Give a monetary sacrifice to our production of ... water, and you'll get healthy!
But that is exactly what happened here. Someone was sentenced to death based on superstition. I don't really see how there's any room for argument or interpretation here, it's pretty clear.What you said boiled down to "in the west we use evidence and trials to convict someone, while in the east they convict someone on superstition". That sounds more like a stereotype than a fact. And stereotypes are generally not factual.
Ah. Then ignore what I said just above.
Yes, the use of nuclear weapons requires the president's authorization, but I'm not really sure what relevance this has to the subject.Doesn't the US president have a thing called "the football" on him that allows him to destroy the world whenever he wants to? Though I'm sure there is a big difference between those, of course ;P
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt on this one because I didn't explain it very clearly. Let me try again. Hitler's actions were based on a certain set of ideas, namely that the Jews and gypsies were to blame for Germany losing the first world war and going into poverty. This set of views led him to conclude that he was justified in sending jews and gypsies to death camps. The set of ideas that Hitler used to justify killing jews is most definitely subject to scrutiny and criticism, which is demonstrated by the fact that naziism is frowned upon in the vast majority of countries.Also, just because a dictator is a bit religious doesn't mean he has a theocracy. Heck, I could take over a country and become a ruthless dictator and kill everyone who opposes me. By your logics if I was even the teensiest bit of religious that would immediatly make my country a theoracy of some kind. But as an Atheist I could do exactly the same thing, and the country wouldn't be a theocracy.
Now let's look at a theocratic government, which Saudi Arabia objectively is since the government bases its laws on the teachings of the Muslim faith. This set of ideas leads them to conclude that they are justified in doing things like forcing women to wear full robes and veils in public and execute people for sorcery. Are you trying to tell me that the set of ideas that leads them to justify these actions should not be subject to scrutiny or criticism? If so, then I will have to respectfully disagree with you.
(Hitler being an occultist really had nothing to do with it, there was no reason for me to bring that up, you're right about that.)
My mistake, I was referring specifically to Baghdad. Baghdad was the hub of scientific knowledge as late as the 11th century. Words like "algebra" and "algorithm" were invented there, and they figured out how the human eye works and a bunch of other stuff. Then it all went to shit when religion took over. I dare you to find me one scientific or mathematical advancement that came out of Baghdad after the 12th century.Wait what? In the 15th and 16th centuries the Ottoman Empire still was way more civilized than it was in Europe.
Turkey was historically much better, and that is reflected today by the fact that Turkey's government is quite secular.