Killing in the name of religion (Islam): This time in Turkey

[Tee Kay]

The point was that it was not modernising. Would a random central asian country adopting the latin alphabet be making progress in your view?

No. Of course Ataturk did more than just changing the alphabet.

I'm too lazy to type about Ataturk but check my post here. It was from a loooong time ago but pretty much sums up what I think of him.

Furthermore if you try to enforce secularism it most probably will not work. Religion dies out with cultural changes, not because someone declared it dead.
Especially if he did not have an impressive mustache

Relgion do not die out. Religion will survive even in the most secular states or it will just changes into another form or mixes with other religions with time. Secularism does not = atheism. Atheism cannot be successfully enforce for it abolish religion altogether. Secularism can be to some extent.

 

[Winner]

EU needs to get the constiution into place before accepting turkey. (which I doubt will want to join )

We need some treaty to be accepted. It will not be a "constitution", I think this term is grossly misleading.

Turkey can't join simply because it is too different. It wouldn't fit. I want a close cooperation with Turkey, economic ties and things like that, but they can't be members.

 

[Dachs]

Turkish secularism is such these days that it infringes on religious practices. Muslim women, for example, don\'t get to wear their head coverings, and you can\'t have any even remotely religiously affiliated political parties or faith-based schools. I, personally, would never want to live there, but it\'s a beautiful country what they stole from the Greeks. One of my favorite vacations ever...

I can\'t see Turkey joining the EU without Greece and Germany raising hell.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

Let's get over this pretence, shall we?

It's not killing in the name of religion, killing like this is part of that religion itself.

Al-Ma'ida, 32

For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our apostles came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/005.qmt.html#005.032

Al-Isra, 33

Nor take life - which Allah has made sacred - except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand retaliation or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life, for he is helped (by the Law)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/017.qmt.html#017.033

read more:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/notislam/misconceptions.html#HEADING7

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/notislam/misconceptions.html#HEADING8

 

[plarq]

I actually thought about Rage Against The Machine?

 

[aneeshm]

Al-Ma'ida, 32

For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our apostles came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/005.qmt.html#005.032

Al-Isra, 33

Nor take life - which Allah has made sacred - except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand retaliation or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life, for he is helped (by the Law)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/017.qmt.html#017.033

read more:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/notislam/misconceptions.html#HEADING7

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/notislam/misconceptions.html#HEADING8

Is this an invitation to a quote-war? Because for every quote you can find, I can find three.

 

[mrt144]

Is this an invitation to a quote-war? Because for every quote you can find, I can find three.

what does it say about your arguments, when non hindu, non muslims flatly reject your arguments out of the clear bias and idiocy of them?

 

[Verbose]

Is this an invitation to a quote-war? Because for every quote you can find, I can find three.

It never was about what quotes can be found, but who interprets and uses them how.

And it's necessary to keep track of the variations. It's not possible to slap a blanket definition on Islam as to exactly what it is, as the Muslims keep coming up with a wide range of interpretations.

I'm interested in which groups hold what views, not in what someone outisde of it tries to analytically define for them. It's just waste of time, unless one has a political agenda for doing so. In which case I'm even less interested.

 

[aneeshm]

It never was about what quotes can be found, but who interprets and uses them how.

Agreed.

And it's necessary to keep track of the variations. It's not possible to slap a blanket definition on Islam as to exactly what it is, as the Muslims keep coming up with a wide range of interpretations.

True. The primary problem is that all the interpretations which draw inspiration from the original legal tradition (that is, all the "authentic" traditions) all accept at face value the sort of stuff which has caused untold misery to non-Muslims ("Kill the infidel wherever you find him", and other things of that nature).

I'm interested in which groups hold what views, not in what someone outisde of it tries to analytically define for them.

The problem, Verbose, is that I've defined nothing. I mean it. Zilch.

I'm only re-iterating the opinions of the great legal scholars of Islam of the past (and the present), who have shaped (and are shaping) the way the Islamic canon is interpreted.

 

[aneeshm]

what does it say about your arguments, when non hindu, non muslims flatly reject your arguments out of the clear bias and idiocy of them?

Logic deficient people usually have bad habits, including one of attempting to attack people who disagree with them ad homimen.

 

[Bast]

Nice. Turkey, even if the admission process runs by the schedule, is due to join the EU in 15 to 20 years. It looks like it will be much less secular by that time.

Again, I must say Turkey appears to be a "Trojan horse". If we take it in, it will open up the gates of Europe and let our enemies in. This must not happen.

So true, Winner. We must not let the mistakes of the past happen again.

 

[knigh+]

Another pointless thread for Turk-bashing and islamophobia.

Every country has murderers. It has nothing to do with religion, EU or secularism.

Turkish secularism is not what is meant by that term in Europe.
It is more of a cult of a certain political leader of the past, and it was rather fabricated from the start. Imagine one person deciding to change the arabic alphabet used before, to a latin one, simply so as to pose as more european. It is logical to expect a rise of islam in Turkey in the future, since it was never a popular decision to secularise.
...
The point was that it was not modernising. Would a random central asian country adopting the latin alphabet be making progress in your view?
Furthermore if you try to enforce secularism it most probably will not work. Religion dies out with cultural changes, not because someone declared it dead.
Especially if he did not have an impressive mustache.

Boy you really need to learn more about Turkey before throwing around random statements.

 

[Kyriakos]

They are not random. Attaturk did not have an adequate mustache to announce the death of religion.


Compare with:

 

[mrt144]

Logic deficient people usually have bad habits, including one of attempting to attack people who disagree with them ad homimen.

some times the facts arent logical.

 

[Atlas14]

Another thread for Islam bashing

And Aneeshm, I read the Qa'ran myself, and found rare instances of preaching violence against non-believers, but those were few and did not follow the overall message being preached throughout the different books.

 

[Sidhe]

Ah Varwnos that's Nietszche no? That man knew how to slay religion, pity he was so ahead of his time

Another thread for Islam bashing

And Aneeshm, I read the Qa'ran myself, and found rare instances of preaching violence against non-believers, but those were few and did not follow the overall message being preached throughout the different books.

Oh stop trolling Islam is just wrong ok.

 

[Kyriakos]

Yes
Probably was a product of his time in many respects though. It is impressive how so many of his thoughts are entirely dependant on keeping the object he was fighting against firmly constructed in his mind. Imo he is more characteristic for his struggle against his own demons, something which latter philosophers tried to copy as a style, when it was born out of misery.

A bit like Turkey, really

 

[knigh+]

They are not random. Attaturk did not have an adequate mustache to announce the death of religion.

Actually he didn't have mustache during presidency.

Anyway I meant reducing Turkey's modernization to script reform and secularism is a very limited view of 15 years of rapid progress and in civ-terms, a golden age.

 

[knigh+]

Yes
Probably was a product of his time in many respects though. It is impressive how so many of his thoughts are entirely dependant on keeping the object he was fighting against firmly constructed in his mind. Imo he is more characteristic for his struggle against his own demons, something which latter philosophers tried to copy as a style, when it was born out of misery.

A bit like Turkey, really

I somewhat disagree. When somethings are obviously against what you want to do, you don't need to keep a constructed/demonized image on your mind.

 

[Kyriakos]

I agree, but Nietzsche did keep one. He ressurects that which he is fighting against, in every hit he attempts at it.
Demons are not defeated by keeping them alive though..

Besides, he understood that his readers would inevitably only live their own struggles through his work. In the end one can only seek his own path.
But he did influence art in a major way. Most of the famous authors of the first half of the 20th century have refferences to his work.

Wait, shouldnt we be discussing about the 'gay Attaturk' thread in YouTube?