[VIDEOS] Why anti Muslim bias is so profound among Hindutva supporters?

[DeadlyVenom]

I don't know if you are a Muslim. But if you are, kudos to you. I am reading this for the first time from a Pakistani.

Nothing to give kudos on this is just normal for religions.

Hindu will discriminate based on certain criteria for example Muslim can't cook food because he may potentially be a beef eater.

Similarly Muslim discriminate. Christians discriminate when it comes to certain religious policies.

In the UK the real HOS ( Royal Family) can only be a Church of England adherent since they HOS is also Head of Church of England.

It is similar in Muslim countries because there is no separation of church and state. But I think we should adopt a stance where PM can be of any religion. It is unfair to young non Muslim kids growing up that they can't dream of the top job.

 

[Stewie]

Hi

Nothing to give kudos on this is just normal for religions.

Hindu will discriminate based on certain criteria for example Muslim can't cook food because he may potentially be a beef eater.

Similarly Muslim discriminate. Christians discriminate when it comes to certain religious policies.

In the UK the real HOS ( Royal Family) can only be a Church of England adherent since they HOS is also Head of Church of England.

It is similar in Muslim countries because there is no separation of church and state. But I think we should adopt a stance where PM can be of any religion. It is unfair to young non Muslim kids growing up that they can't dream of the top job.

I think honest attempts such as this to reason will only elicit vows and gasps and such "outrageous" reactions from the Hindus. These are merely attempts to detract us from the main topic of discussion. There have been plenty of threads to discuss these issues of so-called discrimination within Pakistan. That is not the topic here now, is it?

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Hi

I think honest attempts such as this to reason will only elicit vows and gasps and such "outrageous" reactions from the Hindus. These are merely attempts to detract us from the main topic of discussion. There have been plenty of threads to discuss these issues of so-called discrimination within Pakistan. That is not the topic here now, is it?

It's good to draw parallels because the examples may help understand the thoughts of the other party.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Nothing to give kudos on this is just normal for religions.

Hindu will discriminate based on certain criteria for example Muslim can't cook food because he may potentially be a beef eater.

Similarly Muslim discriminate. Christians discriminate when it comes to certain religious policies.

In the UK the real HOS ( Royal Family) can only be a Church of England adherent since they HOS is also Head of Church of England.

It is similar in Muslim countries because there is no separation of church and state. But I think we should adopt a stance where PM can be of any religion. It is unfair to young non Muslim kids growing up that they can't dream of the top job.

Completely agree with you. All religions discriminate because they are all man made.
We can clearly see human aspects like bias and discrimination in all religions and cults.

 

[Stewie]

Completely agree with you. All religions discriminate because they are all man made.
We can clearly see human aspects like bias and discrimination in all religions and cults.

Good of you to admit anything man made can be subject to scrutiny and discrimination including their "secular" laws.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Good of you to admit anything man made can be subject to scrutiny and discrimination including their "secular" laws.

Everything should be subjected to scrutiny. Nothing can be improved without scrutiny and thorough testing.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Muslims in the new India: How one week showcases their escalating persecution​

In recent years, India has witnessed a disturbing rise in communal violence, reflecting deepening religious divides that threaten the country’s secular fabric. While communal tensions have long simmered beneath the surface, a series of violent incidents over the course of just one week, from August 28 to September 1, has brought these tensions into sharp focus. This wave of violence, marked by attacks on the Muslim communities across the length and breadth of India, has not only raised concerns about the safety and security of Muslims, but has also underscored the growing complicity of state machinery in perpetuating communal hatred.

The incidents, occurring within a span of five days, are not isolated events but rather part of a broader pattern of targeted aggression against Muslims. These attacks range from brutal lynching’s to the destruction of properties and places of worship, often incited by inflammatory rhetoric from political leaders and fuelled by a sense of impunity among the perpetrators. The alarming frequency and intensity of these incidents point to a systematic erosion of communal harmony, where violence against a particular community is increasingly normalised.

What is particularly troubling is the role of state institutions in either directly or indirectly facilitating these crimes? In some cases, law enforcement agencies have been accused of turning a blind eye to the violence, failing to protect victims, or even actively participating in the oppression of minority communities. This tacit or overt state support emboldens perpetrators, creating an environment where communal violence can thrive unchecked.

The week’s events also highlights the role of social media in spreading hate and inciting violence. Misinformation and provocative content circulate rapidly online, stoking communal tensions and leading to real-world consequences. The digital age has amplified the reach and impact of communal propaganda, making it easier for hate to spread and harder for authorities to contain the fallout.

Muslims in the new India: How one week showcases their escalating persecution | CJP

In recent years, India has witnessed a disturbing rise in communal violence, reflecting deepening religious divides that threaten the country’s secular fabric. While communal tensions have long simmered beneath the surface, a series of violent incidents over the course of just one week, from...

cjp.org.in

 

[Stewie]

Muslims in the new India: How one week showcases their escalating persecution​

In recent years, India has witnessed a disturbing rise in communal violence, reflecting deepening religious divides that threaten the country’s secular fabric. While communal tensions have long simmered beneath the surface, a series of violent incidents over the course of just one week, from August 28 to September 1, has brought these tensions into sharp focus. This wave of violence, marked by attacks on the Muslim communities across the length and breadth of India, has not only raised concerns about the safety and security of Muslims, but has also underscored the growing complicity of state machinery in perpetuating communal hatred.

The incidents, occurring within a span of five days, are not isolated events but rather part of a broader pattern of targeted aggression against Muslims. These attacks range from brutal lynching’s to the destruction of properties and places of worship, often incited by inflammatory rhetoric from political leaders and fuelled by a sense of impunity among the perpetrators. The alarming frequency and intensity of these incidents point to a systematic erosion of communal harmony, where violence against a particular community is increasingly normalised.

What is particularly troubling is the role of state institutions in either directly or indirectly facilitating these crimes? In some cases, law enforcement agencies have been accused of turning a blind eye to the violence, failing to protect victims, or even actively participating in the oppression of minority communities. This tacit or overt state support emboldens perpetrators, creating an environment where communal violence can thrive unchecked.

The week’s events also highlights the role of social media in spreading hate and inciting violence. Misinformation and provocative content circulate rapidly online, stoking communal tensions and leading to real-world consequences. The digital age has amplified the reach and impact of communal propaganda, making it easier for hate to spread and harder for authorities to contain the fallout.

Muslims in the new India: How one week showcases their escalating persecution | CJP

In recent years, India has witnessed a disturbing rise in communal violence, reflecting deepening religious divides that threaten the country’s secular fabric. While communal tensions have long simmered beneath the surface, a series of violent incidents over the course of just one week, from...

cjp.org.in

It is very funny you shared this. I think this sort of stuff should be subject to more scrutiny than anything else. When you have people like this guy claiming love jihad, no wonder almost all the Hindu posters on this forum like Brother @Bhaijaan and this other cartoon guy, etc honestly believe Hindus are on their way to extinction because their women are being accosted by Muslims and converted.

India simply loves to match Pakistan hit by hit. They felt they were falling behind in extremism and qatlo gharat and and trying to catch up now.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

It is very funny you shared this. I think this sort of stuff should be subject to more scrutiny than anything else. When you have people like this guy claiming love jihad, no wonder almost all the Hindu posters on this forum like Brother @Bhaijaan and this other cartoon guy, etc honestly believe Hindus are on their way to extinction because their women are being accosted by Muslims and converted.

India simply loves to match Pakistan hit by hit. They felt they were falling behind in extremism and qatlo gharat and and trying to catch up now.

Yep the report seems to suggest wrong in the sense that they think it's been there for just a week

 

[deltexas]

We don't need you, an Indian to tell us to be proud of our laws. LOL.

But maybe you do need someone to point out the discrepancy in your caste based elitist political system because you guys have been turning a blind eye to it by bashing everything and everyone else under the sun as a distraction.

Living in denial and delusion. No wonder Pak is the state it is now because of views like this. Ind has never denied its deficiencies. The societal evils are already banned per Ind law. Just because they were written in some ancient books doesnt mean it's gospel unlike for you. No wonder Islam doesn't to move forward into the modern era.

 

[deltexas]

Yes, as it limits the full participation of minorities in political life.

The counter argument is that as Pakistan is an Islamic Republic, there is a religious aspect to the role and that a non-muslim can't perform. is that because as I am a non-christian me being exempt from being the head of the church of england is also legal discrimination.

I'm not sure how much merit the counter argument has to be honest.

Exactly. When in minority - want full secularism. The moment you are in majority- want Islamic law maybe sharia law and to heck with minorities rights. Atleast thanks for accepting it.

 

[deltexas]

In all honesty, it is not my call anymore. I don't live in Pakistan but I do identify as a Pakistani by race. I don't vote in Pakistani elections. How that country is and should be run is upto the people who live there and make their own choices. I don't think I do enough to fairly have any say in that matter. My personal view would be that eventually, I would like Pakistan to get out of the "labelling" business. A state should have no business in declaring people muslims or non-muslims. it should also allow for non Muslims to become PM and be given equal rights to run for other offices within the state.

Now once they remove any such nonsense from their constitution, they can simply continue with their unofficial policies. Basically take a leaf out of India's book so people like Brother @Champs_Pal who have no business commenting on their policies can pick on something else to complain about Muslims on PP.

But that's the core issue with Islamic countries. Islam the religion defines them. Even if some of the things are primitive and medieval in concept. And it's not an isolated case. Every Islamic country and by that I mean a Muslim majority country has Islamic laws and constitution eith Islam as state religion and no minorities rights. Whereas all western and European countries even though are Christian majority are secular democracies. Ind even though it's Hindu majority- its still a secular country. Nobody in the west cares what religion you belong to and people's entire lives dont revolve around religion

 

[CricketCartoons]

We don't hide behind disowning books like Hindus do with Rig Vedas and whatnot. We own it.

Now please enlighten yourself and read the Quran Karim if you have more questions about how you can try and fix the caste based societal issues of India.

No wait, you are a fellow naturalized American, aren't you? You cant vote in India, so it does not matter. But you sure seem to be hyperactive in discussions about India and the Muslim dynamic. so perhaps you can still study the Quran to satisfy the seemingly limitless curiosity you have about Muslims. Better yet go to a local masjid and spend some time there asking questions of the Imam there. You will feel a lot better, I promise.

You are saying the opposite. When you find some verse conflicting with your modern values, you just find ways to not practice it, or you tell yourself that the teaching was meant for a particular age and time ( this is a good thing to march ahead while keeping your belief intact). But, an important but, you never criticise it. It is because you don't own it. You are owned by it.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Pakistanis live in their deluded world which is why they’re an irrelevant failed country today.

Bharatiyas are very well aware of the realities of the world and the realities of the disloyal Muslims that live in Bharat and yet pray and conspire for its demise. But that will remain a distant dream only as Modi ji has revived Sanatan in the 21st century.

Every anti national will pay price for the crimes against Rashtra.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Poor subcontinental Muslims are the worst, most deluded, most anti national and hypocritical of all the people. They desire Islamic caliphate upon non Muslim nations, obsess about converting every non Muslim eventually, suppress indigenous religions and cultures wherever they grow or equal the majority and yet you have discussions here on why they wonder the non Muslims despise them? You are literally an existential threat in the longer run.

You are just embarrassed you could not conquer Sanatan despite millennium of desperate efforts where you combined every tribal warlords from Central Asia, Turks , Persia and yet Sanatan stands 1 billion strong to this date holding the fortress , much much stronger than all of your nations. Sanatan is untameable because we are strong .

 

[Bhaijaan]

Nothing against Pakistanis, they are a nation and wish them well. Even as Muslims despite of all their efforts to insult Hinduism, I would say it hardly matters as they’re weak, irrelevant and locked out by an international border.

It’s the Muslims in Bharat in particular that get on my nerves. All the centuries of living here and yet anti national. People can say whatever and try to revert a real and serious discussion but ask yourself when or how many times you ever saw a Muslim passionately fighting for or defending Bharat at any forum unless being paid for it or making money out of it hence a few celebrities, politicians, govt officials are excluded. Here on PP also, have you ever seen a Muslim Bharatiya showing love, passion for the country and defending it against hateful Pakistani propaganda. They’re just happy with all the citizen benefits while at the same time conspiring against Bharat all the time. Time has come for them to be held accountable for their historical and current wrong doings and they know it very well hence all the panic. It won’t help.

 

[Stewie]

But that's the core issue with Islamic countries. Islam the religion defines them. Even if some of the things are primitive and medieval in concept. And it's not an isolated case. Every Islamic country and by that I mean a Muslim majority country has Islamic laws and constitution eith Islam as state religion and no minorities rights. Whereas all western and European countries even though are Christian majority are secular democracies. Ind even though it's Hindu majority- its still a secular country. Nobody in the west cares what religion you belong to and people's entire lives dont revolve around religion

I think you have been sold a whammy all this time by whatever they tell you guys in India. It behooves one to fact check. There are a lot of countries that are majority Muslim but don’t have Islamic laws or constitution in entirety.
Pakistan doesn’t. It’s a mix of common wealth law and some Islamic laws. It’s not perfect but when done right it works. Look at Malaysia and Indonesia.

Anyhow let us not use the word “secular” to describe western nations. Indias definition of secular is totally incorrect in my view. I think secular in most of the world kind of means separation of religion and government and that’s not happening in India.



Anyhow the bottom line is that unfortunately in this world there is a thing called democracy. If a vast majority of people want a state religion with all the other baggage, what can you do? Say no to them? Obviously they won’t care how it is “bad” for them because they are Muslims.


Most majority Muslim countries are not multi religious except for a handful.

 

[Stewie]

Nothing against Pakistanis, they are a nation and wish them well. Even as Muslims despite of all their efforts to insult Hinduism, I would say it hardly matters as they’re weak, irrelevant and locked out by an international border.

It’s the Muslims in Bharat in particular that get on my nerves. All the centuries of living here and yet anti national. People can say whatever and try to revert a real and serious discussion but ask yourself when or how many times you ever saw a Muslim passionately fighting for or defending Bharat at any forum unless being paid for it or making money out of it hence a few celebrities, politicians, govt officials are excluded. Here on PP also, have you ever seen a Muslim Bharatiya showing love, passion for the country and defending it against hateful Pakistani propaganda. They’re just happy with all the citizen benefits while at the same time conspiring against Bharat all the time. Time has come for them to be held accountable for their historical and current wrong doings and they know it very well hence all the panic. It won’t help.

You know I feel for you and your dilemma. You should look into this guy called Hitler and how he handled similar problem in Germany in the last century. These dang Muslims man, something should be done about them. You can probably send them all to the moon on the Sanatan rocket you guys have now

 

[CricketCartoons]

I think you have been sold a whammy all this time by whatever they tell you guys in India. It behooves one to fact check. There are a lot of countries that are majority Muslim but don’t have Islamic laws or constitution in entirety.
Pakistan doesn’t. It’s a mix of common wealth law and some Islamic laws. It’s not perfect but when done right it works. Look at Malaysia and Indonesia.

Anyhow let us not use the word “secular” to describe western nations. Indias definition of secular is totally incorrect in my view. I think secular in most of the world kind of means separation of religion and government and that’s not happening in India.



Anyhow the bottom line is that unfortunately in this world there is a thing called democracy. If a vast majority of people want a state religion with all the other baggage, what can you do? Say no to them? Obviously they won’t care how it is “bad” for them because they are Muslims.


Most majority Muslim countries are not multi religious except for a handful.

Which are those "lot of" muslim countries which separate islam from their laws?

 

[CricketCartoons]

You know I feel for you and your dilemma. You should look into this guy called Hitler and how he handled similar problem in Germany in the last century. These dang Muslims man, something should be done about them. You can probably send them all to the moon on the Sanatan rocket you guys have now or something before they all get you and your cows.

We want to follow the solution of Pakistan.

 

[Technics 1210]

One cannot reason with Indians, especially those who subscribe to a different meaning of Secularism.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Exactly. When in minority - want full secularism. The moment you are in majority- want Islamic law maybe sharia law and to heck with minorities rights. Atleast thanks for accepting it.

Isn't this common for every religion or community?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Pakistan living on bailouts: Pakistanis giving lessons on finances to India

Pakistan is an Islamic Republic: Pakistanis giving lessons on secularism to India.

Pakistan lives in a military dictatorship: Pakistanis giving lessons on democracy to India.

And then they want to be taken seriously.

 

[Red-Indian]

Isn't this common for every religion or community?

Not for the majority of each religion and community.

Most Hindus see the absurdity. Most Hindu while pretty devoutly religious, have realised the futility of linking religion to law. It helps that Hindu religion is very confusing and contradictory with respect to legal and governance guidance for it's followers and most of what is codified is antiquated and pretty transparently cannot be followed today.

Christianity has the out that the Old Testament is superceded and the New Testament doesn't have much legal or in fact, mundane day to day guidance. The concept of the infallibility of the Church is hardly taken seriously by most Catholics who in any case have become a minority.

Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism likewise have long given up on using their religious books as guidance for their laws and governance.

Islam is the only religion (to be fair, it's one of the youngest) which wants to continue to cling to it's religious book being the answer to all questions and that any opinions can only be interpretations of the Koran. And unfortunately (sorry if the choice of words offends), the book recommends a pretty antiquated set of laws and system of governance. This leaves the Muslims, when they are in majority, no choice but to try and strive for some sort of Islamic States which legally marginalises minorities and leaves the door open for the worst of the interpretations to take precedence.

 

[RexRex]

Pakistan living on bailouts: Pakistanis giving lessons on finances to India

Pakistan is an Islamic Republic: Pakistanis giving lessons on secularism to India.

Pakistan lives in a military dictatorship: Pakistanis giving lessons on democracy to India.

And then they want to be taken seriously.

Give it a rest; you've already mentioned this about 900 times on here.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Pakistan living on bailouts: Pakistanis giving lessons on finances to India

Pakistan is an Islamic Republic: Pakistanis giving lessons on secularism to India.

Pakistan lives in a military dictatorship: Pakistanis giving lessons on democracy to India.

And then they want to be taken seriously.

To be fair, Pakistanis are undergoing a huge awakening. On average they are a lot more aware, realistic about things and their views on Bharat, Modiji have changed for the better.

 

[cricketjoshila]

To be fair, Pakistanis are undergoing a huge awakening. On average they are a lot more aware, realistic about things and their views on Bharat, Modiji have changed for the better.

What awakening? That was for one day only.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Give it a rest; you've already mentioned this about 900 times on here.

So the only argument you could find against it is that it has been said repeatedly? Means you agree with it.

 

[Bhaijaan]

What awakening? That was for one day only.

If you talk to Pakistanis in real abroad they are a lot more genuine.

Also if you check YouTube, Pakistanis are very real about the situations. They appreciate all the good developments in Bharat.

Please don’t form judgements based on comments from low wage labour in Bradford.

 

[Hitman]

One cannot reason with Indians, especially those who subscribe to a different meaning of Secularism.

We need to learn from Pakistan and introduce blasphemy laws.

 

[Bhaijaan]

We need to learn from Pakistan and introduce blasphemy news.

What law?
They burn and kill anyone they like and nothing stops them.

A woman wore a perfectly fine dress on which Arabic letters were mentioned and the mob wanted to kill her.

Why do you entertain trolls.

 

[Hitman]

We need to learn from Pakistan and introduce blasphemy news.

Laws **

 

[Hitman]

What law?
They burn and kill anyone they like and nothing stops them.

A woman wore a perfectly fine dress on which Arabic letters were mentioned and the mob wanted to kill her.

Why do you entertain trolls.

I wish we followed their ways. We too would have been knocking IMF's door with a begging bowl for the record 24th time.

 

[Stewie]

We need to learn from Pakistan and introduce blasphemy laws.

You guys have enough radicals in your midst that behave like radicals in pakistan, even without the so called protections of the laws in place. So don't worry about that. They are also killing fellow Hindus over suspicion of blasphemy.

 

[Stewie]

Give it a rest; you've already mentioned this about 900 times on here.

He has that saved on a notepad, loves to pull out the old CTRL-C and CTRL-V here 2-3 times a week. Probably has a reminder set to do that as well.

 

[Stewie]

Not for the majority of each religion and community.

Most Hindus see the absurdity. Most Hindu while pretty devoutly religious, have realised the futility of linking religion to law. It helps that Hindu religion is very confusing and contradictory with respect to legal and governance guidance for it's followers and most of what is codified is antiquated and pretty transparently cannot be followed today.

Christianity has the out that the Old Testament is superceded and the New Testament doesn't have much legal or in fact, mundane day to day guidance. The concept of the infallibility of the Church is hardly taken seriously by most Catholics who in any case have become a minority.

Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism likewise have long given up on using their religious books as guidance for their laws and governance.

Islam is the only religion (to be fair, it's one of the youngest) which wants to continue to cling to it's religious book being the answer to all questions and that any opinions can only be interpretations of the Koran. And unfortunately (sorry if the choice of words offends), the book recommends a pretty antiquated set of laws and system of governance. This leaves the Muslims, when they are in majority, no choice but to try and strive for some sort of Islamic States which legally marginalises minorities and leaves the door open for the worst of the interpretations to take precedence.

Philosophically speaking, yes. But practically speaking, I rarely see people or governments push for it except perhaps what we have all heard about the ludicrous attempts in Britain. The whole deal where RW westerners or hindus keep bringing up Muslims want Shariat, is really for optics and political spotlight. Same in Pakistan. Only the religious political parties bring it up to rile up their voter base but.. surprise surprise: they never get enough votes to hold any meaningful position in the government. They are mostly used by the military establishment to break votes or reshape the power dynamics.

Pakistanis in general dont even talk about it. We have lived with the Commonwealth laws for so long, the people are fine with them. Even the Arab countries are swinging the other way now.

 

[HalBass9]

I wish we followed their ways. We too would have been knocking IMF's door with a begging bowl for the record 24th time.

Hindutva has, and will likely continue to, incite violence whenever issues related to cows or perceived offenses to Hindu sentiments arise. The Prime Minister of India is a staunch supporter of Hindutva. However, I do not believe India's challenges with religious intolerance, on par with Pakistan's in many ways, are directly linked to its not dealings with the IMF. The reasons for Pakistan's engagement with the IMF are entirely different, though I suspect you may choose not to grasp that distinction.

 

[Local.Dada]

Hindutva has, and will likely continue to, incite violence whenever issues related to cows or perceived offenses to Hindu sentiments arise. The Prime Minister of India is a staunch supporter of Hindutva. However, I do not believe India's challenges with religious intolerance, on par with Pakistan's in many ways, are directly linked to its not dealings with the IMF. The reasons for Pakistan's engagement with the IMF are entirely different, though I suspect you may choose not to grasp that distinction.

Beef is not even a staple diet for Muslims. I don’t think Arabia etc had cows back in the day. Cows are not found in the desert.Personally don’t care what people eat or drink as long as they maintain a decorum around others. However the sole reason why sacrificing a “cow” on “bakra” Eid or trying to provoke or taunt with beef (which personally I feel very juvenile just like taunting a Muslim with alcohol or pork) is only to get rise out of practicing Hindus. That’s definetely as much as problem of some chapri getting smacked around for acting smart. Obviously don’t endorse violence.

 

[Red-Indian]

Philosophically speaking, yes. But practically speaking, I rarely see people or governments push for it except perhaps what we have all heard about the ludicrous attempts in Britain. The whole deal where RW westerners or hindus keep bringing up Muslims want Shariat, is really for optics and political spotlight. Same in Pakistan. Only the religious political parties bring it up to rile up their voter base but.. surprise surprise: they never get enough votes to hold any meaningful position in the government. They are mostly used by the military establishment to break votes or reshape the power dynamics.

Pakistanis in general dont even talk about it. We have lived with the Commonwealth laws for so long, the people are fine with them. Even the Arab countries are swinging the other way now.

Maybe.

In my opinion, Pakistan has chosen the worst possible option. A confusing mishmash of legacy commonwealth and poorly interpreted Islamic laws which to start with are unfair to minorities and then terribly implemented to make them even worse.

However, even Muslim majority countries that had almost model legal structures - total separation of Mosque and State for eg. Turkey are now unfortunately regressing to mixing them up which at least in my opinion can only end badly. India's facing the same pressure under Modi but luckily the mass support is not there for religionisation (is that even a word?) of the legal system and state. The tilt away from a secular state is still extralegal and driven by fringe elements though with unsaid state encouragement.

 

[CricketCartoons]

You guys have enough radicals in your midst that behave like radicals in pakistan, even without the so called protections of the laws in place. So don't worry about that. They are also killing fellow Hindus over suspicion of blasphemy.

A moderate Pakistani like you talks like a sanghi right winger Indian like me.

A moderate Pakistani who normalizes religious discrimination by law, which a radical Indian like me can only dream of achieving some day.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Beef is not even a staple diet for Muslims. I don’t think Arabia etc had cows back in the day. Cows are not found in the desert.Personally don’t care what people eat or drink as long as they maintain a decorum around others. However the sole reason why sacrificing a “cow” on “bakra” Eid or trying to provoke or taunt with beef (which personally I feel very juvenile just like taunting a Muslim with alcohol or pork) is only to get rise out of practicing Hindus. That’s definetely as much as problem of some chapri getting smacked around for acting smart. Obviously don’t endorse violence.

Cows were known in Arabia. There is a chapter on the golden calf in Quraan.

But Prophet (s.a.w) liked lamb meat, and even ate in moderation. So if a muslim wants to follow his sunnah, he would eat lamb and in moderation.

 

[Stewie]

Maybe.

In my opinion, Pakistan has chosen the worst possible option. A confusing mishmash of legacy commonwealth and poorly interpreted Islamic laws which to start with are unfair to minorities and then terribly implemented to make them even worse.

However, even Muslim majority countries that had almost model legal structures - total separation of Mosque and State for eg. Turkey are now unfortunately regressing to mixing them up which at least in my opinion can only end badly. India's facing the same pressure under Modi but luckily the mass support is not there for religionisation (is that even a word?) of the legal system and state. The tilt away from a secular state is still extralegal and driven by fringe elements though with unsaid state encouragement.

Believe it or not things were much better all the way up to the mid 70s. Pakistan was a moderate country. The extremely religious Muslims had actually opposed the creation of Pakistan and were left back in India. QA Jinnah's vision was to not have a theological state. It was supposed to be a country where Muslims could practice their religion freely, not a country that tries to become be all and end all in the religious sense. I know: its a tricky concept to grasp and it might be news to a lot of the people here. But Jinnah sahib himself was not an overly religious guy. We wanted our own land where we don't have to worry about being Muslims, but it was not meant to have repressive regimes for non muslims or to have the wahhabi, Saudi sort of structure. I have read books and seen pictures of Pakistan in the 50s, 60s and 70s. It was a totally different country.

Then things began to get bad thanks to 1) the military establishment which had always controlled the country and 2) their weaponization of the religion.

Before that we were headed for the sort of a country Turkiye was/ sort of still is. Then Zia came along and the Soviet war happened and the rest as they say is history.

Then all this stuff about blasphemy, ahmadis, etc was added. I have always argued and I will stand by my assertion that modern laws throughout the world are sourced from religion. It is how much of the rigidity you want to leave in there is the tricky part, but for the large part it has worked well for the western nations. Even for the Indian Hindus who are so enamored with the western governance and values, they don't realize the British commonwealth laws they still have enforced in India, have their roots in the Church of England. There is never going to be an absolute separation of church and state. That's a mythical beast you will never mind.

We can have the same model in Pakistan ad Turkiye and try to weed out the unpleasant pieces that leave the potential for human rights violations and give everyone an equal status to move up in the government ranks and society. Unfortunately after the extremist turn that was shoved down the nation by Zia and the Americans is a cancer and continues to live on. Only Pakistanis can fix it. How they do it is a big question mark.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Cows were known in Arabia. There is a chapter on the golden calf in Quraan.

But Prophet (s.a.w) liked lamb meat, and even ate in moderation. So if a muslim wants to follow his sunnah, he would eat lamb and in moderation.

Yep but cow is permissible too and infact was eaten at that time too. Anyways it's not a cow thread so guys please stay relevant

 

[Stewie]

Beef is not even a staple diet for Muslims. I don’t think Arabia etc had cows back in the day. Cows are not found in the desert.Personally don’t care what people eat or drink as long as they maintain a decorum around others. However the sole reason why sacrificing a “cow” on “bakra” Eid or trying to provoke or taunt with beef (which personally I feel very juvenile just like taunting a Muslim with alcohol or pork) is only to get rise out of practicing Hindus. That’s definetely as much as problem of some chapri getting smacked around for acting smart. Obviously don’t endorse violence.

Arabs are an ethnicity, Muslims are a nation based on faith. Let us first of all understand our terms. Just because Arabs do something does not mean a non-Arab Muslim has to do it as well. They have camels there. We have cows and goats.

Nihari, Siri paye, tawa keema, etc is a staple of Muslim subcontinental cuisine and more often that not Nihari is made from beef. Arabs don't eat these particular dishes.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Arabs are an ethnicity, Muslims are a nation based on faith. Let us first of all understand our terms. Just because Arabs do something does not mean a non-Arab Muslim has to do it as well. They have camels there. We have cows and goats.

Nihari, Siri paye, tawa keema, etc is a staple of Muslim subcontinental cuisine and more often that not Nihari is made from beef. Arabs don't eat these particular dishes.

Muslims can eat anything that is permissible and available. But a pious muslim who wants to follow the sunnah will eat in moderation, which makes me think, why do many maulvis seem to have a regular diet of halwa.

Pakistanis and Bangladeshi muslims may eat whatever they want, but Indian muslims insisting on beef means they want to spite the hindus, and think their tastebuds have more rights than any sentiments of hindus.

 

[HalBass9]

Beef is not even a staple diet for Muslims. I don’t think Arabia etc had cows back in the day. Cows are not found in the desert.Personally don’t care what people eat or drink as long as they maintain a decorum around others. However the sole reason why sacrificing a “cow” on “bakra” Eid or trying to provoke or taunt with beef (which personally I feel very juvenile just like taunting a Muslim with alcohol or pork) is only to get rise out of practicing Hindus. That’s definetely as much as problem of some chapri getting smacked around for acting smart. Obviously don’t endorse violence.

What are you trying to say?

So, Muslims consume beef simply to provoke Hindus? By that logic, Christians enjoy steak to do the same? And do the Japanese eat it to offend Hindus as well?

Not everything revolves around Hindus for Muslims, or for any other religion, for that matter.

 

[Stewie]

Muslims can eat anything that is permissible and available. But a pious muslim who wants to follow the sunnah will eat in moderation, which makes me think, why do many maulvis seem to have a regular diet of halwa.

Pakistanis and Bangladeshi muslims may eat whatever they want, but Indian muslims insisting on beef means they want to spite the hindus, and think their tastebuds have more rights than any sentiments of hindus.

you certainly have a point and a very valid precedent set by Pakistan as a religious nation. India should enforce religious laws as well and would be well within their rights to do so as Bharat, a Hindu state.

 

[Stewie]

What are you trying to say?

So, Muslims consume beef simply to provoke Hindus? By that logic, Christians enjoy steak to do the same? And do the Japanese eat it to offend Hindus as well?

Not everything revolves around Hindus for Muslims, or for any other religion, for that matter.

that is their latest angle for sure. I guess the Hindu kid who recently got shot and killed by gau rakshaks over suspicion of beef smuggling, was probably holding up a severed cow head to tease them while driving.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Arabs are an ethnicity, Muslims are a nation based on faith. Let us first of all understand our terms. Just because Arabs do something does not mean a non-Arab Muslim has to do it as well. They have camels there. We have cows and goats.

Nihari, Siri paye, tawa keema, etc is a staple of Muslim subcontinental cuisine and more often that not Nihari is made from beef. Arabs don't eat these particular dishes.

Cow slaughtering is banned in most of India. And more chances are that it will be extended to other provinces.

Those breaking the laws will be punished appropriately.

Now you may not like it. But that's your problem.

 

[CricketCartoons]

you certainly have a point and a very valid precedent set by Pakistan as a religious nation. India should enforce religious laws as well and would be well within their rights to do so as Bharat, a Hindu state.

This is what others don't understand. A moderate Pakistani Muslim like you and a radical Indian Hindu like me are just mirror images of each other. You speak me.

 

[Stewie]

Cow slaughtering is banned in most of India. And more chances are that it will be extended to other provinces.

Those breaking the laws will be punished appropriately.

Now you may not like it. But that's your problem.

Thankfully, I will never have to travel to India or visit there and even if I did, I wont be sourcing the local cuisine at all.
You guys are welcome to enforce your Hindu laws as much as you want. If anything I am glad you are following your neighbor's que on how to do it.

 

[HalBass9]

that is their latest angle for sure. I guess the Hindu kid who recently got shot and killed by gau rakshaks over suspicion of beef smuggling, was probably holding up a severed cow head to tease them while driving.

There is a predictable list of responses whenever someone confronts them about their religious bigotry:

• Ummah
• Pakistan is broke
• IMF involvement
• Arab leaders favor Modi over Pakistan
• British Pakistanis
• Indian CEOs
• India has more billionaires
• Verified news published in Pakistani or Arab sources – but Arab leaders love Modi
• Why do you live in Western countries?
• You all hate Hindus and Hinduism
• Islamist
• What do you know about secularism?
• Modi’s strongman persona

I’m sure I’ve missed a few, so feel free to add to the list.

Whenever they start invoking any of these talking points while ignoring the substance of the argument, it’s a clear indication that they’re offended. They understand the validity of the argument but resort to this list because their feelings are hurt.

 

[Stewie]

There is a predictable list of responses whenever someone confronts them about their religious bigotry:

• Ummah
• Pakistan is broke
• IMF involvement
• Arab leaders favor Modi over Pakistan
• British Pakistanis
• Indian CEOs
• India has more billionaires
• Verified news published in Pakistani or Arab sources – but Arab leaders love Modi
• Why do you live in Western countries?
• You all hate Hindus and Hinduism
• Islamist
• What do you know about secularism?
• Modi’s strongman persona

I’m sure I’ve missed a few, so feel free to add to the list.

Whenever they start invoking any of these talking points while ignoring the substance of the argument, it’s a clear indication that they’re offended. They understand the validity of the argument but resort to this list because their feelings are hurt.

what a fascinating amalgamation of various topics. HAHA

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Not for the majority of each religion and community.

Most Hindus see the absurdity. Most Hindu while pretty devoutly religious, have realised the futility of linking religion to law. It helps that Hindu religion is very confusing and contradictory with respect to legal and governance guidance for it's followers and most of what is codified is antiquated and pretty transparently cannot be followed today.

Christianity has the out that the Old Testament is superceded and the New Testament doesn't have much legal or in fact, mundane day to day guidance. The concept of the infallibility of the Church is hardly taken seriously by most Catholics who in any case have become a minority.

Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism likewise have long given up on using their religious books as guidance for their laws and governance.

Islam is the only religion (to be fair, it's one of the youngest) which wants to continue to cling to it's religious book being the answer to all questions and that any opinions can only be interpretations of the Koran. And unfortunately (sorry if the choice of words offends), the book recommends a pretty antiquated set of laws and system of governance. This leaves the Muslims, when they are in majority, no choice but to try and strive for some sort of Islamic States which legally marginalises minorities and leaves the door open for the worst of the interpretations to take precedence.

How others follow their religion is their business, and they can interpret their religion how they think best.

However, we hear some common tropes by right-wing Hindus - Muslims, when in the minority, want secularism, but when the majority want religious law, (funnily enough, in other threads, they will insist Muslims in India do not want secularism despite being in the minority. There is no evidence of this, but it is something they use to bash Muslims endlessly because it is a trope pushed down on them by BJP head office ( same as the critical mass of Muslims line).

The irony isn't lost on people like @deltexas who bash Muslims all day for this but then wants a Hindu Rashtra himself.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

There is a predictable list of responses whenever someone confronts them about their religious bigotry:

• Ummah
• Pakistan is broke
• IMF involvement
• Arab leaders favor Modi over Pakistan
• British Pakistanis
• Indian CEOs
• India has more billionaires
• Verified news published in Pakistani or Arab sources – but Arab leaders love Modi
• Why do you live in Western countries?
• You all hate Hindus and Hinduism
• Islamist
• What do you know about secularism?
• Modi’s strongman persona

I’m sure I’ve missed a few, so feel free to add to the list.

Whenever they start invoking any of these talking points while ignoring the substance of the argument, it’s a clear indication that they’re offended. They understand the validity of the argument but resort to this list because their feelings are hurt.

On the point about secularism after some study I've concluded that these "concessions" made to Muslims in India are in fact the opposite. The state takes on the custodianship of "dharmic" religions and has left the muslims as "others" who can take care of themselves.

My advice to the Muslims of India would be to advocate for secularism. They can still follow their personal religious laws in private (i.e. if a man wants to marry four women, who can stop him, or if a woman is comfortable with inheritance laws, she can choose to receive less). They don't need state recognition for this.

Watch how the sting comes out of their tail, and the bigots scramble to find another issue to beat them up over.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Bro you missed two points here

*Why Muslims under threat everywhere?
* OP is biased

There is a predictable list of responses whenever someone confronts them about their religious bigotry:

• Ummah
• Pakistan is broke
• IMF involvement
• Arab leaders favor Modi over Pakistan
• British Pakistanis
• Indian CEOs
• India has more billionaires
• Verified news published in Pakistani or Arab sources – but Arab leaders love Modi
• Why do you live in Western countries?
• You all hate Hindus and Hinduism
• Islamist
• What do you know about secularism?
• Modi’s strongman persona

I’m sure I’ve missed a few, so feel free to add to the list.

Whenever they start invoking any of these talking points while ignoring the substance of the argument, it’s a clear indication that they’re offended. They understand the validity of the argument but resort to this list because their feelings are hurt.

d

 

[CricketCartoons]

On the point about secularism after some study I've concluded that these "concessions" made to Muslims in India are in fact the opposite. The state takes on the custodianship of "dharmic" religions and has left the muslims as "others" who can take care of themselves.

My advice to the Muslims of India would be to advocate for secularism. They can still follow their personal religious laws in private (i.e. if a man wants to marry four women, who can stop him, or if a woman is comfortable with inheritance laws, she can choose to receive less). They don't need state recognition for this.

Watch how the sting comes out of their tail, and the bigots scramble to find another issue to beat them up over.

They are not the opposite. Muslim leadership, the ulema, the spokespersons for muslims, they demand to be left alone in their own matters. The so called seculars, also say the same thing, that any change for muslims should come from within. As if they are not citizens, some special category who need to be protected.

Muslims are very happy to enjoy these concessions, and oppose any changes to them.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

They are not the opposite. Muslim leadership, the ulema, the spokespersons for muslims, they demand to be left alone in their own matters. The so called seculars, also say the same thing, that any change for muslims should come from within. As if they are not citizens, some special category who need to be protected.

Muslims are very happy to enjoy these concessions, and oppose any changes to them.

Not special category. Outsiders. The state is yours and Muslims have their own laws.

 

[CricketCartoons]

What are you trying to say?

So, Muslims consume beef simply to provoke Hindus? By that logic, Christians enjoy steak to do the same? And do the Japanese eat it to offend Hindus as well?

Not everything revolves around Hindus for Muslims, or for any other religion, for that matter.

Doesn't matter whether they eat to provoke hindus or just because they love the taste. They should not do it period.


I would not have lunch in front of my muslim colleagues in the lab I worked at. Basic decency to respect peoples faith if you are living with them.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Not special category. Outsiders. The state is yours and Muslims have their own laws.

Because Muslims WANT that to be. And this has only helped otherization.

If muslims want to remain exclusive, where the law and state does not interfere in their internal traditions and practices, they are only doing their own otherization.

Muslims are the biggest opposers of uniform civil laws.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Experts sound alarm on impending genocide of Muslims in India

Political analysts and experts have warned of a dangerous escalation of Muslim persecution in India under Modi regime.

According to Kashmir Media Service, since Modi assumed office, the intensity of attacks on Muslims has surged, with Hindutva activists continuously targeting community with impunity.

The analysts said, Muslims in India face threats, harassment, and violence, with frequent demolitions of their homes and places of worship, particularly in states governed by the BJP.

They said that RSS-backed BJP regime promotes Hindu supremacy, leading to discrimination against Muslims in all spheres of life.

The experts have warned of an impending genocide of Muslims in India, posing a significant challenge to global community.

They urged international community, including the UN, to take immediate steps to stop hate crimes against Muslims in India.

Experts sound alarm on impending genocide of Muslims in India

Experts sound alarm on impending genocide of Muslims in India

www.radio.gov.pk

 

[CricketCartoons]

Doesn't matter whether they eat to provoke hindus or just because they love the taste. They should not do it period.


I would not have lunch in front of my muslim colleagues in the lab I worked at. Basic decency to respect peoples faith if you are living with them.

I meant during ramzan.

 

[Stewie]

Not special category. Outsiders. The state is yours and Muslims have their own laws.

its a very fluid definition of "secularism" in India.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Because Muslims WANT that to be. And this has only helped otherization.

If muslims want to remain exclusive, where the law and state does not interfere in their internal traditions and practices, they are only doing their own otherization.

Muslims are the biggest opposers of uniform civil laws.

The situation now is as a result of the otherization.

State took control of dharmic religions and left the Muslims to fend for themselves.

Now Hindus have a problem with the state and they are taking it out on Muslims.

Muslims will of course try to protect themselves against the rapacious Hindus who want to do them harm.

 

[CricketCartoons]

its a very fluid definition of "secularism" in India.

India should have laws similar to aain-e-Pakistan.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

its a very fluid definition of "secularism" in India.

It works for them reasonably well and they have progressed as a country.

 

[CricketCartoons]

The situation now is as a result of the otherization.

State took control of dharmic religions and left the Muslims to fend for themselves.

Now Hindus have a problem with the state and they are taking it out on Muslims.

Muslims will of course try to protect themselves against the rapacious Hindus who want to do them harm.

I will reply to this tomorrow. It needs full scholarly work.

 

[Stewie]

It works for them reasonably well and they have progressed as a country.

I don't know how you define "working reasonably well" but there is no doubt they have progressed as a country.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

I don't know how you define "working reasonably well" but there is no doubt they have progressed as a country.

Given the variables and dynamics of India ( not just Hindu Muslim) they have a strong identity. Muslims have also risen to the top in various fields.

It's not all doom and gloom.

 

[JaDed]

The situation now is as a result of the otherization.

State took control of dharmic religions and left the Muslims to fend for themselves.

Now Hindus have a problem with the state and they are taking it out on Muslims.

Muslims will of course try to protect themselves against the rapacious Hindus who want to do them harm.

Hindtuva always had a problem with that approach, they didn’t leave out Muslims to fend for themselves, they left out Muslims because Mr. Nehru wanted to be secular..

It was criticised by everyone , including Sarojni Naidu

 

[JaDed]

India’s progress will happen if we dismantle the cultural religious aspect of the silly middle class and usher mandatory innovation.

Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu should be how Indian families be modelled irrespective of religion.

They clearly are leaders in economy.

 

[Stewie]

Given the variables and dynamics of India ( not just Hindu Muslim) they have a strong identity. Muslims have also risen to the top in various fields.

It's not all doom and gloom.

I think the seeds of progress were s.own due to their historically inclusive policies, which are much maligned now by a vast majority of the posters we debate here. They are in favor of ditching them because they believe muslims have abused those rights. So maybe we should revisit this view of yours in another 10-15 years to see if the changing dynamic is still effective for them or not. As country they will continue to progress I am sure but that may or may not be inspite of their minority policies.

 

[JaDed]

So maybe we should revisit this view of yours in another 10-15 years to see if the changing dynamic is still effective for them or not. As country they will continue to progress I am sure but that may or may not be inspite of their minority policies.

Imagine in 2008.. i can pullup threads if you want from PP with same line. How do you think it will hold up?

I did pull them up 3-4 years ago, do you want to see what Pakistani thought of India then?Almost similar doom and gloom..

 

[Stewie]

Imagine in 2008.. i can pullup threads if you want from PP with same line. How do you think it will hold up?

I did pull them up 3-4 years ago, do you want to see what Pakistani thought of India then?Almost similar doom and gloom..

I am not sure you understand what I am really saying here. I am not forecasting doom and gloom in regards to progress. Please re read my post. Anyhow what do I know. I am not Indian. And I also did not forecast any doom and gloom here in 2008 either.

So you be you and I’ll be me.

 

[JaDed]

I am not sure you understand what I am really saying here. I am not forecasting doom and gloom in regards to progress. Please re read my post. Anyhow what do I know. I am not Indian. And I also did not forecast any doom and gloom here in 2008 either.

So you be you and I’ll be me.

My point is change is the only constant, and Indians have tasted GDP success so they will consistently thrive for that now.

It was not inclusion or secularism, it was 1991 economy reforms of N Rao ‘s leadership everything else is just PR.
Same with China 1979 economic reforms.

 

[cricketjoshila]

On the point about secularism after some study I've concluded that these "concessions" made to Muslims in India are in fact the opposite. The state takes on the custodianship of "dharmic" religions and has left the muslims as "others" who can take care of themselves.

My advice to the Muslims of India would be to advocate for secularism. They can still follow their personal religious laws in private (i.e. if a man wants to marry four women, who can stop him, or if a woman is comfortable with inheritance laws, she can choose to receive less). They don't need state recognition for this.

Watch how the sting comes out of their tail, and the bigots scramble to find another issue to beat them up over.

If a man marries 4 woman he can be jailed for polygamy.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

If a man marries 4 woman he can be jailed for polygamy.

What if a man has four girlfriends?

 

[Stewie]

My point is change is the only constant, and Indians have tasted GDP success so they will consistently thrive for that now.

It was not inclusion or secularism, it was 1991 economy reforms of N Rao ‘s leadership everything else is just PR.
Same with China 1979 economic reforms.

So what you are saying is that the progress India has made is inspite of the inclusion/exclusion policies rendering @DeadlyVenom’s argument pointless?

If so I would actually agree with you. Progress of a nation is not necessarily dependent upon inclusionary or exclusionary policies for minorities. We have seen that with China and the Arab states and even the US during the segregation era.

 

[Stewie]

What if a man has four girlfriends?

don’t forget the thumb

 

[HalBass9]

India’s progress will happen if we dismantle the cultural religious aspect of the silly middle class and usher mandatory innovation.

Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu should be how Indian families be modelled irrespective of religion.

They clearly are leaders in economy.

India's progress appears inevitable, fueled by the economic reforms of the 1990s and its relatively high birth rate, especially in contrast to China, where a shrinking population and an aging demographic present significant challenges.

Similarly, Pakistan’s potential for advancement could become evident if a truly representative government, focused on the well-being of its people, were in place. Further decentralizing power from Punjab could serve as a catalyst for Pakistan’s growth, making its development unstoppable.

At times, I even wonder whether reuniting Pakistani Punjab with India could foster greater stability and balance within Pakistan itself.