fb07 said:
googooloo, Turkey has not lost its "islamic spirit" as you put it, it has developed one to suit todays standards I'd wish more muslims understood this as islam as i understand it is a timeless religion. If you don't understand the politics of a country don't say anything at all, its as simple as that you make yourself sound quite stupid. You do not understand that in Turkey, the hijab is not a sign of devotion to ones religion but is more of a political symbol. When its used as an icon of rebellion and whatever I'm for the ban. No the ban does not stretch to work. The hijab may not be worn at school, uni and government institutes. Here's a small example of why the hijab was used as a political symbol; prior to the republic morons would use the covering by going into government buildings and placing bombs. Because they were covered up and assumed as being a women, they were not seen as suspicious yet when authorities found out who these were the necesary steps were taken.
Ataturk modernised Turkey so that Turkey could have a say and develop in terms of western standards and good for him. As far as I know, Turkey have developed further then most muslim majority populated countries. The Ottoman Empire were already going downhill so saying something like "since the Ottoman Empire Turkeys going downhill" is plain ignorant. It was Ataturk that gave the women to vote as early as 1930, do you not think that this is a good advancement?
For him to secularise the country is a damn good thing and no it does not bring about anti-hijabi sentiments. Most of the Turks i know don't have a problem with the hijab so long as it stays as the HIJAB (basic head covering) and nothing more.
Culture is a wonderful thing and if you actually go to Turkey, which i'm presuming you haven't from the way you go on about it, you will see that they are very much obsessed with their culture and religion.
first of all, i agree with you- islam is a timeless religion and as such it is open to new ideas. however, it does not accept changes to its theology or the basic framework of Shariah law. When Attaturk decided to ban the hijab, he did so in the name of modernisation. but why did he decide that the hijab is inconsistent with modernisation? yes maybe the fact that people blew themselves up was a catalyst but thats not the full story. in his desperate attempt to be accepted by the west, he wanted to suppress all outward signs of religion so as to please an increasingly secular western society.
you say that its a good thing that Turkey embraced western culture. may i ask why exactly? what do you feel is so superior about a culture which praises and encourages promiscuity, the desanctity of marriage and the de-humanisation of women? when u walk down the street and see a billboard advertising icecream with a half-naked woman at the front do you consider that liberation or just a continuation of male exploitation of women for their own purposes albeit in a more subtle way?
let me guess..ur reasoning is that capitalism and materialism are the way of the future. well i ahve news for you... because of this so-called "superior western society' over 4 billion people in the world are starving and this figure is increasing. because of globalisation, also an aspect of the ' superior West', the rich are getting millions deposited in their piggy banks everyday while emaciated children in india and Africa are eating flies and worms just to survive. World poverty has never been as great as it was since 'the West' decided it would implement a capitalist regime in all the Western countries in th world.
""As far as I know, Turkey have developed further then most muslim majority populated countries. The Ottoman Empire were already going downhill so saying something like "since the Ottoman Empire Turkeys going downhill" is plain ignorant. It was Ataturk that gave the women to vote as early as 1930, do you not think that this is a good advancement?"""
you say attaturk gave women the right to vote in 1930 as though its something which he should be so proud of...a really big achievement. sweetie, 1400 years ago, when the Europeans were still trying to figure out whether women even had souls, Ilsam gave women the right to vote, the right to work, the right to lead- rights which ' Western women' have only just achieved.
Developed?? you mean added to world poverty by taking on this persona of the West? true... perhaps he has developed more than other muslim countries but pleas esee the distinction between a mUslim country and an Islamic state. i agree with you- the western system is despite its flaws, a better alternative to the regimes currently in place in Muslimcountries. but u have to understand that these countries do not reflect an Islamic state. None of them do! In an islamic state, there would be absolutely no poverty. and this is not just an idealistic model, this is reality. in the earliest Islamic states, becasue of zakat(alms-giving) therwe was not a single poor person in the state-everyone had what they needed. thus, it'd be logical to assume this is a better alternative to Western capitalism. if Attaturk really wanted to advance his country beyond the crappy systems that are in the world at the moment, he should tried to implement a TRUE islamic state. that would be the epitome of modernisation.
and please, for all the moonlight sonata's and comrade nathan's out there, before you open ur mouths and start blubbering ignorance about how an Islamic state is oppressive and backward and God knows what else, go and do ur research!
