As for the Constitutional Court, they simply applied Article 4 of the Constitution. I don't think it's an intelligent idea to shout "fraud". Why didnt AKP replace the constitution altogether, including abolishment of Article 4 (and article 2)? Then they wouldn't have this problem. It is obvious that only allowing the headscarf and not pursuing other liberalizations at the same time comes across as quite one-sided, and that's mildly put.

As for the 16 years old girl, if she believes that God thinks her body is aura (something that causes sexual excitement) and should be covered so she wont arouse men, does her God want her to study in university? Doesnt he prefer women to stay at home, to be sure the wont make any men lustful? Just my two cents worth.

I'm an American who has been reading your op-eds in the Turkish Daily News for a number of months. What struck me about your last article was the following section:

"Nowadays many people say that the AKP has also made important mistakes in this whole process: They couldn’t foresee the reaction of the establishment, and haven’t been able to persuade the ultra-secularists that the freedom for headscarves would not overshadow the freedom for miniskirts."

I'd love to see you write a column that takes on this issue.

I have many liberal-minded Turkish friends who dislike the AKP because they are afraid of the creeping Islamization of Turkish society. These aren't the "secularist fundamentalists" you write about. They're not people who would welcome a military coup.

They are Turks who lead secular lifestyles and are apprehensive about a government that is putting religious litmus test into place for some public position. They're worried by the AKP's moves to ban adultery and crack down on alcohol consumption. They're dismayed when they get dirty looks because they're not dressed a certain way (grnated, headscarved women get dirty looks, too, I'm sure).

That said, I am in agreement with you that the AKP is the least illiberal choice for Turkish voters at present.

The problem is underlined in the B's comment.

There is no such thing as a 'secular lifestyle'. Secularism is a tool of gorvernance, not an identity.

That's why Turks who actually describe themselve as 'secular' are nothing more than people with a grave identity crisis.

It is indeed their right to abandon the traditions of the Turkish nation (as well as religion), but they should not try say it's 'secular' or 'modern'. The description is not suitable.

B,

I can tell you as someone born in Australia of Turkish origin that many of my friends do drink alcohol and also support the AKP. They support the AKP because Turkey has advance in all fields.
Alcohol consumption is the most overated topic in Turkey thanks to the so-called secularists. Many Turks who do drink, are binge drinkers are in a minority which is totally against any society values including Turkey. Increased alcohol consumption does not equate to freedom or increased secularity, but increased crime and health problems. Equating secularism to the opposite to Islam is plain wrong. Any citizen has a right to object to alcohol consumption or building of bars whether they are Muslim or not.

I would seriously question your definition of liberalism and the motivations of your friends. Equating alcohol consumption to modernity is nothing but a desperate attempt to create an issue out of nothing.

If you dislike Islam, fair enough but Islam is part of the Turkish culture and identity. Denying Islam because Turkey is secular is just plain wrong. Secularism is meant to protect Islam and other religions in Turkey. What is occuring in Turkey is not increased Islamization but normalization of Islam. The so-called secularists have abused secularism to cover their anti-Islamic feelings and further their agendas.

The so-called secularists in Turkey are not secular, but atheist. There should be no confusion between the two. There has been widespread confusion between these two terms. If your friends are dismayed when they get dirty looks, well how about the women of Turkey who wear a headscarf suffering from discrimination and a right to education. How about that?

As for you worry that AKP attempts to ban adultery, well again this is nothing new or an AKP initiative. Up until 1999 adultery was banned in the Turkish civil code. It was the right decision to drop this idea. So please in future be a bit more informed rather than making rash decisions.

To A. A. B.

If your serious about posting an article on this site why don't you also reveal your name rather than listing yourself as A.A.B. Removal of the headscarf ban was the right initiative that has wide Turkish society support.

The AKP is far the most liberal party in Turkey. You accuse the AKP of being one sided on liberalizations. I totally disagree with you. The AKP has allowed non-Muslims to receive thier confiscated foundations back, changed article 301, allowed the Kurds to broadcast their languages on TV and plans are underway to establish a Kurdish TV channel in Turkey. So if you have any doubts then I suggest to you to read the facts, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good story. Right?

Also I would like to ask you another question? Does your God allow you to be disrespectful to a 16 year old and to totally ignore their wishes. Does your God allow you ignore society demands and at the same time be a state bureaucrat and accept their taxes? Does your God allow you to oppress minorities? Does your God allow court rooms to disobey the law and make arbitrary decisions? Does your God allow you to rule?

All I see is the abuse of Islamic and Kemalist values and teachings in the name of democracy, secularism, liberalism, republicanism and etc. These concepts are as (in)-coherent, (in)-consistent, (ir)-rational as the other. They are simply baskets that nations fill as they develop and evolve.

All I see is millions of people who are pulled and pushed around by politically motivated individuals, organizations, sects, orders and etc. - not to mention the contributions of this blog's author. I guess this type of manipulation is not surprising given the share of the budget allocated to education.

Göksel,

Does God allow making tekfir? This is what you did: "The so-called secularists in Turkey are not secular, but atheist." Deniz Baykal for example has publicly stated that he is Muslim.

The first A stands for Adem. You don't need to know all of my name. As for the 16-years-old, respect is mutual. Of course, her wish to study in university should be respected. But if she wants to study in a university of the Turkish state, she should also respect the state's laicist character by not wearing religious symbols in there.

Again, the Supreme Court ruling was not illegal. It is in perfect accord with the wording of article 4 of the constitution. The headscarf was one of two constitutional changes initiated by the AKP, the other one being the direct election of the President of the Republic. If they want to allow the headscarf by putting it into the constitution, they should also put in things for other groups of the Turkish populations, such as rights for ethnical and religious minorities. If traditional Sunni women become allowed to wear the türban in university, then the second largest religious community in Turkey, the Alevi-Bektashis, which makes up about 20% of the population, should at least be aknowledged to exist, and the Constantinople Patriarchate of Orthodox church should be allowed to train priests.
Let's fae the facts: Sunnism already is overprivileged in Turkey (think Diyanet and tax money), now why should they get another privileg in the constitution and the others get nothing? That's at least imbalanced.

I have to agree with AAB in regards to the privileged position of sunnism. What he fails to point out is that this is a product of kemalist system, not the AKP. That's partly why kemalism is such a big joke and anti-secular. it did not create an equal distance between the state and all faiths but elevated one in the creation of the neo-national identity. Lets be careful, this was only so Turks would nominally regard themselve as Sunni Muslim. kemalists don't want us to actually practice the religion.

So many people who practice their faith in turkey have their rights denied: Orthodox christians who want to train as priests, Alevi's who want official recognition but also Muslim women who want to wear a headscarf. Truly tragic in the 21st century.

The sleight of the hand against Muslim women in turkey by AAB in his first comment, in particular the young example Mustafa gives, i thought was distasteful:

''As for the 16 years old girl, if she believes that God thinks her body is aura (something that causes sexual excitement) and should be covered so she wont arouse men, does her God want her to study in university? Doesnt he prefer women to stay at home, to be sure the wont make any men lustful? Just my two cents worth.''

That's the point. We are not hear to make laws of what God thinks, but of what people think...And some think they should wear a headscarf therefore shoul be allowed as those who believe they do not have to...

Now here are my two cents worth: Let's turn the argument AAB puts forward round. If the hair is not an ornament, why do these turkish bimbos persist in dying their hair blond (or any colour)or getting these cheap looking highlights? Why do some women spend more in one session at the hair salon than I do all year? Is it not to make themselve more attractive? Come on, lets stop playing the idiots. The hair is an ornament or hair salons would go bust, as simple as that. It should be a right of the Turkish woman to cover it, or not to cover it, and go about getting an education and job without hindrance, be it in the private or public sector.

As to his second posting,The turkish state does not have a secular or laic character, it has a blatantly fascist one. Let's not worry though, the AKP will prosper, be it under another name. Judges and prosecutors will sooner or later be replaced, as will be the university rectors. Kemalists will be replaced by more civilized people and turkey will take its place as a truly modern secular democracy. Inshallah.

A.A.B,

God doesn't allow me to make tekfir, but I am making an obvious statement. I have no objection to these people not being Muslim on the contrary. But what I do have an issue is with these so-called wannabe secularists claiming to be Muslim yet cherry picking what they in Islam and making life difficult for practicing Muslims. The only thing that these westernized wannabe secularists in Turkey have in common with Westerners is their image and lifestyle, such as eating pork and drinking alcohol. Concepts such as freedom of religion, respect for other political views, tolerating dissent, freedom of association are totally alien to them.

You like many wannabe secularists have no idea of secularism. I live in Australia and I can tell you that the freedom that we have here you can only dream of in Turkey. Your idea of secularism is for religious people to hide their religious feelings and for Turkish women to simply ‘shut-up’.

You have a very contradictory view of law and freedom. On the one hand you suggest a 16 year old girl should respect the ‘laicite’ character of the state and the ‘Constitutional court’ made the correct ruling in rejecting constitutional changes. Yet you complain the constitution doesn’t recognize Alevi’s and other religious restrictions. Gee what great consistency you have.

For the record, I have no issue with ethnic or religious minorities. I live in Australia for god’s sake and I know more about ethnic or religious diversity then you. I have no issue living in a community other than Muslims, hell I even believe that people can believe in frogs. The Alevi’s are allowed to exist and you don’t need some statement in the constitution to allow you to exist. I also believe that the state should not interfere in religious practices of individuals and should not fund Diyanet.

I personally believe even if all these concepts where in the constitution and the state funded cemevi’s it will make no difference to you. Tell me, are you going to attend cemevi ceremonies if the state did make financial contributions.

In Turkey, the word 'Muslim' is associated by some to identity,not belief as it should be (1st pillar of Islam). Furthermore, some think that believing in 'something' is enough to be 'Muslim', even if they openly disagree with Islamic teachings. In the west, they would be described and would describe themselves as 'agnostic'.

What kemalists should understand is that they cannot re-invent the Muslim identity or faith to suit them and retain credibility in the Muslim community. In short and simplified,being Muslim rests on five fundamental pillars initiated by the first. Without these the word 'Muslim' is void of its meaning. Yes Baykal has called himself Muslim. The question should not be whether he is or not, but what he understands as being 'Muslim'? Once you answer this, you can see where Goksel is coming from.

Göksel Doganay,
Deniz Baykal has publicly stated that he is Muslim. In the Hanafi legal school that is enough to make it haram to claim the contrary.

Actually I did attend a cemevi for Ashura (as a guest, I am Sunni) and I don't see an incogruence between "Respect the rules" and "If you want more rights for yourself, also give more rights to others". I am not sure if an explicite constitutional change is necessary for the Alevis, but the very fact that the state treats them as non-existent is a problem that needs to be corrected, especially if it is a question of billions of liras.
Now a possibility would to stop funding Sunni Islam as well, another possibility would be giving equal money to all (relative to their share in the population). Whether abolishing the Diyanet is a good idea, would be another question. But the point is that all religions should get equal treatment.

Ceyhan,
The Quran says "Truly, the religion with God is Islam" (3:19). Only God gets to decide what is an "Islamic teaching". Which is the Islamic teaching the "evil Kemalists" disagree with? The headscarf being obligatory? There are many Ilahiyat professors in Turkey who believe it is not obligatory, and even many who sympathize with the AKP and that the ban should be lifted, believe that it is not a religious necessity.

Oh, and by the way, being Muslim is not defined as "agreeing with all teachings of Islam" (there is no actual agreement on all teachings...) but as believing in one God and believing in the Prophet Muhammed.

A.A.B

You continue to contradict yourself and make no sense. I don't care about Deniz Baykal, he can worship elephants for all I care.
"Yes I am a Muslim no worries but I don't like the sight of women wearing headscarves, I don't like people who go to mosques, I don't like any form of religious expression."

This type of mentality does not fit a Muslim. This is the mentality of the fanatical secularists and CHP in Turkey. Consequently they are not even secular. Isn't is ironic that the Ottoman Sultans were more secular than the Kemalists. My advice to these people is to see a psychiatrist.

I am aware there are ilahiyat professors in Turkey who believe that the headscarf is not a religious requirement. But they are in a minority and have no credibility. Islamic law is decided by consensus. The headscarf is only an issue to people who don't like the sight of a headscarf. It is not a problem for Muslims or Muslims women. The only people who are against it are Kemalists who again have a psyhicatric problem when it comes to Islam. An overwhelming majority of Islamic clerics have stated numerous times that the headscarf is a religious requirement all over the world. Therefore stop wasting our time with mindless drivel.

The only thing I agree with you is that all religions should be treated equally. But the problem in Turkey is the incorrect application of Secularism which is not the fault of the AKP. Denying of one group is not the work of the AKP but of the fanatical secularists. The Alevi's aren't the only group's existence that is denied. Look at the Kurds and look at the Headscarved women.

But if I were to rely on a political party to have an equal treatment of all religions in Turkey, I will pick the AKP on any given day. The AKP I believe is a party that treats all groups equally and places a high importance on religion in society and is best to represent Secularism in Turkey. The CHP version of secularism is not secularism. The CHP believes secularism to be a society without religion or a little religion.

You continue to contradict yourself by quoting the Quran yet you are against many sections of it yourself. So really the problem I see in your arguments is that you cherry pick what you believe should be practiced and not to be practiced. Sorry A.A.B you can't have it both ways.

Consensus (icma) itself is not mentioned in the Quran, and was introduced by Islamic jurists for practical purposes. Also consensus only comes AFTER Quran and Sunna. Only if you don't get to a clear solution after verifying with these two sources, you for for a consensus.

Actually, there is a serious problem with Islamic consensus: The majorities change. At the time of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, only he and Muhammed bin Nuh rejected Mutazila. All other scholars supported Mutazilite doctrine. Nowadays there is quite a majority that considers Mutazila to be heretical. This is not because of better arguments, but because historical and political circumstances favoured certain positions.

I studied the headscarf question intensively and I got to the clear conclusion that the headscarf is not commanded by the Quran and that all ahadith that are used to prove it are clearly inauthentic. I even found a hadith in Bukhari that shows that it is not an obligation.

I think that CHP is not against Islam, but they believe that religion should be a private matter.I think that's a good idea and I don't like my religion being used to gain political majorities. I also think it is bad taste to call political disagreement with you a mental illness.

As for headscarved women, they have the same rights as everyone else. But they also have to follow the same rules as everyone else if they want to use them, i.e. abide to clothing regulations and take off the scarf in schools, universities, the parliament etc. And actually, they should fight for their liberties against their husbands, fathers and imams who manipulate them, and not against the party who gave Turkish women equal rights, long before French and Swiss women.

A.A.B,

Mate you'll do a lot better if you stop insulting the intelligence of people especially Muslim women. Claiming that headscarved women have the same rights as everybody else but have to abide by clothing rules by taking off their headscarves is approaching comical hour. You lack consistency in your opinions. Why do these women have to take off their headscarves? Does the sight of a headscarf scare you to the core that much? Headscarved women are not Frankenstein and are not out to get you. Muslim women would like to take up their rightful place in society. This is a clear case of discrimination on the basis of religion. I challenge you to argue otherwise. Remember this blog is not the constitutional court made up of fanatical secularists.

The CHP is nothing but a fear mongering party more interested in partying and drinking. Your claim that the CHP gave Turkish women equal rights before French or Swiss women is again laughable. There is no equality in Turkey with women's rights. Turkish women may have been given the right in the 1930's to vote, but Democracy didn't arrive in Turkey till 1950. So what is the point in voting in an election if the parliament is made up of the same party? Under the previous civil code Turkish men were allowed to rape their wives. It wasn't until 2004 which was updated by the AKP that this tragedy was outlawed.

On my recent trip to Turkey last year I was surprised with the audacity in which women were disrespected. Domestic abuse, honour killings and sexual harassment is high in Turkey. Women participation in the workforce is at 24 percent. The participation of women in the Indonesian workforce is at 52 percent. Again, I would like to challenge you again and prove that Islam is the reason for the failure of women's rights in Turkey.

Yes religion is a private matter, but the CHP don't believe in such. The CHP and many of their fanatical supporters want the Islamic religion to be pacified and people to hide their religious expression. These people are 'ashamed' of Islam. These people don't believe in Secularism or freedom, but exploit Secularism to restrict religious freedom.

Claiming that headscarved women cover up due to manipulation from their fathers, husbands or imams goes to show how you insult the intelligence of Muslim women and denigrate them. This is compounded by your dubious claim that your research shows that the Headscarf is not a religious requirement. My advice to you if you don't believe the headscarf to be a religious requirement fine, don't allow your wife or daughter to cover up, but you have no right to impose 'your view' on others. This also applies to the state; incidentally the state is made up of employees who are to serve the taxpayer, not the other way around.

You expect people to believe that 65% of the female population are terrified of their men. If you seriously believe this, then I believe you have issues unresolved in your life. Don't expect to take people for fools. It is obvious that you don't have respect of people who think differently to yourself. I think it is a very human condition for everyone to have differing opinions, yet fanatical secularists can't come to grips with this reality.

You also expect Muslim women to suddenly take off their headscarves because fanatical secularists believe it is not a religious requirement. My advice to you is this is never going to happen. Turkish Muslim women will wear headscarves forever!

As for Islamic law and teachings. Again you show a very narrow mind and cherry pick whatever you like. People don't believe in a religion or not believe just because of your whims. The headscarf is an Islamic requirement, it is not up to you to decide if it’s a requirement or not. I am not going to waste my time arguing with someone who clearly doesn't understand why Muslim women wear a headscarf.

In regards to mental illness let me say a few things. If you live in a Muslim country and you cannot bear the sight of a woman with a Headscarf then you do need to see a psychiatrist. You have every right to dislike it, but at the very least you have no right to deny basic human rights to people who don't agree with you.

Göksel Doganay,

I am not scared of headscarved women, and I respect all religions. But I don't believe it is discrimination if all people are equally required to practise their religion in private, and not by visibly wearing something distinctive in public. It is actually interesting to see that you agree that religion is private, and still you insist on the public practice of wearing a headscarf. It is even more interesting to see that you seem to think that the choice of wearing a headscarf or not is made by the father or husband, not by the woman herself.

Actually I really think that many Turkish women are terrified by their husbands, if you look at statistics how many women are allowed to travel without asking their husband's permission, for example, or how many women experience domestic violence, the numbers are quite high. Low employment is not the only problem Turkish women have (actually the share of women in the workforce decreased even further under the AKP government). I don't blame any of these things on Islam though. Actually I am Muslim. I would rather blame them on Persian cultural influence. Iran is an example for that. Also Eastern Turks where things such as honour killings are prevalent, are very influenced by Persian culture (The so-called Kurdish spoken there are actually Persian dialects).

I don't think headscarved women are less intelligent than other women, I just believe they are less courageous. I have had many discussions with them, including many with university students (in non-Turkish universities). They are mostly notopen for rational discussion. Instea,d they tell me sentences like "We should follow Sunna and not question things too much". Otherwise put, they just believe what they are told and rather exclude themselves from society than question what they are told by their fathers and imams. This is why the headscarf is worn. But such an attitude has nothing to do with the Quran, look at 10:100 for example.

You accuse me of not understanding certain things. But do you understand what the Turkish Republic is? It is not just an organism to spend tax money effectively, but one of its aims is civilisational development of the Turkish people. Also, wearing the headscarf is not a human right (according to the European Human Rights Court) and Turkey is not a Muslim country. Türkiye laiktir, laik kalacak! (Turkey is laicist and will remain laicist).

I'm surprised AAB still has the time to leave long, non-sensical, irrational and contradictary messages on this blog. I would have thought he would have been too busy following his political representation, the CHP, at the all important 'Mulberry International'. Indeed Mulberries are important in the 'civilisational development of the Turkish people' as he so eloquently puts it.

A.A.B,

Dear dear dear me, you sound like a troubled little child who has lost his dummy or a goose rather than a civilised individual. Are you aware of what you have written on this blog? You are sounding more and more comical as you write more blogs. I have one question; do you have any mental disabilities? You continue to contradict yourself and offer no rational argument.

Your claims are very laughable and cannot be taken seriously. Let me list some of your claims and ask yourself will anyone listen to you?

Headscarved women;

- are 'less' intelligent than others
- 'less' courageous
- terrified of their husbands
- not open to rational discussion

You not only generalise Muslim women but you show no respect and sheer contempt. My advice for you will be to 'get over it'. I will give you a statistic and eat your heart out. When headscarved women were asked if they wear the headscarf willingly, an overwhelming 90% of responded with stating that wearing the headscarf was their own choice. Go read the research by TESAV.

You acknowledge that problems do exist for women in Turkey but make a racist and degrading claim blaming it on Persian cultural influences. Gee, what great scholarly research you have, tell me did it take completing a PhD at Harvard to make a groundbreaking claim?

Rather than doing any credible research in factors that affect honour killings and low women labour participation you make simplistic claims which fall short of the mark. You would do much better by researching factors such as the economy, wages, distribution of wealth, infrastructure available, educational qualifications, trade practices and regulatory requirements. These problems are all issues in developing countries and not due to Persian cultural influence.

You continue to contradict yourself, show no empathy for people who don't agree with you and insult the intelligent of people especially Muslim women. If you don't fear the headscarf what is wrong with the sight of a Muslim women wearing a headscarf? You respect all religions yet you don't want anything distinctive in public. Are you trying to make me laugh? This is a clear case of 'CONTRADICTION'. Oh and if you want to look up the Quran, I would suggest you read the surah el-kafirun.

Also I don't need the European court to decide the headscarf is a human right. I have the Australian High Court which ensures my religious freedom. I also have the charter for Human rights by the UN.

The Turkish republic you insist upon with your ideals is nothing but a joke to the world. It is the AKP that has advanced Turkey since 2002. The legacy of the fanatical secularists have left behind is a 'failed' state, high human rights violations, high inflation, high interest rates, high unemployment and military coups. If this is your idea of a civilised development of the Turkish people, I say to you no thanks I'm happy living in Australia. Turkey is a Muslim nation but not an Islamic one; there is a difference between the two.

My response to you with your laughable slogan to Turkey is laicist and will remain laicist. Turkey is not secular, but Australia is secular and will remain secular. Religious freedom is an indispensable element of Secularism. If you don't have it then there is no Secularism. If you continue to write comical blogs, my slogan to you is;

You a fruit loop and will remain a fruit loop!