‹ First  < 2 3 4
 
   
 

It’s not about terrorists, it’s about theocracy

 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3164
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
25 July 2016 15:42
 
lynmc - 25 July 2016 02:40 PM
Celal - 25 July 2016 01:52 PM
lynmc - 25 July 2016 12:27 PM

(Celal)

Why not give an example of a secular democracy in an overwhelmingly Muslim country!  Can you, the lover of facts?

Great, another bigoted fool.

Explain following implications of your demand:
a) Why you think that the particular form of government people have (in this case, Muslims) has anything to do with what form of government people actually want?
b) Why you think that wanting a non-secular form of government is the same as wanting a theocracy?

BTW, Great Britain and Germany, and a number of other western countries, are not secular democracies.  Turkey is an overwhelmingly Muslim country that’s also a secular democracy.  The people of Great Britain and Germany seem perfectly happy with their god-ruled countries.

Both bigotry and being a fool often come from ignorance.

The only Muslim country example you came up with is Turkey.  You either do not understand secularism,  which is asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief OR haven’t clue about the country of Turkey. One or the other. Or both. Which is it?

Turkey isn’t secular.

This Government Agency called “Diyanet Isleri Baskanligi”, here is the website: You can click on the english version.

http://www.diyanet.gov.tr/

In charge of upkeep, maintenance, staffing, appointments of Imams, etc of more than 80,000 Mosques. Not just Islam. Sunni Islam. Minorities are persecuted or even killed. 

Do you think you will apologize for calling me a fool or a bigot? I suspect not.

By the very definition and fundamentals of Islam, there can never be a secular democracy. There never has been and there never will be. Islam practiced varies from executions in public squares or in the dark, dingy corners of the prisons after torture out of public eye.

You are the fool thinking after having a shish kebab, homous and tabooli at a Middle Eastern restaurant and chatting with Abdul, you know all about Islam.  smile

 

Nope, and I don’t know anyone named Abdul.  But obviously, you speak Turk (right).  Here is wikipedia on Turkey: Religion in Turkey.  It is officially secular since 1924, whether or not minorities are oppressed.  No state religion, even though the people may want one.  So I need make no apologies for calling you what you are, an ignorant fool and a bigot.

LOL. Just great!  Talking to a tourist. Dude - you believe everything that is claimed in wikipedia?  Never mind. You are a waste of internet ink.

 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  479
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
25 July 2016 16:01
 
Celal - 25 July 2016 03:42 PM
lynmc - 25 July 2016 02:40 PM
Celal - 25 July 2016 01:52 PM
lynmc - 25 July 2016 12:27 PM

(Celal)

Why not give an example of a secular democracy in an overwhelmingly Muslim country!  Can you, the lover of facts?

Great, another bigoted fool.

Explain following implications of your demand:
a) Why you think that the particular form of government people have (in this case, Muslims) has anything to do with what form of government people actually want?
b) Why you think that wanting a non-secular form of government is the same as wanting a theocracy?

BTW, Great Britain and Germany, and a number of other western countries, are not secular democracies.  Turkey is an overwhelmingly Muslim country that’s also a secular democracy.  The people of Great Britain and Germany seem perfectly happy with their god-ruled countries.

Both bigotry and being a fool often come from ignorance.

The only Muslim country example you came up with is Turkey.  You either do not understand secularism,  which is asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief OR haven’t clue about the country of Turkey. One or the other. Or both. Which is it?

Turkey isn’t secular.

This Government Agency called “Diyanet Isleri Baskanligi”, here is the website: You can click on the english version.

http://www.diyanet.gov.tr/

In charge of upkeep, maintenance, staffing, appointments of Imams, etc of more than 80,000 Mosques. Not just Islam. Sunni Islam. Minorities are persecuted or even killed. 

Do you think you will apologize for calling me a fool or a bigot? I suspect not.

By the very definition and fundamentals of Islam, there can never be a secular democracy. There never has been and there never will be. Islam practiced varies from executions in public squares or in the dark, dingy corners of the prisons after torture out of public eye.

You are the fool thinking after having a shish kebab, homous and tabooli at a Middle Eastern restaurant and chatting with Abdul, you know all about Islam.  :)

 

Nope, and I don’t know anyone named Abdul.  But obviously, you speak Turk (right).  Here is wikipedia on Turkey: Religion in Turkey.  It is officially secular since 1924, whether or not minorities are oppressed.  No state religion, even though the people may want one.  So I need make no apologies for calling you what you are, an ignorant fool and a bigot.

LOL. Just great!  Talking to a tourist. Dude - you believe everything that is claimed in wikipedia?  Never mind. You are a waste of internet ink.

Absolutely, I don’t believe everything in wikipedia, nevertheless, secularism in Turkey is supported by plenty of history texts, regardless of the direction they’re presently headed.  It was established by Turkey’s modern founder, Mustafa Ataturk, as anyone not determined to be ignorant could easily have discovered.  Well, it’s pretty hopeless, any attempt to enlighten ignorant fools.  I don’t know why I ever try.

 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3164
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
25 July 2016 21:45
 
lynmc - 25 July 2016 04:01 PM

Absolutely, I don’t believe everything in wikipedia, nevertheless, secularism in Turkey is supported by plenty of history texts, regardless of the direction they’re presently headed.  It was established by Turkey’s modern founder, Mustafa Ataturk, as anyone not determined to be ignorant could easily have discovered.  Well, it’s pretty hopeless, any attempt to enlighten ignorant fools.  I don’t know why I ever try.

You clearly do not understand what you read. The link I gave you was a Government site. You disregard the Turkish Gov site and go to a wikipedia written by “anyone”. It is absurd to dismiss the info of the Turkish Gov Site.

Here this one in English

http://www.diyanet.gov.tr/en/home


Never mind the wikipedia, here is an Middle East Magazine that provide the relevant info about Turkey.

http://www.meforum.org/2045/fethullah-gulens-grand-ambition?v=1362363401000?


“... Today, Turkey has over 85,000 active mosques, one for every 350 citizens—compared to one hospital for every 60,000 citizens—the highest number per capita in the world and, with 90,000 imams, more imams than doctors or teachers. It has thousands of madrasa-like Imam-Hatip schools and about four thousand more official state-run Qur’an courses, not counting the unofficial Qur’an schools, which may expand the total number tenfold. Spending by the governmental Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet I?leri Ba?kanl???) has grown five fold, from 553 trillion Turkish lira in 2002 (approximately US$325 million) to 2.7 quadrillion lira during the first four-and-a-half years of the AKP government; it has a larger budget than eight other ministries combined.[1] The Friday prayer attendance rate in Turkey’s mosques exceeds that of Iran’s, and religion classes teaching Sunni Islam are compulsory in public schools despite rulings against the practice by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the Turkish high court (Dan??tay).  Both Prime Minister Erdo?an and the Diyanet head Ali Bardako?lu criticized the rulings for failing to consult Islamic scholars.”


This was in 2009. It has only gotten worse.  The agency has the biggest budget and responsible for the cost of religious institutions, staffing, salaries, education, etc. So, your little wikipedia is wrong because the World is full of stupid people.  Turkey has NEVER been secular. The morons that confuse Turkey being secular and even teach it in academia as such because, Ottoman Empire had sharia laws. The founder abolished the sharia laws and established Turkish Constitution. It dissolved all of the district, regional religious authorities and consolidated them under a central institution called “Diyanet Isleri Baskanligi”.  It certainly does have an official religion called Islam. Sunni Islam.  Just because Turkey is not as bad as Saudi Arabia does not make it secular.

If you dont get this may be someone else will.

 
Poldano
 
Avatar
 
 
Poldano
Total Posts:  3333
Joined  26-01-2010
 
 
 
27 July 2016 01:30
 
Celal - 25 July 2016 09:45 PM

...

This was in 2009. It has only gotten worse.  The agency has the biggest budget and responsible for the cost of religious institutions, staffing, salaries, education, etc. So, your little wikipedia is wrong because the World is full of stupid people.  Turkey has NEVER been secular. The morons that confuse Turkey being secular and even teach it in academia as such because, Ottoman Empire had sharia laws. The founder abolished the sharia laws and established Turkish Constitution. It dissolved all of the district, regional religious authorities and consolidated them under a central institution called “Diyanet Isleri Baskanligi”.  It certainly does have an official religion called Islam. Sunni Islam.  Just because Turkey is not as bad as Saudi Arabia does not make it secular.

If you dont get this may be someone else will.

So, by this implied definition much of Europe is not secular, either. In England, the Church of England is the official (i.e., established or constitutionally privileged) religion, and the English head of state is titularly the head of that religion. In Scotland, the Church of Scotland, cognate with Presbyterianism in the U.S., is the official religion. Germany has two official religions, depending on administrative state (e.g., Bavaria), Lutheranism or Roman Catholicism. The Scandinavian countries are officially Lutheran to at least some extent. Poland is officially Roman Catholic.

I’d also like to point out that ignorance is not the same as stupidity. I was taught that Ataturk established a secular government in Turkey. I am not a moron simply because I did not see a need to question that. The insidious influence of religion on government is present regardless of the official status of that religion. Turkey seemed to have had relatively secular governments until Erdogan came along. His intent seems to be primarily that of restoring the dubious glory of the Ottoman Empire (i.e., a Turkish analog of Putin), so his actual personal attachment to Islam is likely to be at least as much Machiavellian as heartfelt. As Nietzsche said of politicians, they regard all other people as either rivals or tools.

 

 
 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3164
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
27 July 2016 07:55
 
Poldano - 27 July 2016 01:30 AM
Celal - 25 July 2016 09:45 PM

...

This was in 2009. It has only gotten worse.  The agency has the biggest budget and responsible for the cost of religious institutions, staffing, salaries, education, etc. So, your little wikipedia is wrong because the World is full of stupid people.  Turkey has NEVER been secular. The morons that confuse Turkey being secular and even teach it in academia as such because, Ottoman Empire had sharia laws. The founder abolished the sharia laws and established Turkish Constitution. It dissolved all of the district, regional religious authorities and consolidated them under a central institution called “Diyanet Isleri Baskanligi”.  It certainly does have an official religion called Islam. Sunni Islam.  Just because Turkey is not as bad as Saudi Arabia does not make it secular.

If you dont get this may be someone else will.

So, by this implied definition much of Europe is not secular, either. In England, the Church of England is the official (i.e., established or constitutionally privileged) religion, and the English head of state is titularly the head of that religion. In Scotland, the Church of Scotland, cognate with Presbyterianism in the U.S., is the official religion. Germany has two official religions, depending on administrative state (e.g., Bavaria), Lutheranism or Roman Catholicism. The Scandinavian countries are officially Lutheran to at least some extent. Poland is officially Roman Catholic.

I’d also like to point out that ignorance is not the same as stupidity. I was taught that Ataturk established a secular government in Turkey. I am not a moron simply because I did not see a need to question that. The insidious influence of religion on government is present regardless of the official status of that religion. Turkey seemed to have had relatively secular governments until Erdogan came along. His intent seems to be primarily that of restoring the dubious glory of the Ottoman Empire (i.e., a Turkish analog of Putin), so his actual personal attachment to Islam is likely to be at least as much Machiavellian as heartfelt. As Nietzsche said of politicians, they regard all other people as either rivals or tools.

Ref Church of England, here is their financial overview.

https://www.churchofengland.org/media/1886486/financialoverview.pdf

Income sources from donations, grants, fund raising, investment etc. Not from Government collected taxes.  There is no question that “Church of England” or other institutions in Europe have had historical burdens to overcome. Public very much knows that in the past, the monarch became the supreme governor of the state church and that title is symbolically held by the queen Elizabeth today.

Surely you aren’t comparing Queen Elizabeth of today as the head of Church of England to fatwa issuing head of the Turkish religious affairs?  I think not. If you do not address the spirit of the discussion, instead be stickler with the technicality, we would never get anywhere.

I do agree that ignorance is not the same as stupidity. My comment to the previous poster was about ignoring the Turkish Gov site and instead opting to use the Wikipedia. Now, that was stupid. Wont you agree?  I do understand why the west considered Turkey secular. Because “believe it or not” the term secular was in the Turkish constitution. Even I, growing up, thought it was secular. Question: Do fish know they are swimming in water?

Poldano, such is the nature of Muslim societies and the culture. They make claims and that make it so, though it is not.

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7686
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
27 July 2016 19:48
 

It seems quite a stretch to even roughly equate Islam’s role in Turkey to the CE’s role in England. Did I read that wrong?

 
 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3164
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
28 July 2016 09:51
 
icehorse - 27 July 2016 07:48 PM

It seems quite a stretch to even roughly equate Islam’s role in Turkey to the CE’s role in England. Did I read that wrong?

I’m afraid you read it correctly. Though, I never thought Poldano isnt intelligent, but as most westerners, he makes the common mistake of moral equivalence.  What he and many others don’t get is that different cultures using the same words but with opposite meanings. As a result concepts like mercy, justice, honor and duty are perverted to their opposite meanings. This is also why I think interfaith dialogue between Islam and Christianity is impossible because they dont use the same vocabulary. 

Honor - means something different in Islam
Mercy - means something different in Islam
Justice - means something different in Islam
Secular - means something different in Islam
Peace - means something different in Islam
etc -

I ask you how is communication possible if the words aren’t calibrated?

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7686
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
28 July 2016 10:20
 
Celal - 28 July 2016 09:51 AM
icehorse - 27 July 2016 07:48 PM

It seems quite a stretch to even roughly equate Islam’s role in Turkey to the CE’s role in England. Did I read that wrong?

I’m afraid you read it correctly. Though, I never thought Poldano isnt intelligent, but as most westerners, he makes the common mistake of moral equivalence.  What he and many others don’t get is that different cultures using the same words but with opposite meanings. As a result concepts like mercy, justice, honor and duty are perverted to their opposite meanings. This is also why I think interfaith dialogue between Islam and Christianity is impossible because they dont use the same vocabulary. 

Honor - means something different in Islam
Mercy - means something different in Islam
Justice - means something different in Islam
Secular - means something different in Islam
Peace - means something different in Islam
etc -

I ask you how is communication possible if the words aren’t calibrated?

Really interesting perspective. Could you give us quick Islamic definitions for these words, I think that would be really useful ?!

 
 
unsmoked
 
Avatar
 
 
unsmoked
Total Posts:  8683
Joined  20-02-2006
 
 
 
28 July 2016 11:48
 
GAD - 25 July 2016 08:30 AM
whiskey - 25 July 2016 01:08 AM

Different strokes for different folks, they say. And all that jazz. There has to be a way to help the religious see that they have been…bamboozled, for lack of a better term offhand.

No one has found a way yet…

Is it because most religious people want to be bamboozled?  For example, most religious people that I know expect to continue to be alive after they die.  To assure them that this is an advantage that humans have over every other form of life calls for cradle to the grave bamboozling.  Point out the effects of Alzheimer’s or some other common-sense observation about the brain and memory, or the wisdom of nature and new beginnings and the cry is, “Get behind me Satan!”  Time for another dose of bamboozling!

 
 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3164
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
28 July 2016 11:50
 
icehorse - 28 July 2016 10:20 AM
Celal - 28 July 2016 09:51 AM
icehorse - 27 July 2016 07:48 PM

It seems quite a stretch to even roughly equate Islam’s role in Turkey to the CE’s role in England. Did I read that wrong?

I’m afraid you read it correctly. Though, I never thought Poldano isnt intelligent, but as most westerners, he makes the common mistake of moral equivalence.  What he and many others don’t get is that different cultures using the same words but with opposite meanings. As a result concepts like mercy, justice, honor and duty are perverted to their opposite meanings. This is also why I think interfaith dialogue between Islam and Christianity is impossible because they dont use the same vocabulary. 

Honor - means something different in Islam
Mercy - means something different in Islam
Justice - means something different in Islam
Secular - means something different in Islam
Peace - means something different in Islam
etc -

I ask you how is communication possible if the words aren’t calibrated?

Really interesting perspective. Could you give us quick Islamic definitions for these words, I think that would be really useful ?!


If you are looking for a Islamic “Webster’s”  Dictionary style meanings,  can’t do but if you accept that Islam is a religious, social, and political system based upon texts preserved for centuries then I can attempt to explain.  Let us take some commonly used phrases in this context.

Tolerance” -  Muslims as a group tolerate the existence of non-Muslim groups as long as each of those non-Muslim groups adheres to certain Islamic laws while living under Islamic domination. Therefore the word tolerance has different meaning in Muslim and Christian worlds.  So, in conversations when Muslims claim Islam is a tolerant religion, it isn’t same as what’s meant by Christians.

Peace” – Likewise, peace is obtained under Islamic domination and all Muslims and non-Muslims live under the Islamic rule, also known as the natural order of the mankind.  Therefore when Muslims speak of believing in peace,  this is what they mean. That is why they can claim how diverse groups lived in peace under Islamic empires like the Ottomans.  Hence, the Islam is the religion of Peace.

Honor” -  In order to understand the Islamic attitudes of honor and shame, need to understand 7th Century Tribal Arab Culture.  Back then the tribes would go to sleep in the desert and often only to wake to the rattle of swords of another larger, more powerful tribe. The raiding tribes would kill some of the men, the rest would flee, leaving behind their women.  The losing tribe would feel the ultimate disgrace when his women would fall prey to another tribe’s men.  His hatred was not directed to the other tribes for taking the woman, rather at his own woman, because he would be in a similar position of taking someone else’s woman.  Women were the source of shame and dishonor.    You might say such instincts are present in most cultures. But Islam cast them in concrete that can not evolve into modern times or laws.

That is why Qur’an 4:3 says marry women who seem good to you 2, 3, 4 of them, ... or take slave women.

Notice it says seem good to you. Koran didn’t care about the feelings of women.  Cared only to satisfy the sexual desires of men. He was able to acquire women, just like he was able to acquire livestock. So, in Islamic cultures “Women” are possessions and are passed around from a Father who owned them to their husbands. The language in Islam supports the notion that Women are like livestock. It is passed on and so is the responsibility for the honor of losing them.

Rape” -  There is no concept of rape in Qur’an. You won’t find any references to it. Because it doesn’t exist.  That is why there is no punishment for rape. There is punishment for adultery. Sex outside of marriage is punished. Western concept of “Rape” is punishable under Islam only because it was sex outside of marriage.  That is why you often hear that the raped women also get punished. So, when Muslims claim there is no rape in their societies, they are technically correct based on their texts.

Mercy” -  Muslims will read the following passage in Qur’an from Allah regarding punishment in Hell

“those who disbelieve in Our communications, We shall make them enter fire; so oft as their skins are thoroughly burned, We will change them for other skins, that they may taste the chastisement; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise” 

What western cultures might interpret them as being sadistic, Muslims will describe as merciful.  Muslim laws of torture and punishment in THIS world can be presented as cleansing one of their sins, and helping the sinners towards Allah’s path. Showing mercy. 


Justice” – There is only one true justice and that is based on the texts of Allah.  No man made Justice can supersede the justice of Allah.  So all the perverted and sadistic passages in the Qur’an can be exacted on the infidels to show true justice.

And so on …

 

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7686
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
28 July 2016 12:01
 

Celal,

Seems consistent with what I know and this also seems really powerful to put in one place like this! thanks!

 
 
Dennis Campbell
 
Avatar
 
 
Dennis Campbell
Total Posts:  19830
Joined  20-07-2007
 
 
 
28 July 2016 13:45
 

While I disagree with Celal on many things, such as Trump, and “liberals” as he uses the term, I’ve found his posts on Islam most informative.  Islam, and, for that matter, elements of Christianity, strikes me as antithetical to humanistic secularism, as well as non-authoritarian rational reasoning expressed with civility.

 
 
‹ First  < 2 3 4