DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**HedgeYourBets** · 07-02-2012, 08:47 PM

Since RSS is brought in to bash it, let us get RSS views; I am not an rss member.

No individual can be secular unless he is an atheist or marxist. Secularism, a western import, refers to the separation of state or government from the people; a state can be secular though its people are not. Views of sri mg vaidya of rss is given in quotes. Link to the article is given in the end.

"Article 14 says “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the protection of laws within the territory of India.” The Art. 15 gives the specifies when it declares “The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on the grounds of only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.”

All ancient indian kings shivaji, ashoka, harsh were all secular in the true sense. See what has happened to pakistan and bangladesh; will anyone call then secular. Only a hindu majority state can be secular.

In europe, secularism emerged because of heavy interference of the church in the affairs of the king. No catholic can become the king of england or president of USA (kennedy?).

"Look at a few examples of the practice of pseudo-secularism that is rampant in our country. The Supreme Court, granted alimony to a Muslim divorcee woman. This was in accordance with the Art. 125 of Indian Penal Code. But the Congress government of Rajiv Gandhi, to appease the orthodox Muslim mind, amended the Constitution to nullify the verdict of the highest court of justice. Is this secularism? Though it is directed by our Constitution to enact a Common Civil Law for all citizens nothing is done in that direction. Can it be called practising secularism? And the recent shameless attempt to give 4.5 per cent reservation to the Muslims from the OBC quota. Should this be lauded as secular statecraft?"

"To vaunt a polity that makes difference between religions as secular and to insult those that propound that no discrimination be made on the basis of religion, calling them communal, is nothing short of intellectual adultery."

http://organiser.org/Encyc/2012/7/1/...p4=&PageType=N

07-02-2012, 08:47 PM	#10
HedgeYourBets Join Date Aug 2008 Posts 4,655 Senior Member	Since RSS is brought in to bash it, let us get RSS views; I am not an rss member. No individual can be secular unless he is an atheist or marxist. Secularism, a western import, refers to the separation of state or government from the people; a state can be secular though its people are not. Views of sri mg vaidya of rss is given in quotes. Link to the article is given in the end. "Article 14 says “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the protection of laws within the territory of India.” The Art. 15 gives the specifies when it declares “The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on the grounds of only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.” All ancient indian kings shivaji, ashoka, harsh were all secular in the true sense. See what has happened to pakistan and bangladesh; will anyone call then secular. Only a hindu majority state can be secular. In europe, secularism emerged because of heavy interference of the church in the affairs of the king. No catholic can become the king of england or president of USA (kennedy?). "Look at a few examples of the practice of pseudo-secularism that is rampant in our country. The Supreme Court, granted alimony to a Muslim divorcee woman. This was in accordance with the Art. 125 of Indian Penal Code. But the Congress government of Rajiv Gandhi, to appease the orthodox Muslim mind, amended the Constitution to nullify the verdict of the highest court of justice. Is this secularism? Though it is directed by our Constitution to enact a Common Civil Law for all citizens nothing is done in that direction. Can it be called practising secularism? And the recent shameless attempt to give 4.5 per cent reservation to the Muslims from the OBC quota. Should this be lauded as secular statecraft?" "To vaunt a polity that makes difference between religions as secular and to insult those that propound that no discrimination be made on the basis of religion, calling them communal, is nothing short of intellectual adultery." http://organiser.org/Encyc/2012/7/1/...p4=&PageType=N
	Quote