Antwerp wants to give the half full churches to Muslims for Mosques

The Antwerp alderman of public worship, Philip Heylen (Christian Democrats) has an ambitious plan to do something about the profusion of half-empty churches in his city. Some of the about 80 churches he wants to demolish or use for other purposes. Heylen also sees an opportunity for Muslims to take over barely used church buildings.

Vlaams Belang reacted with shock to the plans. According to the party there seems to be an auction war in Antwerp between the Christian Democrats and Socialists on who could bring in the largest group of Muslim voters.

The party promises the necessary actions and campaigns if the alderman pushes through his plans. Vlaams Belang does think there should be a solution for the high maintenance costs of the Catholic churches in the city.

http://shariahfinancewatch.wordpres...he-half-full-churches-to-muslims-for-mosques/

 

I hope people understand the real issue here.

The government should not be in ownership of private property, certainly religious private property.

If the churches cannot sustain themselves, then they will be sold off. But for the state to arbitrarily decide whose place of worship gets amalgamated with another is silly, it's ridiculous.

 

Yes, I agree with you ,that the topic maybe is not the right one picked for this news. The churches are buildings , as other buildings they are private property . If those churches can not sustain themself, they will be sold, and anyone can buy and use it as he wants, or just make it mosque. No one is going to take churches and give them to muslims in Antwerp. But the fact is that those churches are loosing their followers. And there is a demand for mosques in that city. I would prefer build new mosques instead of using church buildings, if it possible ( if goverment letting building new mosques)

 

The good thing about mosques, is that they can be anywhere, and any kind of building.

 

Compared to?

 

Various temples of other religions.

A mosque is not dependent on certain fixtures or antiquities. I've even seen Mosques without an Imam leading prayers.

 

But is that different than other religions? I think most JW's meet in windowless "church" buildings and mormons have temples in different locations, but I am guessing that even those two rigged religions allow for other buildings to be used.

I personally have been to "church" in coffee shops, houses, business complexes and stadiums and everything else between. I guess I should say we had "church" on the dirt in the Dominican Republic as well.

The New Testament church is the people, not a building.

 

Oh, god, here we are again - a fresh cycle of declaring who is, and who isn't "true Christian." Fabulous.

 

By definition, private property is not owned by the goverment, religious or otherwise.

 

The christians could not maintain the churches for lack of donation etc. and they might have to sell the land. full stop.

Anybody can acquire the land i.e buy it from the christians. If the moslems wants it, they'll have to come up with bids that is satisfactory to all parties involved. No free lunch

 

Ok, I guess I am speaking in the sense of the props and pageantry of a modern church. I've seen mosques that were second story above a row of stores, basically a large room where people rotated in and out for Friday midday prayers. A carpeted room with nothing on the walls. Ultra plain. It could have been anywhere.

I'm somewhat familiar with this stuff but certainly no expert.

Right. But apparently in Antwerp, the central planners can decide which religion gets to use which church, allocating holy land like they would plan bus routes.

 

Can't help himself eh

 

Really? interesting.....

are you going to follow every post I make and comment about "true Christian" now? BTW, reread my post, nothing said like that.

I think I misspelled the word rigid.....

 

No, I'm not following you. I do wonder when the trashing of Mormons and JW's will stop, to be honest, so when I see "rigged religions," I will likely make a comment - if this is OK with you?

I will take your word for it, that you meant "rigid" but actually typed "rigged." Freud might not, but I will.

 

I actually typed it the way I thought it was spelled, but when you highlighted it, I realized it said rigged and thought crud... bad misspelling of a word. I actually had to google around to figure out what the word was that was in my head, I felt stupid when I finally figured it out, needless to say.

Although, you don't sound convinced, but for some reason you think I am a liar - seen on how you bantered me so long about how you read something different than that which I meant before. If you knew me in person, the one thing you would find about me is how much I value honesty, so you can imagine my frustration when I am being harassed when I know I am telling the truth.

 

Debunked, I am convinced. But beyond that, I'm just being a prick, and I'm wrong. I'm sorry.

 

OK, thanks. I really wish my vocabulary was better when speaking and writing. I understand a huge vocabulary, but when I go to use it, words evade me like the plague. Same with my Spanish, I can read quite a bit now, but if I try to speak it .....

 

There are more important things than a great vocabulary.

I know for myself that I also hunger for a mastery of the language. I just read folks who write better than I will ever hope to, and as their love for language seeps in to become my own, to whatever extent, some of it rubs off for me.

Peace, debunked.

 

Ziya, thank you for posting this. I wasn't aware of this news as I was abroad on 11th. As a Belgian, this concerns and worries me a lot, the never-ending Muslim (r)evolution in my own country and continent. As far as I'm aware, Antwerp is occupied territory. In fact, we already lost Antwerp...

One and a half/ 2 months ago, the news about the subject was quite different. The plan was to build new mosques to handle the invasion.

Muslims have been used during the last elections (especially the last one) to stop Vlaams Belang from continuing their series of victories since the early '90's.
The socialists imported an important number of "voters" to the Flemish capital to counter their political enemies.

Perhaps one day we will wake up and we'll have a prime minister whose name is Mohammed Ben Salami.

 

I am sorry , but Vlaams Belang, they sound like racist, and their block was forbidden and disbanded by court in past. In democratic country it must be normal if you will have a prime minister whose name is Mohammed Ben Salami. I dont think you will not let him because of a name or relgion as a France TV station did with a boy whose name was Islam