Feed on
Posts
Comments

Second@s Plus, a lobby group in Switzerland consisting of mostly Muslim immigrants, demand that Switzerland removes the cross from the nation’s flag.

They will run a campaign in October against this Christian symbol which they consider unfit in today’s multicultural Switzerland. They consider the flag offensive to Muslims.

This has caused a heated debate. But this is just one of many similar cases taking place almost every week in Western democracies. Some groups demand a freedom from seeing or hearing things they don’t like or agree with. These demands come mainly from some Muslim and homosexual groups. They pro-actively seek to reduce freedom of expression and introduce freedom from hearing!

It is of great concern that citizens of democracies work to dismantle democracy; they strive to eliminate basic human rights. But it is equally worrying that some politicians, authorities and journalists move in the same direction.

Just one recent example from the UK: The police in Lancashire recently ordered the owner of a Christian cafe to stop having Bible verses on a TV screen inside the café. Why? It might offend someone who is not Christian.

This absurd no-one-must-ever-be-offended-principle leads towards the death of free speech. If you never want to expose yourself to a dissenting opinion I recommend you become a hermit in the Sahara. Or a dictator.

PS: Viewer discretion is advised, the following image may be deemed offensive, and may even cause great distress among some.


8 Responses to ““Remove the cross from the Swiss flag!””

  1. Harry Groot says:

    Are those advocating taking away the cross from the flag lobbying in equal measure for taking the crescent from multiple flags from other countries ?

  2. […] Mats latest post! Share this:FacebookEmailPrintMoreTwitterLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry […]

  3. Alex Araujo says:

    I understand the overall concern, and have a question: Are you equating removal of the Christian symbol from the national flag as an attempt to dismantle democracy? To me it seems, in itself, to be an outworking of democracy. If Switzerland could truly claim to be a Christian nation (as Israel seems to claim to be a Jewish nation, thus the star of David on its flag, and Saudi Arabia as a Muslim nation, thus the Muslim symbol in its flag), then I would better understand your point.

    Still, I think your point is valid to the extent that it points out the ways in which interest groups pressure existing institutions to comply more and more with their limited interests. Vigilance is needed to preserve what is good in our democratic institutions. I also think it important to say that some of these attempts by interest groups are more visible and more clearly against our own preferences, therefore they get more of our attention.

    Other groups are more subtle and already have undue influence. They work in the corridors of power to preserve that influence, making institutions work in their favor at the expense of other concerns. Think for instance of banking and financial interests, and multinational corporations. Perhaps we think they are better for us and don’t mind that they carry disproportionate influence? But that would mean that we undervalue democratic institutions also, and only get worried when the “bad” interest groups are trying to bend them in their favor?

    • Paul Miller says:

      Alex,

      I am not sure comparing banks to Muslims quite works. That is, I think lot’s of the resentment against banks, while understandable (because they benefitted directly from bail-outs while others did not), is actually ill-founded factually and illogical economically. As to the facts: the assumption in all these anti-Wall Street etc. actions is that there is some hidden conspiracy by the banks who are pressuring politicians through there lobbyists to give them money. But just think of the first great bail-out, also resented, against all the thrifts, when? – under Democrat Bill Clinton. He was no pro big-business Republican, but simply someone who realized reluctantly, was necessary, to keep the infrastructure of the economy going. Plus, what was Bush’s 1st reaction: let Lehman Bro.s go under… and everybody, social democrat Europeans included, said, “You’re insane. We’ll all go under.” So he switched course. Why? That brings us to the “illogical economically” strand.
      The banks were not saved because they had such good hidden interest lobbyists but on cold, hard economic considerations: without an operative credit system, we will all go under. We may not like the banks but we need them. There has always been a love-hate relationship between main street and Wall street, between credit agencies and those who borrow their money. So naturally, when main street went under (unemployment, bankruptcies etc.) while Wall Street (or the banks more particularly), there was not a lot of love lost. But conspiracy talk to me leads us off in the wrong direction.
      Paul

  4. Mike Stevens says:

    Watch out Mats… our ‘home country’ of Sweden may be next—-?
    What will be the next ‘PC’ move put forward?
    Maybe it is time for Christians in Europe to be pro-active rather than reactive.

  5. Heidi says:

    You should check your facts before publishing: There is no “campaign in October against this Christian symbol;” Second@s is mainly formed of Atheists or Christians; and at no point Petrusic mentioned Muslims. It is very irreponsible to spread news that are false, especially in such sensitive matters as inmigration and religion.
    I hope to see this comment posted.

    • Mats Tunehag says:

      Hi Heidi,
      Research into this was done by, among others, human rights activists, moderate Muslims and expert investigative reporters at Hudson New York.
      Kind regards,
      Mats

    • Paul Miller says:

      I did check out both the original Aargauer Zeitung story – which definitely identifies Second@s Plus as an “immigrant association” (not as atheists) – and Second@s Plus own website – at http://www.secondos-plus.ch/index.php?id=home – which equally identifies them as focused on immigration issues (again, not atheism etc.). On this same site, they seek to now distance themselves from the comments of I. Petrusic, which seems rather disingenuous since he is on Second@s Plus’s Aargau board of directors (I believe the vice-president), see http://www.secondos-plus.ch/index.php?id=29

Leave a Reply