@Kalyani

You are absolutely right in blaming the Congress Party for the fiasco on this score. But that should in way lead or mislead us into glorifying the BJP - the present avataar of the erstwhile Jan Sangh - as a party committed to gender equality and champion of upholding women's rights. The present reversal of roles or stands that we witness today among political is a rotten product of sheer shameless opportunism.What about its stand on the hapless widows of Vrindaban, the murderous decisions of village councils? It seizes upon cases when minorities are to score political points. The its MP from Mathura the noted actress Hemamalini made moronically hurtful comments on these hapless widows. Now coming to Nehru's pusillanimity in reforms of personal laws when confronted by the venerable socialist leader J.B.Kripalini who on the floor of parliament thundered that 'you must bring it also for the Muslim community.Take it from me that the Muslim community is prepared to have it but you are not brave enough to do it'. Nehru's ambiguity, indecisiveness and verbal jugglery proved very dear one for the country in relation to other issues including this one. He was on record saying 'I should like a civil code which applies to everybody but 'wisdom hinders'! Whose wisdom was he talking about? Should such wisdom or lack of it have been to override the constituional mandate?

suni51 wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

I agree with Chinmoy and others that majority is basis of democracy.  Majority is of different kinds.  Majority based on thought/ opinion is fluctuating and represents public opinion. Nothing wrong with this. Majority view is that holds authority in democracy. But then there is majority or minority based on sectional and community interests. This sort of majority or minority is of permanent nature. The so called conversions and ghar vapasi are intended to disturb the existing conditions based on religious community. In this context also, majority matters more. After all, in system of universal adult franchise, majority rules- be this based on opinion, thought or sheer numbers of a community.

Here is the issue of minority rights. Majority cannot oppress minority. This is also in company law. So far as majority rule is in interest of all citizens, all is well. Oppression of minority community by majority in any manner is negation of democracy. Not only majority rule but also equality before law, protection of citizenship rights of all irrespective of community, caste and gender are bedrock of any democracy, any civil society. It is in this context that secularism and socialism gain significance.  

 

A very simple question sir, does this minority right apply in India only or any other countries in our neighborhood have any care for this. Leave apart countries but in our own country where Hindus are minority groups what do you suggest for their welfare. Why is all the emphasis on one particular community that otherwise is the majority all over the world and clearly breaking all the rules of humanity.  

 

Everywhere suppression of minority is bad. We can only exercise moral pressure and UNO may take appropriate action where minority community is suppressed by various means. India can also raise its voice in UNO in this regard. Possibly, Hindus have not been treated properly in some parts of India as well. For example, Kashmiri Pandits are living as refugees in delhi and elsewhere. Government of India needs to take appropriate steps in this matter.     

 

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

suni51 wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

I agree with Chinmoy and others that majority is basis of democracy.  Majority is of different kinds.  Majority based on thought/ opinion is fluctuating and represents public opinion. Nothing wrong with this. Majority view is that holds authority in democracy. But then there is majority or minority based on sectional and community interests. This sort of majority or minority is of permanent nature. The so called conversions and ghar vapasi are intended to disturb the existing conditions based on religious community. In this context also, majority matters more. After all, in system of universal adult franchise, majority rules- be this based on opinion, thought or sheer numbers of a community.

Here is the issue of minority rights. Majority cannot oppress minority. This is also in company law. So far as majority rule is in interest of all citizens, all is well. Oppression of minority community by majority in any manner is negation of democracy. Not only majority rule but also equality before law, protection of citizenship rights of all irrespective of community, caste and gender are bedrock of any democracy, any civil society. It is in this context that secularism and socialism gain significance.  

 

A very simple question sir, does this minority right apply in India only or any other countries in our neighborhood have any care for this. Leave apart countries but in our own country where Hindus are minority groups what do you suggest for their welfare. Why is all the emphasis on one particular community that otherwise is the majority all over the world and clearly breaking all the rules of humanity.  

 

Everywhere suppression of minority is bad. We can only exercise moral pressure and UNO may take appropriate action where minority community is suppressed by various means. India can also raise its voice in UNO in this regard. Possibly, Hindus have not been treated properly in some parts of India as well. For example, Kashmiri Pandits are living as refugees in delhi and elsewhere. Government of India needs to take appropriate steps in this matter.    

 

Probably the world is waking up now under the guidance of King of Jordan and Prez Obama to teach them proper lesson which they should have learned way before. They have started to believe they are here to rule over the world and everything is fair in the process, including increasing own population, killing others and even kidnapping women for the purpose. Human right and they do not see each other properly where might is right in any or every case.   

 

 

Those who are targeting the minority community for many ills are not offering any solution. Chinmoy states that in democracy majority is the basis for decision making. Fair enough, the decision to be a secular country was also taken by a majority. It was enshrined in the constitution. Should it now be changed. Suni51 repeatedly informs that countries around us are not secular. So should we also become non secular like them and become chaotic or set an example for them to follow.The minority community in India is not a monolithic community and is  divided world over. Fringe elements and their supporters should not be allowed to succeed irrespective of which religion they belong to as otherwise India will be the loser.

vijay wrote:

Those who are targeting the minority community for many ills are not offering any solution. Chinmoy states that in democracy majority is the basis for decision making. Fair enough, the decision to be a secular country was also taken by a majority. It was enshrined in the constitution. Should it now be changed. Suni51 repeatedly informs that countries around us are not secular. So should we also become non secular like them and become chaotic or set an example for them to follow.The minority community in India is not a monolithic community and is  divided world over. Fringe elements and their supporters should not be allowed to succeed irrespective of which religion they belong to as otherwise India will be the loser.

 

So we should lose our identity in the name of secularism?

Wait and watch, now Imam has issued Fatwa so be ready to ruled by IMAM BHAKTA in place of RAM BHAKTA. 

China has taken several steps including ban on Burka and beard in particular areas. They have clearly stated Burka is not accepted as it helps terrorism. There is no need to say one child formula is applicable for all citizens in China irrespective of religion one follows. Only India is afraid of applying any restriction on population explosion which is sending demography out of proportion. 

I think any comparison with countries which have earned notoriety in meting out a thoroughly barbatic treatment to members of other religions is not warranted here. These are failed nations. If India commands respect in the comity of nations it is because of her secular credentials. Mr Vijay talks about majority having accepted secularism. That is true. The only point of our difference is that this majority was not that of the majority community but one which had representations from all.Thus upholding and strengthening secular traditions and practices the leaders of all communities and faiths have a sacred duty. We may not accept the idea of Hindu identity for all but an Indian identity strictly based on citizenship as defined in the statute along with constitutional provisions. Our Constitution - that visionary document - provides the greatest protective shield for their rights and they must submit themselves to the primacy of constitutional not their archaic personal laws. India is not a banana republic.Our legislators may have disappointed us but we have an independent judiciary and a professional army and fairly enlightened press to take care of any mischief in this regard. For India embracing secularism was or is not a matter of choice but one of compulsion.The moment it is gone it would be all over for us.

Please read the line beginning with "we may not accept....." with the following ' is a must".

chinmoymukherjee wrote:

I think any comparison with countries which have earned notoriety in meting out a thoroughly barbatic treatment to members of other religions is not warranted here. These are failed nations. If India commands respect in the comity of nations it is because of her secular credentials. Mr Vijay talks about majority having accepted secularism. That is true. The only point of our difference is that this majority was not that of the majority community but one which had representations from all.Thus upholding and strengthening secular traditions and practices the leaders of all communities and faiths have a sacred duty. We may not accept the idea of Hindu identity for all but an Indian identity strictly based on citizenship as defined in the statute along with constitutional provisions. Our Constitution - that visionary document - provides the greatest protective shield for their rights and they must submit themselves to the primacy of constitutional not their archaic personal laws. India is not a banana republic.Our legislators may have disappointed us but we have an independent judiciary and a professional army and fairly enlightened press to take care of any mischief in this regard. For India embracing secularism was or is not a matter of choice but one of compulsion.The moment it is gone it would be all over for us.

 

Then what is the issue. Why are fringe elements being seen as saviours by many and why is there non secular logic being accepted by even many well off and educated people. Fringe elements are in all communities.