the cross taken down to accommodate other religions

[tasha]

Can you tell us the full story please.

A religious group in Burn insist on having the cross removed from the swiss flag as they believe that the countey is now a multicultural country and that they cross is not a part of that new state. It is an immigrant religious group that are insisting on having the cross removed. I am not certain if it was all the churches that have taken down their cross but one of them did to accommodate other religions and make them feel at home in their country.

 

[explorerx7]

The cross is a religious symbol, however, it will not save anyone. if it is there fine if ti's not it should not be a problem. If your are a Christian you should be more concerned with doing what is necessary to fulfil the requirements of your faith. It's dangerous when people use a situation like this to begin to refer to enemies.

 

[remnant]

Faith involves belief in a higher power for protection and provision of our earthly needs. The Swede action portrays negative faith which negates their faith in the first place. Christianity, being the major religion in Sweden states that one has to resist iniquity to the point of death and cowards will have their place in the lake of fire. If you don't stand for nothing, you fall for anything. I think they are agnostic or don't know their identity.

 

[Falcon29]

This isn't true. The cross is displayed at Churches in Sweden, nothing has changed.

 

[fcuco]

Please, understand that Switzerland and Sweden are 2 completely different countries.

Taking down a cross from a church is not the same as discussing if a certain symbol should be on a national flag.

A church building is private property, and anybody should be allowed to fly any colors and display any symbols that they consider relevant to themselves. This is a matter of free speech. I know that the concept of free speech is different in Europe than in the United States, at least in its scope and interpretation, but even no religious people will agree that forcing a church to remove a symbol on their grounds is unacceptable.

That being said, the concept of separation of church and state if one of the tenets of any modern form of goverment or society, so revising your nationals symbols so they can more universally cover and represent all the people living in your society is good.

 

[djdefense]

I couldn't care a bit about all this religious gibberish. People should be free to worship whatever imaginary friend they like to.

That being said, I think taking the cross out of the Swiss flag is absurd. Even if the demographics have started to change, why would anyone ever change a country's flag?

This is something that we have to face in India all the time. They keep "appeasing" religious minorities. All that ever does is create ill-will. We are used to a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and multi-lingual society in India. But, most of us still have a hard time swallowing the length politicians will go to, in order to appease people.

Recently, we've faced major issue with a university where they let communism thrive. No problems with that since universities are meant to be ideological battle-grounds, but what happend next was appaling. China poured money into that university and now they didn't want to hoist the Indian National Flag on that university's campus. Then, this university went one step further and supported Islam (nothing wrong in that) but the way they did it was by saying that islamic terrorists who went through the whole legal process and executed were really not terrorists! Why? Because they have a problem with calling an Islamic terrorist a terrorist, they want them called "Anti-nationals". Hahahah what a joke. And Yale is backing this university tooth and nail.

So, that is what happens when you create a tiny hub anywhere in a country that goes out of the way to create "equality". I am all for equality but not for this dumbfoolery. I mean now we have a Communist-cum-Islamic terrorism hub in Delhi, whom Yale is supporting whole-heartedly in the name of "free speech", "freedom of thought" and "religious tolerance". Absurd absurd.

 

[fcuco]

This is something that we have to face in India all the time. They keep "appeasing" religious minorities. All that ever does is create ill-will. We are used to a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and multi-lingual society in India. But, most of us still have a hard time swallowing the length politicians will go to, in order to appease people.
.

The really equally funny a tragic thing is that these actions are often demanded not by the supposed minority that is "offended" but by people that think that they should be offended on behalf of this group.

Deep down they despise or see these minority groups with contempt no matter how much they claim to be their defenders because they waste no opportunities talking on behalf of them even without consulting them first and denying them all sense of agency or control to stand up for themselves.

 

[djdefense]

Yeah, its like who made these people incharge of representing minorities. People can raise their voice however and whenever they like without a need for outside help. But, that doesn't stop some "intellectuals" from gaining political leverage by pretending to be all for equality when in reality they do nothing to help anyone.