Are Islam and democracy compatible really

so the army giving the government an ultimatum to leave or else isnt a coup????

anyway, if its democracy, then why did the army force the government to leave?

and didnt ataturk's successor (or himself, dont quite remember) ban islamic parties from even forming?? maybe thats why.

and secondly, this new government is also islamic but because they dont want to get kicked out like the previous administration, then have toned it down a bit.

infact, there was something on bbc news a while ago that was talking about how religous muslims want turkey to be less liberal, for example banning alcohol and other things....

the fact of the matter is that, by providing the turkish model as evidence, it is clear that democracy and liberalism can only come from fighting islam.

for example, the dictator of egypt has kept egypt secular only by banning islamic parties ( for a long time). and now with the elections, the radical islamic parties have gained tremendous power, now the future of egypt is not so clear any more, another country like saudi? like iran?

i wish islam is like that. if it was like that then there would be no problem.

but islam is not like that! islam is waaaaaay to strict and the religious always interfere with the non religous because they think that that is what God wants. for example, Iran, after 60+ years of secularism, you would think that the religous community would be used to it right? but no, they kept forcing their ideals till they finally got an islamic revolution.

Originally posted by barish Originally posted by prsn41ife Originally posted by barish Originally posted by prsn41ife so why cant women who wear scarves drive? There is no such thing. are you sure? but you do agree about the other things. Yes, I'm sure. That would be really ridiculous. Do I agree about other things? I can understand you. You live in Iran. Iran is ruled by fundamentalists. And they claim that we act according to Islam. That's why you hate Islam. But I think "true" Islam is compatible with democracy.

i dont live in iran, and i wasnt raised in iran.

i live in the GREAT USA!!!

and i hate all religions. i believe religions hare corrupt and a form of control over the masses for people who want power.

so, are avoiding the other facts i listed. 

After the death of Prophet Mohamad,Peace be upon him,The first Rightly Guided Caliphs (successors) of Arabia were elected in the following order:Abou Bakr al-Siddik,Omar ibn al-Khattab,Osman Abou Affan and Ali Ibn Abi-Talib who was assassinated on the order of Moaawya Ibn Abou Sufian who declared himself Caliph and ruled from Damascus adopting the Byzantine custom of heredidetary monarchy. So democracy was known to the Arabs but absolute monarchy was copied from the Christian west.

For many centuries the Caliphs held secular and temporal powers and were called"Amir El Mouominin" or Leader of the blievers. What has happned since is that a number of countries have separated the secular from the temporal power thus becoming more democratic.

Some  good examples of Islamic democratic counties are Turkey,Bosnia Herzegovina,Malaysia,Indonesia,Egypt  etc.

who says they're not coming around to the concept of democracy? See for yourself... 

Lahme = Meat

http://www.youtube.com/w/Arab-meat-%28lahme%29-song?v=XFxll8 LiR1I&search=lahme

turkey is not an example of a muslim democratic country.

firstly, like barbar said, they arent a full democracy, secondly, religous people are not tolerated in turkey. so turkey would be an example of how a country has to fight islam in order to be secular.

but malaysia is a good example of democracy and islam, althought not completely either.

Egypt is not Islamic - let alone democratic.

The Muslim Brotherhood is not tolerated, and Al Azhar (the highest religious authority) is paralyzed by the government. 

They've had the same government for the past 25 years, and the current president is pushing for his son to inherit the presidency.  (Thanks to the Assads of Syria, others have learned how to get around the system to allow for the inheritance of the presidency in a so-called republic.)

Mubarak's opponent from the last elections, Ayman Nour, is in jail for alleged forgery.  I don't know if this sounds belivable to you; but Mubarak supposedly received 89% of the votes.  (Reminds me of Saddam receiving 99.9% of the votes, lol.)

I don't know if I'd call that a democracy.

Of course freedom of speech is allowed you ninny. Otherwise, Turkey wouldn't have the serious news and 'trash-gossip' magazines galore that it does. Protests in Turkey are more abundant then I have seen in the US. The people always demonstrate their rights. The main constraint is that police do not abuse their jobs and that the protestors do not act contrary to the law.

Turkey became secular by implementing the Swiss, Italian and French codes of law into their constitution. The National Congress votes on them and amends them as needed.

Ataturk was against foreign dominance and religious laws affecting the government. He expanded on rights of farmers, women, villagers, and created state subsidies. These are a few among many of the things he had done.

Churches have not been given a fair shake by certain governmental municipalities. That is true. The Churches already in use have not been affected. They still welcome practicing whorshippers. Whether the limited numbers has to do with limited followers of a certain faith or blackballing by various local agencies is a viable line of reasoning which could be debated.

I may be disillusioned and biased but I have alot more knowledge of the country then you do. I don't hoot from the hip. I have experince with what I am talking about.

Is Turkey done progressing as a nation? Of course not. Does it have its share of disgruntled citizens? For sure. Does this mean that it lacks a democracy and that it is against religous people or institutions? No.