuss, or better yet, a compromise negotiated that would respect religious freedom and toleration on all sides without going so far as to engage in the ludicrous notion that somehow banning minarets would deter Muslims from being Muslims in their cantons.

    Then again, perhaps the Swiss do not arm their Muslim population as they do others, so the majority believe that they have a trump card should Islamic unhappiness about the referendum boil over. That, however, would be a failure of democracy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  187. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “So what does Europe do about it’s falling birth rates, aging population, and a need for cheap labour?”

    In the first place, stop listening to brain fucked progressives like you who are, with an ideology that should have been canned four decades ago at least, the main cause of the problems.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  188. transmogrifier (522 comments) says:

    It’s a silly argument, really, whether New Zealand was founded on Christian morals or not. Christian morals were invented by men in the first place, so what exactly is the issue?

    Islamic morals were invented by men as well, btw. Basically we get to choose which set (or combination of both) we prefer. Personally, I’ll go with a lot of the former, but not all of it, and not because I believe in God

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  189. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    If abuse was a solution you’d solve everything Red, but you don’t have much else to offer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  190. dad4justice (8,222 comments) says:

    He has more to offer than you pathetic petey. Go back and talk to yourself over at the pc blog wimpfest.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  191. Rufus (667 comments) says:

    Pete George 3:09
    “I only embrace the decent Christian principles and values, I reject the crap ones like intolerance and superiority and double standards and resistance to evolving with the times.”

    Oh, so you won’t tolerate Christian intolerance? Idiot. Nobody tolerates everything. That’s the whole idea behind the word “tolerance” – you “tolerate” or “put up with” ideas/stuff you don’t really agree with, but can live with.

    There will be other things that you simply can’t live with, so you don’t “tolerate” them.

    To claim that you’re somehow “tolerant” is nonsense. You simply tolerate other ideas/lifestyles/things. Sounds like a very superior attitude and double standards to me…

    Rufus

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  192. transmogrifier (522 comments) says:

    I’m not sure what can be done to stop the spread of Islam. I certainly think it is a backwards way of living, but it has advantages in that it is maniacally self-perpetuating and encourages high birth rates, two key traits that keep it chugging along.

    I’m not a fan of banning any religion per se; any country worth its salt will have laws that don’t allow the worst excesses of religious dogma to be expressed in the first place. In fact, part of me would like to see crimes based on religious dogma to be punished even more severely, but that is a little vindictive of me….but then again, if there was ever an honour killing here, I’d like to see the bastards responsible strung up.

    So, in sum….I’ll get back to you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  193. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    Well it should never be an issue in New Zealand – they would never get around the RMA and the building consent process, for fuck sake it’s hard enough putting a deck up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  194. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    I didn’t say anything about tolerating Christian anything. I just think there are good Christian values and crap ones, I don’t know what sounds superior about it, I think that idea is very common. I don’t claim my god and my selected values are the only right ones.

    I’m more critical of more Muslim values but I simply don’t see what is wrong with a building part of a certain shape, that’s the least of my worries about Islam.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  195. transmogrifier (522 comments) says:

    Rufus: I think it’s a matter of tolerating those things that happen between consenting adults and have no impact on you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  196. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Thanks for a good summary Paul, yes, that sums up the real point of this topic quite well. The problem is that a few regulars here wouldn’t be happy with any sort of democracy because they wouldn’t get what they wanted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  197. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Switzerland got it right.

    I would hope we follow suit and outlaw the Briscoes woman

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  198. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Pete George posted at 7.31

    So what does Europe do about it’s falling birth rates, aging population, and a need for cheap labour?

    Pete is way off the mark if the linked article below is any guide. The fertility rate has collapsed in Iran, it argues. Palestine and Yemen are the only Muslim states still with high birth rates. Muslims, like Europe and Russia, are suffering the same collapse in birthrates.

    As for labour requirements, that’s old hat. Robotics, computerisation, and new production methods have only begun to slash numbers in manufacturing, and service industries will develop higher productivity, too. Rising labour costs will drive innovation’s pace and cause a surge in productivity.

    Don’t write off Europe and Russia, especially the latter. Russia has been through appalling population decreases during attacks by the Mongols and by the Nazis (20 million dead), and bounced back. It will bounce back from its present poverty-caused devastation.

    The link:

    http://tkcollier.wordpress.com/2009/05/09/muslim-birthrates-falling-worldwide/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  199. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Jack5 (1247) Vote: Add rating 4 Subtract rating 2
    December 1st, 2009 at 5:09 pm

    Jack5, sorry mate, fourth generation Kiwi, born in the King Country, raised in the Waikato. There you go.

    My suggestion to you is to repeat what I said above, and you kindly quoted.

    Rant and rave all you like, but Muslims are still there and still the fastest growing religion, if only through a prolific birth rate. So instead of personal abuse, why don’t you tell us how you would address what is perceived at the “Islam problem”.

    The floor is yours.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  200. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Lucy at 10.23:

    … Muslims are still there and still the fastest growing religion, if only through a prolific birth rate..

    Please read the link in my post immediately before yours.

    I’ll repeat it for you below. Get your facts right.

    And let’s similarly question the statistics on Islam’s spread. Someone head counting the black Africans being forcibly converted to Island before being enslaved, raped, murdered, or all three? Who is counting in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, and Indonesia? Who is verifying the figures.

    The fact remains that Islam treats women abominably and should be wiped out for this reason alone. I’m surprised leftist fuckers who recently championed feminism, so quickly jump on the tolerance-for-Islam bandwagon.

    Lucy, one of the contributors under the Lucy pseudonym may be a Waikato farmer, but the varying tone suggests others aren’t. Or perhaps Lucy is a victim of the multiple-personality syndrome. That would explain much about the Lucy posts.

    The link repeated for Lucy contributor No. X:

    http://tkcollier.wordpress.com/2009/05/09/muslim-birthrates-falling-worldwide/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  201. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    The fact remains that Islam treats women abominably and should be wiped out for this reason alone.

    It offends me too, Jack, how Islam treats women, so what I am asking you is just how you think Islam should be wiped out?

    Feel free to reply without ad homs, but, hey, water off a ducks back, Jack.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  202. Herman Poole (297 comments) says:

    how you think Islam should be wiped out?

    Guns are fine. Bombs are not visceral enough really, although I think chemical weapons could be quite entertaining.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  203. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Re Lucy’s 10.44…

    “Should” does not mean Islam will be wiped out or even can be wiped out, as you well know Lucy.

    The style of your avoidance of answering questions and points raised, and your ripostes with off-beam, irrelevant questions raises suspicion that the Lucy-posters syndicate is actually a group of stand-ins for DPF working to keep the postings count high. It’s rather like play with one of those “psychologist interviewer” programs that were in vogue on the early internet. Vague questions just to keep the flow going.

    Now, Lucy should go to bed. How this should be accomplished is up to the Lucy syndicate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  204. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Jack, conspiracy theories just seem to suit you, somehow.

    You are the one with the pointless rants, and then offer nothing constructive to address your concerns. I offer constructive, ethical suggestions and you abuse me. At least Herman has the balls to say what he thinks – slaughter 1.4 billion people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  205. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “If abuse was a solution you’d solve everything Red, but you don’t have much else to offer.”

    You seem to have a lot of trouble understanding my points Petey. What I am trying to tell you is that there are going to be a number of massive social changes occurring over the next decade or so, not for the better unfortunately. These negative changes are all down to the Progressives Petey. (that’s you)

    People who are already immensely pissed off at what you and your ilk have done are going to get a lot more pissed off. What’s more the number of pissed off people is growing exponentially. The next decade is not going to be quite as comfy for the Progressives as the last few decades Petey.

    People will be looking for someone to blame for the outcomes that are on their way Pete. You think a bit of perceived abuse is something to whine about today mate, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  206. MrSaneperson (3 comments) says:

    I’m with Redbaiter on this especially his comments >>

    ” Should those who wish to destroy freedom be permitted to use freedom to achieve that objective??

    Answer that question and you’re dealing with the real issue. <<

    Do any of you know what a minaret is ? It is to provide a vantage point for a call to prayer which is played on an amplified sound system 5 times during the day very loudly.
    If you have never heard it , i can say it is damned annoying & from the moment it starts you would welcome it to stop.
    The Swiss have done the right thing with regard to banning them! I doubt anyone here would want to hear it in their own backyard, 5 times daily!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  207. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    I understand your points Russy. You wish bad shit on anyone who disagrees with you. You wish that bad shit will happen to all current politicians (but you won’t say who you think will replace them). You wish that extreme bad shit will happen in the US, followed by extreme bad shit happening here, to the country and to everyone you label as Progressive, whatever that is supposed to be (apart from someone that you disagree with).

    You have fascist wishes Redshitter. You wouldn’t care about destroying a country to achieve your own extreme goals.

    But I could be wrong. You may be just a fake, an entertainment for Kiwiblog. For those that like sad shitty entertainment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  208. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    MrSanePerson, the issue was not noise control. I am sure the well regulated Swiss could resolve that without outright religious discrimination.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  209. bwakile (757 comments) says:

    So Farrar thinks this is “horrendous”
    I say bloody well done Switzerland for standing up for your right to protect your culture.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  210. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Whose up first from the Lucy Hansen syndicate today?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  211. MrSaneperson (3 comments) says:

    You’re right Luc it wasn’t about noise control. I presumed thats what they were being used for but apparently not in this case.
    If it wasn’t about noise issues ,does anyone know why the Swiss were so concerned about the minarets?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote