[AntonioMQ]

Your excuse that we shouldn't cut our hair is not sufficient. Why do you cut your nails, then?

As for the history, the burden of proof rests upon the claimant. Please prove your skewed version of history from non-Sikh texts. Aurangzeb is seen as the best Mughal emperor amongst Muslims because of his realization of Islamic shari'ah in Mughal India. I highly doubt that there is any fact to the claim that he promoted forcing people to convert because many Hindus and even Sikhs survived under Aurangzeb . What Aurangzeb did do was break the cycle of complacency that had plagued the Muslims of India for far too long. India being India, a lot of the legends are greatly exaggerated, with emotion overriding historical facts leading to falsifying of history.

As for "ritualized" slaughter, all a Muslim really has to do to make an animal halal is say "Bismillah" and go ahead with regular slaughter. In fact, sometimes a Muslim may even forget saying "Bismillah" yet the animal is STILL considered halal so where is this "ritual"? And why do you think such a law came into place anyway? Hindus don't have anything to consider when slaughtering an animal. There are recommended ways of slaughter in Islam that ARE ritualistic albeit they are not requirements, such as facing the animal towards the qibla, using a sharp blade (it is forbidden to use a dull blade and cause pain to the animal), severing the carotids and jugulars, as well as the trachea, and that is all. So, this law against "ritual" slaughter was concocted specifically to target Muslims because no other religious group in India has a method in their religion when it comes to the slaughter of animals.