Maybe Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait and other Muslim countries should force all Indians to recognize Palestine and Kashmir before they are allowed to work or live there. It is equally possible that this could happen..would you like it? And do you think it is fair?
I don't think its fair, and your example has little to do with Italy's decision.
Italy has asked Islamic institutions, not Muslim individuals, to recognize the existence of Israel. This is obviously related to the fact that mosques which don't recognize Israel are indulging in political activities which are considered undesirable there.
Besides, lets stop using Saudi Arabia as an example of religious tolerance. Let them start allowing people to practice other faiths before we do that.
Secondly....Did you know that Israel is the one country in the world that has still refused to define its borders? And we're not talking about one or two places where they have disputes with their neighbors....ISRAEL DOES NOT DECLARE ITS BORDERS!! What are you recognizing when you recognize Israel? There is no definition to it yet. On what basis will you recognize a state that refuses to declare its borders and is in violation of more than one dozen United Nations resolutions ranging from their illegal occupation of Palestinian land to the apartheid against the Palestinians to the millions that they drove out of their homes and turned into refugees. So secular law actually states that Israel is in violation and is a rogue state....support for Israel is based on the Judaeo-Christian relationship, belief in the "Rapture", and belief that "God gave this land to the Jews". You are a hypocrite to be supporting this and claiming to be secular on the otherhand.
Most countries have less-than-saintly reasons for their existence. Its either religion, ethnic superiority or cultural superiority which leads to the formation of countries.
Having said that, Israel has been recognized by the vast majority of countries as well as the UN.
You must be a fanatic if you believe that. Are you saying that people who are religious have no right to a say in politics? You are proving my point about secular fanaticism.
I don't "believe" anything. Secularism by one definition means that religious institutions have no role in politics. However, most countries have a healthy amount of freedom as far as religion is concerned (which is how
they define secularism)
Sure, religious people have every right to a say in politics.
However, religious institutions should not endorse political views. It amounts to misleading the public and taking undue advantage of the faithful.
The last two sentences are my personal views, which are rarely followed in secular countries. For example, in the US, Presidential candidates regularly draw support from Church leaders.
You have just proved what I was saying on my other thread. Thank you
What might that be?
And you seem to be agreeing with a right wing religious/ideological agenda while saying that religious people should not have any input in politics. You contradict yourself.
I am not agreeing with anything. I am merely pointing out the facts. Italian society is not a good example of a secular state.
Infact, I believe that their constitution has no mention of the word 'Secular' at all.
Italians derive their laws from their ancient Roman judicial code and Napoleonic laws (wikipedia) which me and presumably you, know nothing about.