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

[Itachi]

I am talking in general not this specific case.....we have all read the treatment of minorities in India and the language used. I for one wouldn't feel comfortable.

The establishment could implement policies which can impact negatively towards one community more than the others. It could be intentional or it may be unintentional which may occur as side effect. The crux of the issue is, does the system allow the people to challenge these policies or not?

A govt may take wrong policies but can the Indian people make the govt answerable or not?

In both the cases, the answer is yes because it's the constitution which gives the people the right which can not be changed by any govt.

Congress even suppressed the people even more by declaring emergency without any justified cause. But amendments were made so that such acts of unfair advantage by the govt can not be taken.

I don't see any strong example in your case where people went against the establishment yet the jurisdiction even didn't allow them to exercise their constituitional rights. If I've missed, can you point any?

 

[Itachi]

The constant change of stance/arguments by the Indian posters is laughable.

You call yourself the world's largest democracy....start acting like one! By allowing a head covering or letting people to pray just going to harm the nation.

I will request you to check the definition of democracy. Religion has nothing to do with democracy.

Its just a political system where all people have equal votes.

 

[IAJ]

I think you have misconception about what democracy means. It simply is a political system where citizens can elect the representatives of the state based upon their equal rights to vote.

Is that not so in India's case?

Elections are an important part of democracy, but not the only thing that is necessary for a country to be democratic. There are a large number of characteristics that must be in place in a democracy. Here is one point you obviously forget to include:

Human rights are rights that everyone is entitled to, regardless of gender, religion, skin color or orientation. Some of these are freedom of expression, education and necessary health care. The state is responsible for securing these citizens.

This is how the most democratic country in the World describes what democracy is.

https://norwaytoday.info/news/norway-named-the-worlds-most-democratic-country/

 

[Itachi]

Elections are an important part of democracy, but not the only thing that is necessary for a country to be democratic. There are a large number of characteristics that must be in place in a democracy. Here is one point you obviously forget to include:

Human rights are rights that everyone is entitled to, regardless of gender, religion, skin color or orientation. Some of these are freedom of expression, education and necessary health care. The state is responsible for securing these citizens.

This is how the most democratic country in the World describes what democracy is.

https://norwaytoday.info/news/norway-named-the-worlds-most-democratic-country/

What you stated I didn't see in the link you quoted. Can you specify in the article?

 

[Salma_T]

Elections are an important part of democracy, but not the only thing that is necessary for a country to be democratic. There are a large number of characteristics that must be in place in a democracy. Here is one point you obviously forget to include:

Human rights are rights that everyone is entitled to, regardless of gender, religion, skin color or orientation. Some of these are freedom of expression, education and necessary health care. The state is responsible for securing these citizens.

This is how the most democratic country in the World describes what democracy is.

https://norwaytoday.info/news/norway-named-the-worlds-most-democratic-country/[/QUOTE

A point lost on our Indian poster.....

 

[Itachi]

Elections are an important part of democracy, but not the only thing that is necessary for a country to be democratic. There are a large number of characteristics that must be in place in a democracy. Here is one point you obviously forget to include:

Human rights are rights that everyone is entitled to, regardless of gender, religion, skin color or orientation. Some of these are freedom of expression, education and necessary health care. The state is responsible for securing these citizens.

This is how the most democratic country in the World describes what democracy is.

https://norwaytoday.info/news/norway-named-the-worlds-most-democratic-country/

A point lost on our Indian poster.....

I have already asked for clarification since the words he wrote wasn't present in the article of which link he posted.

 

[IAJ]

What you stated I didn't see in the link you quoted. Can you specify in the article?

No problem;

Her you go. This is from website of our Norwegian Parliament;

https://www.stortinget.no/no/Storti...omstrinnet/demokrati---ung/kort-om-demokrati/

Just copy paste the text to google translate and you will see exactly what I typed.

 

[Itachi]

No problem;

Her you go. This is from website of our Norwegian Parliament;

https://www.stortinget.no/no/Storti...omstrinnet/demokrati---ung/kort-om-demokrati/

Just copy paste the text to google translate and you will see exactly what I typed.

Why would I care about some words posted in a Norwegian website?

What is the definition of democracy? Check any political books.

 

[IAJ]

Why would I care about some words posted in a Norwegian website?

What is the definition of democracy? Check any political books.

Lol, first you wanted me to to specify from the article and I provided you that. Now you don't have anything more to say and you start fiddling.

When you have a question you go to the best, and whether you like it or not, Norway is the best when it comes to democracy and why do you think they top the list?

When top sites declare a winner, do you think they only look for the political system/elections?

The rankings are based many categories: electoral process and pluralism, functioning of government, political participation, political culture, and civil liberties.

 

[Itachi]

Lol, first you wanted me to to specify from the article and I provided you that. Now you don't have anything more to say and you start fiddling.

When you have a question you go to the best, and whether you like it or not, Norway is the best when it comes to democracy and why do you think they top the list?

When top sites declare a winner, do you think they only look for the political system/elections?

The rankings are based many categories: electoral process and pluralism, functioning of government, political participation, political culture, and civil liberties.

The standard is set by a private organization. Not sure I would put any gravity onto it.

Even by that standard, your words doesn't include those criterion.

 

[IAJ]

The standard is set by a private organization. Not sure I would put any gravity onto it.

Even by that standard, your words doesn't include those criterion.

Oh rehney dey, meri post kou naz'r-andaaz karo, koi faiyda nahi sar khapane ka, lagay raho

 

[MenInG]

Guys - circular arguments. Stop now as its boring other posters.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

What is boring is the 'what next argument' it is the same deployed by extremists everywhere and seeks to paint a bleaker picture by painting a worst case scenario.

In this thread we have Hindus asking if we allow the hijab then what next Muslims will ask for XYZ and paint a scenario of things people have not asked for.

It is like someone saying oh you ban beef what next Hindus will ask for cow urine to be made mandatory ( mods i am not mocking anything just using an exteme example to make a point). Itachi (in his usual strange way) has illustrated that allowing Hijab will trigger a chain of events where ultimately the Indian banking sector will collapse because Muslims are too busy praying while Hindus are busy working hard.

Stick to the topic and debate it properly...this is specifically about Hijab im schools and not hypothetical what next or doomsday scenarios.

 

[Major]

Indians unfollow Manchester United star Paul Pogda After he showed solidarity to Muslim students of Karnataka

French football star Paul Pogba has jumped into the Karnataka hijab row with the Manchester United midfielder sharing a video clip of protests featuring a faceoff between burqa-clad girls and saffron-scarved boys.


The 28-year-old footballer shared the clip, originally posted from an account named '_.islamismydeen._', on his Instagram story and captioned it: “Hindutva mobs continue to harass Muslim girls wearing hijab to college in India.” Pogba is the second prominent International figure to speak on the Karnataka hijab row after human rights activist Malala Yousufzai.

ALSO READ | ‘Horrifying’: Malala Yousafzai reacts to Karnataka hijab row


A screenshot from the video shared by Paul Pogba
Nobel laureate Malala Yousafzai had earlier reacted to the hijab controversy in Karnataka, saying "refusing to let girls go to school in their hijabs is horrifying" and "leaders must stop the marginalisation of Muslim women”.

Malala made the remarks while sharing a news report on the hijab row where several Muslim students across various government colleges in Karnataka were banned from entering college premises wearing hijab.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/sto...ent-muslim-hindutva-malala-1911589-2022-02-11

 

[Major]

funny how the indians start doing boycott whenever they get exposed. Will they ever be boycotting the forums aswell?

 

[cricketjoshila]

This is fake democracy because Hindu votes will outweigh others easily.

So? Just because a person is a hindu his vote should count less.

Its shocking how people from a religious republic has so much problem if another country has a non muslim majority.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The constant change of stance/arguments by the Indian posters is laughable.

You call yourself the world's largest democracy....start acting like one! By allowing a head covering or letting people to pray just going to harm the nation.

Anyone is free to pray but for that there are religious places. A public place or a institution or office is not for prayers.

Similarly a person has to follow the dress code of the place he is going to.

Dhoti Kurta is the traditional dress of Bengalis, i won't be allowed to enter one club in bengal with that attire.

 

[Salma_T]

Anyone is free to pray but for that there are religious places. A public place or a institution or office is not for prayers.

Similarly a person has to follow the dress code of the place he is going to.

Dhoti Kurta is the traditional dress of Bengalis, i won't be allowed to enter one club in bengal with that attire.

I think you are mistaken there a person can pray anywhere....you don't need a "religious place/building" to offer prayers. If there is a room at work/school that is empty why can't that be used for prayer?

In regards to dress codes they can evolve, many schools in in the UK didn't have the option of trousers for girls but that has changed now. You need to change as per the needs of your community....if girls are requesting Hijabs how does that actually change anything?

 

[Itachi]

I think you are mistaken there a person can pray anywhere....you don't need a "religious place/building" to offer prayers. If there is a room at work/school that is empty why can't that be used for prayer?

In regards to dress codes they can evolve, many schools in in the UK didn't have the option of trousers for girls but that has changed now. You need to change as per the needs of your community....if girls are requesting Hijabs how does that actually change anything?

Considering that many girls stated that they want to wear hijab because of the presence of opposite gender teacher, allowing it will validate their claim and the male teachers will be in fear of making them uncomfortable. It will be a unhealthy environment caused by a few students only.

 

[Salma_T]

Considering that many girls stated that they want to wear hijab because of the presence of opposite gender teacher, allowing it will validate their claim and the male teachers will be in fear of making them uncomfortable. It will be a unhealthy environment caused by a few students only.

So again....to protect the feeling of some men, girls are being denied an education! The environment is already unhealthy as everyone is aware of the situation so not sure how it helping those poor hard done by male teachers!

 

[Itachi]

So again....to protect the feeling of some men, girls are being denied an education! The environment is already unhealthy as everyone is aware of the situation so not sure how it helping those poor hard done by male teachers!

This is how a 3rd wave and 4th wave feminsim argument goes. But here's the counter.

1. The girls are not denied of education. They were given a separate room. They can continue their studies. I am sorry to say but you are sprouting lies here.

2. Secondly, The ffelings of some girls should be considered but not when it is about male. That is sexism on your part and shows intolerance.

3. The environment was going fine till some girls came in to the picture with religious attitude mixed up with own insecurities.

 

[Salma_T]

This is how a 3rd wave and 4th wave feminsim argument goes. But here's the counter.

1. The girls are not denied of education. They were given a separate room. They can continue their studies. I am sorry to say but you are sprouting lies here.

2. Secondly, The ffelings of some girls should be considered but not when it is about male. That is sexism on your part and shows intolerance.

3. The environment was going fine till some girls came in to the picture with religious attitude mixed up with own insecurities.

Poor men......feeling threatened.....
They want to wear Hijab and study with their peers! Just let them wear it, it is nota health and safety issue.....it is all done to the lack of inclusive uniform policies at the college.

 

[Itachi]

Poor men......feeling threatened.....
They want to wear Hijab and study with their peers! Just let them wear it, it is nota health and safety issue.....it is all done to the lack of inclusive uniform policies at the college.

The condescending tone in your post was disappointing. But none the less, if you would put forward arguments in childish manner like above, we can just agree to disagree and stop the quoting here. Because in my opinion, neo feminism mixed with religious biased is not something through which one might go forward with logical reasoning.

 

[Salma_T]

The condescending tone in your post was disappointing. But none the less, if you would put forward arguments in childish manner like above, we can just agree to disagree and stop the quoting here. Because in my opinion, neo feminism mixed with religious biased is not something through which one might go forward with logical reasoning.

Nearly 600 post about women being denied an equal opportunity due to lack inclusive uniform policy and mention the poor male teachers.....cry me a river!

Learn to be inclusive is all I am saying!

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Obligatory means compulsion. Without it the person may not be called a muslim.

Just saw this post. You are misinterpreting, perhaps deliberately.

Only associating other Gods with Allah or rejecting Prophet Muhammad (saw) as the final messenger of God takes you out of the religion.

You use Singhs example a lot. Try telling a Singh without a Turban that they are no longer Sikh and see what happens to you.

It's a similar case with the Hijab.

 

[LaLoco]

Wasting time with Hijab ban apologists, they've come with every detached excuse under the sun they could possible think of, to the point some of them attempted to redefine Islam to fit their own reprehensible agenda.

After 8 pages, it must be quite obvious for everyone, it isn't about democracy, it isn't about secularism, it isn't about anything but taking away 'inclusivity and dignity of 250 million Muslims' in the name of getting rid of 'minority appeasement', term itself has bigotry connotation. It is a systematic approach and this particular event is not the end of it.

Hindu ethnocracy is the ultimate goal and it can only be achieved through systemic approach.

 

[MenInG]

Wasting time with Hijab ban apologists, they've come with every detached excuse under the sun they could possible think of, to the point some of them attempted to redefine Islam to fit their own reprehensible agenda.

After 8 pages, it must be quite obvious for everyone, it isn't about democracy, it isn't about secularism, it isn't about anything but taking away 'inclusivity and dignity of 250 million Muslims' in the name of getting rid of 'minority appeasement', term itself has bigotry connotation. It is a systematic approach and this particular event is not the end of it.

Hindu ethnocracy is the ultimate goal and it can only be achieved through systemic approach.

Quite clear to me its all about marginalizing Muslims.

 

[Kroll]

I'm not holding my breath on this court case either. The state machinery is in collusion with these right wing maniacs.

Looks like its going to a long battle ahead...

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The constant change of stance/arguments by the Indian posters is laughable.

You call yourself the world's largest democracy....start acting like one! By allowing a head covering or letting people to pray just going to harm the nation.

You are wasting your time arguing with hindutvas, for them Muslims are not only a minority, but a constant reminder of history of Mughal rule in India. For them it is not about today, it is about yesterday and evening the score. I think India is very confused, they want to be both eastern and western, both modern and traditional, and of course both multicultural and victoriously hindu. It is not easy to accomplish.

 

[IMMY69]

Quite clear to me its all about marginalizing Muslims.

This was obvious.
But what always surprises me is how some posters here defend BJP/Hindutva one what may.
A hindutva can commit cold blooded murder and they'll still defend that person.

 

[Kroll]

You are wasting your time arguing with hindutvas, for them Muslims are not only a minority, but a constant reminder of history of Mughal rule in India. For them it is not about today, it is about yesterday and evening the score. I think India is very confused, they want to be both eastern and western, both modern and traditional, and of course both multicultural and victoriously hindu. It is not easy to accomplish.

Even enemies with the screeching of genocide etc.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

You are wasting your time arguing with hindutvas, for them Muslims are not only a minority, but a constant reminder of history of Mughal rule in India. For them it is not about today, it is about yesterday and evening the score. I think India is very confused, they want to be both eastern and western, both modern and traditional, and of course both multicultural and victoriously hindu. It is not easy to accomplish.

I think it's a mix of hate based politics cooked up some very cunning men.
If Mughal's were the ones, then Hinduvta/current Indian govt's biggest hate based target should have been Afghanistan since that was the root of Mughals. However, Indian politics was EXTREMELY friendly to Afghanistan as log as it served the purpose to proxy against Pakistan.

You are right, these hatred filled Hinduvata bigots are not only confused but they are big time hypocrites as well.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I think you are mistaken there a person can pray anywhere....you don't need a "religious place/building" to offer prayers. If there is a room at work/school that is empty why can't that be used for prayer?

In regards to dress codes they can evolve, many schools in in the UK didn't have the option of trousers for girls but that has changed now. You need to change as per the needs of your community....if girls are requesting Hijabs how does that actually change anything?

Yes you do need a religious place to pray. Work place or schools are not for praying. There needs to be a separation.

Rules cannot and will not be changed for one community. There will be uniform secular rules for all.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Just saw this post. You are misinterpreting, perhaps deliberately.

Only associating other Gods with Allah or rejecting Prophet Muhammad (saw) as the final messenger of God takes you out of the religion.

You use Singhs example a lot. Try telling a Singh without a Turban that they are no longer Sikh and see what happens to you.

It's a similar case with the Hijab.

A sikh without Kesh and covering is considered an outcast in Sikhism. Its mandatory to keep that.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Its amusing to see how everyone has ignored the article which states that local ulema told the girls that removing hijab in the classroom is alright, but the girls didn't listen. They were supported by the Campus front to start this.

 

[cric_man]

Quite clear to me its all about marginalizing Muslims.

This is exactly what it is. After 70+ years, they suddenly found hijab to be objectionable, not part of uniformetc.

This is a 2fer..
first creates a rallying cry for the Hiduvta bigots for the upcoming elections and they know this will disenfranchise the strictly observing Muslimas. They will be denied education without actually explicitly doing so. Impact will be felt by future generations...

 

[cric_man]

Its amusing to see how everyone has ignored the article which states that local ulema told the girls that removing hijab in the classroom is alright, but the girls didn't listen. They were supported by the Campus front to start this.

Why is removing hijab in the classroom OK if the teacher is a non mehram male?

 

[cricketjoshila]

This is exactly what it is. After 70+ years, they suddenly found hijab to be objectionable, not part of uniformetc.

This is a 2fer..
first creates a rallying cry for the Hiduvta bigots for the upcoming elections and they know this will disenfranchise the strictly observing Muslimas. They will be denied education without actually explicitly doing so. Impact will be felt by future generations...

Hijab was never allowed in the classroom in that college. These very girls followed the rules till December.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

Yes you do need a religious place to pray. Work place or schools are not for praying. There needs to be a separation.

Rules cannot and will not be changed for one community. There will be uniform secular rules for all.

no it won't be.
Your bigot hinduvta politicians won't dare to ban Sikhs from wearing turban in schools.

 

[cricketjoshila]

no it won't be.
Your bigot hinduvta politicians won't dare to ban Sikhs from wearing turban in schools.

A Sikh becomes an outcast if he abandons the kesh and covering. Its essential to have that to be a sikh. Is it essential to have the hijab to be a muslim?

Rooms for prayers for one community cannot be allowed in a secular institution.

If i want my son to be able to wear hindu religious articles like a thread on the hand or a tika on the forehead, i will sent him to a school that allows this. I wont go to a missionary school or Army School or other institutions that don't allow these and start a fight.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

A Sikh becomes an outcast if he abandons the kesh and covering. Its essential to have that to be a sikh. Is it essential to have the hijab to be a muslim?

Rooms for prayers for one community cannot be allowed in a secular institution.

If i want my son to be able to wear hindu religious articles like a thread on the hand or a tika on the forehead, i will sent him to a school that allows this. I wont go to a missionary school or Army School or other institutions that don't allow these and start a fight.

Who says a singh becomes outcast?

 

[Justcrazy]

A sikh without Kesh and covering is considered an outcast in Sikhism. Its mandatory to keep that.

I do not think they have that high stance on Hair.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

A Sikh becomes an outcast if he abandons the kesh and covering. Its essential to have that to be a sikh. Is it essential to have the hijab to be a muslim?

Rooms for prayers for one community cannot be allowed in a secular institution.

If i want my son to be able to wear hindu religious articles like a thread on the hand or a tika on the forehead, i will sent him to a school that allows this. I wont go to a missionary school or Army School or other institutions that don't allow these and start a fight.

Clutching to the straws, aren't we?
There are many many Sikhs who don't wear turbans but they are accepted as Sikhs not only by their own communities but by many others too.

 

[James]

A Sikh becomes an outcast if he abandons the kesh and covering. Its essential to have that to be a sikh..

Not sure on this one really — clearly many Sikhs do wear a head covering and there is likely a religious argument in favour of this, however, in day to day life many do not wear a covering and I don’t think it causes a huge issue.

 

[Itachi]

Not sure on this one really — clearly many Sikhs do wear a head covering and there is likely a religious argument in favour of this, however, in day to day life many do not wear a covering and I don’t think it causes a huge issue.

Your observation is based upon UK. The circumstances in India is different. And the subject of the thread is India.

 

[MenInG]

The noxious controversy over hijabs in Karnataka's schools and colleges is "unnecessary and not in the interest of peace and harmony", the Ramakrishna Ashram in the state's Karwar has said, defending a lawyer who has faced attacks for representing Muslim students in the case.

Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat, who has been targeted by right-wing commentators for citing Islamic scriptures to defend students fighting for the right to wear hijabs in schools and colleges, has done no disservice to the Hindu religion, the ashram's top priest has said in a statement.

"An unnecessary discussion is going on about the dress code of Muslim girls in Schools/Colleges, and, I am pained to witness a raging controversy in this regards at different levels of the Society. This is certainly not in good taste, and, in the interest of peace and harmony in the Society," Swami Bhaveshanand said.

"I am more pained to observe that the name of Shri Devadatt Kamat - Senior Advocate in the Supreme Court is being dragged in this controversy simply because he represented a party in the Court as an Advocate," he said.

"Some elements are trying to brand him as supporting a cause against Hindu Religion. This perception is absolutely uncalled for and baseless. A lawyer representing a client in the court has to do his duty and justice to his client's cause. That is a professional duty and responsibility. It cannot be branded as a cause against the Hindu Religion," Swami Bhaveshanand added.

Calling the attacks on Mr Kamat "unjustified and orchestrated baseless propaganda that is being perpetrated by some unscrupulous elements," the priest applauded the advocate's antecedents as a "devout follower of Shri Ramakrishna Vivekanand Philosophy".

Arguing for students who have been told not to wear hijabs to schools and colleges in the state's Udupi, Mr Kamat had on Thursday told the Karnataka High Court that the religious headscarves were part of their culture which cannot be impinged upon.

"Our fundamental right is held hostage to the college development committee. The government order says the prohibition of headscarves is not a violation of Article 25. The GO (Government Order) is not as innocuous as the state government says," Mr Kamat said.

He also cited verses from the Quran which said it was incumbent upon women to cover their heads before anyone other than close family members.

The controversy over Hijabs erupted in Karnataka in late December as Muslim students wearing hijabs to a government college in Udupi faced protests that have since grown so virulent that the state government has had to close schools for Classes 11 and 12 as well as colleges till Wednesday.

https://www.ndtv.com/karnataka-news...in-hijab-row-2765422#pfrom=home-ndtv_bigstory

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Your observation is based upon UK. The circumstances in India is different. And the subject of the thread is India.

Why do Sikhs have iron clad laws of wearing a turban in India, but in the UK they suddenly become free to wear or discard as they please? Bear in mind, UK doesn't have prohibitive laws against religious headgear.

This is very relevant as you are claiming exception based on Sikh faith which surely will apply whether they live in India or England.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Who says a singh becomes outcast?

Their rules. Write to the SGPC. Their highest religious body and they will answer this for you.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Clutching to the straws, aren't we?
There are many many Sikhs who don't wear turbans but they are accepted as Sikhs not only by their own communities but by many others too.

It is mandatory to keep kesh and use a cloth to cover it.

The covering can be a turban a patka a dastaar. But covering is mandatory.

Read about the 5 Ks of sikhism.
[MENTION=1842]James[/MENTION]

 

[cricketjoshila]

This issue will be the pre cursor for the uniform civil code. Hopefully the UCC is brought in at the earliest and these controversies are buried once and for all.

 

[IAJ]

It is mandatory to keep kesh and use a cloth to cover it.

The covering can be a turban a patka a dastaar. But covering is mandatory.

Read about the 5 Ks of sikhism.

[MENTION=1842]James[/MENTION]

The real issue is not it being mandatory in their religion, I don't think anyone is questioning this.

You claim they leave their faith if they don't wear a turban, are they concidered as non-sikhs then?

The majority of the sikhs I know are clean shaven and don't wear the turban, but they still go to gurudawara etc, never heard them say they are not sikhs anymore.

 

[Salma_T]

The real issue is not it being mandatory in their religion, I don't think anyone is questioning this.

You claim they leave their faith if they don't wear a turban, are they concidered as non-sikhs then?

The majority of the sikhs I know are clean shaven and don't wear the turban, but they still go to gurudawara etc, never heard them say they are not sikhs anymore.

It doesn't fit his narrative.....I have met many Sikhs without Turbans who still were Sikhs, married in Gurdwaras etc

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Their rules. Write to the SGPC. Their highest religious body and they will answer this for you.

So when Yuvraj got married in a gurdwara did they do it with the lights off so the SGPC wouldn't notice.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Your observation is based upon UK. The circumstances in India is different. And the subject of the thread is India.

So it becomes a religious obligation depending on geography.

Very interesting.

 

[James]

It is mandatory to keep kesh and use a cloth to cover it.

The covering can be a turban a patka a dastaar. But covering is mandatory.

Read about the 5 Ks of sikhism.

[MENTION=1842]James[/MENTION]

I know about the 5 K’s, this was taught to me in school over 25 years ago with the greatest of respect.

My post was not regarding the religious teachings which are available via Google, it was about the day to day life as lived by people and communities. Many Sikhs wear a head covering, and some don’t, it’s not an issue. Or it shouldn’t be.

 

[James]

The real issue is not it being mandatory in their religion, I don't think anyone is questioning this.

You claim they leave their faith if they don't wear a turban, are they concidered as non-sikhs then?

The majority of the sikhs I know are clean shaven and don't wear the turban, but they still go to gurudawara etc, never heard them say they are not sikhs anymore.

Spot on.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The real issue is not it being mandatory in their religion, I don't think anyone is questioning this.

You claim they leave their faith if they don't wear a turban, are they concidered as non-sikhs then?

The majority of the sikhs I know are clean shaven and don't wear the turban, but they still go to gurudawara etc, never heard them say they are not sikhs anymore.

If you cut your hair, you become an outcast among sikh faith. You can confirm this by mailing the SGPC, Sikhs highest religious body that also manages the Golden temple.

Kesh is one of the Ks of Khalsa. Without it they are not part of the Khalsa.

Lots of things happen in the west, people adopt western practices and try to be inconspicuous.

 

[cricketjoshila]

So it becomes a religious obligation depending on geography.

Very interesting.

Lots of hindus in western countries eat beef. In India thats hardly common.

 

[cricketjoshila]

It doesn't fit his narrative.....I have met many Sikhs without Turbans who still were Sikhs, married in Gurdwaras etc

Even i can go to the gurudwara. Its open for all.

But cutting the hair separates you from the Khalsa.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Even i can go to the gurudwara. Its open for all.

But cutting the hair separates you from the Khalsa.

Always good to hear nuggets of wisdom about Sikh principles from a learned Hindu activist.

 

[IMMY69]

Lots of hindus in western countries eat beef. In India thats hardly common.

Lots of women choose not to wear a hijab in the west but that doesn't mean they should be prevented from wearing it in India or anywhere else

 

[DeadlyVenom]

If you cut your hair, you become an outcast among sikh faith. You can confirm this by mailing the SGPC, Sikhs highest religious body that also manages the Golden temple.

Kesh is one of the Ks of Khalsa. Without it they are not part of the Khalsa.

Lots of things happen in the west, people adopt western practices and try to be inconspicuous.

Ah ok so we have moved on from random examples to high religious bodies now.

Why don't you also follow through and mail the deoband seminary?

 

[LaLoco]

Every excuse one could possibly think of, redefining every religion, to serve their reprehensible agenda.

 

[Itachi]

Why do Sikhs have iron clad laws of wearing a turban in India, but in the UK they suddenly become free to wear or discard as they please? Bear in mind, UK doesn't have prohibitive laws against religious headgear.

This is very relevant as you are claiming exception based on Sikh faith which surely will apply whether they live in India or England.

Ask the British Sikhs.

How would I know that living in India?

 

[Itachi]

So it becomes a religious obligation depending on geography.

Very interesting.

More importantly, the community which changes with different geography.

 

[Technics 1210]

What I find more remarkable is Athiests defending Hindutva and Skihism. Got to love the irony.

 

[LaLoco]

What I find more remarkable is Athiests defending Hindutva and Skihism. Got to love the irony.

Funniest comments are from those who are pretending to be atheists and if that don’t work then it always to fall back on to try convincing everyone that 1+1 = 11, lol

 

[Local.Dada]

I know about the 5 K’s, this was taught to me in school over 25 years ago with the greatest of respect.

My post was not regarding the religious teachings which are available via Google, it was about the day to day life as lived by people and communities. Many Sikhs wear a head covering, and some don’t, it’s not an issue. Or it shouldn’t be.

You are talking with half baked knowledge I think. Turban is compulsory in Sikhism. If someone is not wearing one he is just another Punjabi born in a Sikh family. Thats the difference.

Hijab on the other hand is not. Ironically most Pakistani women anchors complaining about this are not wearing Hijab from what I am seeing.

That’s exactly the court case going on too, if the lawyers can prove that hijab is a mandatory garment for women than it will be allowed.

It wasn’t considered as one all these years.

In fact in Indian subcontinent most Muslims dress or more or less look like they are from the same culture regardless of their religious practices and beliefs. Growing up I either saw non-hijabi Muslim women or women wearing burqa in the rural or ghetto type backward areas. I didn’t even know what a hijab was say 15 years back.

In this case it is that simple, uniform was prescribed and exception made for Sikhs, rest all need to fall in line. If that’s a problem wait for the court to give a judgement either ways. It isn’t anymore complicated than that.

As you can see in India everyone has the right and voice on anything. In other countries going against the norm and creating these kind of problems would result in some unthinkable actions.

Also I know this will be offensive to some but why do you have to dress like someone from another country to prove you are Muslim? I don’t think religion is about dress code/ fashion etc, people miss all the other spiritual aspects to better themselves.

 

[MenInG]

Hyderabad: Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao today continued his no-holds-barred attack on the BJP, saying it "has to be sent out as early as possible". At a press conference in Hyderabad, he called the BJP-led government "totally undemocratic" and slammed the PM on a range of issues from the now revoked farm bills to the controversy over Muslim girls wearing Hijab (headscarves)in Karnataka schools and universities. Adding that the BJP has "no respect for democracy", Mr Rao said he would "continue to chase" the ruling party.

"Why did they form governments where they did not get the mandate?" he asked, referring to states where the BJP formed the government with help from alliances and defections even when it was not the single largest party.

The Chief Minister accused the BJP of using the messaging service WhatsApp to "spread untruths". Religious sentiments are being provoked throughout the country, he said and added that "we need new thinking" and put "divisive ideas" aside to go forward.

Mr Rao hit out at Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma for his recent "father-son" barb at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and appealed to BJP president Jagat Prakash Nadda to replace him. "Is this your culture? This is not our culture," he said.

Mr Rao's remarks came after Mr Sarma attacked Congress leader Rahul Gandhi for demanding proof of India's surgical strike in Pakistan in 2016 and airstrike in 2019, and asked whether the BJP had ever demanded proof of him being the "son of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi". Mr Sarma added that the Wayanad MP had no right to demand proof from the Army.

Mr Rao said that there was nothing wrong with Rahul Gandhi asking for proof of surgical strikes. "Even I can ask for proof," he said and added that there's a "popular apprehension" of disturbances at the borders right before elections. "How can the BJP use the surgical strikes for political ends?" he said.

"Rahul Gandhi's father was killed, grandmother was killed, great grandfather went to jail for the country and a BJP Chief Minister speaks like this?" Mr Rao said.

He called PM Modi "maafi ka saudagar", a spinoff on the Congress' "maut ka saudagar" barb on the PM after the Godhra riots, for backtracking on the three farm laws. "Why did they have to ask for forgiveness from the farmers?" Mr Rao said and claimed that before becoming PM, Narendra Modi was asked about the Godhra riots and he told Muslims that "it won't be repeated".

The Telangana Chief Minister defended his recent remark that the time has come that the Constitution in India needs to be rewritten. It was not a random and impulsive statement, he said. He claimed that he demanded a new Constitution for the welfare and betterment of SC, ST, OBC, and also for the protection of women and girls. "We need to increase reservations for Dalits, is it wrong?" he said.

On a possible non-BJP, non-Congress front for the 2024 general elections, he said that he can't predict what will happen tomorrow but "something will happen". It doesn't need to be a front of political parties but can be a "people's front", he said.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/tel...-as-possible-2766517#pfrom=home-ndtv_bigstory

 

[Maher96]

Please can we stay on the Topic and not get Personal guys.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

Why do Sikhs have iron clad laws of wearing a turban in India, but in the UK they suddenly become free to wear or discard as they please? Bear in mind, UK doesn't have prohibitive laws against religious headgear.

This is very relevant as you are claiming exception based on Sikh faith which surely will apply whether they live in India or England.

This is an excellent point. It makes hypocrisy reek from the bigot sanghis defending Sikhism turban now.

 

[Kroll]

I've known loads of Sikhs from UK who didn't wear turban but happily identify themselves as Sikh.

 

[MenInG]

Srinagar, J&K: Amid row over hijab, former Jammu and Kashmir CM and PDP chief Mehbooba Mufti on Saturday lashed out at the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) alleging that the saffron party wants to erase all symbols of Muslims.

"I fear BJP won't stop at Hijab. They will come for other symbols of Muslims and erase all. For Indian Muslims it is not enough to be an Indian, they have to be BJP as well," ANI quoted the Mufti as saying in Srinagar.

"Jammu and Kashmir is a political matter but they (BJP) want to make it a community matter," she added.

The Hijab protests began on February 4 at the Government Girls PU college in Udupi district in Karnataka when some students alleged that they had been barred from attending classes wearing hijab (a headscarf worn by Muslim women).

During the protests, some students were allegedly denied entry to college wearing hijab earlier this month.

Following these protests, a three-day holiday from February 9 has been declared in all the universities under the Department of Higher Education and colleges under the department of Collegiate and Technical Education (DCTE).

Meanwhile, National Conference chief Farooq Abdullah also jumped into the row and said that everyone has the right to eat as they wish and is free to practice their religious beliefs.

"There are some radical elements who are attacking a particular religion in an attempt to win polls by dividing people along the communal lines," Abdullah said while talking to reporters in Pulwama.

https://www.timesnownews.com/india/...m-symbols-says-mehbooba-mufti-amid-row/858420

 

[Smbhayi]

funny how the indians start doing boycott whenever they get exposed. Will they ever be boycotting the forums aswell?

Didn't France banned hijab by the way..?

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Saw a video from an Indian Instagram handle showing Muslim women being forced to take off hijab and niqab before entering a campus

Pathetic rats are the BJP and pathetic rats are the peoooe defending that in this thread

They are all bunch of educated jaahils. This is 2022 and these andhbhakhts are still fighting over these things.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Ask the British Sikhs.

How would I know that living in India?

The point was raised first by an Indian hindu who claimed that not wearing the turban took Sikhs outside of the folds of Sikh religion. When I questioned this, he didn't reply and you are continuing the discussion by going off in a different direction. As far as I know a Sikh is a Sikh, if the decision to discard the turban is taken that doesn't mean he stops being a Sikh. But if a qualified Sikh can confirm this is true, I will accept it, but I won't take the word from hindutvas on a Pak forum.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The Karnataka High court has banned all religious attire from school and college campuses till the final disposition of the case.

This order was passed on Thursday.

 

[Technics 1210]

So Hindutva apologists will happily diss the West when the West comments on India affairs, but the same apologists will seek Western approval (in this case France, even though not applicable). When will India stand on its own 8 feet instead of seeking justification from the West? Never.

Now you have said apologists claiming Sikhism in the West is different from Sikhism in India.

The world is waking up to the 4th Reich (Hindutva), and the reality is Hindutva apologists in this thread, have never set foot out of India, and the closest they've experienced the West, is through a Pakistan Forum.

You really and truly couldn't make it up.

There are only 2 facts.

1. India is not a secular nation, given Hinduism is integral to government policy and agenda no matter how hard Indians wipe their constitution.

2. India is not an advert for Pluralism, but polarisation and intolerance.

UK should stop referring to India as the former jewel in the crown.

 

[Smbhayi]

You are talking with half baked knowledge I think. Turban is compulsory in Sikhism. If someone is not wearing one he is just another Punjabi born in a Sikh family. Thats the difference.

Hijab on the other hand is not. Ironically most Pakistani women anchors complaining about this are not wearing Hijab from what I am seeing.

That's wrong info... Be it a men or women, covering their aurat is must/compulsary in islam.. you can do that or don't do that but that doesn't make it optional..

 

[PakLFC]

That's wrong info... Be it a men or women, covering their aurat is must/compulsary in islam.. you can do that or don't do that but that doesn't make it optional..

You are half right. A Muslim lady needs to cover her modesty from the neck to the toes or ankles. It is optional to cover the hair and face. Most scholars agree that the burkha or niqab is unnecessary where as the hijab seems to have gained in popularity over the last decade or something. It is also true that many Muslim people especially Pakistanis and Indian's want to be like Arab's these days due to some complex they have. Covering up need not be in abaya's or jibab's when a salwar kameez is just as good.