Slavery was outlawed since the 20th century, it's only kept in the muslim countries. In fact, slavery was secularity too, since Christianity forbid slavery.
So I guess saudi arabians are secular? How about the ones in Qtar? Or the ones in Iran? Hmm?
amnesty.org.uk
No, you have not discovered a grand truth hidden by the elites...
Caleb White
Brandon Nelson
It's used by the muslim states.
Parker Scott
cheked
Andrew Miller
Yes, but European countries colonized the whole world and even today they exploit many third world countries, leading them to extremism.
Those places are Monarchies and Theocracies were the religious dogma is law. What exactly are you implying? That Christianity is somehow better? Because it was the exact same before changes were made against its religious dominance.
The text doesn't specify who rolled back the women's rights, only that it happened during that period.
Brandon Walker
Colonialism was done by every major countries in the world, muslim countries included. Look at the Ottoman.
They all have decent to high living standard, surely, poverty and education do not make one secular.
Considering the Soviet occupied the territory at that time, the responsibility of laws fall upon them.
Tyler Lewis
Social democracy is a nice dream but it's a failed project that can only be sustained by marxist revolutions happening in other countries.
Chase Miller
Elaborate on this. As in, Nordic countries are successful because the Soviets came to power?
Justin Phillips
If there were no revolutions in the 20th century I don't think social democracy would even be a thing.
William Morgan
The Ottomans didn't colonize, they expanded and they were forced to abandon their territories by the major powers of Europe. Also, muslims in Turkey today are much more moderate.
When compared to muslims in the USSR, or muslims that have migrated to European nations you can tell how the political system in these Monarchies reinforces religious fundamentalism. Also, the only way such countries exist the way they do is because it is in the direct interest of Imperialism.
That is a non sequitur. Just because they occupied the territory doesn't mean they controlled it absolutely. If fundamentalists held over parts of Afghanistan they could impose their own laws.
Isaac Hughes
please fill this out before posting again