Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by parijataka, Oct 22, 2012.
YSR widow campaigns with Bible in hand.
In Andhra Pradesh, battle over the Bible
When will Hindus realise this is a big problem.
Don't mess with Bible.....
When the problem to too big to sweep beneath the carpet....
I would like to tell something. Couple of months earlier when Jagan Reddy visited the Tirupathi Shrine there was a debate on whether he is a Hindu or a christian and everybody form his party argued that he is a Hindu and today his mother carries a Bible and says that she is a christian. Now then the same party who told that they were Hindus now are mum on the issue and now they say that they are secular.....
This is very misleading to the people, they have to be clear as to what they are following and what they preach. They themselves are not clear and they are preaching that they will do this and that if they are elected. If a leader is confused of what he is following then what will he preach and what will he do.......
its ok to carry a bible as long as she does not drag it to discussions or comments , actions etc. it is just like a cross or tilak etc. if you wear a small cross it is ok , problem is if you carry a big real life size cross in a rally, then then cross becomes a political too with its presence and symbolism.
She should wear western dress instead of campaning in saree & big bindhi....Her dressing is also political.
No, I dont think so. Will it be considered ok if say Salman Khurshid campaigns with a Kuran in hand or Digvijaya Singh with a Bhagwad Gita ?
How is Vijayamma 'propagating' a particular religion? Did she say something from the Bible or allude to it or wave it in hand for the cameras and channels to see?
Next, a person wearing a cross or taleem or rudraksh at a rally is also 'propagating' a religion?
Why is it ok? If the Bible is not used as a reference, then it is just symbolism. Can you deny a politician's right to wear or carry on her person her religious symbol at a political rally? If so, The same standards apply to everybody. And as such, the rudraksh should be cut off the hand and the taleem removed off the neck of anyone campaigning at a political rally.
A cross or rudraksha or taleem is unobtrusive and not visible like a book in one's hand.
She's blatantly propagating Christianity. Some Andhra folk I know called late YSR as the desi Constantine
Rudraksh, Tilak, etc are symbols. Would you call a politician campaigning with the Gita or Koran as exercising symbolism ?
What if it is? A standing order should then be passed that the visible cross or taleem, or rudraksh constitutes 'religious philandering' should then be passed? You see where this is going? Plenty of politicians wear the tagiyah (muslim prayer cap) or a tilaka on their heads at political rallies by the way.
Arguing that 'carrying a bible' at a political party as a source of strength or religious symbol is religious 'proselytizing' when it is not used as a reference, a political tool in any overt way or not alluded to is illogical in a country like India. I agree it is asecular in asmuch as it is personal religious exhibitionism in public form, but then for that matter so is a taqiyah or a tilaka.
How is she 'blatantly propagating' Christianity in this instance? Did she say something from the Bible, did she mention it at the rally as her source of strength? If yes, she did.
How is the tilaka struck across the forehead of a politician not an overt symbol of that politician's religiosity? And it is just that, as long as he does not allude to the tilaka or uses it in a way that references it as a prop or appendage in his political rally.
In asmuch as the Bible being carried around in the hand of a person is a personal religious symbol of that individual's particular religiosity, exhibited albeit in the public domain, but not justified as a source of the principles of that individual's political party or not used to subvert in any way the otherwise secularist agenda of that party.
And yes, a politician carrying a Gita or Koran is still using a religious symbol at a political rally, and is not proselytizing until he/she utters from his/her mouth at that political rally that the Gita or Koran is more than just a symbol for instance, but a supernatural source that justifies, legitimizes or vindicates their party.
A Tilak is as 'overt' as a Bindi or Vande Mataram or a Saffron wristband/Kada
Carrying a Quran, Bible or Gita while campaigning for elections is most definitely pandering to a particular votebank
Saree and bindhi for attracting Hindus and Bible for christians.........
Its all cheap add of paid Missionaries running with the help of these fools...
Definitely not same as wearing a cross or rudraksha or a taweez which I am sure lot of leaders do! She carries a Bible in her hands while doing election campaign and says `it gives her strength` - not so subtle promotion of Christianity.
That I'm afraid, Lurkerbaba, is a personal opinion. And while you are certainly entitled to hold your view, there is no logical or legal grounds or legal precedent to preclude considering a religious book a religious symbol- as long as it is not used as a reference, a source or an adjuvant to justify the sanguineness of political principles or policies.
I hold the opposite view on logical-reasoning grounds, if a book is not used to reference or validate political principles or policy or hold in any way one superior from the other, whether of the individual or party concerned by the individual or party concerned at that political rally, it is not in its functionality anything more than a religious symbol. And as such, constitutes a symbolic religious appurtenance or extension of that person.
But mate, did she say that at the rally? Or after the rally, as her justification for carrying it? In which case, the justification is entirely personal.
Why do you think Hindus wear the rudraksh?
Bhai, I am fine with anyone wearing rudraksha or corss or taweez. This lady is a public figure and her actions will be scrutinised for whatever she says or does like any other politician and what she said is a promotion of her faith. She is not visitng her neighbours house carrying a Bible in hand, she is giving a speech, an election rally to boot. Definitely it is symbolic.
Separate names with a comma.