PM Modi's government announces implementation of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) [Post Updated #85]

[rpant_gabba]

I am in favour of Uniform Civil Code

Uh Oh. you are in trouble now...

 

[Red-Indian]

Interfaith Marriage Invalid Under Muslim Personal Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The marriage between a Muslim man and a Hindu woman is not valid under Muslim personal law even if registered under the Special Marriage Act, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has said while denying police protection to an interfaith couple.

www.ndtv.com

@pillionrider @RexRex @pseudoseculars

The Muslim law does not permit a Muslim man's marriage with a "fire-worshipper", Justice GS Ahluwalia said while hearing a petition by the couple seeking police protection.​

I'm not sure what your point is. The majority of religious personal laws don't allow interfaith marriages and are essentially absurd. That's why we have the Special Marriages Act.

 

[rpant_gabba]

I'm not sure what your point is. The majority of religious personal laws don't allow interfaith marriages and are essentially absurd. That's why we have the Special Marriages Act.

The point is sitting judges are wiling to ignore special marriages act and willing to lean on religious personal laws even now.

religious personal laws should be removed asap

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

you being secular and all that, wanted to get your take on the judges opinion.

I'm surprised by your question. thought you will rise and defend secular values.

All the secular judgements seem to be aimed at Muslims at the same time as mosques are getting demolished or targeted to be demolished to be replaced by hindu temples. You don't find that a slightly strange form of secularism?

 

[rpant_gabba]

All the secular judgements seem to be aimed at Muslims at the same time as mosques are getting demolished or targeted to be demolished to be replaced by hindu temples. You don't find that a slightly strange form of secularism?

want to me call you a wambulance cap?

 

[Red-Indian]

The point is sitting judges are wiling to ignore special marriages act and willing to lean on religious personal laws even now.

religious personal laws should be removed asap

All the secular judgements seem to be aimed at Muslims at the same time as mosques are getting demolished or targeted to be demolished to be replaced by hindu temples. You don't find that a slightly strange form of secularism?

I'm still not able to understand what the argument is? Religious personal laws are obviously regressive since they fight change and try to stay frozen in time. However you cannot force change and progress on the people in the religion until they're somewhat ready for it.

Yes the MP High court judgement was regressive, illogical and idiotic. But from a quick Google, the Allahabad High court delivered a logical and simple judgement on interfaith marriages almost simultaneously.

This judgement will be overruled in the SC if the couple appeal. The country will eventually move towards a uniform civil code. Hopefully not because a Muslim baiter like Modi forces the issue but because the majority of the community tacitly if not openly wants it.

 

[RexRex]

This judgement will be overruled in the SC if the couple appeal. The country will eventually move towards a uniform civil code. Hopefully not because a Muslim baiter like Modi forces the issue but because the majority of the community tacitly if not openly wants it.

Would you oppose a Uniform Civil Code if BJP enacts it in this next term (assuming Muslims oppose it)? They'll likely have the majority in both houses to pass it in parliament.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

want to me call you a wambulance cap?

What does that mean in English? I'm sure it has some connection to the discussion but "want to me" what?

 

[rpant_gabba]

I'm still not able to understand what the argument is? Religious personal laws are obviously regressive since they fight change and try to stay frozen in time. However you cannot force change and progress on the people in the religion until they're somewhat ready for it.

Yes the MP High court judgement was regressive, illogical and idiotic. But from a quick Google, the Allahabad High court delivered a logical and simple judgement on interfaith marriages almost simultaneously.

This judgement will be overruled in the SC if the couple appeal. The country will eventually move towards a uniform civil code. Hopefully not because a Muslim baiter like Modi forces the issue but because the majority of the community tacitly if not openly wants it.

Assuming the couple have the resources to see it through.

In the mean time, religious personal laws will be abused against those who can't afford to fight it

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Since the discussion has been sidelined, let me continue in the vein. What is a wambulance and why would I "want to me" someone sitting in a different country to call one?

 

[Red-Indian]

Would you oppose a Uniform Civil Code if BJP enacts it in this next term (assuming Muslims oppose it)? They'll likely have the majority in both houses to pass it in parliament.

Yes I would. I don't think Modi's the right person to ensure it's long term adoption and it would do more harm than good.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Yes I would. I don't think Modi's the right person to ensure it's long term adoption and it would do more harm than good.

and we are back to square 1. the opposition led by congress, TMC, CPI etc etc would never touch the issue.

similar to Art 370 issue.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Yes I would. I don't think Modi's the right person to ensure it's long term adoption and it would do more harm than good.

who is the right person?

Considering we are 74 years too late in implementation of UCC.

 

[Red-Indian]

and we are back to square 1. the opposition led by congress, TMC, CPI etc etc would never touch the issue.

similar to Art 370 issue.

who is the right person?

Considering we are 74 years too late in implementation of UCC.

Not 74, we're a few thousand years late in implementing a rational uniform civil code. I want it to succeed and be adopted.

Having a Muslim baiter like Modi lead the charge in changing Muslim personal laws actually makes it easy fodder for the regressive rabble rousers in the Muslim community to mobilise the community against the changes.

If his and his party's motivation is protecting the disadvantaged Muslim women (there can't be any other motivation since no other community is being impacted by Muslim personal laws), he should stick to investment in improving education levels in that group. They'll take care of fighting for change in their own personal laws themselves.

As an example, it's not the Modi government that cause the regressive triple talaq to be banned. It was the Supreme court acting on a petition by a Muslim woman. The Act itself was a subsequent follow-up.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Time to gather all illegal Bangladeshis and send them back home.

 

[Devadwal]

All neighborhood countries are showing why is CAA is necessary when minorities are being killed and raped .

 

[cricketjoshila]

All neighborhood countries are showing why is CAA is necessary when minorities are being killed and raped .

Time to take some land too.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Time to gather all illegal Bangladeshis and send them back home.

With no Hasina government we don't risk alienating an ally.

 

[RexRex]

Time to gather all illegal Bangladeshis and send them back home.

They don't have a sticker on their forehead that identifies them as 'illegal bangladeshi'.

 

[cricketjoshila]

They don't have a sticker on their forehead that identifies them as 'illegal bangladeshi'.

We will identify and put a sticker. Ok.

 

[oatmeal]

Not 74, we're a few thousand years late in implementing a rational uniform civil code. I want it to succeed and be adopted.

Having a Muslim baiter like Modi lead the charge in changing Muslim personal laws actually makes it easy fodder for the regressive rabble rousers in the Muslim community to mobilise the community against the changes.

If his and his party's motivation is protecting the disadvantaged Muslim women (there can't be any other motivation since no other community is being impacted by Muslim personal laws), he should stick to investment in improving education levels in that group. They'll take care of fighting for change in their own personal laws themselves.

As an example, it's not the Modi government that cause the regressive triple talaq to be banned. It was the Supreme court acting on a petition by a Muslim woman. The Act itself was a subsequent follow-up.

UCC wont be implemented easily because it will have to be targeted at Muslims to satisfy BJP voters which BJP doesnt have the votes in Lok Sabha along to push through.

But Indian law has so many special provisions for different religions - Hindu Marriage Act, for Parsis, Sikhs, for Muslims, for Christians, and its just not marriage - it's regarding succession, regarding adoption, the HUF. The whole thing will get messy

A real UCC will detangle all those community civil provisions and bring them into a common law. Which is definitely a good thing if done from a neutral perspective but it means not just muslims losing special provisions carved out , but all religions.

 

[Red-Indian]

UCC wont be implemented easily because it will have to be targeted at Muslims to satisfy BJP voters which BJP doesnt have the votes in Lok Sabha along to push through.

But Indian law has so many special provisions for different religions - Hindu Marriage Act, for Parsis, Sikhs, for Muslims, for Christians, and its just not marriage - it's regarding succession, regarding adoption, the HUF. The whole thing will get messy

A real UCC will detangle all those community civil provisions and bring them into a common law. Which is definitely a good thing if done from a neutral perspective but it means not just muslims losing special provisions carved out , but all religions.

Dude, if you really do a study, there's very few exceptions left. Most special provisions in the acts you've listed have long been either subordinated by Court judgements or by laws passed by Parliament. There may be some procedural differences in laws over Marriage, Divorce, Adoption and Succession but they're mostly irrelevant in a practical sense.

The only significant exception unfortunately is Muslim Personal Law. Though the worst such as triple talaq have been eliminated by the judiciary and law, it still contains some pretty regressive provisions that discriminate against Muslim women in terms of allowing polygamy (but not polyandry), divorce laws and inheritance laws. The only party adversely affected is Muslim women. Unfortunately there are only two constituencies for change in India today
- Educated activist Muslim women (and men) who want parity between the sexes
- The Hindutva brigade who see Muslim men getting additional rights over Muslim women as some sort of affront to their own masculinity

The vast majority of folks of other religions as well as Muslims aren't actively pushing for change which is why the Modi government hasn't even tried to introduce any. The only time they've acted is when forced by the Supreme Court.

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Dude, if you really do a study, there's very few exceptions left. Most special provisions in the acts you've listed have long been either subordinated by Court judgements or by laws passed by Parliament. There may be some procedural differences in laws over Marriage, Divorce, Adoption and Succession but they're mostly irrelevant in a practical sense.

The only significant exception unfortunately is Muslim Personal Law. Though the worst such as triple talaq have been eliminated by the judiciary and law, it still contains some pretty regressive provisions that discriminate against Muslim women in terms of allowing polygamy (but not polyandry), divorce laws and inheritance laws. The only party adversely affected is Muslim women. Unfortunately there are only two constituencies for change in India today
- Educated activist Muslim women (and men) who want parity between the sexes
- The Hindutva brigade who see Muslim men getting additional rights over Muslim women as some sort of affront to their own masculinity

The vast majority of folks of other religions as well as Muslims aren't actively pushing for change which is why the Modi government hasn't even tried to introduce any. The only time they've acted is when forced by the Supreme Court.

Kinda poor argument, just because a discriminatory and degrading law is tolerable to the masses doesn't mean that law should be allowed to stay. Wtih this kind of logic, Lincoln would never have been able to abolish Slavery.
Certain laws have to be enshrined by law firmly or the rights granted by mere judicial precedence can be taken away with the same ease. Take the Abortion rights in US recently. I recommend you watch the movie "Lincoln".

 

[oatmeal]

Dude, if you really do a study, there's very few exceptions left. Most special provisions in the acts you've listed have long been either subordinated by Court judgements or by laws passed by Parliament. There may be some procedural differences in laws over Marriage, Divorce, Adoption and Succession but they're mostly irrelevant in a practical sense.

The only significant exception unfortunately is Muslim Personal Law. Though the worst such as triple talaq have been eliminated by the judiciary and law, it still contains some pretty regressive provisions that discriminate against Muslim women in terms of allowing polygamy (but not polyandry), divorce laws and inheritance laws. The only party adversely affected is Muslim women. Unfortunately there are only two constituencies for change in India today
- Educated activist Muslim women (and men) who want parity between the sexes
- The Hindutva brigade who see Muslim men getting additional rights over Muslim women as some sort of affront to their own masculinity

The vast majority of folks of other religions as well as Muslims aren't actively pushing for change which is why the Modi government hasn't even tried to introduce any. The only time they've acted is when forced by the Supreme Court.

The whole point of the UCC is that you bring everyone into the same civil code so that one law will absorb all previous amendments and changes made over the years. That means doing away with HUF, implementing the same succession laws for all religions, the exact same marriage laws. North east tribes have their own inheritance and marriage rules which will have to be brought under the UCC too. It will get messy once they start drafting it

I think you are understating the changes needed in the system for it. If it was just muslims being impacted, BJP will have brought about it in its last term. They should just ban polygamy which is the most unfair part.

 

[Red-Indian]

Kinda poor argument, just because a discriminatory and degrading law is tolerable to the masses doesn't mean that law should be allowed to stay. Wtih this kind of logic, Lincoln would never have been able to abolish Slavery.
Certain laws have to be enshrined by law firmly or the rights granted by mere judicial precedence can be taken away with the same ease. Take the Abortion rights in US recently. I recommend you watch the movie "Lincoln".

I'm guessing you didn't read the thread and are just responding to the last post.

Just to clarify - I'm all for a Uniform Civil Code and eliminating discrimination against Muslim women. But a right wing Muslim baiting leader and government is the last person who should be leading the charge. The danger would be playing right into the hands of the extremists and further prejudicing, endangering the rights of Muslim women.

As an illustration, homosexuality should've been decriminalized years ago and same-sex marriage permitted. Discrimination against those folks was terrible in India. However, if it had been tried in the 90s, you'd have preachers on all sides (Hindu, Muslim and Christian) uniting in condemnation and the whole subject would be taboo for any politician or judge. You'd have set their rights back 50 years. Today, because we waited and did it right, there's hardly been a squeak on the subject. Societal attitudes changed.