What is your definition of a secular country?

Question

Is it acceptable for a secular county to recognize the holidays of only one religion as legal public days, have an official religious body which represents only a sect of a religion and identify that sect of the religion as a required subject? Also, is it appropriate for civil servants like soldiers in uniform to attend religious ceremonies, even if it is a funeral?

When a system favors a sect of/one religion over another, can it be defined as secularist?

Answer 1

That is a great question you should ask this question in the US, UK, France, Australia and other western nations as well.  In Turkey all the oaths are sworn upon the flag and nation, not to God.  In fact the Turkish military uses the generic term for God "Tanri" not the Arabic "Allah" which causes great consternation amongst the fanatical Muslims that happen to serve by way of conscription.  Turkey is as secular a country as you will get.  The closest definition of secular as you will get.  You see on the Turkish Lira it doesn't say "In God we Trust" like the US dollar but people in the US forget to read the other side which says, "And everybody else we monitor".

Answer 2

in greece the christian church is the boss! the laws first take the ok from the church and after from the greek parliament. also in schools,in universities there is one subject about christianity. also every morning student does their prayer at s chool        . moreover sometimes the lessons cancelled because the students must go to church.moreover in classes there are orthodox-pictures.  also the greek army is connected with church.  also greek country pay money to church but greece is a secular country!!so yes can it be denifined as secularist

Answer 3

I tend to agree with jtrusnik on most of the sub-parts of your questions as much about holidays and ceremonies is a pragmatic matter, not necessarily ideological.  E.g. In Los Angeles, where there has been a considerable Jewish population for quite some time, schools are often off on Yom Kippur as well as the usual Christian holidays.  And, in any case, *for any individual student* taking the day off due to a religious holiday (regardless of the religion) is always a valid excuse.

With regards to the question of religious ceremonies and the example of a funeral, I do not see why it should be *disallowed* for soldiers in uniform to attend.  This is just a matter of religious freedom, not secularism.  Especially if the deceased is a soldier who died in battle, then no matter what was his religion he has a right to a religious funeral.  And, his fellow soldiers have a right to pay him proper respects.  The beauty of this freedom is that even if the deceased is a Hindu soldier fighting for his majority Christian country, his Muslim comrade may pay him such respect.

Now, we arrive to your last question: "When a system favors a sect of/one religion over another, can it be defined as secularist?" The answer to this is a clear "No" when it comes to legal code and rights.  There can be no favoritism instituted in law of members of one religion/sect over members of another if the country is truly secular.  In this sense, it is absolute that a country instituting Sharia cannot be secular.  Similarly, if it is really true, as the poster above claimed, that the Greek government checks with the Greek Church before any and every thing, then that poster has just made an argument stating that Greece is in fact *not* secular.  Of course, some people think that it is o.k. for a majority Christian country to be non-secular while it is not o.k. for a majority Muslim country to be non-secular.  Thoughts like that are the stuff that crusades are made out of.

Answer 4

hi,

please check out this link for ATATURK'S  secularism principle and secularist reforms:

http://www.delinetciler.net/forum/ingili...

hope,help you

Answer 5

.

about nakis posts,

No ,nothing before being decided,must first be approved by church.The only truth is that priest involve into politics and tell their opinion (they think that someone asked them?)

The boss,is the goverment,or to be honest ,the boss are the rich guys.....

and no.in University there are not subjects about Christianity unless,is history or theology,which is a part of (my uniiversity had 7 diferent schools,but never such a lesson)

The classes are cancelled when is a big religious celebration such as the "triwn ierarxon" which are the saint protectors of the students.

Greek army has no connection with church,actually this is the most hilarious think i ve heard.even the oaths that soldiers take ,are in their religion,some are muslims ,some christians,some dont participate because they are atheists/differetn religions.

People pay in church,when they visit the church ( to light the candles) which also is something optional and not obligatory.

to answer to your question though,

•recognition of public holiday only for one religion is logical fo rme as ling as this is the majority....lets imagine to have public holidays for every religion!!!!half of the working days would be off.

•why not be apropriate?would be better of course,if someone dont like or agree/to not be there,but its sound good to me.....

If i judge from that you stated,yes sounds secular to me....................

Answer 6

git isine ya

biktim boyle sorulardan

im sick of these type of questions

you know what you wanna hear so why are you asking?

Answer 7

A secular nation should not prefer one religion over another. Nor should it prevent people from worshipping at their own discretion.

However, if an overwhelming majority of the citizens practice a particular religion, the nation is presented with a predicament. Most employees will want to take off on a specific holiday. The government needs to plan for this, and will often close most nonessential services (i.e,. the police, military, hospitals, fire departments, mental health facilities, etc. would stay in service), with plans to allow either higher pay or another vacation day granted in stead for those employees that had to work.

There is nothing wrong with requiring a civil servant to wear government-issued uniforms to a religious ceremony of any sort. My brother, for example, is in the U.S. Airforce, and he wore a specific dress uniform when he got married. The government maintains a certain amount of respectability for the organization in question, and this extends beyond the time that you're "on the clock" for many civil servants. As long as joining the service is voluntary, and you understand what you're getting into when you join, then you are consenting to wearing a uniform at specified times.