Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Nothing is stopping the Patriarch from moving.
It makes sense as almost none of his flock is where he is.
Why should he have to move? The Patriarchate has been there longer then the state of Turkey or even the Ottoman Empire for that matter.
The last I checked, the Turks had basically dealt with the Greeks in Turkey."They could always move" is usually a bad argument. Racists , anti-immigrant people and their ilk often use it. " If Black people don't like the racism in America why don't they move back to Africa"...etc.
According to you then maybe the Indians in America should "move" since they are also "minority" too? Or forbid them from having their own schools?
what is your take in a government that does not 'tolerate' any religion. Straight out denies its very existance? That is what happens in Turkey and their government... It denies Christians their right to express their religious beliefs. Not being about to have a Christian schoolThis is religious intolerance? Nope it is not and violates the human rights to worship one's God and learn about their own faith.
To stop looking like a pathetic old loser living in the past.
The last I checked, the Turks had basically dealt with the Greeks in Turkey.
Well there isn't actually an "Indian-land" that they can move to, like the Greeks in Turkey have in...well...Greece.
I was a bit confused because first you implied that the Government you were speaking of does not tolerate 'any' religion, but then you specified Christianity as the object of intolerance. Just to clarify... which do you mean?
A State that is not neutral with respect to the religions of its citizens is a State that does not tolerate pluralism - it outlaws it. Such States often do so because they wish to impose a particular state-favoured religion, usually with the goal of creating a monlithic society.
I don't think they are overly concerned that you might consider them "pathetic losers living in the past" and therefore don't see that as a reason for moving.
Because injustices might have taken place in the past it's now perfectly acceptable for the Turkish government to continue them today?
wrong they can move to south America... why not there seem to be the majority of them after the whites chased them out the same as the Turks chased out and killed all the Armenians and Greeks...Not to mention the Kurds.. These Greeks are Asia Minor Greeks period as Indians from South America are just that... How fare would it be to kick some out to their neighbour's land?
ArnautDaniel[QUOTE said:;54176498]Well they can say whatever they want, and it is their own business.
What it looks like is that they don't want to give up on Constantinople as it is a symbol the last time that the Greeks constituted a major power that actually mattered on the world stage.
The smart man at the poker table knows when he has lost and moves on to better horizons.
Again, they can do what they want.
Of course, as an American, I don't see why the US should care.
On the contrary, you are under the illusion that all the pre-Columbian American peoples are a single society. They are not.
It makes no sense for say a Lakota to make common cause with Mayas in Central America or Incas in Peru.
On the other hand Greeks in Greece and Turkey represent a common culture and common language.
If there were a Lakota state existing somewhere then I'd wonder why Lakotas in North and South Dakota hadn't gone there.
However there is no reason for those same Lakotas to go to Mexico or Peru, or Guatemala, or any of those place.
Nope if they want to join EU they have to have their human rights in order and they never bothered to deal with it that is why they are not even considered...
this is not poker
The man in Constantinople is a religious figure and some respect is due to him. You should at least treat others the way you want them to treat you.
The Patriarch has any right to be like the Patriarch of Antioch,
Jerusalem, Alexandria and so forth. They have a right to there as any muslim has a right to express his relgious obligations in any other country. That is double standard.
No they cannot if they claim to be a "democracy". And the US should care for they send their own missionaries that get persecuted from the Turkish government.
Like you said: "Why should America care". So what are you doing defending the Turks? Turkey refuses to recognise an EU member state (Cyprus), this alone is enough to bar Turkeys accession to the EU! Even if Turkey was a role model of democracy! It is like a country recognising the USA but not the state of Texas.You don't think that they have this little feud with the Greeks...the Greeks are already members of the EU...and the Greeks are working as hard as they can behind the scenes to make sure they never become members...might have something to do with things?
You don't think that they have this little feud with the Greeks...the Greeks are already members of the EU...and the Greeks are working as hard as they can behind the scenes to make sure they never become members...might have something to do with things?
Who says we do work hard not to let them in the EU? It is to our advantage to have them so they can finally stop violating the human rights and become finally a true democracyIt is the French and Germans who they do not want them...
Well, reality is reality and idealism is idealism, and sometimes grownups just do what makes sense even if the listless dreamers don't like it.
Who is the dreamer? The ones who want to eliminate Christian presence in Turkey? or the ones who are already the Christian presence ?
So? that does not set the norm one Patriarchate did so? what about the rest?Yes but there is no reason for him to stay in Constantinople. I mean, the guy who was in Antioch found it sensible to move from nowhere Antioch to somewhere Damascus and the world didn't fall apart.
So why shouldn't the guy in Constantinople move to nearby Athens?
We have our own Spiritual leader but I do not expect people to understand our ecclesiology..... We have our own Archbishop no need to have a Patriarch. His flock is all of Europe in case you are wondering. He is not only the hierarch for Turkey.... He is the spiritual leader of Australia, Western Europe, and Americas. So to say "go to Greece" is pointless.
Most of the guy in Constantinople's flock is in nearby Greece...wouldn't it make sense for a religious leader to reside where his flock lives?
totally incorrect! His flock is all over and to be in Constantinople juristictionally speaking is no problem at all since he "cannot be near" to all of his flock anyways
Of course it would make sense...if Constantinople didn't represent a Greek Golden Age that is long gone and that the Greeks refuse to let go of.
So much as the Turks should leave Thrace and go home.... But according to Lossaine Treaty we have that minority so what you say is pointless also since they have every right to be there. Kicking out a minority is "undemocratic" indeed; or then all African Americans should have been "kicked out"...or "Mexicans" etc....and still call America a democratic nation...
The guy in Contantinople would have left years ago had he instead been the guy in Nowhere-Southwestern-Turkey.
By far the Patriarch has recieved great honor from politicians from US and Europe
Oh, they are a "democracy" and the majority of people in that democracy want the Greeks and the guy in Constantinople to leave.
lol... how can this be but not a contradiction ? The majority wants a certain minority out? how about kicking out the Albanian minority out from Greece? Greeks do not likfe the Albanians shall we kick them out?
This is not how democracy works at all... Civilized people do not "vote" others out of their country ....
That is the wonder of majority rule.
But perhaps you are confusing "democracy" with something less democratic...something that restricts what the majority can actually do.
The majority rules applies to restrict immigration rules maybe but never to just vote for eliminating minorities out of one's country.. With this kind of "majority rules" laws Turkey can only dream to become part of the EU.
Well there isn't actually an "Indian-land" that they can move to, like the Greeks in Turkey have in...well...Greece.
Athens already has a church. Antioch 'ceased to be' a city.Yes but there is no reason for him to stay in Constantinople. I mean, the guy who was in Antioch found it sensible to move from nowhere Antioch to somewhere Damascus and the world didn't fall apart.
So why shouldn't the guy in Constantinople move to nearby Athens?
Why should he move?Most of the guy in Constantinople's flock is in nearby Greece...wouldn't it make sense for a religious leader to reside where his flock lives?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?