Go back a few hundred years and I bet most people from your community would disagree. Modern standards =/= most of human history's opinion on the matter. Hell 'highly secular' wasn't even a proper thing until a few decades ago.
Define deviation. Rome tolerated a whole bunch of stuff, including most forms of religious diversity, yet if you refused to acknowledge the Emperor as a god that was definitely a problem, how is that relatively minor requirement any different from bar mitzvah or the face tattoos? Similarly, I just watched a documentary on the BBC that with a straight face 'praised' the Ottoman Empire for being remarkably tolerant and diverse for 'only' having the institutionalized rape, kidnapping and forcible conversion of Christian children.
"Secular" has a particular modern meaning but religious observance is something that varies a great deal. Just look at the popularity of deism among 17th-18th century intellectuals.
And beyond that, like I said in a previous post, DA adopts a purely modern morality. Xenophobia and bigotry are not portrayed as virtues even within the setting.
As for what the Ottomans did, I can't comment on what BBC program you watched. They did do a substantial amount to support religious diversity in contrast to Europe.





Retour en haut














