Was there ever a perfectly secular country?
>implying there's a difference between religion and philosophy
>>670421
>Was there ever a perfectly secular country?
To a degree. Most modern nations working on a religion institution's dogma but the term "religion" is so hilariously vague that it cannot be said very clearly that their mainstream doesn't work off of something that could be considered a religion in some essence.
>>670421
China during the Cultural Revolution or Albania during Enver Hoxha's rule
>>670421
Iraq in 1991, Syria in 2012, and Lybia in 2013.
>>670909
Both of those were actively anti-secular, dumbass
By secular do you mean without God?
>>670421
>perfect
>secular
Hahahahah.
Switzerland, Monaco, Estonia
>>670909
Both of these were cults running a state with a false god in command and all forced to worship them.
>>670421
France? The Scandivian countries?
/pol/ meems aside, they're pretty neat places to live.
>>670421
>Was there ever a perfectly secular country?
No, not really. All the communist states either didnt try very hard, or failed, to eradicate religion and the political influence of the church. Nobody else ever bothered to try.
The joke is that the closest thing to a secular country is polis time Athens, since while they did worship and probably genuinely believed in their gods, they didnt treat them the same way organized religions did. Gods were more like a name for things that occur, human nature and disasters and such, rather than actual divinities that required worship OR ELSE.
Its also the closest we've been to a democracy, a time where a homeless person could have an idea like "lets invade Sicily" and make a plan, go to the assembly, present it, and start the invasion later that week.
>>671806
>/pol/ memes aside
Wish that we had such luck. A perfectly secular country is as much an enigma as a /pol/ free discussion on /his/. Or a religion free discussion, for that matter.
>tfw /his/ will never be a fully rational, by the books, facts and facts discussion of past events, devoid of religious zeal and my-ancestors-could-beat-up-your-ancestors tier nationalism
Modern western countries are pretty secular. Also China.
>>671823
I hope there'll be a /religion/ board soon. It's a little annoying to see the History and Humanities board catalog occasionally getting dominated by Catholics/Protestants/Orthodox shitposting about each other.
>>671824
>The Communist Party, which remains an atheist organisation, presently formally recognises five religions in China: Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Protestantism, and Catholicism.
Those are only the officially recognized and allowed religions. There is also Mongolian and Tibetan believes that are popular, but not recognized.
>>671830
No it wont, just because of that specific reason you mentioned. Everyone just shitposts and argues and /rel/ would be nothing more but a shitty warzone between Christian denominations, muslims and atheists.
>>670421
RF
nearly 40% of ppl are athiests, but they still respect their Orthodox hurritage
also, perhaps Maltese socialist regime, which got overthrown mainly due to church's support for capitalist West, ironically enough. served them right as new regime went totally SJW, legalised gay and formarly introduced divorce
Putin have to shift between the electorate variously
Tho his later remarks about Lenin were a bit wierd
>>670421
probably Albania
>>671836
But right now that same shit occurs, and its taking good threads and discussions down into the grave with it.
>>671841
Officially there are more tengrists/shamanists in Russia than there are atheists.
All the atheists self describe as orthadox christians.
>>671830
I want to see politics (lets face it /pol/ is not about that and wasn't supposed to be) and religion/philosophy board too
Not really fitting topic for his
Most population will be /int/ernationals anyway, many of whom are /pol/acks and former /new/smen like me
>>671848
In order to talk about politics you need some degree of respect.
You cant respect anonymous people.
4chan's format is just ill suited for it. Go try some internet forum, with moderation and user names.
That way when someone talks shit you can call him out that last week they were saying the opposite in that other thread or some such.
>>671836
Yeah, but at least they won't be shitting up here. I can take the spookposting and Diogenes stuff, but our resident religious crowd is more shitposting than funny.
>>671848
I doubt a politics board will last a more than a month. I've already seen /his/ get painted with the "Leftism" brush because we don't toe the 4chan Right-leaning line, I can't imagine a board where people will openly shitpost about their far-Left/Right ideologies will last very long without people trying to dominate the discussion.
>>670421
France, Turkey and Switzerland are the most secular countries today.
Even Erdogan's populist 12 year run couldn't change their constitution to a non-secular "Americanesque In God We Trust" stuff.
Ataturk was truly one of a kind.
>>671806
Doesn't Norway has a state religion?
>>670421
Czech Republic
>>673290
I'm surprised it took so long for this to be posted.
>secular
>bad
I want the Christians to go back to their board on the other *chan. This is a history and philosophy board, not a religious circle-jerk.
>>673366
Is anyone saying secularism is bad?
OP definitely isn't saying that...
>>670421
Technically most Western Democracies are.
Unless of course you're using the millennial definition of secularism. That being the complete expulsion of all religious influence from national politics. In that case the answer is no. And will always be no.
Any democracy for example must bend to religious influence simply by virtue of religion influencing voter's decision making. Even an undemocratic nation built on separating church from state is still more than likely going to be built by religious men who will be influenced ideologically and intellectually by their religion. And even if by some miracle the core constituency of some total dictatorship were all atheists they're still products of their culture which, like it or not is influenced by religion. And again they would still be required to cater at least in part to their religious populace.
Taken in this light perhaps a state church or simple separation of church and state is a necessary ambiguity?
>>670421
This still really needs a pepe and wodjack edit.
