Talk:Islam in Turkey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Turkey, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Turkey-related topics. Please visit the project page if you would like to participate. Happy editing! | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. | |
 |
To-do list for Islam in Turkey: | edit · history · watch · refresh |
|---|---|---|
|
No to-do list assigned; you can help us in improving the articles in the same category |
||
Contents |
[edit] Comments
[edit] Comment
Neither Süleymancis nior Nurcus are a tarikat. The most secularized cities are not Istanbul and Ankara but Izmir, Antalya and Mugla.Marriex 15:07, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- And Edirne. Gerry Lynch 14:38, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
I have noticed that many Turkish takes pride in being the most "modern" muslim countries. This is debatable. I would say Malaysia is difintely better in term of human right and GDP per capita as well as (arguably) minority right. On the other hand malaysia is defintely less secular. So it is probably NPOV to just say that turkey is the most westernised muslim country. Vapour
"The Turkish governmental system has no difference with those of many European countries which separate religion from the affairs of the state."
- I'm quite sure this is how secular Turks wish to see Turkey. It is at least debatable if Turkey is truly a "liberal" democracy. Separation of church and state should means that the state does not interfere with religion, which is not the case in turkey. I would think replacing SCS with secularism is more NPOV. Vapour
The terminology "Islamic nation" is very misleading because Turkey is a strictly secular state and technically is as Islamic as France. Turks as a people aren't particularly religious and Islam in many cases, serves as a community identifier more than anything else. I've changed it to "Islamic tradition" which is a lot more accurate and less controversial. It would be great if someone could upload some images of mosques like Ortakoy Mecide (which IMO, is the beautiful one in Turkey).--Kilhan 18:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] some comments
Sorry to state but this article is an alleged 'disguised' and 'attire wise modernised' attack('takiyye' in Turko/Arabic) towards Turkey's unique stance as being the only secular but predominantly Muslim state in the world;from most probably the ubiquitous and infamous Fethullah supporters reigning freely in INTERNET.(ironically he himself lives in the States currently after jurisdictional issues and has an enmormous wealth). Thus it is pretty much biased at status of religion section.
If one carefully examines sharia of Islam, he will see that it is virtually impossible to reconcile with modern day understanding of democracy and civil rights (especially women)and it has been made quite obvious from former experiences that it would oppress and eventually ban peoples rights soon after it takes command (i.e. Iran,Afghanistan,and slowly but succeedingly nowadays in Morrocco and in Turkey by master of disguise AK Party).
Anyone with objective intentions and neutral look towards Turkey as it is today would certainly find zillions of attesting evidence.
Bluntly,If you want to live in a world of western but universal democracy(mind you I am very much against hypocritic values of western society but some values are really for the peaceful minded excluding some infamous global US administrations) you have to stay strictly secular in Turkey because after centuries of illiteracy,oppression and poverty which is still in tyrannic rule,Turkish people are very much inclined to fall for a regime which would produce bloody results as at least there still is a large number devoted in the belief that real religion is in the hearts and minds not in the headscarves or obvious practices.
regards,
- Seeing things like "The Turkish democracy intends to build one mind one soul and rejects heteregenous structures." makes me inclined to agree that this section of the article is far from NPOV.
[edit] Removed section
I removed a section because it is a copy-paste from http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+tr0051) If needed one can add it to external links--Charlesriver 02:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hi. The Library of Congress Country Studies is in the public domain. To quote from the article, "No copyright is claimed on them." Khoikhoi 02:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oops.. I didn't know that. Thank you for correcting.--Charlesriver 02:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] This article is not neutral
The article represents a perspective and it's not neutral in any way. One can replace it with the opposite view. I'm highly disappointed to see such misinformation on Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.254.115.179 (talk) 14:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC).
- Please be specific. Khoikhoi 03:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Khoikhoi, the 4th paragraph of the article represents the typical Kemalist view about the issue. It's what the newspaper Cumhuriyet lectures. One can easily argue with different arguments. I respectfully ask informed people to check the article and shape it into a neutral view. My English is not ready to handle it for now. Regards. 85.104.218.80 03:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
