Toronto Hindus oppose Muslim prayers at school

[The Messiah]

Funny isnt it, that in the Bagwad Gita in Public Schools, they are all pro for it, while for the Muslims they arent. Bunch of hypocrites.

Stick a beard on them and they'll be shouting the same thing the crazy mullahs shout.

Opposite ends of the same stick.

 

[sanjay]

Don't leave out the Kaangressmen, who are the most fanatical worshippers of their own Personality Cult.

Harm their God, and they'll kill you by the thousands. They've already proven that, haven't they?

 

[KS]

Level the field ?

How are minorities getting advantage over hindus through these civil laws ? Id very much like to hear since those laws are only applicable when both parties are from the same religion.

One instance - Govt does not appropriate their religious assets - because of those very laws - while it gratuitously 'manages' our assets.

BTW who does not want his own lil' private harem in his home ?

Don't leave out the Kaangressmen, who are the most fanatical worshippers of their own Personality Cult.

Harm their God, and they'll kill you by the thousands. They've already proven that, haven't they?

Exactly - for their Granma the Sikhs had to pay with their blood and for papa the SL Tamils were made to pay.

 

[JayATL]

Getting cocky again are we ?

Western definition of secularism isn't universal.

Why not ask the members on this forum from the minorities whether India is secular or not ?

I believe you made your snarky remark to which I called you out. I don't have to ask any minority about India's claim to being secular. I know it's not--- it's really as simple as saying do you need air to survive... i.e. to be secular you can't have laws that discriminate based on religion. And if you don't get it , you need to uncloud your mind from all that 1st and 2nd hand smoking

 

[The Messiah]

One instance - Govt does not appropriate their religious assets - because of those very laws - while it gratuitously 'manages' our assets.

BTW who does not want his own lil' private harem in his home ?

If you haven't noticed we are debating civil "personal laws".

even ashoka had a harem! last i heard he wasn't a muslim

 

[The Messiah]

I believe you made your snarky remark to which I called you out. I don't have to ask any minority about India's claim to being secular. I know it's not--- it's really as simple as saying do you need air to survive... i.e. to be secular you can't have laws that discriminate based on religion. And if you don't get it , you need to uncloud your mind from all that 1st and 2nd hand smoking

Read the first post in the previous page.

My stance is pretty clear either have religious laws for all communities or have one single uniform civil law. im fine with both and both are secular in different ways.

 

[sanjay]

If you haven't noticed we are debating civil "personal laws".

even ashoka had a harem! last i heard he wasn't a muslim

Is this the age of Asoka? Are you groping for any argument in order to give a reply?

 

[The Messiah]

Is this the age of Asoka? Are you groping for any argument in order to give a reply?

It implies harems aren't exclusively for muslims.

 

[sanjay]

It implies harems aren't exclusively for muslims.

In ancient times, everybody had harems - but in modern times, only a few retain the practice of marrying multiple wives. Uniform Civil Code is a way to ensure such practices are ended. Those who don't have the intellect to understand what secularism truly is, and only try to maintain their own false and deficient facsimiles of it for purposes of political expediency, are doomed to playing games of moral equivalency, while not realizing why society is eroding from under their feet. Keep posturing foolishly.

 

[Ray]

I presume that the US which claims that it separates Church and the State and hence secular is also not secular.

There are enough evidence where the Church merges with the State.

 

[sanjay]

I don't see you offering any proof, just making empty assertions. There is such a thing as false pride.

I'd point out that far more people from around the world flock to America because they are attracted by the quality of its political system, than there are people flocking to India from around the world. All I see is that people have been leaving India in droves for decades and even centuries - which says a lot.

Where do you see people queuing up around the world to move to India? Fat chance of that.

If you take a poll among the respective populations of each country, asking each people how happy they are with their political systems, which country do you think will come out ahead?

 

[Ray]

I don't see you offering any proof, just making empty assertions. There is such a thing as false pride.

I'd point out that far more people from around the world flock to America because they are attracted by the quality of its political system, than there are people flocking to India from around the world. All I see is that people have been leaving India in droves for decades and even centuries - which says a lot.

Where do you see people queuing up around the world to move to India? Fat chance of that.

If you take a poll among the respective populations of each country, asking each people how happy they are with their political systems, which country do you think will come out ahead?

People flock to the US without not a fig on their mind about US politics.

They go there because the economic situation for even the average is far better than it is India. Pure simple, personal economics!

It also helps their folks back home since they little that they can send home, is a fortune here, given the exchange rate.

So, there is no idealism behind going to the US. Pure economics is what attracts. The idea that the political system attracts is all hyperbole. In fact, the Indian psyche does not exult on things like Guantanamo or attacking Iraq on silly grounds of bringing 'Freedom and Democracy', be he in India or in the US, except those who are dying to chase the will o' the wisp i.e. be 'accepted' by the WASP as their own!

It might also interest you to know that many are relocating back to India. Again economics! Nothing to do with 'love for the Motherland' and such tripe which is doled out to cover the truth!

US business is flocking to India. Not because they love India as the 'biggest democracy' and such tripe that is flaunted. It is purely Economics!

Money speaks!

See the IPL. They abandon their country!

 

[sanjay]

People flock to the US without not a fig on their mind about US politics.

They go there because the economic situation for even the average is far better than it is India. Pure simple, personal economics!

It also helps their folks back home since they little that they can send home, is a fortune here, given the exchange rate.

So, there is no idealism behind going to the US. Pure economics is what attracts. The idea that the political system attracts is all hyperbole. In fact, the Indian psyche does not exult on things like Guantanamo or attacking Iraq on silly grounds of bringing 'Freedom and Democracy', be he in India or in the US, except those who are dying to chase the will o' the wisp i.e. be 'accepted' by the WASP as their own!

It might also interest you to know that many are relocating back to India. Again economics! Nothing to do with 'love for the Motherland' and such tripe which is doled out to cover the truth!

US business is flocking to India. Not because they love India as the 'biggest democracy' and such tripe that is flaunted. It is purely Economics!

Money speaks!

See the IPL. They abandon their country!

You don't seem to understand that their economic situation is a direct result of their highly developed legal and political system.
And oddly enough, you won't see immigrants themselves saying, "I came here to cash in on America's money!" You'll actually find most immigrants saying they appreciate the freedoms of the American way of life. For instance, if there is a rare bomb blast in the USA, you don't see their politicians shrugging their shoulders and saying, "What the hell do you want me to do? I can't stop every bomb blast!" You actually see concerted response from people. I know that sounds frivolous to someone who lives in a so-called "functioning anarchy" - a meaningless oxymoron coined by those leading pampered lives that offers no comfort to the man on the street. But to those who are used to living in a functioning society, it matters a lot. Hence, I don't see a lot of people from the developed world applying to live in India.

The fact that much of India lives like sub-saharan Africa, while some live surrounded by wretched excess of luxury also seems lost on you. But this will no doubt be cited by you as more evidence of your "Indian miracle" no doubt.

I'm saying that India is a flawed society - much more flawed than most developed countries - which is why they're called developed and India isn't. The sooner Indians recognize their country's flaws instead of trying to gloss them over by spraying perfume on the manure, the more quickly they'll be able to solve the massive problems and the widespread misery that afflicts the country. Living in denial surely won't help.

But don't let my petty lectures about principles and ethics keep you from marrying that fourth wife, if you really need that personal law so badly.

 

[KS]

If you haven't noticed we are debating civil "personal laws".

even ashoka had a harem! last i heard he wasn't a muslim

Exactly - Discriminatory personal laws ensure that I cant have my own harem but some others can have. And I want the discriminatory laws abolished and instead an Uniform Civil Code put in place.

Anything 'un'secular about my demand ?

 

[A chauhan]

Theoretically making a Uniform Civil Code is a great idea but practically it's impossible if not impossible then it's very hard to achieve; making such Code would be a very tough and detailed work,it will have to be done through borrowing good aspects of different personal laws and mixing them as the Code which is not an easy task.

If we ever succeed in making such Code i think religious groups having extremists views wont let it happen, they will object on each and every aspect of the proposed code derived from the faiths of other religious groups. As extremists will find it against their belief and religion.

If it ever happens, i will be ready to accept the good aspects of Muslim, Christian and other personal laws, I also expect that majority of Hindus will accept UCC as they have accepted secularism; but i hardly expect that people from extremist beliefs would do the same, specially from the Muslims.As they wont be ready to reform their personal laws.

I always appreciated Special Marriage Act,1954 because it shows us a way through which we can gradually come close to the people other religions by marrying them. But it was opposed by the Muslims even they declared that marriage under this act is "a 'sin' and his marriage is unlawful in the eyes of Islam".

Uniform civil code of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Yusuf]

Exactly - Discriminatory personal laws ensure that I cant have my own harem but some others can have. And I want the discriminatory laws abolished and instead an Uniform Civil Code put in place.

Anything 'un'secular about my demand ?

Lol are you pissed at not being able to have a Harem because of your religious beliefs and jealous about those who can?? He he.

Believe you me, you would not want to have a Harem. Ek hi samhalti nahi barabar se.

 

[LurkerBaba]

Lol are you pissed at not being able to have a Harem because of your religious beliefs and jealous about those who can?? He he.

Well polygamy isn't exactly forbidden in Hinduism. Polyandry, Polygamy sab kuch chalta hai

Harems should not be allowed because it's regressive social practice !

Ek hi samhalti nahi barabar se.

 

[JayATL]

I presume that the US which claims that it separates Church and the State and hence secular is also not secular.

There are enough evidence where the Church merges with the State.

give me one single example where the laws of the church is the reason for state/federal law...one , any....

term separation of church and state means no religion shall govern laws of the state and country.. it does not mean that a law against murders is there because the bible says thou shall not kill.

 

[Yusuf]

Well polygamy isn't exactly forbidden in Hinduism. Polyandry, Polygamy sab kuch chalta hai

Harems should not be allowed because it's regressive social practice !

Theek hai na, what's the govts problem in banning polygamy for everyone? If Hindu high priests decide to make polygamy ok for Hindus, i dont think it would be a problem to amend the Hindu Marriage Law.

Those who can afford it can go for it. 4 wives, at least 2 kids per wife. God help!!!

 

[JayATL]

Theek hai na, what's the govts problem in banning polygamy for everyone? If Hindu high priests decide to make polygamy ok for Hindus, i dont think it would be a problem to amend the Hindu Marriage Law.

Those who can afford it can go for it. 4 wives, at least 2 kids per wife. God help!!!

This is a very interesting topic in terms of law for me. Marriage is recognized by the state on the basis of it being a " contract" and not on a religious basis. IMO in most countries the flaw is in the denial of not allowing polygamy under these terms.

Why? because IF it's a fact that a marriage simply recognized by religion does not constitute as a " marriage" till the state issues a license. Then people should be able to get into multiple contracts just like they can with business entities.