• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Minneapolis submits voluntarily

Not the worst thing a person can hear at 0330. And if it doesn't pertain to you, you'll learn to sleep through it soon enough.

The only people who are going to bitch about this are the people who always bitch about such things and usually live a thousand miles away.
^ Part of why I live a thousand miles away.
I gotta go with my RW extremist mentor here. They should set their own alarms.
Tolerance is all very well and good, but piling on superstitious rituals that are noisy and intrusive is totally unnecessary and nobody should be required to tolerate it and lose sleep against their will because some superstitious fuck wants to advertise their stupidity.
OTOH, church bells always gave me the creeps, and they’re not even in the middle of the night. Maybe I’m just an intolerant curmudgeon (which is the mature form of “arrogant punk”, which was what I was when I developed my disdain for loud godder noises.)
 
Not the worst thing a person can hear at 0330. And if it doesn't pertain to you, you'll learn to sleep through it soon enough.

The only people who are going to bitch about this are the people who always bitch about such things and usually live a thousand miles away.
^ Part of why I live a thousand miles away.
I gotta go with my RW extremist mentor here. They should set their own alarms.
Tolerance is all very well and good, but piling on superstitious rituals that are noisy and intrusive is totally unnecessary and nobody should be required to tolerate it and lose sleep against their will because some superstitious fuck wants to advertise their stupidity.
OTOH, church bells always gave me the creeps, and they’re not even in the middle of the night. Maybe I’m just an intolerant curmudgeon (which is the mature form of “arrogant punk”, which was what I was when I developed my disdain for loud godder noises.)
I agree.

And where in the Koran mention amplified loudspeakers?
 
Not the worst thing a person can hear at 0330. And if it doesn't pertain to you, you'll learn to sleep through it soon enough.

The only people who are going to bitch about this are the people who always bitch about such things and usually live a thousand miles away.
^ Part of why I live a thousand miles away.
I gotta go with my RW extremist mentor here. They should set their own alarms.
Tolerance is all very well and good, but piling on superstitious rituals that are noisy and intrusive is totally unnecessary and nobody should be required to tolerate it and lose sleep against their will because some superstitious fuck wants to advertise their stupidity.
OTOH, church bells always gave me the creeps, and they’re not even in the middle of the night. Maybe I’m just an intolerant curmudgeon (which is the mature form of “arrogant punk”, which was what I was when I developed my disdain for loud godder noises.)
I agree.

And where in the Koran mention amplified loudspeakers?
sleepless-young-man.jpg
 
One of the very best things about the USA is that we have a fairly generous policy for welcoming refugees and have had throughout our history, with some very shameful exceptions.

It is not unusual for new immigrants or first generation immigrants to struggle to find a way to fit into their new country and new society. It's even more dramatic when your skin color and religion are very different than the population and culture you are expected to assimilate into. Minnesota is an extremely white state and heavily Catholic and Lutheran, with many other faiths also found throughout the state. And....we (Americans) expect people who come here to assimilate---to lose all ties and affiliations to the country of origin and to do it immediately without actually doing a lot to welcome newcomers.

Also, some people go to a new country--for travel (pleasure or business or education) or for immigration with the very, very best of intentions and find themselves overwhelmed by culture shock. I've seen it happen, very unexpectedly, to people who truly want to be where they are but find it very difficult to find their place. It's not so surprising that young people whose family immigrated and who find themselves very much 'other' because of their skin color, their religion, their language look for where they fit in. Refugees are different than other immigrants: they cannot go back home because it is too dangerous and sometimes, home no longer exists. I feel a lot of compassion.
 
Not the worst thing a person can hear at 0330. And if it doesn't pertain to you, you'll learn to sleep through it soon enough.

The only people who are going to bitch about this are the people who always bitch about such things and usually live a thousand miles away.
^ Part of why I live a thousand miles away.
I gotta go with my RW extremist mentor here. They should set their own alarms.
Tolerance is all very well and good, but piling on superstitious rituals that are noisy and intrusive is totally unnecessary and nobody should be required to tolerate it and lose sleep against their will because some superstitious fuck wants to advertise their stupidity.
OTOH, church bells always gave me the creeps, and they’re not even in the middle of the night. Maybe I’m just an intolerant curmudgeon (which is the mature form of “arrogant punk”, which was what I was when I developed my disdain for loud godder noises.)
Intolerant curmudgeon here too. :wave2:It also has the unintended consequence of making people resent you and your fucked up religion (even more than they already do). If you want your neighbors to respect you and your way of life, start by respecting them.
 
One of the very best things about the USA is that we have a fairly generous policy for welcoming refugees and have had throughout our history, with some very shameful exceptions.

It also has the unintended consequence of making people resent you and your fucked up religion (even more than they already do). If you want your neighbors to respect you and your way of life, start by respecting them.

Both of these, hugely.

I cherish this Nation of Immigrants. Among the worst aspects of the Trump Administration policies was his stupid, unChristian, anti-American, Wall.

But at the same time I'm not OK with religionists imposing their stuff on the rest of us. I don't want to hear a call to prayer from anyone, including Muslims.

If they can blast music that they like, the rest of us should be able to blast Nazareth, "The Hair of the Dog", the same way.

It's not a matter of respecting the culture. It's a matter of respecting your neighbor.
Tom
 
But at the same time I'm not OK with religionists imposing their stuff on the rest of us. I don't want to hear a call to prayer from anyone, including Muslims.
Yep. I'm going to side with tolerance too. That is, side with no religious noises imposed on any other religious or non-religious people.
 
This is an article from a few years ago about the Somali diaspora, emphasizing on Minneapolis.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/us/minneapolis-somalis-george-floyd.html?unlocked_article_code=kRHB9ZqGOGc4MvHtezVUY2yxqzkKEedZ57AoKOlKFqCtGddx01XgFcBQVG2ybIzTx7bQxHXDL4gwGv52aZAMm5IHTzzlVykXW6sJF_tb74ogEWsOqi3I9QV93u5IiZjkdUqMql2510dkrXxrEZ2cygpVJzmzC7jBxYZ7OdqisWVAtXMHQzwsettVxwK7XxnhmZEmhxsp2BOizeqIDdcL6owHRtpd9cQkcCxYnbx54skegd6DwBwplDMH3tZ-NPHMt5OIOY9Se2QHa6kuYsummolObLntLEuExcmUaRAOsdpXJM5ih5wkt9spOUTRcy-JxCZyHdW942PlQwhtMQpcOiH4xl-O&giftCopy=3_Independent&smid=url-share

I think it’s a fairly mild article about some of the issues faced by Somali immigrants in Minnesota.
 
Some points to consider.

First, the 5 calls to prayer are regulated by the position of the sun. The first is at daybreak (which does not happen in Minneapolis at 3:30 AM), the last at sunset (which does not occur at 11:30 PM in Minneapolis). For Minnesota, daybreak occurs after 5am in the morning. Sunset occurs before 10pm. So the claim about blasting calls to prayer at 3:30 am or 11:3) are inane since there is no reason for a mosque to do so.

Second, Christian religious institutions do not have to get special permission to ring their bells (which can be loud and annoying), so there is some tension with 1st amendment of the Constitution in regulating these calls to prayer.

Third, according to the newspaper reports, there was no organized opposition to this change. Making a city more welcoming to its citizens is a good thing, regardless of their ethnicity or religion.

This is a local matter that is trivial in the minor scheme of things. Frankly, I think a bigger issue is the underlying bigotry that drives such an OP and its corrosive effect on our civic and social lives.
 
I am not a "freethinker" nor an infidel, nor have ever claimed to be.
May I ask you, what is your religious position?
I do value secularism, and believe that if the truce between church and state is to be maintained, the door has to swing both ways.
The whole point of secularism is that religion should not occupy an exalted position in society. It is wrong when Christianity does it, and it is just as wrong when Islam does it. Unfortunately, the left (and Minneapolis city council is very left) has a soft spot for Islam, and so do many posters on here. Things that they would attack furiously if Christianity did them ("a church wants to install louder bells? And ring them at 3:30? How dare they?!") they defend when Islam does it.
The government must not be controlled by nor attempt to control religious prerogatives.
It looks to me that Minneapolis city council gave in to "religious prerogatives". Noise ordinances are there for a reason. Religious groups should not be exempt. Not even Islam.
Toleration of multiple faith perspectives and practices is not a violation of secular philosophy, but a necessary step in maintaining the plausibility of multicultural and plurireligious state over the long term.
Toleration is one thing. Letting them blast wailing of the muezzin at 3:30 am at unlimited volume goes well beyond toleration. It goes into allowing a religious group to impose their will onto everybody else.
 
Not the worst thing a person can hear at 0330.
Can't think of many worse things.
And if it doesn't pertain to you, you'll learn to sleep through it soon enough.
Why should I, or any other unbeliever, have to "learn to sleep through" mosques blasting at unlimited volumes? What's wrong with Muslims using alarms to wake up?
The only people who are going to bitch about this are the people who always bitch about such things and usually live a thousand miles away.
It's the proverbial camel's nose inside the tent. Don't be surprised if Minneapolis Muslims start demanding more and more concessions in the coming years.
 
So the claim about blasting calls to prayer at 3:30 am or 11:3) are inane since there is no reason for a mosque to do so.
It's based on the ordinance that allows them to do so during those hours. At unlimited volumes.
I looked it up, and the earliest sunrise is indeed 5:25 for Minneapolis. But is the so-called "call to prayer" broadcast (at unlimited volume) right an sunrise or maybe at twilight? According to this, the "Fajr" prayer occurs about an hour and a half before sunrise. That would put it before 4am around the Summer Solstice, which is why the ordinance set 3:30 as cutoff. But even 5:25am is still way too early to wake up regular people just so some Muslims do not have to set their alarm.
Likewise, "isha" occurs about an hour and a half after sunset.
So stop calling people "inane" when you yourself do not know shit about shit.

Second, Christian religious institutions do not have to get special permission to ring their bells (which can be loud and annoying), so there is some tension with 1st amendment of the Constitution in regulating these calls to prayer.
Church bells are not amplified. As I said before, the previous ordinance likely set intensity limit (70 dB) such that it corresponds to how loud church bells are at ground level close to the church. Now, mosques can blast at unlimited volumes. Next, churches do not ring bells in the middle of the night.
First Amendment is not at issue here. This isn't a lawsuit on constitutional grounds, it's city politicians giving special privileges to Muslims. Nobody has argued that the Constitution mandates allowing Muslims to wake up the whole city in the middle of the night.

And personally, I also think that the sound of bells is much more pleasant than some guy wailing in Arabic. And I heard both things.

Third, according to the newspaper reports, there was no organized opposition to this change. Making a city more welcoming to its citizens is a good thing, regardless of their ethnicity or religion.
Minneapolis city council is very left wing, and the contemporary left is very Islamophilic.
Re being "welcoming". To the point of making it less welcoming to the non-Muslim majority of its citizens? How is using an alarm some unreasonable restriction of the Muslim religion?
This is a local matter that is trivial in the minor scheme of things.
It is a local matter, but I disagree it is trivial. Not even in the "minor[sic] scheme of things".
Frankly, I think a bigger issue is the underlying bigotry that drives such an OP and its corrosive effect on our civic and social lives.
To you and your "ilk", any criticism of Islam is "bigoted".
 
Last edited:
To me a preferential view of Christianity over Islam, Judaism or Hinduism is bigoted.
Just sayin’. Religiosity gives me the creeps.
 
Derec said:
May I ask you, what is your religious position?
It's right there on the little tab, I loosely follow Jedi meditative practices and generally remain agnostic on religious matters. Irrelevant to the discussion if you ask me; I am not a Muslim if that is what you are asking, nor do I harbor any particular hatred for the tradition.

The whole point of secularism is that religion should not occupy an exalted position in society. It is wrong when Christianity does it, and it is just as wrong when Islam does it. Unfortunately, the left (and Minneapolis city council is very left) has a soft spot for Islam, and so do many posters on here. Things that they would attack furiously if Christianity did them ("a church wants to install louder bells? And ring them at 3:30? How dare they?!") they defend when Islam does it.
So clever, you think you are, eh? No, I don't support the restriction of any faith's customary traditions.

If a local city council wants to "allow" church bells in their city, at whatever decibel, and they all agree to it, the government has no reason, prerogative, or right to tell them they cannot or should not out in place whatever rules they think make sense for their community. Indeed, I'm pretty suree most American towns do, in fact, allow church bells to ring. Therer are sometimes noise complaints. If someone thinks there's a consensus in their community that every hates the bells or wants them to be quieter, they can always bring their own petition before the city council. That might happen in this case, now that the Right Wing media circle jerk is descending on the city.
 
It's based on the ordinance that allows them to do so during those hours. At unlimited volumes.
Perhaps you should learn to distinguish between "can" and "does". For example, you have the ability to make cogent responses but that does not mean that you necessarily do make cogent responses. The fact that mosques are permitted to use unlimited volumes does not mean that they will use unlimited volumes.

I looked it up, and the earliest sunrise is indeed 5:25 for Minneapolis. But is the so-called "call to prayer" broadcast (at unlimited volume) right an sunrise or maybe at twilight? According to this, the "Fajr" prayer occurs about an hour and a half before sunrise. That would put it before 4am around the Summer Solstice, which is why the ordinance set 3:30 as cutoff. But even 5:25am is still way too early to wake up regular people just so some Muslims do not have to set their alarm.
You have no idea whether the call to prayer will wake up "regular people" or not. And who do mean by "regular people"?

And why would you think that Muslims use these calls to prayer to wake up? A Muslim who is going to prayer is already up in order to get to call to prayer. The call to prayer is not meant to awaken people from slumber but to get them to come to the mosque. It is an invitation, just like church bells are invitations or reminders that the service is starting.


Derec said:
Church bells are not amplified. ...
Electronic church bells are amplified. And some regular bells are pretty loud.

Derec said:
First Amendment is not at issue here...
Of course it is. Are you under the inane view that people or local gov'ts only act to insure that their laws and practices are constitutional if they are sued?

Derec said:
Third, according to the newspaper reports, there was no organized opposition to this change. Making a city more welcoming to its citizens is a good thing, regardless of their ethnicity or religion.
Minneapolis city council is very left wing, and the contemporary left is very Islamophilic.
Re being "welcoming". To the point of making it less welcoming to the non-Muslim majority of its citizens? How is using an alarm some unreasonable restriction of the Muslim religion?
As I said, there was no reported organized opposition which suggests to a careful reader and reasoner that the citizenry of Minneapolis is not upset with this at all. You have presented no evidence that suggests this change is makes Minneapolis less welcoming to the non-Muslim citizens.

As to your last question, are you implying that Minneapolis require Muslims to use alarms to help them to go to prayer? If so, that is truly inane.

If not, then it is simply a non-sequitur. The call to prayer is more than simply an announcement - it is part of the religious practices. I am not an expert on Islam, but I do know that some adherents believe it is mandated by Allah.


Derec} It is a local matter said:
scheme of things".
It is local. Apparently, it is trivial to the citizens of Minneapolis if there is no organized opposition.
BTW - you misused [sic} because there was no grammatical error.

Derec said:
Frankly, I think a bigger issue is the underlying bigotry that drives such an OP and its corrosive effect on our civic and social lives.
To you and your "ilk", any criticism of Islam is "bigoted".
You are mistaken for a variety of reasons. First, your bigoted OP is not a criticism of Islam but of the Minneapolis city council changing the noise ordnance. Second, there are significant reasons to criticize any religion (which, includes Islam). Third, the OP veers around whining about CAIR and Bill Clinton's policy on immigration that has nothing whatsoever to do with the change in the noise ordnance.
 
Last edited:
I think the problem here is historical Christian favoritism by so-called infidels. To review--in US, church bells became a thing in colonial settlements centuries ago to call people to prayer. In many places, including Minneapolis, church bell usage has continued, sometimes as a tradition, like, "aw, how cute" or "quaint." Towns may have their historic cred, too, linked to their 1700's or 1800's church bell still ringing at 6am, 9am, 12pm, 6pm, every hour, every fifteen minutes, or whatever.

You know, there will be a "yabut it's not when people are trying to sleep," but that isn't true. People sleep at different times. People work graveyard shifts. Even if not, 6am is earlier than many town noise ordinances and certainly every hour or 15 minutes is a noise problem. The principle here is alleged to be freedom _from_ religion. Do non-religious or non-Christians deserve freedom from noise pollution of Christians? Yes, but the kind of people complaining have chosen to tolerate it, like In God We Trust on coins or God in the pledge. Not enough people stood against it.

So, this created a precedent and a perception of bias, if not, outright actual bias. Only now once the Somalis want to make noise following their religious traditions, some people in far away places are like, "no you have to do it in the same time frame as Christians." But some Christian bells ring every hour...more common is 6am, 12pm, and 6pm. Certainly many people are asleep at 6am.

Here's a UK example of problems of Christian bell ringing:
Germany:

Switzerland:
Malta:
Pennsylvania:
Texas:
Illinois:

Searching for anecdotes in google, you can find many in the US. Where was the national outrage?

So, that means this sudden interest in religious noise pollution lacks credibility. But it's worse...because we've chosen to tolerate Christians we can't just suddenly start micro-raging about the darkies' religious noise. That's discrimination. Likely, that's the issue that some on the city council faced who considered opposition: either allow the Muslims to have their traditional religious summons, too, or get rid of noise pollution for everyone. For those who hadn't thought about opposing the change, they probably noted how Jewish and Christian leadership in Minneapolis were all in favor of the noise ordinance change.

If you are still micro-raging over this thing a thousand miles away because Teh Somalis!!!!11!, you can always ask the Church of Satan to start doing their calls to prayer, too. That will certainly increase opposition.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom