Why anti Muslim bias is so profound among Hindutva supporters?

[Stewie]

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

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

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

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

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



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


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

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

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

We want to follow the solution of Pakistan.

 

[Technics 1210]

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

 

[DeadlyVenom]

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

Isn't this common for every religion or community?

 

[cricketjoshila]

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

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

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

And then they want to be taken seriously.

 

[Red-Indian]

Isn't this common for every religion or community?

Not for the majority of each religion and community.

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

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

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

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

 

[RexRex]

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

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

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

And then they want to be taken seriously.

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

 

[Bhaijaan]

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

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

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

And then they want to be taken seriously.

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

 

[cricketjoshila]

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

What awakening? That was for one day only.

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

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

 

[Bhaijaan]

What awakening? That was for one day only.

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

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

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

 

[Hitman]

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

We need to learn from Pakistan and introduce blasphemy laws.

 

[Bhaijaan]

We need to learn from Pakistan and introduce blasphemy news.

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

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

Why do you entertain trolls.

 

[Hitman]

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

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

Why do you entertain trolls.

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

 

[Stewie]

We need to learn from Pakistan and introduce blasphemy laws.

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

 

[Stewie]

Not for the majority of each religion and community.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[HalBass9]

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

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

 

[Local.Dada]

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

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

 

[Red-Indian]

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

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

Maybe.

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

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

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

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

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

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

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

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

 

[Stewie]

Maybe.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[The Bald Eagle]

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

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

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

 

[Stewie]

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

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

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

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

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

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

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

 

[HalBass9]

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

What are you trying to say?

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

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

 

[Stewie]

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

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

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

 

[Stewie]

What are you trying to say?

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

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

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

 

[cricketjoshila]

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

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

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

Those breaking the laws will be punished appropriately.

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

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

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

 

[Stewie]

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

Those breaking the laws will be punished appropriately.

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

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

 

[HalBass9]

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Stewie]

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

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

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

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

what a fascinating amalgamation of various topics. HAHA

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Not for the majority of each religion and community.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[DeadlyVenom]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Bro you missed two points here

*Why Muslims under threat everywhere?
* OP is biased

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

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

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

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

d

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

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

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

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

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

 

[DeadlyVenom]

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

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

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

 

[CricketCartoons]

What are you trying to say?

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

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

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


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

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

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

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

Muslims are the biggest opposers of uniform civil laws.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Experts sound alarm on impending genocide of Muslims in India

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

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

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

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

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

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

Experts sound alarm on impending genocide of Muslims in India

Experts sound alarm on impending genocide of Muslims in India

www.radio.gov.pk

 

[CricketCartoons]

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


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

I meant during ramzan.

 

[Stewie]

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

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

 

[DeadlyVenom]

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

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

Muslims are the biggest opposers of uniform civil laws.

The situation now is as a result of the otherization.

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

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

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

 

[CricketCartoons]

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

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

 

[DeadlyVenom]

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

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

 

[CricketCartoons]

The situation now is as a result of the otherization.

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

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

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

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

 

[Stewie]

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

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

 

[DeadlyVenom]

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

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

It's not all doom and gloom.

 

[JaDed]

The situation now is as a result of the otherization.

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

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

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

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

It was criticised by everyone , including Sarojni Naidu

 

[JaDed]

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

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

They clearly are leaders in economy.

 

[Stewie]

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

It's not all doom and gloom.

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

 

[JaDed]

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

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

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

 

[Stewie]

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

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

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

So you be you and I’ll be me.

 

[JaDed]

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

So you be you and I’ll be me.

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

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

 

[cricketjoshila]

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

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

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

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

 

[DeadlyVenom]

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

What if a man has four girlfriends?

 

[Stewie]

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

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

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

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

 

[Stewie]

What if a man has four girlfriends?

don’t forget the thumb

 

[HalBass9]

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

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

They clearly are leaders in economy.

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

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

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

 

[JaDed]

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

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

Yes.. also Europeans , Skorea and Japan

 

[JaDed]

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

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

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

I doubt Indian Punjab will give any progress to Pakistani one, I never felt any level of urban innovation during my time there.(I’m a Punjabi that grew up in South)
Western and Southern India do most of the heavy lifting even in India.

On birth rate unfortunately our top economy states are down too and it’s UP Bihar MP Jharkhand ones with high fertility rate, no guarantee they will usher economic development.

 

[Stewie]

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

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

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

This is a very popular and in my view incorrect opinion within the non Punjabi Pakistanis. Full disclaimer I am Punjabi myself, but my reason for the disagreement is not out of some sense of ethnicity.

Pakistan’s population is over 50% Punjabi. So it is not a surprise that the majority of evil establishment happen to be punjabis. The military establishment has mostly Punjabi monopoly as well. But it does not mean the province itself is a cause of the instability we face.

Anyway that is not related to this topic. Maybe we can discuss it in a thread of it’s own

 

[RexRex]

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

The law allows indian muslims to take 4 wives

 

[Stewie]

The law allows indian muslims to take 4 wives, lucky sons of guns them.

Come over to the light side of the force and you will reap the benefits,

 

[Local.Dada]

Come over to the light side of the force and you will reap the benefits,

4 wives is considered a benefit by some maybe but is looked at as a perversion in 2024 by most normal people. Wrong selling point.

 

[Stewie]

4 wives is considered a benefit by some maybe but is looked at as a perversion in 2024 by most normal people. Wrong selling point.

RexRex does not seem to think so.

By the way in all seriousness who even goes for that these days? I highly doubt educated working middle-class can even afford one wife and a few kids. This is something you only see the ultra rich, or ultra conservative who have the means take advantage of. Most women don't want to be in such sort of marriage.

 

[deltexas]

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

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

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

Where did I ever say Ind should be a Hindu rashtra? I am totally for separation of church and state. I am from the USA and it is a secular country here and everyone is free to do what they want. And on Ind- it is a democratic secular constitution and that's how it should be. It should never ever be a hindu rashtra. The moment countries become religious- it's going down the barrel hole. And regarding the muslim full secularism ithing- search for the city hamtramck, Michigan . The present city council is all muslim and see what they are doing. When they were in minority- they claimed full secularism and the moment they became a majority there- they started claiming Islamic laws and shoving it down other's throats and to heck then with others minorities rights

 

[Champ_Pal]

RexRex does not seem to think so.

By the way in all seriousness who even goes for that these days? I highly doubt educated working middle-class can even afford one wife and a few kids. This is something you only see the ultra rich, or ultra conservative who have the means take advantage of. Most women don't want to be in such sort of marriage.

Bottom line is, it is allowed as per Islamic religious law. What people do can be different to what religion preaches.

 

[deltexas]

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

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

Ind has made progress inspite of the system yes. Inspite of the corruption and all the imperfections. People dont realize how diverse Ind is. 30 plus languages and dialects, multiple religions etc.. Its mors like EU than s single country. For such a complex country wi tg h so many imperfections- it has done pretty well and is on the upward trajectory and continuing.

Arab states and progress lol ! Just because they have oil doesn't make them a progress. A literate education population is what makes a country. And comparing the USA progress with Arab states is in your words blasphemy.

 

[cricketjoshila]

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

It was criticised by everyone , including Sarojni Naidu

The constitution before Nehrus amendment allowed all religions to have their personal laws.

Nehru amended it to bring others another a common law while letting Muslims follow their personal laws.

What if a man has four girlfriends?

Can be jailed for adultery.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The law allows indian muslims to take 4 wives

It does. And that's because Indian law discriminates between Muslims and Non Muslims.

Till 1955 all religions were allowed to follow their personal laws.

Then Nehru brought laws to govern every other religions personal laws except Muslim.

This is the reason to ask for uniform civil code.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Muslim Student Suspended For Bringing 'Non-Veg' Food In Uttar Pradesh School​

In a shocking video, a school principal was seen engaging in a heated argument with a parent of a student for allegedly bringing non-vegetarian food in tiffin to school. The 7-year-old student, who belongs to the Muslim community, has been suspended from the school for the same reason.

This incident is reportedly from Hilton Public School in Amroha, Uttar Pradesh.

In the video, the student's mother can be heard arguing with the principal, claiming that the student did not carry non-vegetarian food in his tiffin and refuting the comments made on a religious basis.

The principal went on to argue that the school does not wish to teach students who bring non-vegetarian food to school and made derogatory remarks about Muslims, including accusing the students of wanting to demolish Hindu temples.

"We don't want to teach such students who break our temples, bring non-veg food to school, harm Hindus, and talk about converting all Hindus and destroying Ram Mandir," the principal stated in the heated argument.

The principal further stated that the student often carries non-vegetarian food, which he was asked not to bring to school, and accused the student of influencing other students to convert their religion.

During the heated argument, the mother also claimed that the student was allegedly made to sit in school without being allowed to attend classes for the entire day, and the school did not inform the parent about this incident.

The principal stated that the school would provide a transfer certificate to the parents.

After the video of the incident went viral on social media, the Amroha Police took to social media and commented that an investigation has been launched into the matter.

"Sir, regarding the above case, please be informed that a three-member investigation committee has been constituted by the District School Inspector Amroha to investigate and take action on the viral video. The law and order situation is normal," the comment read.

Shocking VIDEO: Muslim Student Suspended For Bringing 'Non-Veg' Food In Uttar Pradesh School

A student in Amroha was suspended for allegedly bringing non-vegetarian food to school. A viral video captures the principal making derogatory remarks about the student's Muslim background and refusing to teach students who bring non-veg food. The Amroha Police have launched an investigation...

www.freepressjournal.in

 

[Rajdeep]

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

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

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

And then they want to be taken seriously.

This is the irony I find hilarious, especially on the 2nd point.

I can add more -

Shedding tear for Palestine women and children but won't say a word about Taliban regime who are oppressing women in Afghanistan.

Condemn Israel's invasion but glorify Mughals for doing the same but 10 folds to Indians.

Pls take the opinion of these guys with a pinch of salt. India has all the right to be wary of muslims as they are national threat.

 

[Stewie]

This is the irony I find hilarious, especially on the 2nd point.

I can add more -

Shedding tear for Palestine women and children but won't say a word about Taliban regime who are oppressing women in Afghanistan.

Condemn Israel's invasion but glorify Mughals for doing the same but 10 folds to Indians.

Pls take the opinion of these guys with a pinch of salt. India has all the right to be wary of muslims as they are national threat.

Does that include the Indian Muslims as well including those who claim to be patriots? I am just amazed at the bigotry of making blanket statements like that. LOL. Love it!

Stuff like this just proves the point of this thread.

 

[deltexas]

Ind has made progress inspite of the system yes. Inspite of the corruption and all the imperfections. People dont realize how diverse Ind is. 30 plus languages and dialects, multiple religions etc.. Its mors like EU than s single country. For such a complex country wi tg h so many imperfections- it has done pretty well and is on the upward trajectory and continuing.

Arab states and progress lol ! Just because they have oil doesn't make them a progress. A literate education population is what makes a country. And comparing the USA progress with Arab states is in your words blasphemy.

The standard response of posters like @Stewie @HalBass9 when they have no proof or when they know they have no reply is their standard emoji . instead of any actual factual discussion. Nothing new.

 

[RexRex]

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

That is an interesting observation you made with regards to a Pak moderate & Hindu extremist. Both you and stewie are opposite sides of the same coin - he wants to ban cartoons all over the world whereas you I assume would want the same - ban cow slaughter worldwide.

 

[Rajdeep]

Does that include the Indian Muslims as well including those who claim to be patriots? I am just amazed at the bigotry of making blanket statements like that. LOL. Love it!

Stuff like this just proves the point of this thread.

View attachment 146087

Most of the terrorism and riots in India or wider world is perpetrated by muslims. Take a globe in hand and rotate in any direction...you will find most conflicts have some sort of muslim connection. There is a reason they preach about Islamophobia but not phobia for any other religion. There is a reason Donald Trump one proposed to ban all muslims entering into USA. Lets put it this away, apart from muslims...no one else like muslims given their track record. Ofcourse there are hundreds of decent peace loving muslims but there are equal share of extremists too. So I think its only fair if the world is curiously aware of muslims living in their country and their whereabouts. Especially a country like India which has been plundered and looted by muslims in the past.

This thread can prove whatever it wants but you know me I always speak the truth. No point being politically correct just for the sake of it.

 

[RexRex]

"We don't want to teach such students who break our temples, bring non-veg food to school, harm Hindus, and talk about converting all Hindus and destroying Ram Mandir," the principal stated in the heated argument.

I'm sure this UP principal is a member here on PP, I've heard very similiar chat.