"Wearing Hijab Is Indiscipline": Karnataka Minister On Students' Protest

[IMMY69]

Mate you need to get the message. It's up to indian courts, presided over by predominantly hindu judges to decide on who gets preferential treatment and who doesn't. We can't argue this, we can only listen to their droning propaganda and try to understand where it's coming from.

Bit strange though that in a "secular" country someone has to go to court to be able to wear their religious whatever it is...

I'm so grateful to be living in a country where children in schoolds are allowed to wear whatever they like on their heads due to their religion and don't have to go to court for it.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Bit strange though that in a "secular" country someone has to go to court to be able to wear their religious whatever it is...

I'm so grateful to be living in a country where children in schoolds are allowed to wear whatever they like on their heads due to their religion and don't have to go to court for it.

What would we know about their country? They don't even seem to know themselves. Appealing to western standards when it suits them, but totally missing the point at home.

 

[Itachi]

Bit strange though that in a "secular" country someone has to go to court to be able to wear their religious whatever it is...

I'm so grateful to be living in a country where children in schoolds are allowed to wear whatever they like on their heads due to their religion and don't have to go to court for it.

I think you have a misconception about what "secularism" is.

One has to go through court BECAUSE it is a secular country.

Religious customs are allowed as long as it doesn't conflict with the existing laid procedures. Once it conflicts or complaints arise, both the party will have to approach judiciary.

 

[Itachi]

What would we know about their country? They don't even seem to know themselves. Appealing to western standards when it suits them, but totally missing the point at home.

If you define by what others think of you, then you have an identity crisis where your existence is depended upon what others think. I've seen it specifically in brit Muslims (unlike US Muslims). So I don't think it is coming from the religion but there is some culture in Britain where it does make some muslims insecure about their identity and seeks validation from others just like you've wrote here.

 

[Justcrazy]

I don't know the exact details of the case. If you are interested, i can find the judgement and give it you. Will be interested in your opinion.

If I have to decide about spelling of a word I will go to dictionary, if I want to know about Hinduism I will go to Vedas, If I want to know about cricket I will go to wisden.

Same way if I want to know about a Islamic issue I will go to right sources, Quran and hadeeth and then opinion of companions.

All three clearly show Muhammad is final prophet.

Now if someone believes in someone else to be prophet, that is fine , but they cannot use Islam and claim that view.

The issue is NOT what they want to believe, the issue is they are projecting it as Islam, they using Islamic sources and propagating ideas that are fundamentally against Islam.

Its like a Pakistani soldier wearing an Indian army uniform and killing a third party and projecting as Indian soldier.

This is something no one is going to accept and tolerate.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Bit strange though that in a "secular" country someone has to go to court to be able to wear their religious whatever it is...

I'm so grateful to be living in a country where children in schoolds are allowed to wear whatever they like on their heads due to their religion and don't have to go to court for it.

They have to go to court because its a secular country. If it was a islamic one, they wouldn't have to.

If religious beliefs of someone clashes with laid down rules, either he has to obey the laid down rules or go to the court to prove that the rules conflict with his fundamental rights.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

If you define by what others think of you, then you have an identity crisis where your existence is depended upon what others think. I've seen it specifically in brit Muslims (unlike US Muslims). So I don't think it is coming from the religion but there is some culture in Britain where it does make some muslims insecure about their identity and seeks validation from others just like you've wrote here.

It's just your observation, and coming from a defensive position because what I said must have hit home. It's pointless even addressing your views as it will only distract from the topic, but if you want to discuss then I suggest you dig up one of the threads about Brit Muslims and we can take it up there.

 

[IMMY69]

If I have to decide about spelling of a word I will go to dictionary, if I want to know about Hinduism I will go to Vedas, If I want to know about cricket I will go to wisden.

Same way if I want to know about a Islamic issue I will go to right sources, Quran and hadeeth and then opinion of companions.

All three clearly show Muhammad is final prophet.

Now if someone believes in someone else to be prophet, that is fine , but they cannot use Islam and claim that view.

The issue is NOT what they want to believe, the issue is they are projecting it as Islam, they using Islamic sources and propagating ideas that are fundamentally against Islam.

Its like a Pakistani soldier wearing an Indian army uniform and killing a third party and projecting as Indian soldier.

This is something no one is going to accept and tolerate.

Its like a Jewish person calling himself Christian even though he believes in the Jewish teachings

 

[PakLFC]

[MENTION=155806]kumjsr[/MENTION]

Hindu's should also be allowed to celebrate their faith. Muslim's are not responsible for them not being allowed to do so in India.

 

[PakLFC]

It doesn't bother the entire India, it bothers right-wing fascists who are in power. You'd ask how they were elected then, because the opposition party is far weak, corrupt and religion and "patriotism" works in every single country.

That may be so but the fascists are in power. They are strong enough to hold a massive vote bank.

 

[light]

Did you guys know that this issue is actually within a law in one of the Canadian province (Quebec) where hijab, turban, etc are banned for official government employees in school, police, etc. You get fired/let go of you oppose the law. And this is meant to be a first world country lol ... Then again, it's Quebec, not like you can expect anything better from this province.

 

[MenInG]

NEW DELHI:
Barring students from wearing hijab or headscarf is an attack on the "symbols of faith," said activists and experts in India.

For many weeks now, a group of Muslim women at a college in India's southern state of Karnataka has been barred from attending classes while wearing the headscarf.

On World Hijab Day being marked on Tuesday, Fawaz Shaheen, the national secretary of the Students Islamic Organisation of India, the student wing of socio-religious organisation Jamaat-e-Islami, told Anadolu Agency that the institutions which have banned students from wearing hijab are doing an "unconstitutional act".

"It is not sudden and has been happening now, it is connected to the alienation of Muslims. We have seen such narratives for some time now," he said. "Even cultural habits are being challenged. Such moves have basically attacked the symbols of faith and are happening continuously to polarise the society."

The government of another state, Kerala, this week said that it cannot allow police cadets to wear hijab and full sleeves.

Shaheen noted that the wearing of hijab or anything else was a right guaranteed by the Constitution.

Also read: Hardline Indian group allied with Modi calls for ban on face veil

Urging Indians to speak up, Shaheen said silence against such acts would mean an endorsement.

"The majority should speak ... Silence is not an option," he said.

According to the Indian Constitution, every citizen has the right to practice, profess and propagate religion. This right can be curtailed only on grounds of public order, morality, and health.

Last month, tensions erupted in another government college in Karnataka's Balagadi village after a group of students turned up wearing saffron scarves — the colour favoured by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party — and asked their female classmates from the Muslim community not to wear hijab during classes.

Subsequently, the authorities banned hijabs and saffron scarves on the campus.

New Delhi-based activist Aysha Renna told Anadolu Agency that such incidents were on the rise and all possible measure will be taken against it.

In Karnataka, the state government has said it will constitute a committee to formulate guidelines on uniforms at colleges.

Local Indian daily The Indian Express quoted State Education Minister B C Nagesh as saying: "We will look into the court verdicts and what other states have done in such matters and will take steps. We have directed the colleges to follow the present rule till the government decides."

Indian Muslims have witnessed a deterioration of the right to practice faith under the rule of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his right-wing BJP.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/2341486/activists-decry-headscarf-ban-in-indian-state

 

[cricketjoshila]

NEW DELHI:
Barring students from wearing hijab or headscarf is an attack on the "symbols of faith," said activists and experts in India.

For many weeks now, a group of Muslim women at a college in India's southern state of Karnataka has been barred from attending classes while wearing the headscarf.

On World Hijab Day being marked on Tuesday, Fawaz Shaheen, the national secretary of the Students Islamic Organisation of India, the student wing of socio-religious organisation Jamaat-e-Islami, told Anadolu Agency that the institutions which have banned students from wearing hijab are doing an "unconstitutional act".

"It is not sudden and has been happening now, it is connected to the alienation of Muslims. We have seen such narratives for some time now," he said. "Even cultural habits are being challenged. Such moves have basically attacked the symbols of faith and are happening continuously to polarise the society."

The government of another state, Kerala, this week said that it cannot allow police cadets to wear hijab and full sleeves.

Shaheen noted that the wearing of hijab or anything else was a right guaranteed by the Constitution.

Also read: Hardline Indian group allied with Modi calls for ban on face veil

Urging Indians to speak up, Shaheen said silence against such acts would mean an endorsement.

"The majority should speak ... Silence is not an option," he said.

According to the Indian Constitution, every citizen has the right to practice, profess and propagate religion. This right can be curtailed only on grounds of public order, morality, and health.

Last month, tensions erupted in another government college in Karnataka's Balagadi village after a group of students turned up wearing saffron scarves — the colour favoured by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party — and asked their female classmates from the Muslim community not to wear hijab during classes.

Subsequently, the authorities banned hijabs and saffron scarves on the campus.

New Delhi-based activist Aysha Renna told Anadolu Agency that such incidents were on the rise and all possible measure will be taken against it.

In Karnataka, the state government has said it will constitute a committee to formulate guidelines on uniforms at colleges.

Local Indian daily The Indian Express quoted State Education Minister B C Nagesh as saying: "We will look into the court verdicts and what other states have done in such matters and will take steps. We have directed the colleges to follow the present rule till the government decides."

Indian Muslims have witnessed a deterioration of the right to practice faith under the rule of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his right-wing BJP.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/2341486/activists-decry-headscarf-ban-in-indian-state

The matter is in the Karnataka High court now. They will decide if the right to wear the hijab is a constitutional right or not. Any random person saying its a constitutional right doesn't make it so.

Secondly, Saffron is the first colour in the Indian flag, its not only a BJP colour.

Thirdly this case will not only decide the fate of hijab but also what religious symbolism is allowed inside a secular school. Because tommorow hindus will demand the right to wear something and christians may demand something else.

 

[kumjsr]

[MENTION=155806]kumjsr[/MENTION]

Hindu's should also be allowed to celebrate their faith. Muslim's are not responsible for them not being allowed to do so in India.

1. It's not discrimination as some people are pointing out.
2. It's not attack on symbol on one faith as the article posted above this post mentions.

Probably thousands of Hindus remain under some sort of restriction in schools, yet no one create this much hype out of this issue.

Whether a person should be allowed to use symbols or not is debatable. When you say that muslims are not the reasons for restrictions, let me tell you that presence of multiple religions and classes is the reasons for restrictions.

Dress codes exist in India to bring in uniformity among that diversity.

 

[PakLFC]

1. It's not discrimination as some people are pointing out.
2. It's not attack on symbol on one faith as the article posted above this post mentions.

Probably thousands of Hindus remain under some sort of restriction in schools, yet no one create this much hype out of this issue.

Whether a person should be allowed to use symbols or not is debatable. When you say that muslims are not the reasons for restrictions, let me tell you that presence of multiple religions and classes is the reasons for restrictions.

Dress codes exist in India to bring in uniformity among that diversity.

What are you on about? Of course it is discrimination to disallow people from any faith from expressing their religious identity. Muslim's are the prime targets. Hindu's are sometimes targeted to justify attacks on Muslim's and Christians. Your "probably" is not based on any fact whatsoever when the fascist Modi government is encouraging Hindu terror groups and seeing love jihad everywhere.

Dress code should not compromise any religious identity like the desire to cover ones head should they wish. India can not call itself the world's largest democracy whilst curtailing freedom of religious expression. Every day such events occur in India, it is not only restricted to this issue. https://hindutvawatch.org/

 

[kumjsr]

What are you on about? Of course it is discrimination to disallow people from any faith from expressing their religious identity. Muslim's are the prime targets. Hindu's are sometimes targeted to justify attacks on Muslim's and Christians. Your "probably" is not based on any fact whatsoever when the fascist Modi government is encouraging Hindu terror groups and seeing love jihad everywhere.

Dress code should not compromise any religious identity like the desire to cover ones head should they wish. India can not call itself the world's largest democracy whilst curtailing freedom of religious expression. Every day such events occur in India, it is not only restricted to this issue. https://hindutvawatch.org/

How did you reach conclusion that Muslims are prime targets and Hindus are target sometimes only.

I have posted multiple instances against Hindus, while this is first instance which we have heard of against Muslims in recent times.

Even in this scenario, none of the students were fined or punished. They are allowed to enter schools, but not the class. On the other hand, there have been instances where Hindus students have been punished.

If the rules are same for all, then how is it discrimination?

This is what I get as definition of discrimination

1.
treating one person or group worse than others

2.
FORMAL
the state of being able to see a difference between two people or things

How is it discrimination to disallow people from any faith from expressing their religious identity? If purpose of dress code is to ensure that there is uniformity among kids, then doesn't it go against the 2nd definition of discrimation where you can't see difference between two people?

 

[PakLFC]

How did you reach conclusion that Muslims are prime targets and Hindus are target sometimes only.

I have posted multiple instances against Hindus, while this is first instance which we have heard of against Muslims in recent times.

Even in this scenario, none of the students were fined or punished. They are allowed to enter schools, but not the class. On the other hand, there have been instances where Hindus students have been punished.

If the rules are same for all, then how is it discrimination?

This is what I get as definition of discrimination

1.
treating one person or group worse than others

2.
FORMAL
the state of being able to see a difference between two people or things

How is it discrimination to disallow people from any faith from expressing their religious identity? If purpose of dress code is to ensure that there is uniformity among kids, then doesn't it go against the 2nd definition of discrimation where you can't see difference between two people?

Are you kidding me?. Firstly just because they may be speaking against Hindu people once in a blue moon not that I have seen it does not justify attacks on Muslim people. As proved with the link i attached Hindu zealots are openly calling for the genocide of Muslim's or talking of forcefully converting them to Hinduism. Have you not heard of this love jihad movement they keep talking about so to demonise the Muslim community too? They are also being killed for eating beef or doing something offensive in front of a cow!. It is become more absurd with every passing day.

No point attending school if they are refused entry to the class. I can go and stand outside my workplace but until they allow me inside my office there is no point in me attending. Try harder in justifying your illogical nonsense. You must be the only Indian who thinks their is no Muslim hate in India when even many of your honest journalists are shouting against it from the rooftops.

As I say even if Hindu's are being thrown out of classrooms does not justify such acts. Hindu temples are not being attacked by RSS thugs neither are they being stopped from praying etc. There is no comparison here whatsoever. I am are not just talking about the school controversy here but other things happening in India too.

Anything that is against basic human rights is discrimination. What harm does it cause a school if a student chooses to cover her head as is the case in western school's. It is not compromising the uniform if she chooses to do that whatsoever when she is willing to do both.

 

[cricketjoshila]

What are you on about? Of course it is discrimination to disallow people from any faith from expressing their religious identity. Muslim's are the prime targets. Hindu's are sometimes targeted to justify attacks on Muslim's and Christians. Your "probably" is not based on any fact whatsoever when the fascist Modi government is encouraging Hindu terror groups and seeing love jihad everywhere.

Dress code should not compromise any religious identity like the desire to cover ones head should they wish. India can not call itself the world's largest democracy whilst curtailing freedom of religious expression. Every day such events occur in India, it is not only restricted to this issue. https://hindutvawatch.org/

Its secular school not a religious place. If someone is concerned about showing off their religious identity they should join a religiously run institution.

There is a dress code and everyone has to follow it unless they have a court order giving them and exception.

 

[kumjsr]

Are you kidding me?. Firstly just because they may be speaking against Hindu people once in a blue moon not that I have seen it does not justify attacks on Muslim people. As proved with the link i attached Hindu zealots are openly calling for the genocide of Muslim's or talking of forcefully converting them to Hinduism. Have you not heard of this love jihad movement they keep talking about so to demonise the Muslim community too? They are also being killed for eating beef or doing something offensive in front of a cow!. It is become more absurd with every passing day.

No point attending school if they are refused entry to the class. I can go and stand outside my workplace but until they allow me inside my office there is no point in me attending. Try harder in justifying your illogical nonsense. You must be the only Indian who thinks their is no Muslim hate in India when even many of your honest journalists are shouting against it from the rooftops.

As I say even if Hindu's are being thrown out of classrooms does not justify such acts. Hindu temples are not being attacked by RSS thugs neither are they being stopped from praying etc. There is no comparison here whatsoever. I am are not just talking about the school controversy here but other things happening in India too.

Anything that is against basic human rights is discrimination. What harm does it cause a school if a student chooses to cover her head as is the case in western school's. It is not compromising the uniform if she chooses to do that whatsoever when she is willing to do both.

You are repeating same thing.

Once in a blue moon against Hindus and Muslims being prime target, whereas I have posted incidents indicating that it goes once in a blue moon against Muslims and Hindus are primary affected groups.

Anything that is against basic human rights is discrimination

From where did you get this definition?

Are you allowed to wear shorts in your meetings with clients? Being able to wear what you want, even that is basic human right.

Can army officers in any country refuse to wear uniform citing basic human rights and discrimination?

There would thousands of institutions across the globe requiring people to follow dress code against basic human rights.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Its secular school not a religious place. If someone is concerned about showing off their religious identity they should join a religiously run institution.

There is a dress code and everyone has to follow it unless they have a court order giving them and exception.

Why is there an exception made for Sikhs then?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Why is there an exception made for Sikhs then?

Because they have a court judgement in their favour. These students have also approached the courts, lets wait for the judgement.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Because they have a court judgement in their favour. These students have also approached the courts, lets wait for the judgement.

They shouldn't need a court judgement in their favour if they follow the principles you are espousing:

Its secular school not a religious place. If someone is concerned about showing off their religious identity they should join a religiously run institution.

Those are your words, if you believe them, they should apply to Sikhs as well.

 

[cricketjoshila]

They shouldn't need a court judgement in their favour if they follow the principles you are espousing:

Its secular school not a religious place. If someone is concerned about showing off their religious identity they should join a religiously run institution.

Those are your words, if you believe them, they should apply to Sikhs as well.

If something is an essential part of one's religion, something thats compulsory to follow, without which that person will cease to have that religious identity, then courts do allow that.

 

[PakLFC]

Its secular school not a religious place. If someone is concerned about showing off their religious identity they should join a religiously run institution.

There is a dress code and everyone has to follow it unless they have a court order giving them and exception.

They are following the normal routine. Wearing an additional attire does not compromise the basic unformal conduct. It is like wearing a pair of pyjama's under a regular school skirt should never be a problem.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

Its secular school not a religious place. If someone is concerned about showing off their religious identity they should join a religiously run institution.

There is a dress code and everyone has to follow it unless they have a court order giving them and exception.

School?

The entire country boasts about being secular, no?
Should cow slaughter ban be removed and beef consumption should be allowed in the states where it's banned?
Secular country, right? Why do you need Mandirs to show off your religion? Take them out.

 

[PakLFC]

You are repeating same thing.

Once in a blue moon against Hindus and Muslims being prime target, whereas I have posted incidents indicating that it goes once in a blue moon against Muslims and Hindus are primary affected groups.



From where did you get this definition?

Are you allowed to wear shorts in your meetings with clients? Being able to wear what you want, even that is basic human right.

Can army officers in any country refuse to wear uniform citing basic human rights and discrimination?

There would thousands of institutions across the globe requiring people to follow dress code against basic human rights.

I am repeating it so it gets through to you which it obviously isn't. Not sure about your "once in a blue moon" comment. Once in a blue moon what? My point is this is just the latest of many incidents to target Muslim people in India. I don't want to go through the many vile incidents that take place every day for which i have posted a website.

Now you are twisting the logic here with your wearing shorts and boxers in business meetings. A hijab should not offend anyone at all be it worn in a school classroom or bank. I could understand and would agree if the face veil was banned but the hijab is allowed in most places. Yes Muslim ladies in western armies are allowed to wear the hijab as well. From the UK to the USA it has become a common practise.

By observing the hijab no one is unfollowing the professional code of conduct. Next you will say male students can not grow a beard either.

 

[LaLoco]

Arguing to Hindutva followers about India being secular is probably not the best way to waste your own time.

Constitution on a historical piece of paper may be secular but there is absolutely nothing secular about India, from the poster defending it to electing to someone at the highest office.

India has become a convenient secular which is depended on whom and who it is applied on.

Absolute waste of time.

 

[cricketjoshila]

School?

The entire country boasts about being secular, no?
Should cow slaughter ban be removed and beef consumption should be allowed in the states where it's banned?
Secular country, right? Why do you need Mandirs to show off your religion? Take them out.

Beef is allowed. Cow slaughtering isn't allowed in certain states. Animal protection laws exist in every country.

Why? Is mandir a public place? Its a private religious building. Like a mosque or a church.

Why do you want only Mandir's destroyed? Iconoclasm?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Arguing to Hindutva followers about India being secular is probably not the best way to waste your own time.

Constitution on a historical piece of paper may be secular but there is absolutely nothing secular about India, from the poster defending it to electing to someone at the highest office.

India has become a convenient secular which is depended on whom and who it is applied on.

Absolute waste of time.

Laws have to be secular.

People will follow their religion.

A person is free to vote for anyone he wants, thats the basics of democracy. X doesn't have to think about Y's opinion, before voting.

I understand this concept is hard to grasp when one grows up in a religious republic, with Little democracy.

 

[from_da_lost_dim3nsion]

Hijab is banned in various European countries. Whats the big deal if they are asking these girls to follow the uniform code?

because its India and home to a lot of muslims .

 

[LaLoco]

Laws have to be secular.

People will follow their religion.

A person is free to vote for anyone he wants, thats the basics of democracy. X doesn't have to think about Y's opinion, before voting.

I understand this concept is hard to grasp when one grows up in a religious republic, with Little democracy.

LOL - Taunting islamic republic while trying extremist 'ly' hard to portray domestic issues as mass religious conversion of Hindus in a Hindu majority country.



We all understand

 

[cricketjoshila]

because its India and home to a lot of muslims .

Its a secular country and all are equal.

 

[cricketjoshila]

LOL - Taunting islamic republic while trying extremist 'ly' hard to portray domestic issues as mass religious conversion of Hindus in a Hindu majority country.



We all understand

If only you would understand what it means to be a secular democratic republic.

 

[PakLFC]

Its a secular country and all are equal.

That is why Muslim's are being battered and harassed all the time because everyone is equal in India. Pull the other one lad! You are always sounding like a broken record with your claptrap always against the facts.

 

[Justcrazy]

Beef is allowed. Cow slaughtering isn't allowed in certain states. Animal protection laws exist in every country.

Why? Is mandir a public place? Its a private religious building. Like a mosque or a church.

Why do you want only Mandir's destroyed? Iconoclasm?

Can you explain to us how can we get beef without slaughtering cows ? Has Baba Ramdev found a way to get Patanjali beef ?

 

[Justcrazy]

That is why Muslim's are being battered and harassed all the time because everyone is equal in India. Pull the other one lad! You are always sounding like a broken record with your claptrap always against the facts.

Democracy is an over-ratted word. The majority of people in India are Hindu , so one vote counts as one , so its natural laws will be made according to the majority.

 

[LaLoco]

If only you would understand what it means to be a secular democratic republic.

Lol - Hitler was also elected through democracy.

But this repeated argument is just another attempt to evade from the real issue, of course Emperor Modi was elected through democracy. It’s just majority elected Modi -that is the point which you and other from your school of thought try to evade by keep repeating, “democracy”

But every reader on this forum knew this simple concept but y’all repeat it for your own feel good counter argument and nothing more -enjoy

India sure is secular

 

[kumjsr]

Lol - Hitler was also elected through democracy.

But this repeated argument is just another attempt to evade from the real issue, of course Emperor Modi was elected through democracy. It’s just majority elected Modi -that is the point which you and other from your school of thought try to evade by keep repeating, “democracy”

But every reader on this forum knew this simple concept but y’all repeat it for your own feel good counter argument and nothing more -enjoy

India sure is secular

Can you show me any example of Nazis and Hitler facing discrimination from other groups in Germany like Hindus face through forced conversions?

Can you show the examples of Nazis facing genocide like Hindus have faced in subcontinent.

Can you show any example of Nazis being driven away from their homelands just like Kashmiri Pandits?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Can you explain to us how can we get beef without slaughtering cows ? Has Baba Ramdev found a way to get Patanjali beef ?

Buffalo meat. Imported meat etc.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Democracy is an over-ratted word. The majority of people in India are Hindu , so one vote counts as one , so its natural laws will be made according to the majority.

So now the problem is hindus are a majority in India. May be every hindu vote should count as only half, no? That will be satisfactory for muslims?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Lol - Hitler was also elected through democracy.

But this repeated argument is just another attempt to evade from the real issue, of course Emperor Modi was elected through democracy. It’s just majority elected Modi -that is the point which you and other from your school of thought try to evade by keep repeating, “democracy”

But every reader on this forum knew this simple concept but y’all repeat it for your own feel good counter argument and nothing more -enjoy

India sure is secular

In every democracy, whoever gets majority vote is elected. That's how democracy functions.

I know its a hard concept for you to grasp, because you may be used to selected leaders or dictators.

Regarding Hitler, well he never won a majority in Reichstag, thats why he forced through the enabling act 1933.

You need to read about Hitler's loss to Hindenberg in 1932 elections and how Hitler seized power.

 

[LaLoco]

Lol - Hitler was also elected through democracy.

But this repeated argument is just another attempt to evade from the real issue, of course Emperor Modi was elected through democracy. It’s just majority elected Modi -that is the point which you and other from your school of thought try to evade by keep repeating, “democracy”

But every reader on this forum knew this simple concept but y’all repeat it for your own feel good counter argument and nothing more -enjoy

India sure is secular

]In every democracy, whoever gets majority vote is elected. That's how democracy functions. [/B]

I know its a hard concept for you to grasp, because you may be used to selected leaders or dictators.

Regarding Hitler, well he never won a majority in Reichstag, thats why he forced through the enabling act 1933.

You need to read about Hitler's loss to Hindenberg in 1932 elections and how Hitler seized power.

You keep repeating the same thing over and over as if you are the genius one who only understand the concept and mechanism of democracy with an attempt and hope as an insult -lol. We get it, it is another defensive and evasive tactic to support, promote and normalize marginalize and bigotry against the minority, and that is acceptable because this school of thought has majority in India, hence democracy, which is not even the topic but it highlight the unsettling and dangerous fact, which is not surprising considering the history of India.

So i guess, there were less people who supported Hitler radicalism but in 2022, the Emperor Modi, who will claim India back from the Indian born Mughals after 300 years their rule ended while normalizing marginalizing and dehumanizing the minority has majority, still look bad -lol

Alright, you have made your point, and we all get it, India is back on track to be free from Indian born Mughal rule.

 

[IMMY69]

If you define by what others think of you, then you have an identity crisis where your existence is depended upon what others think. I've seen it specifically in brit Muslims (unlike US Muslims). So I don't think it is coming from the religion but there is some culture in Britain where it does make some muslims insecure about their identity and seeks validation from others just like you've wrote here.

and what does it tell you about the people's state of mind when they complain about a girl covering her hair?

 

[IMMY69]

I think you have a misconception about what "secularism" is.

One has to go through court BECAUSE it is a secular country.

Religious customs are allowed as long as it doesn't conflict with the existing laid procedures. Once it conflicts or complaints arise, both the party will have to approach judiciary.

and what does it tell you about the people's state of mind when they complain about a girl covering her hair?

 

[cricketjoshila]

and what does it tell you about the people's state of mind when they complain about a girl covering her hair?

Its about following the rules. Every one has to follow it.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Its about following the rules. Every one has to follow it.

Unless they get a court order excepting it if they are Sikhs right?

 

[IMMY69]

Its about following the rules. Every one has to follow it.

Its strange but I suppose this is how it must have felt when debating with a member of the third reich in the 30's / 40's.

Just read your posts and tell me what am I missing? People objecting to a girl covering her hair and the rules that forbid it. Can you really tell me that the school or the people who object to this don't have a screw loose in their head?

 

[from_da_lost_dim3nsion]

Its a secular country and all are equal.

Are they though ?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Its strange but I suppose this is how it must have felt when debating with a member of the third reich in the 30's / 40's.

Just read your posts and tell me what am I missing? People objecting to a girl covering her hair and the rules that forbid it. Can you really tell me that the school or the people who object to this don't have a screw loose in their head?

What's even more laughable is that when pointing out his hypocrisy over Sikhs asking for special dispensation to flaunt their religion publicly - something he himself declares is flouting Indian secular standards according to him - he says they got a court order so other minorities ( meaning Muslims) should do the same. The courts which will be presided over by judges who govern by guess which type of mentality?

 

[PakLFC]

Democracy is an over-ratted word. The majority of people in India are Hindu , so one vote counts as one , so its natural laws will be made according to the majority.

These laws include hating on Muslims.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Unless they get a court order excepting it if they are Sikhs right?

If muslims get one, that will be followed as well.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Are they though ?

Would really want to know which laws are discrimnatory towards muslims?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Its strange but I suppose this is how it must have felt when debating with a member of the third reich in the 30's / 40's.

Just read your posts and tell me what am I missing? People objecting to a girl covering her hair and the rules that forbid it. Can you really tell me that the school or the people who object to this don't have a screw loose in their head?

Its about following the uniform dress code. You tell me whats the objection to a hindu guy tying the sacred thread on his hand or having the tilak on his head?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.de...on-tilak-may-take-kerala-school-to-court.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nd...or-wearing-tilak-on-her-birthday-743069/amp/1


https://www.indiatimes.com/news/ind...hool-demanded-from-a-class-ii-kid-246162.html



Look these news articles. Dont you think the cases are all similar.

 

[IMMY69]

Its about following the uniform dress code. You tell me whats the objection to a hindu guy tying the sacred thread on his hand or having the tilak on his head?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.de...on-tilak-may-take-kerala-school-to-court.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nd...or-wearing-tilak-on-her-birthday-743069/amp/1


https://www.indiatimes.com/news/ind...hool-demanded-from-a-class-ii-kid-246162.html



Look these news articles. Dont you think the cases are all similar.

Sorry but I am not going to read any articles that your have posted.
I don't know what they're about and frankly I don't care.

This thread is about you, sorry I mean extremist India, no I mean a Girl's right to wear a head scarf at school. If a Sikh had to go to court and was allowed by judges to wear their turban then that surely sets a precedent?

Unless of course the laws of India discriminate between religions. Is that what you're saying?

 

[IMMY69]

^^^
Also why would people object to it?
On what grounds? Are they covering their face?
What makes people want women to remove a scarf that covers their hair?

 

[MenInG]

Lets see a Sikh going to court in India, versus a Muslim girl going to court in India asking for permission to preserve her modesty...What are the chances here?

 

[LaLoco]

Sorry but I am not going to read any articles that your have posted.
I don't know what they're about and frankly I don't care.

This thread is about you, sorry I mean extremist India, no I mean a Girl's right to wear a head scarf at school. If a Sikh had to go to court and was allowed by judges to wear their turban then that surely sets a precedent?

Unless of course the laws of India discriminate between religions. Is that what you're saying?

In most of the secular countries by default ruling applies to everyone regardless of their gender unless their is discriminatory angle involve.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Sorry but I am not going to read any articles that your have posted.
I don't know what they're about and frankly I don't care.

This thread is about you, sorry I mean extremist India, no I mean a Girl's right to wear a head scarf at school. If a Sikh had to go to court and was allowed by judges to wear their turban then that surely sets a precedent?

Unless of course the laws of India discriminate between religions. Is that what you're saying?

If you are not going to read about the topic then there is no use discussing it.

If hindus can be stopped from wearing a tilak or the sacred thread, muslims too can be stopped from wearing the hijab,if its not mandatory.

Sikhs were able to prove that wearing the turban is mandatory in their religion. If muslims prove hijab is mandatory, well they would be allowed too.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Lets see a Sikh going to court in India, versus a Muslim girl going to court in India asking for permission to preserve her modesty...What are the chances here?

Turban is mandatory in the sikh religion, if hijab is mandatory, it should be allowed.

 

[Justcrazy]

Buffalo meat. Imported meat etc.

In India beef cow meat.

India itself is largest exporter of beef , why should they import !

 

[Justcrazy]

So now the problem is hindus are a majority in India. May be every hindu vote should count as only half, no? That will be satisfactory for muslims?

No , I did not say that Hindus being Majority is a problem. What I said is that idea of democracy is shallow under such circumstances, and it is very much evident, if one vote one person is applied, then the majority certainly have an advantage because they can pass any kind of laws they want.

 

[Justcrazy]

Its about following the uniform dress code. You tell me whats the objection to a hindu guy tying the sacred thread on his hand or having the tilak on his head?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.de...on-tilak-may-take-kerala-school-to-court.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nd...or-wearing-tilak-on-her-birthday-743069/amp/1


https://www.indiatimes.com/news/ind...hool-demanded-from-a-class-ii-kid-246162.html



Look these news articles. Dont you think the cases are all similar.

I condemn them as well, if a person wants to wear tilak or thread like what brahmins do , should be allowed .

 

[Justcrazy]

If you are not going to read about the topic then there is no use discussing it.

If hindus can be stopped from wearing a tilak or the sacred thread, muslims too can be stopped from wearing the hijab,if its not mandatory.

Sikhs were able to prove that wearing the turban is mandatory in their religion. If muslims prove hijab is mandatory, well they would be allowed too.

Wearing turban was mandatory why so many sikhs do not do that , yet they can go in gurudwara and practice and mix with sikhs ?

Secondly growing hair is mandatory in sikhism ,not wearing turban.

 

[cricketjoshila]

In India beef cow meat.

India itself is largest exporter of beef , why should they import !

India exports buffalo meat not cow meat.

If someone is so fond of cow meat, they can import and eat.

When a uniform civil code is proposed, which removes all religion specific laws, muslims are the first to raise a hue and cry. They want sharia personal laws. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I condemn them as well, if a person wants to wear tilak or thread like what brahmins do , should be allowed .

But it is not. That's what i am trying to convey, this isn't a muslim specific issue. It cuts across the religious lines.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Wearing turban was mandatory why so many sikhs do not do that , yet they can go in gurudwara and practice and mix with sikhs ?

Secondly growing hair is mandatory in sikhism ,not wearing turban.

I can go to a gurudwara too and pray. I am not a sikh.

It is mandatory to cover the head in Sikhism. Some do it with a full turban, some with a patka.

 

[Justcrazy]

India exports buffalo meat not cow meat.

If someone is so fond of cow meat, they can import and eat.

When a uniform civil code is proposed, which removes all religion specific laws, muslims are the first to raise a hue and cry. They want sharia personal laws. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

How will you have a uniform civil code for everyone? Why should a Muslim be guided in civil matters according to legislative laws? Hindus , Muslims, sikhs , Christians etc have their own laws in marriage , divorce , etc.

 

[Justcrazy]

I can go to a gurudwara too and pray. I am not a sikh.

It is mandatory to cover the head in Sikhism. Some do it with a full turban, some with a patka.

It is mandatory to cover head as a sign of respect, it is done by other religion people as well but when inside gurudwara, but not outside. No sikh will tell you to cover your head with a turban. You can cover with any kind of cloth.

 

[Itachi]

How will you have a uniform civil code for everyone? Why should a Muslim be guided in civil matters according to legislative laws? Hindus , Muslims, sikhs , Christians etc have their own laws in marriage , divorce , etc.

Religious laws are valid as long as it doesn't clash with part III of Indian constitution. If there is conflict, the part III will take precedence.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Lets see a Sikh going to court in India, versus a Muslim girl going to court in India asking for permission to preserve her modesty...What are the chances here?

You only have to see joshila bhai's virulent criticism of Muslim's secular credentials in the first place for wearing religious garb to "flaunt their religion". This is the type of judge who will make the decision under Modi's India.

 

[Itachi]

and what does it tell you about the people's state of mind when they complain about a girl covering her hair?

Same as girls not allowed to come in casual dress to schools but come in a uniform same as other students.

 

[IMMY69]

Same as girls not allowed to come in casual dress to schools but come in a uniform same as other students.

But in the UK some schools have a strict uniform code and yet girls are allowed to wear a hijab or boys with Turbans.

The schools use a pragmatic approach and no one has to go to court for it.

So I ask you again, why would a school insist on a girl not covering her hair?
It doesn't really make much sense to me

 

[IMMY69]

I could even understand if the girl wore a multicoloured hijab and was asked to wear a neutral coloured one, perhaps one that matches the school's colours. But why would they ban this altogether?

 

[JaDed]

Very stupid by the colleges, Karnataka used to be such a good place during my college years.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I could even understand if the girl wore a multicoloured hijab and was asked to wear a neutral coloured one, perhaps one that matches the school's colours. But why would they ban this altogether?

The problem with adopting a secular ideology and trumpeting it from the rooftops, is that you really have to mean it. That means you either adopt strict dress codes which apply to everyone, including Sikhs, otherwise stop pretending to be secular and be yourselves. If you don't know, I will give you a hint: India (not France).

 

[Lego20]

Lets see a Sikh going to court in India, versus a Muslim girl going to court in India asking for permission to preserve her modesty...What are the chances here?

There is prejudice and bias in this comment.

 

[cricketjoshila]

How will you have a uniform civil code for everyone? Why should a Muslim be guided in civil matters according to legislative laws? Hindus , Muslims, sikhs , Christians etc have their own laws in marriage , divorce , etc.

Every one would be governed by same laws. This is a secular country and no one can have special religious laws for themselves.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The problem with adopting a secular ideology and trumpeting it from the rooftops, is that you really have to mean it. That means you either adopt strict dress codes which apply to everyone, including Sikhs, otherwise stop pretending to be secular and be yourselves. If you don't know, I will give you a hint: India (not France).

Sikhs get to wear their turbans in France aswell.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Very stupid by the colleges, Karnataka used to be such a good place during my college years.

Will you allow a hindu to wear dhoti?

 

[Kroll]

Karnataka hijab row deepens as students petition court

A high court in the southern Indian state of Karnataka is set to hear two petitions that argue that Muslim women wearing headscarves should be allowed to attend classes.

The development comes after weeks of protests by six teenage students at a government-run pre-university college - equivalent to a high school.

The protesters have been barred from attending classes by the college's management, who say students can wear the headscarf on campus but must remove it inside the classroom.

The stand-off has increased fear and outrage among India's minority Muslims, who say the country's constitution guarantees them the freedom to wear what they want.

The issue has also snowballed to other colleges in the state - on Thursday, a video showing college gates being shut on a group of young hijab-clad women had led to outrage.

It was shot at a pre-university college in Kundapur in Udupi district in Karnataka. The earlier protest had also taken place in Udupi, one of three districts in Karnataka's communally sensitive coastal belt.

Commentators often describe the region - a stronghold of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) - as a laboratory for majoritarian Hindu politics. The BJP is also in power in Karnataka.

In the video, a student could be heard pleading with authorities to let them attend classes to help them prepare for exams.

But the principal refused to let them enter the campus wearing the hijab.

A day before the women were barred from classes, a group of boys had come to the college wearing saffron shawls - the colour is seen as a Hindu symbol - to protest against Muslim women wearing headscarves.

Three other colleges in the state have also seen similar protests.

Nagesh BC, the state's education minister, has backed college authorities who say both saffron scarves and headscarves should be banned on campuses.

He told BBC Hindi that the government would soon outline its stand before the Karnataka high court, which will hear the two petitions next week.

One, filed by a student, argues that choosing what to wear is a fundamental right guaranteed by India's constitution.

The other, filed on behalf of five of the protesters, points out the government's academic guidelines for the current year do not prescribe uniforms for pre-university colleges.

Both petitions quote a judgment from neighbouring Kerala state that upheld a court verdict permitting Muslim students to wear headscarves for a national entrance exam.

While the issue rages on, protesters say their studies are being badly affected.

"We came to a government college because we could not afford the fees for a private college. Why are we facing discrimination when others can follow religious rituals?" says Almas AH, one of the six protesters at the Udupi college.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-60256262