Aap ka corruption!

[derp]

Such a govt can ban clothing like burka because it makes it difficult to identify the person wearing it and if they are hiding anything and they don't have to give any consideration for the religious/cultural beliefs or traditions of Muslims or any other people who wear similar clothing.

This exactly is anti secular. This is no less than facism in a masqueraded form.

 

[abhi1984]

Kejriwal is living proof that getting educated at an IIT or another premier institute does not imply one is intelligent and that education does not necessary bring intelligence.

I really like this, education does not equal intelligence. But at the risk of getting into a debate, there are some parts of the post I disagree with. Just putting my thoughts as "agree to disagree".

Lastly, India is neither tolerant nor secular. It has never been in its long history.
The reactions to opinions of Sharukh or Amir (without even trying to understand what they were trying to say) is prime proof of intolerance. The reaction to an Tennis athlete or an airline that does s not know about Sachin Tendulkar is again a proof of intolerance. What our country has in abundance is population and its power is regularly abused to forcefully shutdown unfavorable opinions. That is what intolerance means.

The word secular means that the countries policies have nothing to do with and remain completely unaffected and unbound by religion or the idiocies that come bundled with it. And here, we have a frigging law to protect the "precious religious sentiments" of the people. Religious appeasement as a means to get political brownie points t is pretty common. We also have extremist outfits of of a majority religion operating out in the open and outfits of a minority religion which expressed similar kind of extremist views banned. A secular country would have banned all of them equally as hindrances to progress.

I think this whole "intolerant" and "secular" debate is bullshit.

For one, secularism as a definition "is the principle of the separation of government institutions and persons mandated to represent the state from religious institutions and religious dignitaries." (thanks to wiki). India is not alone in not following this rule, in many western countries their religion plays a very big role, be it Jewish or Christianity. Here, I don't mean if they are not following the principle, so we shouldn't too. Unfortunately as much as we don't want it to be, religion plays a big role in everyone's life. As someone said, it helps people in difficult times but it also leads to atrocities. In my opinion, the birth of religion has to do more with politics than any thing, from athenian vs spartans (a greek reference to the "gods" they prayed and city governance at that time) till today.
France for that matter has been some what has been an exception and forefront of democracy. If someone has watched "National Treasure 2", there Nicolas Cage gives a preview of democracy coming from France - "government setup so that no man needs to be afraid of another". France follows something called Laïcité - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laïcité
but I can't say similar things about other countries. So I find the whole view of criticizing India, a developing country, to be not secular as strange, to put it mildly when many developed and educated economies find it difficult to implement. Let us think about educating India before we start this debate.

As for intolerance. The actual word people are looking for is "fanboyism". And as much as media tries to portray it as post 2014 phenomena, it has been a rising global phenomena. The unfortunate thing in India is it is not limited to certain topics like gaming, movies etc. but is part of our every day life. We as a people are fanboys to everything we do and have to defend it. This includes defending Salman even if his movies are shit and even if he ran over people with his car or panning SRK if he says "intolerance" is rising. People saying "Star Wars is bad" or anything against gamers on twitter get the same bigot-ic responses as do people saying BJP or AAP is bad. They are not "intolerant". They are fanboys, who have to defend their choices irrespective of whether it is right or wrong. This was the case of tennis star not recognizing Sachin and all sachin fanboys went ape shit.
That said, fanboys or not, everyone has right to express their views. So if people pan SRK or Aamir, based on whatever they understood is fine because if not, then wouldn't it be people are being intolerant of the intolerance of people being intolerant of SRK or Aamir's view on intolerance. See where this goes. This leads to everyone calling each other of being intolerant of others view. Someone has to step up to the plate and say "okay, its fine if you disagree with my view", as simple as that. But no, we have so much fanboyism that it is not stopping.

In the movie Creed, Rocky says "its a fact of life, until you are talking you are not listening, and if you are not listening, you are not learning". I don't know if Modi is listening or "not a fanboy" but he his keeping his mouth shut unlike Kejriwal who talks a lot that you have to wonder if he is even listening.

I welcome anyone to be intolerant to this view. Don't worry, it is fine and there wouldn't be any such tl;dr posts

 

[derp]

Kejru be like:-

 

[derp]