So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
call to prayer.

That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
late enough for the beginning of night.

There are these things called alarm clocks that faithful worshippers can
set, but then, they wouldn't be able to presume upon their neighbors.

Minneapolis becomes first major U.S. city to allow all five Muslim daily
prayer calls
A change to the city's noise ordinance ensures that the call to prayer,
or adhan, can be broadcast from speakers year-round, five times a day.
By Dave Orrick
Star Tribune
April 13, 2023 - 5:23pm
https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-just-became-the-first-major-u-s-city-to-allow-all-muslim-prayer-calls/600266786/

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 01:03:09 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
>The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
>call to prayer.
>
>That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
>not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
>late enough for the beginning of night.

How long before someone takes out the speakers? My guess is within the
first month if they really intend on starting at dawn when people are
still trying to sleep.

>There are these things called alarm clocks that faithful worshippers can
>set, but then, they wouldn't be able to presume upon their neighbors.
>
>Minneapolis becomes first major U.S. city to allow all five Muslim daily
>prayer calls
>A change to the city's noise ordinance ensures that the call to prayer,
>or adhan, can be broadcast from speakers year-round, five times a day.
>By Dave Orrick
>Star Tribune
>April 13, 2023 - 5:23pm
>https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-just-became-the-first-major-u-s-city-to-allow-all-muslim-prayer-calls/600266786/

On 2023-04-14 9:03 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
> The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
> call to prayer.
>
> That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
> not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
> late enough for the beginning of night.
>
> There are these things called alarm clocks that faithful worshippers can
> set, but then, they wouldn't be able to presume upon their neighbors.
>
> Minneapolis becomes first major U.S. city to allow all five Muslim daily
> prayer calls
> A change to the city's noise ordinance ensures that the call to prayer,
> or adhan, can be broadcast from speakers year-round, five times a day.
> By Dave Orrick
> Star Tribune
> April 13, 2023 - 5:23pm
> https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-just-became-the-first-major-u-s-city-to-allow-all-muslim-prayer-calls/600266786/

That is NOT going to be a popular measure.

Many years back when I was living in the co-op, I had a summer job on
the paint crew. One morning, still quite early, I was on an unfamiliar
floor and heard this caterwauling in a foreign language coming from one
of the rooms. At first I thought it was someone with a lousy singing
voice trying to sing along with a favourite song but some of the other
people on the same floor informed me that I was hearing a Muslim who
lived in that room doing his first prayers of the day. I'd heard that
Muslims prayed several times a day before but I'd never encountered it
before in person and was quite surprised that they prayed aloud; I had
previously assumed that they simply prayed in their heads. Let's just
say that this practice was NOT popular with the other people in earshot
of the individual praying!

If they actually allowed the call to prayer to be broadcast at any
mosque within earshot of where I was, I guarantee you that I would be
among those who protested. (I hope I would be just as outspoken if the
mosque was NOT within earshot.)

--
Rhino

On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 9:03:14 PM UTC-4, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> So

Religious imposition on public life, not just for Christians

https://www.google.com/search?q=4+billion+for+jewish+state

https://www.google.com/search?q=35+states+with+Anti+BDS+law

The defacto god of the Jews

https://www.google.com/search?q=The+defacto+god+of+the+Jews+state+of+israel

tags: https://www.google.com/search?q=bipartisan+support+Washington+Israel

----------

fuck-you kerman

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxRqSsd6oUk

On 2023-04-14 9:15 PM, shawn wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 01:03:09 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
>> The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
>> call to prayer.
>>
>> That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
>> not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
>> late enough for the beginning of night.
>
> How long before someone takes out the speakers? My guess is within the
> first month if they really intend on starting at dawn when people are
> still trying to sleep.
>
The exact times when the prayers are said vary from day to day and I
believe they vary depending on the latitude of the mosque. (A guy I knew
slightly from work had just come back from a stint working in Saudi
Arabia and gave me an English-language Saudi daily newspaper; I
distinctly remember that the time of prayers for the specific date of
that newspaper was published in much the way the weather forecast was.)
I suspect that prayer times can be VERY early indeed at some latitudes
and times of year!

According to this website, the first prayer today was just after 5 AM in
the Eastern time zone in southern Ontario but varies slightly from city
to city. Longitude may also be a factor because cities towards the east
pray somewhat earlier than those towards the west (Montreal, which is
just east of the Ontario border, had their first prayer at 4:42 AM while
Toronto's first prayer was 5:12 AM, a full half hour later.):

https://www.islamicreliefcanada.org/resources/prayer-times/est/#1615305519556-fcf7cc6e-5550

Given that the call to prayer must be at least slightly earlier than the
specific prayer times, any mosque that broadcasts its call over
loudspeakers is surely going to be broadcasting VERY early indeed!

The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
at all five prayer times!

I don't expect that many people are going to want to take the legal risk
of trying to disable the loudspeakers because they will surely get
charged with trespassing, vandalism and related offences. Any city that
has a big enough Muslim population to enact a bylaw allowing the
broadcast of the call to prayer seems like to enforce the laws against
vandalism, trespass, etc. if anyone tries to tamper with the
loudspeakers, perhaps to the point of posting police at each mosque to
preclude tampering with the loudspeakers.

It's going to be interesting to see how the non-Muslim community
responds to the calls to prayer! I'm hoping to see a peaceful but
creative effort in scrapping this bylaw. Hmm. How about putting a truck
with a loudspeaker in front of each mosque that broadcasts sermons from
the Jewish faith? Or parking food trucks that sell only pork products?
Or organizing dog walkers to walk in circles around the mosque during
the call to prayer? (Muslims apparently have a pathological hatred for
dogs.) Naturally, I'd also expect to see considerable political
agitation for a repeal of that bylaw as various candidates for mayor and
city council declare themselves for or against such a repeal....

>> There are these things called alarm clocks that faithful worshippers can
>> set, but then, they wouldn't be able to presume upon their neighbors.
>>
>> Minneapolis becomes first major U.S. city to allow all five Muslim daily
>> prayer calls
>> A change to the city's noise ordinance ensures that the call to prayer,
>> or adhan, can be broadcast from speakers year-round, five times a day.
>> By Dave Orrick
>> Star Tribune
>> April 13, 2023 - 5:23pm
>> https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-just-became-the-first-major-u-s-city-to-allow-all-muslim-prayer-calls/600266786/

--
Rhino

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 11:08:22 AM UTC-4, chromebook test wrote:
> On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 9:03:14 PM UTC-4, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> > So

Needed that 2nd cup of java before posting, so post deleted.

Let's be nice to each other and respectful.

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:27:37 -0400, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>According to this website, the first prayer today was just after 5 AM in
>the Eastern time zone in southern Ontario but varies slightly from city
>to city. Longitude may also be a factor because cities towards the east
>pray somewhat earlier than those towards the west (Montreal, which is
>just east of the Ontario border, had their first prayer at 4:42 AM while
>Toronto's first prayer was 5:12 AM, a full half hour later.):
>
>https://www.islamicreliefcanada.org/resources/prayer-times/est/#1615305519556-fcf7cc6e-5550

Given Saudi Arabia is one of the few places that does NOT use Standard
time (which was a Canadian invention as you probably know) but rather
uses Solar time - that would explain the time differences between
their practices in Toronto vs Montreal.

>Given that the call to prayer must be at least slightly earlier than the
>specific prayer times, any mosque that broadcasts its call over
>loudspeakers is surely going to be broadcasting VERY early indeed!

I understand that in near 100% Muslim areas - but it's unacceptable in
areas where they're a small minority.

Incidentally while in Hong Kong I noticed several hotels with a small
(about 4" round) brass plaque on the window sill with an arrow
pointing towards Mecca. At least one of these was in a hostel operated
by the Catholic church so I suppose it was done for commercial
reasons.

>The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>at all five prayer times!

Local churches often DO open their windows during their services in
summer - but then locals tend to be OK with that given they DON'T use
amplifiers and when they make little noise 6 days a week and never
open the windows after dark.

>It's going to be interesting to see how the non-Muslim community
>responds to the calls to prayer! I'm hoping to see a peaceful but
>creative effort in scrapping this bylaw. Hmm. How about putting a truck
>with a loudspeaker in front of each mosque that broadcasts sermons from
>the Jewish faith? Or parking food trucks that sell only pork products?
>Or organizing dog walkers to walk in circles around the mosque during
>the call to prayer? (Muslims apparently have a pathological hatred for
>dogs.) Naturally, I'd also expect to see considerable political
>agitation for a repeal of that bylaw as various candidates for mayor and
>city council declare themselves for or against such a repeal....

Around here the usual suspects would cry "Hatred! Islamophobia!" in
near record time.

>>> There are these things called alarm clocks that faithful worshippers can
>>> set, but then, they wouldn't be able to presume upon their neighbors.

Very good point - particularly since most newspapers publish sunrise
and sunset with their weather reports as does Microsoft in their
weather app. I understand that the muzzein was needed 1200 years ago
to get the word out but nott today.

>>> Minneapolis becomes first major U.S. city to allow all five Muslim daily
>>> prayer calls
>>> A change to the city's noise ordinance ensures that the call to prayer,
>>> or adhan, can be broadcast from speakers year-round, five times a day.

Few people would complain about an unamplified call.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:27:37 -0400, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:

>>According to this website, the first prayer today was just after 5 AM in
>>the Eastern time zone in southern Ontario but varies slightly from city
>>to city. Longitude may also be a factor because cities towards the east
>>pray somewhat earlier than those towards the west (Montreal, which is
>>just east of the Ontario border, had their first prayer at 4:42 AM while
>>Toronto's first prayer was 5:12 AM, a full half hour later.):

>>https://www.islamicreliefcanada.org/resources/prayer-times/est/#1615305519556-fcf7cc6e-5550

>Given Saudi Arabia is one of the few places that does NOT use Standard
>time (which was a Canadian invention as you probably know) but rather
>uses Solar time - that would explain the time differences between
>their practices in Toronto vs Montreal.

Standard time was adopted by railroads in Chicago in 1883! Sandford Fleming
did not attend. The longitude through Greenwich was adopted as the prime
meridian at the conference at Washington DC in 1884 but this conference
didn't adopt standard time.

I just looked it up. I'd forgotten that the worldwide adoption of the prime
meridian should have happened first, but didn't.

Saudi Arabia adopted Standard Time in 1968. Arabia Standard Time is
+3; there is no daylight saving time for commercial purposes, with the
following exceptions. Daylight time is observed at specific oil production
and oil pipeline facilities.

Previously, because the day in the Islamic calendar starts at sunset the
night before, clocks were set to 12 at sunset. That's just too literal.

To better match with Europe, the clocks were set at 6 at sunset, but
that does nothing about the seasonal variance. Standard time sure makes
life simpler.

>>Given that the call to prayer must be at least slightly earlier than the
>>specific prayer times, any mosque that broadcasts its call over
>>loudspeakers is surely going to be broadcasting VERY early indeed!

>I understand that in near 100% Muslim areas - but it's unacceptable in
>areas where they're a small minority.

Not everyone is observant. Given intolerance, they say nothing about
their objections.

>. . .

On Apr 14, 2023 at 6:15:09 PM PDT, "shawn" <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 01:03:09 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
>> The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
>> call to prayer.
>>
>> That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
>> not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
>> late enough for the beginning of night.
>
> How long before someone takes out the speakers? My guess is within the
> first month if they really intend on starting at dawn when people are
> still trying to sleep.

I lived in Riyadh as a kid for about four years. Believe me, this is no small
annoyance. When we finally moved back to the States and I was able to sleep
past 5:30AM for the first time without having some guy's moaning voice
blasting through the house, I was in heaven.

On Apr 15, 2023 at 8:27:37 AM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:

> On 2023-04-14 9:15 PM, shawn wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 01:03:09 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
>>> The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
>>> call to prayer.
>>>
>>> That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
>>> not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
>>> late enough for the beginning of night.
>>
>> How long before someone takes out the speakers? My guess is within the
>> first month if they really intend on starting at dawn when people are
>> still trying to sleep.
>>
> Given that the call to prayer must be at least slightly earlier than the
> specific prayer times, any mosque that broadcasts its call over
> loudspeakers is surely going to be broadcasting VERY early indeed!

People should make sure to set up relay speakers outside the homes of every
member of the Minneapolis city council to ensure they enjoy the same cultural
enrichment they're forcing on everyone else in the city.

On Apr 15, 2023 at 9:41:58 AM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>> It's going to be interesting to see how the non-Muslim community
>> responds to the calls to prayer!
>
> The vote on the city council was unanimous (the one absent member said
> he favored it), so clearly the voters want this. Don't ask me why.

Yes, and the votes on the L.A. City Council to allow the vagrants to foul the
city are also unanimous, yet the polls show people are overwhelmingly sick of
the vagrant encampments.

If you have a better explanation than Helsinki Syndrome as to why people who
hate something keep voting for the people who are imposing it on them, I'm all
ears.

On Apr 15, 2023 at 11:30:50 AM PDT, "The Horny Goat" <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:27:37 -0400, Rhino
> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>> The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>> early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>> early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>> the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>> at all five prayer times!
>
> Local churches often DO open their windows during their services in
> summer - but then locals tend to be OK with that given they DON'T use
> amplifiers and when they make little noise 6 days a week and never
> open the windows after dark.

This Muslim prayer call issue came up in a Texas town just outside of Dallas
about 10 years ago, where a local mosque started in with the constant
highly-amplified wailing five time a day. The city outlawed it and stood their
ground under threat of lawsuit by the ACLU. The only concession they had to
make was to also ban one of the local churches from ringing their church bells
on Sunday mornings so that they treated all religions equally.

On Apr 15, 2023 at 7:55:29 AM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:

> On 2023-04-14 9:03 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
>> The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
>> call to prayer.
>>
>> That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
>> not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
>> late enough for the beginning of night.
>>
>> There are these things called alarm clocks that faithful worshippers can
>> set, but then, they wouldn't be able to presume upon their neighbors.
>>
>> Minneapolis becomes first major U.S. city to allow all five Muslim daily
>> prayer calls
>> A change to the city's noise ordinance ensures that the call to prayer,
>> or adhan, can be broadcast from speakers year-round, five times a day.
>> By Dave Orrick
>> Star Tribune
>> April 13, 2023 - 5:23pm
>>
>> https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-just-became-the-first-major-u-s-city-to-allow-all-muslim-prayer-calls/600266786/
>
> That is NOT going to be a popular measure.
>
> Many years back when I was living in the co-op, I had a summer job on
> the paint crew. One morning, still quite early, I was on an unfamiliar
> floor and heard this caterwauling in a foreign language coming from one
> of the rooms. At first I thought it was someone with a lousy singing
> voice trying to sing along with a favourite song but some of the other
> people on the same floor informed me that I was hearing a Muslim who
> lived in that room doing his first prayers of the day. I'd heard that
> Muslims prayed several times a day before but I'd never encountered it
> before in person and was quite surprised that they prayed aloud; I had
> previously assumed that they simply prayed in their heads. Let's just
> say that this practice was NOT popular with the other people in earshot
> of the individual praying!

At least Minneapolis isn't allowing the Muslims to interrupt all the TV
broadcasts with the daily prayer. They did that in Saudi Arabia when I lived
there.

Maybe that'll be next-- they'll give the Muslims access to the same system
that completely hijacks my DVR during weather alerts and won't let me change
channels, watch recorded programs, or even turn the TV off.

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>On Apr 15, 2023 at 9:41:58 AM PDT, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>>>It's going to be interesting to see how the non-Muslim community
>>>responds to the calls to prayer!

>>The vote on the city council was unanimous (the one absent member said
>>he favored it), so clearly the voters want this. Don't ask me why.

>Yes, and the votes on the L.A. City Council to allow the vagrants to foul the
>city are also unanimous, yet the polls show people are overwhelmingly sick of
>the vagrant encampments.

I'm in favor of relocating the camps to the front lawn of each
politician that voted "yes", as you suggested for the loudspeakers.

>If you have a better explanation than Helsinki Syndrome as to why people who
>hate something keep voting for the people who are imposing it on them, I'm all
>ears.

Voters are STOOPID.

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>Apr 15, 2023 at 11:30:50 AM PDT, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:27:37 -0400, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:

>>>The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>>>early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>>>early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>>>the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>>>at all five prayer times!

>>Local churches often DO open their windows during their services in
>>summer - but then locals tend to be OK with that given they DON'T use
>>amplifiers and when they make little noise 6 days a week and never
>>open the windows after dark.

>This Muslim prayer call issue came up in a Texas town just outside of
>Dallas about 10 years ago, where a local mosque started in with the
>constant highly-amplified wailing five time a day. The city outlawed it
>and stood their ground under threat of lawsuit by the ACLU. The only
>concession they had to make was to also ban one of the local churches
>from ringing their church bells on Sunday mornings so that they treated
>all religions equally.

Where are the federal courts on this issue with respect to the free
exercise clause? Do I have a civil right to free exercise of religion
NOT to be subjected to someone else's free exercise of religion? Do I
have the right to be left alone?

Lehman v. Shaker Heights (1974), which is still the law, isn't directly
applicable. It's the case that justified arrests of Hare Krishnas in
airports who were prosyletizing.

But these loudspeakers are on the property of a religious congregation,
or attached to poles with permission. The people affected by the
nuisance aren't just in the public way (where if they object, their
civil rights may not be violated) but in offices and shops or even their
own homes, places that are not public forums.

It's interesting that moviePig hasn't chimed in.

On Apr 15, 2023 at 1:55:23 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>> Apr 15, 2023 at 11:30:50 AM PDT, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>> Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:27:37 -0400, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:
>
>>>> The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>>>> early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>>>> early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>>>> the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>>>> at all five prayer times!
>
>>> Local churches often DO open their windows during their services in
>>> summer - but then locals tend to be OK with that given they DON'T use
>>> amplifiers and when they make little noise 6 days a week and never
>>> open the windows after dark.
>
>> This Muslim prayer call issue came up in a Texas town just outside of
>> Dallas about 10 years ago, where a local mosque started in with the
>> constant highly-amplified wailing five time a day. The city outlawed it
>> and stood their ground under threat of lawsuit by the ACLU. The only
>> concession they had to make was to also ban one of the local churches
>> from ringing their church bells on Sunday mornings so that they treated
>> all religions equally.
>
> Where are the federal courts on this issue with respect to the free
> exercise clause? Do I have a civil right to free exercise of religion
> NOT to be subjected to someone else's free exercise of religion? Do I
> have the right to be left alone?
>
> Lehman v. Shaker Heights (1974), which is still the law, isn't directly
> applicable. It's the case that justified arrests of Hare Krishnas in
> airports who were prosyletizing.
>
> But these loudspeakers are on the property of a religious congregation,
> or attached to poles with permission. The people affected by the
> nuisance aren't just in the public way (where if they object, their
> civil rights may not be violated) but in offices and shops or even their
> own homes, places that are not public forums.
>
> It's interesting that moviePig hasn't chimed in.

I shudder to imagine his 1st Amendment analysis here.

On 4/15/23 3:27 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Apr 14, 2023 at 6:15:09 PM PDT, "shawn" <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 01:03:09 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
>>> The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
>>> call to prayer.
>>>
>>> That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
>>> not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
>>> late enough for the beginning of night.
>>
>> How long before someone takes out the speakers? My guess is within the
>> first month if they really intend on starting at dawn when people are
>> still trying to sleep.
>
> I lived in Riyadh as a kid for about four years. Believe me, this is no small
> annoyance. When we finally moved back to the States and I was able to sleep
> past 5:30AM for the first time without having some guy's moaning voice
> blasting through the house, I was in heaven.

Until you reached puberty when it became common again.

On 4/15/23 4:04 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Apr 15, 2023 at 1:55:23 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>> Apr 15, 2023 at 11:30:50 AM PDT, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>>> Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:27:37 -0400, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:
>>
>>>>> The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>>>>> early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>>>>> early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>>>>> the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>>>>> at all five prayer times!
>>
>>>> Local churches often DO open their windows during their services in
>>>> summer - but then locals tend to be OK with that given they DON'T use
>>>> amplifiers and when they make little noise 6 days a week and never
>>>> open the windows after dark.
>>
>>> This Muslim prayer call issue came up in a Texas town just outside of
>>> Dallas about 10 years ago, where a local mosque started in with the
>>> constant highly-amplified wailing five time a day. The city outlawed it
>>> and stood their ground under threat of lawsuit by the ACLU. The only
>>> concession they had to make was to also ban one of the local churches
>>> from ringing their church bells on Sunday mornings so that they treated
>>> all religions equally.
>>
>> Where are the federal courts on this issue with respect to the free
>> exercise clause? Do I have a civil right to free exercise of religion
>> NOT to be subjected to someone else's free exercise of religion? Do I
>> have the right to be left alone?
>>
>> Lehman v. Shaker Heights (1974), which is still the law, isn't directly
>> applicable. It's the case that justified arrests of Hare Krishnas in
>> airports who were prosyletizing.
>>
>> But these loudspeakers are on the property of a religious congregation,
>> or attached to poles with permission. The people affected by the
>> nuisance aren't just in the public way (where if they object, their
>> civil rights may not be violated) but in offices and shops or even their
>> own homes, places that are not public forums.
>>
>> It's interesting that moviePig hasn't chimed in.
>
> I shudder to imagine his 1st Amendment analysis here.

No you don't. You scurry like a rat when I post though. Just how I
like it.

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>On 2023-04-14 9:15 PM, shawn wrote:
>>On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 01:03:09 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

>>>So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
>>>The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
>>>call to prayer.

>>>That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
>>>not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
>>>late enough for the beginning of night.

>>How long before someone takes out the speakers? My guess is within the
>>first month if they really intend on starting at dawn when people are
>>still trying to sleep.

>The exact times when the prayers are said vary from day to day and I
>believe they vary depending on the latitude of the mosque. . . .

Is the noon prayer at noon per the local time zone, or noon at midday
per a sundial?

>Given that the call to prayer must be at least slightly earlier than the
>specific prayer times, any mosque that broadcasts its call over
>loudspeakers is surely going to be broadcasting VERY early indeed!

>The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>at all five prayer times!

And you can't go to bed early before the sun completely sets and stars
are seen despite the obligation to pray at sunrise.

>I don't expect that many people are going to want to take the legal risk
>of trying to disable the loudspeakers because they will surely get
>charged with trespassing, vandalism and related offences.

Most states have laws against abuse of the elderly. That may be a
defense!

>Any city that has a big enough Muslim population to enact a bylaw
>allowing the broadcast of the call to prayer seems like to enforce the
>laws against vandalism, trespass, etc. if anyone tries to tamper with
>the loudspeakers, perhaps to the point of posting police at each mosque
>to preclude tampering with the loudspeakers.

Seems to me it's a violation of the Establishment Clause and NOT
mandated in the free-exercise clause, which DOES NOT protect religious
practice that negatively impacts everybody else.

But I don't know if I can say that my free exercise means I'm not
subject to this nuisance.

>It's going to be interesting to see how the non-Muslim community
>responds to the calls to prayer!

The vote on the city council was unanimous (the one absent member said
he favored it), so clearly the voters want this. Don't ask me why.

>I'm hoping to see a peaceful but creative effort in scrapping this
>bylaw. Hmm. How about putting a truck with a loudspeaker in front of
>each mosque that broadcasts sermons from the Jewish faith? . . .

You don't want prosyletizing, which has entirely undesireable outcomes.

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> On 2023-04-14 9:03 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
>> The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
>> call to prayer.
>>
>> That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
>> not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
>> late enough for the beginning of night.
>>
>> There are these things called alarm clocks that faithful worshippers can
>> set, but then, they wouldn't be able to presume upon their neighbors.
>>
>> Minneapolis becomes first major U.S. city to allow all five Muslim daily
>> prayer calls
>> A change to the city's noise ordinance ensures that the call to prayer,
>> or adhan, can be broadcast from speakers year-round, five times a day.
>> By Dave Orrick
>> Star Tribune
>> April 13, 2023 - 5:23pm
>> https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-just-became-the-first-major-u-s-city-to-allow-all-muslim-prayer-calls/600266786/
>
> That is NOT going to be a popular measure.
>
> Many years back when I was living in the co-op, I had a summer job on
> the paint crew. One morning, still quite early, I was on an unfamiliar
> floor and heard this caterwauling in a foreign language coming from one
> of the rooms. At first I thought it was someone with a lousy singing
> voice trying to sing along with a favourite song but some of the other
> people on the same floor informed me that I was hearing a Muslim who
> lived in that room doing his first prayers of the day. I'd heard that
> Muslims prayed several times a day before but I'd never encountered it
> before in person and was quite surprised that they prayed aloud; I had
> previously assumed that they simply prayed in their heads. Let's just
> say that this practice was NOT popular with the other people in earshot
> of the individual praying!
>
> If they actually allowed the call to prayer to be broadcast at any
> mosque within earshot of where I was, I guarantee you that I would be
> among those who protested. (I hope I would be just as outspoken if the
> mosque was NOT within earshot.)
>

A friend of mine at MIT lived in a dorm that had multiple bedrooms with a
common living room and kitchen. Their Muslim roommate had flunked out and
lost his privileges to a bedroom, but he just moved into the kitchen and
slept on the floor, even though he wasn’t going to school anymore. Aside
from the unbearable, stench of sweat and curry. They, of course, had to put
up with his caterwauling (that’s exactly the word for it) several times a
day. They couldn’t get the school to throw him out. We offered to toss him
out a window for her, but she was getting married that weekend and wouldn’t
be living there any longer anyway. Since he was now in the country
illegally, I suspect somebody might have reported him to INS.

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

On 2023-04-15 2:25 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-04-15 12:41 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2023-04-14 9:15 PM, shawn wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 01:03:09 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:
>>>
>>>>>> So, the Minneapolis city council has lifted the ordinance banning noise.
>>>>>> The purpose is to allow loudspeakers to be set up to sound the Muslim
>>>>>> call to prayer.
>>>
>>>>>> That would be five times a day. They've already been allowing them but
>>>>>> not before 7 am, which isn't early enough for dawn, and not necessarily
>>>>>> late enough for the beginning of night.
>>>
>>>>> How long before someone takes out the speakers? My guess is within the
>>>>> first month if they really intend on starting at dawn when people are
>>>>> still trying to sleep.
>>>
>>>> The exact times when the prayers are said vary from day to day and I
>>>> believe they vary depending on the latitude of the mosque. . . .
>>>
>>> Is the noon prayer at noon per the local time zone, or noon at midday
>>> per a sundial?
>>>
>> The link I posted shows the times for all five prayers, plus sunrise.
>> The prayer that is closest to noon is the second one but Montreal had it
>> at 12:55 today and Toronto had it at 1:19; I'm not sure those constitute
>> "lunch time" given that people eat their lunches at various times.
>>
>>>> Given that the call to prayer must be at least slightly earlier than the
>>>> specific prayer times, any mosque that broadcasts its call over
>>>> loudspeakers is surely going to be broadcasting VERY early indeed!
>>>
>>>> The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>>>> early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>>>> early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>>>> the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>>>> at all five prayer times!
>>>
>>> And you can't go to bed early before the sun completely sets and stars
>>> are seen despite the obligation to pray at sunrise.
>>>
>> Good luck seeing the stars on a cloudy day or within a city due to light
>> pollution....
>>
>>>> I don't expect that many people are going to want to take the legal risk
>>>> of trying to disable the loudspeakers because they will surely get
>>>> charged with trespassing, vandalism and related offences.
>>>
>>> Most states have laws against abuse of the elderly. That may be a
>>> defense!
>>>
>> I'd certainly give that a try as one strategy against this nonsense.
>>
>>>> Any city that has a big enough Muslim population to enact a bylaw
>>>> allowing the broadcast of the call to prayer seems like to enforce the
>>>> laws against vandalism, trespass, etc. if anyone tries to tamper with
>>>> the loudspeakers, perhaps to the point of posting police at each mosque
>>>> to preclude tampering with the loudspeakers.
>>>
>>> Seems to me it's a violation of the Establishment Clause and NOT
>>> mandated in the free-exercise clause, which DOES NOT protect religious
>>> practice that negatively impacts everybody else.
>>>
>>> But I don't know if I can say that my free exercise means I'm not
>>> subject to this nuisance.
>>>
>> It will be interesting to read the decisions of the various courts that
>> weigh in on this....
>>
>>>> It's going to be interesting to see how the non-Muslim community
>>>> responds to the calls to prayer!
>>>
>>> The vote on the city council was unanimous (the one absent member said
>>> he favored it), so clearly the voters want this. Don't ask me why.
>>>
>> They were threatened with beheading if they didn't support it?
>>
>>>> I'm hoping to see a peaceful but creative effort in scrapping this
>>>> bylaw. Hmm. How about putting a truck with a loudspeaker in front of
>>>> each mosque that broadcasts sermons from the Jewish faith? . . .
>>>
>>> You don't want prosyletizing, which has entirely undesireable outcomes.
>
>> It might be hard to label this as prosyletizing;
>
> You proposed Jewish prosyletizing. I'm pointing out one enormous and
> unintended consequence to that.

Okay, fair enough, that suggestion was not as carefully considered as it
should have been ;-) Still, you have to admit it would drive the Muslims
absolutely NUTS, although probably not in a way that would discourage
them broadcasting their call to prayer. (I'd be more concerned about a
violent act against a Jewish target....)
>> if I was a Muslim, I'd insist it was just a community service for existing
>> Muslims, not an attempt to recruit others.
>
> It's a way of loudly proclaiming Islam as the superior religion and
> that, five times a day, it's the most important aspect of the community.
>
Just wait until the Muslims demand that non-Muslims in Minneapolis pay
the jizyah to prove that they really are "respectful" of Muslims. (The
jizyah, as you may know, is the tax that non-Muslims are allowed to pay
in some Muslim countries to prove that they are submissive to the Muslim
majority.)
>> . . .

--
Rhino

On 2023-04-15 4:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Apr 15, 2023 at 9:41:58 AM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It's going to be interesting to see how the non-Muslim community
>>> responds to the calls to prayer!
>>
>> The vote on the city council was unanimous (the one absent member said
>> he favored it), so clearly the voters want this. Don't ask me why.
>
> Yes, and the votes on the L.A. City Council to allow the vagrants to foul the
> city are also unanimous, yet the polls show people are overwhelmingly sick of
> the vagrant encampments.
>
> If you have a better explanation than Helsinki Syndrome as to why people who
> hate something keep voting for the people who are imposing it on them, I'm all
> ears.
>
How about the strong likelihood that the politicians are
virtue-signallers who think that those signals are going to win them
mass approval and help insure their re-election and even help pave the
way to higher offices?

How many of the LA councillors who voted to allow the homeless
encampments got re-elected in the last elections? I know that Mike Bonin
chose not to run again and Garcetti didn't run for mayor again (due to
term limits??) but what about the rest?

And how's the new mayor working out? Any sign that the mayor or council
has learned ANYTHING from the disaster of these encampments?

--
Rhino

On 2023-04-15 4:38 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Apr 15, 2023 at 11:30:50 AM PDT, "The Horny Goat" <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:27:37 -0400, Rhino
>> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>>> early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>>> early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>>> the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>>> at all five prayer times!
>>
>> Local churches often DO open their windows during their services in
>> summer - but then locals tend to be OK with that given they DON'T use
>> amplifiers and when they make little noise 6 days a week and never
>> open the windows after dark.
>
> This Muslim prayer call issue came up in a Texas town just outside of Dallas
> about 10 years ago, where a local mosque started in with the constant
> highly-amplified wailing five time a day. The city outlawed it and stood their
> ground under threat of lawsuit by the ACLU. The only concession they had to
> make was to also ban one of the local churches from ringing their church bells
> on Sunday mornings so that they treated all religions equally.
>
>
That sounds like a very reasonable compromise.

Maybe the people of Minneapolis who AREN'T Muslim should ring church
bells multiple times a day, every day, and see if the Muslims can't see
the merit in not broadcasting their call to prayer over loudspeakers in
exchange for the churches not ringing their bells?

--
Rhino

On 2023-04-15 2:30 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:27:37 -0400, Rhino
> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>> According to this website, the first prayer today was just after 5 AM in
>> the Eastern time zone in southern Ontario but varies slightly from city
>> to city. Longitude may also be a factor because cities towards the east
>> pray somewhat earlier than those towards the west (Montreal, which is
>> just east of the Ontario border, had their first prayer at 4:42 AM while
>> Toronto's first prayer was 5:12 AM, a full half hour later.):
>>
>> https://www.islamicreliefcanada.org/resources/prayer-times/est/#1615305519556-fcf7cc6e-5550
>
> Given Saudi Arabia is one of the few places that does NOT use Standard
> time (which was a Canadian invention as you probably know) but rather
> uses Solar time - that would explain the time differences between
> their practices in Toronto vs Montreal.
>
>> Given that the call to prayer must be at least slightly earlier than the
>> specific prayer times, any mosque that broadcasts its call over
>> loudspeakers is surely going to be broadcasting VERY early indeed!
>
> I understand that in near 100% Muslim areas - but it's unacceptable in
> areas where they're a small minority.
>
> Incidentally while in Hong Kong I noticed several hotels with a small
> (about 4" round) brass plaque on the window sill with an arrow
> pointing towards Mecca. At least one of these was in a hostel operated
> by the Catholic church so I suppose it was done for commercial
> reasons.
>
>> The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>> early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>> early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>> the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>> at all five prayer times!
>
> Local churches often DO open their windows during their services in
> summer - but then locals tend to be OK with that given they DON'T use
> amplifiers and when they make little noise 6 days a week and never
> open the windows after dark.
>
>> It's going to be interesting to see how the non-Muslim community
>> responds to the calls to prayer! I'm hoping to see a peaceful but
>> creative effort in scrapping this bylaw. Hmm. How about putting a truck
>> with a loudspeaker in front of each mosque that broadcasts sermons from
>> the Jewish faith? Or parking food trucks that sell only pork products?
>> Or organizing dog walkers to walk in circles around the mosque during
>> the call to prayer? (Muslims apparently have a pathological hatred for
>> dogs.) Naturally, I'd also expect to see considerable political
>> agitation for a repeal of that bylaw as various candidates for mayor and
>> city council declare themselves for or against such a repeal....
>
> Around here the usual suspects would cry "Hatred! Islamophobia!" in
> near record time.
>
>>>> There are these things called alarm clocks that faithful worshippers can
>>>> set, but then, they wouldn't be able to presume upon their neighbors.
>
> Very good point - particularly since most newspapers publish sunrise
> and sunset with their weather reports as does Microsoft in their
> weather app. I understand that the muzzein was needed 1200 years ago
> to get the word out but nott today.
>
+1000! Technology IS the answer to this problem. There must be an app
that tells Muslims what the prayer times are in their area (and if not,
it ought to be pretty easy to build one)!. Let them get notified by an
app or a text or a chain phone call. They don't NEED a muzzein today.

>>>> Minneapolis becomes first major U.S. city to allow all five Muslim daily
>>>> prayer calls
>>>> A change to the city's noise ordinance ensures that the call to prayer,
>>>> or adhan, can be broadcast from speakers year-round, five times a day.
>
> Few people would complain about an unamplified call.
>
Correct.

--
Rhino

On 2023-04-15 4:55 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>> Apr 15, 2023 at 11:30:50 AM PDT, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>> Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:27:37 -0400, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:
>
>>>> The last prayer of the day may be problematic for people who go to bed
>>>> early, like children or very old people or people that have to get up
>>>> early for a job that starts early. Shift workers that need to sleep in
>>>> the daytime would be completely screwed and might very well be re-woken
>>>> at all five prayer times!
>
>>> Local churches often DO open their windows during their services in
>>> summer - but then locals tend to be OK with that given they DON'T use
>>> amplifiers and when they make little noise 6 days a week and never
>>> open the windows after dark.
>
>> This Muslim prayer call issue came up in a Texas town just outside of
>> Dallas about 10 years ago, where a local mosque started in with the
>> constant highly-amplified wailing five time a day. The city outlawed it
>> and stood their ground under threat of lawsuit by the ACLU. The only
>> concession they had to make was to also ban one of the local churches
>>from ringing their church bells on Sunday mornings so that they treated
>> all religions equally.
>
> Where are the federal courts on this issue with respect to the free
> exercise clause? Do I have a civil right to free exercise of religion
> NOT to be subjected to someone else's free exercise of religion? Do I
> have the right to be left alone?
>
> Lehman v. Shaker Heights (1974), which is still the law, isn't directly
> applicable. It's the case that justified arrests of Hare Krishnas in
> airports who were prosyletizing.
>
> But these loudspeakers are on the property of a religious congregation,
> or attached to poles with permission. The people affected by the
> nuisance aren't just in the public way (where if they object, their
> civil rights may not be violated) but in offices and shops or even their
> own homes, places that are not public forums.
>
> It's interesting that moviePig hasn't chimed in.

He's busy praying to Allah.... ;-)
--
Rhino