Haryana becomes fifth BJP-ruled state to ban sale of meat
- Thread starter letmein
- Start date
- Status
Mr.J
Innovator
I don't know what he's trying to say but I have problems with the way BJP acts as moral guardians, riding their high horses and treating citizens as stupid kids who don't know anything better.
chiron
Innovator
fwict i don't thing he has any problem with anything discussed in this thread. it is just his moral obligation of being a trollvadhi leading to random posts.
I think my post is quite clear. Which part do you you have difficulty understanding?
Last edited:
Mr.J
Innovator
The ignorance, stupidity and dis-respect in this one sentence is just too much.
Party Monger
Juggernaut
Sigh, here we go again. Fundamental rights, that's why. No matter who it is. If there has been appeasement, then object to that, dont justify using old shit done by idiots for political gains.
All of it. Does not make sense to me. Well let me try..!
What you mentioned were highly geopolitical issues (at that time at least) and not comparable to what happened regarding ban of sale of meat due to a Jain time of prayer. Irrespective even those were incorrect in their banishment as an entity in our system. Did those acts have a direct impact on our consumption habits...? Did they affect a large populace sector enmasse..? It is not about which religious groups is being favored here, it is about the concept of free speech and it being succumbed to muzzling by our government. Which is lame and pathetic. A loss (akin to freedom) is same irrespective of time line and quantum. Where as your reaction (and subsequently its questioning of the the group here), it is nonsensical and thrives on xenophobia. The last two paragraphs are just plain simple satire and sarcasm laced with frustration and nonchalance towards the concept of freedom and free speech. My "x" and their "y" does not work always. Well it does for our foolish politicians, you want to ride the same bandwagon..?
Correct me please, if I am incorrect in my assessment. Maybe what I wrote is diametrically aligned to what you meant, so I apologize; and you should clarify.
Last edited:
I am in agreement with much of what you say. I would however like to elaborate a few points.
First a rhetorical question:
1. True story. One of my friend's daughter was unwell recently and he was up at night taking care of her. She was in pain and sleeping fitfully. And then at 3:30, the mosques started their alla-akbar routine. It was the holy month and the racket continued for half an hour. She woke up and couldn't sleep after that. Long story short, the loudspeakers ruined the day for her. And it wasn't one of those unlucky days. The 3:30 routine continued for the whole month and a different version of the routine goes on the entire year.
She is still a kid. When she grows up, what advice would you give her on secularism, freedom of religion and concern for other's welfare.
2. I am for keeping all religious crap out of public space. Keep religion inside home, dick inside pants and I wouldn't give a $hit. But if someone is going to force their crap on me or my family, do not expect sympathy when your kids don't get to enjoy beef or are forced to do yoga.
If it is going to be my crap vs theirs, I am going to fight for my crap. More than any other fundamental principle, I am for reciprocity. Be nice to me if you want me to be nice to you.
3. Free speech, secularism, democracy are great ideas. Till they are not. It is important to be alert and fight against dangerous ideologies. Remember, Hitler was a democratically elected leader. While you are fighting for free speech and liberty, make sure you do not give space to totalitarians who would use it to undermine those very liberties.
4. For those who are trying to give it political angle, I was born in non-secular India. I have seen the work of those champions of freedom who put secularism in the constitution. It wasn't pretty.
Last edited:
I partially agree with what you have to say, especially the early morning loudspeaker prayers. Why is it that only one community is favoured in the name of minority rights? Aren't other minorities be given equal advantage?
This is what a Senior secular Pakistani writer has to say about morning prayers in India on a Canadian TV show. Watch the last 20mins of video without fail.
Wait for a month, these brainless Khans will lecture us on TV for Noiseless, Smokeless Diwali.
I literally puked when I traveled across old city Hyderabad post Bakrid, you can see roads filled with blood, smelling flesh & what not. Thankfully they've banned a cow slaughter this Bakrid, with Ganapathi festival on other end, it's a perfect recipe for communal tension.
This ban seems to be a very much planned law & order exercise.
Party Monger
Juggernaut
Check the relevant sections as per law and complain to police. Talk to the seniors of their community with the police. Tell them the genuine issues. Dont think anyone would have a problem.
Thanks. I will watch the video at leisure. I used to watch Tarek Fateh videos a lot earlier. BTW, he is a Canadian citizen.
Yup. That is how low we have allowed things to fall. It is only a slightly less infuriating than lectures on secularism from people whose real desire is a establish a sharia kingdom under a dictator.
Last edited:
iknowledge
Discoverer
Guys lets us not go into religious biases and debates on religion. Everyone has their rights to practice their religion. Let us all follow our religion and respect other religions in our country.
When there is sound of prayers on loud speaker in the mosques, there is sound of fire crackers in Diwali, there is sound of prayers on loud speakers for aarti's, there is sound of loud music for any celebrations in our country. It all depends with part of the state or city you reside in.
There is appropriate authorities designated in our country to take care of any nuisance or issues. Let us all be fair and follow the right procedure and follow it truthfully.
Can we try and worship in silence and celebrate with less noise? Yes we can. If yes, then all of us should do it in silence or with less noise. Cant tell one person to be silent when others are using high sound.
The change will start from us. Let us initiate the change for the betterment of our city, state, and country. And the world around us will change for the betterment of the world. If we start taking small steps towards betterment of the Humanity, I am sure things will change for good in the long run.
When there is sound of prayers on loud speaker in the mosques, there is sound of fire crackers in Diwali, there is sound of prayers on loud speakers for aarti's, there is sound of loud music for any celebrations in our country. It all depends with part of the state or city you reside in.
There is appropriate authorities designated in our country to take care of any nuisance or issues. Let us all be fair and follow the right procedure and follow it truthfully.
Can we try and worship in silence and celebrate with less noise? Yes we can. If yes, then all of us should do it in silence or with less noise. Cant tell one person to be silent when others are using high sound.
The change will start from us. Let us initiate the change for the betterment of our city, state, and country. And the world around us will change for the betterment of the world. If we start taking small steps towards betterment of the Humanity, I am sure things will change for good in the long run.
ryanrulez4ever
Herald
i'd rather have corrupt over religious and corrupt
True that mate, finally someone with common sense !!
Mr.J
Innovator
What made you think congress doesn't have religious biases? It is just that people who use the congress platform to push their religious agenda get a free pass from the media and the intellectual class in India. Some people's agenda is just news. Some people's agenda become 'The rise of the right wing' .
There are too many examples to list. Wondered why the 'secular' Sonia went to meet Imam Bukhari before the elections? It has been a tradition in congress to fall at the feet of Bukhari to get a fatwa in their favour. Remember, Indira was the PM who introduced the word 'secular' in the constitution. She also sent the army to the golden temple and suppressed the news of Hindu massacre in Bangladesh in 1971 (so that her favorite constituency doesn't face a backlash in India).
I am telling you guys again. If you are going to make it a party x vs party y issue, there is so much dirt I can dig out on congress.
Again it is not religious vs corrupt. It is one kind of religious and one kind of corrupt vs another kind of religous and another kind of corrupt.
Could you elaborate a little. What specific changes could the Hindus of kashmir have made so that they would not have been evicted from their homes by their neighbors?
- Status