Turkey needs a new social contract. During the Republic's early years, the country missed a similar opportunity as the founding fathers became preoccupied with social engineering to create the nation of their dreams. They did, no doubt, mean well and wanted to stop the country from going back to the brink of collapse. Their efforts were motivated by both anger toward and admiration of the West, which had brought the Ottoman Empire to its knees. Thus all things authentic about the country came to be viewed as the root cause of the empire's demise, as the government regarded the people, still attached to tradition and religion, as a domestic threat. This attitude, in turn, gave rise to a fascist state that fundamentally promoted a Western lifestyle and sought to absolutize all practices relevant to its construction. However flamboyant or rational the state's claims were, the implementation of its policies hinted at a totalitarian mentality. Thus the fascism inherent in the practices, not the content itself, became the problem.For the past 12 years, Turkey has been democratizing under the leadership of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. This process of transformation has been occasionally turbulent and sometimes quite rough and contradictory due to the Kemalist elite's resistance and continued advocacy of the status quo. The Justice and Development Party (AK Party) itself, which has emerged as a transformative force in Turkish politics, has not been immune to such contradictions either. After all, breaking away from the old ways tends to be challenging for a reformist movement struggling against them. For instance, Deputy Prime Minister Bülent Arınç recently stated that "women should not laugh in public," while Erdoğan has been speaking out against the Gaza massacres, the Islamic world's indifference as well as anti-Semitism. Arınç's remarks received attention at home and abroad, as he described how men and women ought to live according to Islam - that is, his own interpretation thereof.Not only Turkey's secularists but also members of the AK Party criticized the deputy prime minister. After all, this is the first time after 80 years of Kemalist oligarchical rule that society has engaged in a dialogue about what kind of country we should live in and how it ought to be governed. As such, it is perfectly healthy for the general population to disapprove of Arınç's statements.Erdoğan, in turn, has a more progressive approach about such matters than his fellow party members. He represents a social class that demands respect as religious people, but nonetheless want to coexist with others on equal footing. This represents a valuable effort and important example for not only Turkey, but also the Middle East and the world.It would have been perfectly alright if Arınç was addressing a small group of like-minded individuals as a private citizen. But when a public figure and a government official voices such opinions, to which perhaps only part of the audience would condone, society tends to react. The problem, in this sense, is not what Arınç said, but which hat he was wearing when he spoke his mind. He is, after all, a key representative of the government of Turkey's people.In a democratic country, all citizens are entitled to freely exercise and promote their religion. Again, citizens of all backgrounds and religious affiliations ought to be able to serve at all levels of government.But at times when individuals interact with others in a social setting, they are expected to abide by the social contract upon which the entire society agrees. Government officials, in particular, cannot impose subjective convictions and values, however righteous and beneficial, on others.To be sure, an all-encompassing social contract and ethical agreements guarantee the entire spectrum of subjective values and identity groups. Anything else would suggest that the rules will remain the same even if the power-holders change. Considering that Erdoğan is mature enough to handle these delicate matters, others in his party should follow suit.