" massive growth in the Muslim population if the draft legislation to streamline cumbersome procedures for second and third generation immigrants is approved"

Truely amazing. Consider what has happened to France; it doesn't seem as "French" as it used to be, and in some areas feels more like the Middle-East.

Why should this even be an issue? Keep them out! No one in Saudi Arabia for example is trying to introduce legislation to facilitate citizenship for Westerners; yet the people of Europe and the US seem to think that their self-preservation is the same as "hate-speech."

The absurdity of this PC thinking is destructive and I fear, will kill the West more surely than any "dirty" bomb.

Posted by: witness at September 26, 2004 7:12 AM

JWers/DWers:

This will be posted on multiple threads and periodically for the next few days, so I apologize in advance for the repetition.

Susan B and I are compiling a list of e-mail addresses for JWers/DWers who might wish to contact each other personally. Once your name is on the list, if someone wants to contact you, you will first be contacted by Susan who will obtain your authorization before giving out your e-mail address to the individual who requests it. So far we've had a pretty good response to our previous posts but there are a lot of familiar names missing! If you'd like to join our contact list, send your info (be sure to include your JW screenname so we know who you are) to susan_b356@yahoo.com.

CGW

Posted by: CGW at September 26, 2004 9:42 AM

Couldn't happen to more deserving skunks. Let's see Switzerland retain its neutrality under a Muslim onslaught.

Posted by: Whistling Dixie at September 26, 2004 3:51 PM

It's not a question of "dark-skinned" foreigners or not. I live here, I vote here; Switzerland generally has a kind of schizophrenic guilt problem with foreigners in general. Instead of tackling the problem head-on, as France has attempted to do with the head-scarf thing, a lot of people refuse to lay out some fairly general, basic rules under which people can move here.

Immigration to a society is generally a healthy phenomenon, under certain conditions. Immigrants assimilate, and in turn they influence their host culture. Like economic competition, it keeps cultures from stagnating, essentially keeping them "on their toes."

Switzerland is the origin country of the Red Cross, and the home of the UN and other organizations with fairly noble goals; given that, it only seems rational that we should offer shelter to those seriously in need (as in, if they go home, they get their heads chopped off.) A lot of second- and third-generation children of immigrants are totally assimilated but denied citizenship. They will work here, form families, and believe in the republican principles of this country. They should be welcomed with open arms and given citizenship.

Unfortunately, a lot of what's generally, fairly ignorantly portrayed as "economic migrants" also come here to take advantage of the reasonably generous social services and reluctance to engage in head-on debate about such issues. I don't think that description is fitting, as economic immigrants open shops and contribute to the cultural well-being of the body politic. The people the SVP (and I) dislike are scum, non-European equivalents of poor white trash. They treat women like shit, refuse to accept the basic tenets of my civilization (separation of church and state means that Shari'ya does NOT supersede my judicial system) and generally make my life difficult.

As it stands, rejecting this law was a sad step, as it's not really addressing the issue at hand.

Posted by: snarflegarfle at September 26, 2004 4:45 PM

Since when did self-preservation become a hate-crime?

Posted by: voletti at September 26, 2004 8:03 PM

Actually, Snarflegarfle, I understand some Swiss Cantons and cities are officially Protestant, and some Roman Catholic. Maybe you haven't killed each other over such things for a while, but still, those are official religions, no? Also, it seems that a lot of European countries have official religions without persecuting dissenters (Germans can pay a church tax; Scandinavia's officially Lutheran; until Zapatero, the Roman Catholic Church had special rights in Spain; etc.) For a non-European example, Thailand is officially Theravada Buddhist--which means that the king must be of that religion, and taxes support the sangha; even though they've had a Muslim Foreign Minister and Christians in numerous official posts, too (to name two of their religious minorities).

Frankly, there isn't an immigration problem in much of the world--just problem immigrants. The trick is to frame immigration and nationality laws that help you benefit from the entrepreneurial, skilled, and just plain decent immigrants while avoiding the importation of other countries' problems.

Posted by: Kepha1 at September 26, 2004 10:24 PM

Kepha1,

cantons are not officially protestant or catholic. There are a number of "recognized" religions, including the above; if you choose to do so, you can pay a certain (fairly hefty) amount of your local taxes to one or another of the organized churches. the govt. then disburses this cash for them. I have no idea what good this does, as I definitely unchecked that box first thing.

I will stick by my point that organized religion is kind of dumb, but that's a personal opinion. What I won't compromise on is an absolute separation of church and state, which is a reason why I object to the above phenomenon. I also don't give a flying **** about what someone chooses to worship, as long as it does not in any way contravene basic accepted standards (yes I know, who defines these?) of the society I inhabit.

Hence, you are absolutely correct about the "problem immigrants" vs. "immigrant problem"--that's a point I've been making for a long time, and I appreciate that someone's put it so succinctly.

Posted by: snarflegarfle at September 30, 2004 6:57 AM